All Things Head

[Uncle-A]

45 years old and have never seen snow - until today. Still had the quality stickers on them! Fun ski, but has a lot of camber, took some getting used to. View attachment 120253 View attachment 120254 View attachment 120255

Are they S 444 bindings on them? If they are still NOS I guess that they would work but if they are worn it is a different story.

 

[Dan]

Are they S 444 bindings on them? If they are still NOS I guess that they would work but if they are worn it is a different story.

Good point. Yes, also appear unused. Rollers in great shape. AFD unscratched and in great shape. I put a drop of oil on the rollers. I used my Lipe release check to set them where I like (very low setting for me). And before skiing I released both toes with a twist in both directions, they were smooth as expected. The chrome on the rear latch is not in perfect shape after 45 years in some environment but the heel functions smoothly as well!

 

[Sconnieskiscavenger]

Pair of 1970s Head Pro 178cm.

I didn’t see this one in the ads. Anyone know where this stood in the line up? It’s pretty soft flexing and looks similar to the yahoo.

 

[Uncle-A]

Pair of 1970s Head Pro 178cm.

I didn’t see this one in the ads. Anyone know where this stood in the line up? It’s pretty soft flexing and looks similar to the yahoo. View attachment 126645 View attachment 126646 View attachment 126647 View attachment 126648

Looks like a package ski for a big box sports store, aka a special make up ski. It has the big name manufacturer but the model is not part of the regular ski line. Especially because you say it is so soft as well as the entry level Tyrolia 150 binding that was used in many packages.

 

[justplanesteve]

I posted this as an add-on to my post in the beginner section.

What does playful mean re: skis?

I skied in grade school, HS, & college years southern PA, never very good but lots of fun. Had isolated winters of moderate skiing activitiy and many without over next few decades. Moved to southern tier NY early 90's and continued the very sporadic tradition. Broke my collarbone in the glades...

www.skitalk.com

It was suggested the skis be posted here.

To re-cap the history: (Head XR1's)
One of my best friends acquired them, if not right in Timonium, somewhere around Baltimore in the period the skis were current but the factory was moving. He is not a skier though may have been on rentals a few times long ago. Then they sat in his warehouse for a few decades, he knew i was intrigued. I am certain i saw them in original livery (very simple graphics) multiple times over the years, but now the history, & the skis, get cloudy.

A few years ago i made a couple sets of carriage house doors to install on his property. At one point after they were installed on the carriage house, we were down in his finished barn moving materials on pallet racks & the skis were on top. He pulled them down

and said "you take them, i'll never use them". Then he also said "dunno what i was thinking when i painted them, but it seemed like a good idea at the time." He has top shelf taste, but often de-id's it.

Just spent 15 minutes on a tail (see bare patch), to see how stuck the paint is. It will come off with acetone and grey scotch-brite, but it looks like the tops might even have been sanded for adhesion.....

Can anyone comment on how they would compare to skiing VR-17's? SL. 200 cm 53/51
I bought new in spring 1970 in HS.
Multiple boots since, but never any other skis until starting back again this year.
I'm a fairly low level skier. Bought the Dynamics at Hechinger lumber yard because they were reputed to be "ice skates" & that is all we had in southern PA.
What would make sense to look for, for bindings? Are Look Nevada's still acceptable? Or?
Don't need the bindings to be retro if i decide to go through with this.

If i try harder to remove paint (not necessary, really) is there a suggested process considering the materials under it? I am an expert restorer of other things with clients including Smithsonian & historic government properties. No direct experience with skis, though.

Thanks!
smt

 

[skibot1000]

Head 320W review...

 

[Uncle-A]

Head 320W review...

Thanks for sharing this video, you talked about the grove in the bottom of the ski. The grove was there to help the ski track straight, now depending on the age of the ski was the shape of the grove. Head and other manufacturers used two different grove shapes, the earliest groves looked molded and a round channel the newer groves looked like someone took a router and cut a grove it the P tex. This grove had square edges and gave more resistance to turning than the molded grove.
As far as comparing the two skis it is a bit unfair because you are talking about technology that is decades apart. The Head from the 50's and 60's the Olin's from the 80's and 90's. The first ski that I remember to remove the grove and go with a flat bottom was K2 but that is only my memory not sure who was actually the first. At around the same time was the earliest I remember that manufacturers started also adding a base angle to the ski. It sure did help to let the skis turn easier.

 

[skibot1000]

So cool to hear these details. I meant to get a shot of the groove then never did. It is squared off shape. What year you figure these skis are from? Didn't realize that much older than Olin. I'm only comparing the two because they closer to each other than any other skis I have.

 

[Uncle-A]

So cool to hear these details. I meant to get a shot of the groove then never did. It is squared off shape. What year you figure these skis are from? Didn't realize that much older than Olin. I'm only comparing the two because they closer to each other than any other skis I have.

Winter of 69 - 70 is my best guess for the 320's and I think that when they switched to the routed out grove it was a cost cutting change because the older method had to be more expensive.

 

[Don in Morrison]

My first skis were head 320 W. My understanding was that the 320 W was softer than the 320 E, the former being designed for softer western snow and the latter for harder eastern snow. I got them in the spring of 1969. The following year I replaced them with a pair of Head 720. The 720 has a molded groove, flat on the bottom and beveled on the sides. A couple years ago I took the 720's out for the first time in about 35 years and had an awful time trying to make them go where I wanted to. It might be that I was trying to ski on a 35 year-old tune, because my K2 710's are a piece o' cake to ski on, but they've been tuned more recently.

 

[Uncle-A]

My first skis were head 320 W. My understanding was that the 320 W was softer than the 320 E, the former being designed for softer western snow and the latter for harder eastern snow. I got them in the spring of 1969. The following year I replaced them with a pair of Head 720. The 720 has a molded groove, flat on the bottom and beveled on the sides. A couple years ago I took the 720's out for the first time in about 35 years and had an awful time trying to make them go where I wanted to. It might be that I was trying to ski on a 35 year-old tune, because my K2 710's are a piece o' cake to ski on, but they've been tuned more recently.

If I remember correctly the 710's don't have a grove and came from the factory with a base bevel of 1 but I did not like my 710's but really enjoyed my 610's especially in the bumps.

 

[Don in Morrison]

If I remember correctly the 710's don't have a grove and came from the factory with a base bevel of 1 but I did not like my 710's but really enjoyed my 610's especially in the bumps.

Mine have a groove from the factory. It looks like a molded groove.

 

[Uncle-A]

Mine have a groove from the factory. It looks like a molded groove.

I would love to see any photos if available. Where they a very early model? Mine had the wood core not the foam core and the best I can remember is no grove.

 

[Don in Morrison]

I got them when they first came out. The Head is on the left, since this is a Head thread, K2 on the right. The K2 looks like it has a routed groove, so my remembery was a little off.

 

[Uncle-A]

I got them when they first came out. The Head is on the left, since this is a Head thread, K2 on the right. The K2 looks like it has a routed groove, so my remembery was a little off.

View attachment 129850

Thanks

 

[Rdputnam515]

we used to make fun of Head skis, then I got a pair last year...love them.

really great skis

 

[justplanesteve]

Where did Master's fit in the line-up?
I tried searching but the term has not brought much up related to Head + Master skis.
At least not to the models from mid-late 60's.

Thanks!
smt

 

[Bad Bob]

Where did Master's fit in the line-up?
I tried searching but the term has not brought much

Thanks!
smt

The Master was a softer ski and located just below the comp. It position in the line up was taken by the 360. It was not as damp or stiff as the Comp.

 

[Uncle-A]

Where did Master's fit in the line-up?
I tried searching but the term has not brought much up related to Head + Master skis.
At least not to the models from mid-late 60's.

Thanks!
smt

It was an advanced intermediate to expert ski but not a racing ski. If I remember correctly the target customer was the adult male that skied well and had the money to get the best ski but might be past his prime athletic ability.

 

[justplanesteve]

the target customer was the adult male that skied well and had the money to get the best ski but might be past his prime athletic ability.

Better than i expected!
That sort of describes me, except the money part, but especially the "past his prime" part.

So sort of an all-mountain cruiser?
Probably not ideal in the hard/icy stuff?

I'd sort of like to try them, but they have very early Marker toes, and Geze-Rasant heels.
Not safe? Should i relegate them to wall hangars?

OTOH on modern groomers it does not seem to matter much what is underfoot.

Thanks!

smt