I'm old to skiing, and old too. Obviously I need something explained to me.
If a dream day is fluffy deep powder. Why do today's skiers insist on floating on top of it???
Because wide skis with rocker are easier.
If they just want to ride on top of the freshie, why chase the deep??? A foot will work won't it?
Density of the snow matters. Plus bragging rights on depth of snow they skied, even if they never needed said depth.
In my days at Snowbird, Plaza Restaurant Pearl Diver, early 70s, (3 chair lifts and Tram)we ran 205 GS skiis with our tips buried to get our body as deep into the snow as we could. Waist deep became neck deep when we compressed at the bottom of the turn. That was the goal. Smith goggles and bandanna days. Come out of the turn, take a breath, wipe off the goggles, (wait a minute, I never had to wipe goggles in the dry cold smoke western fluff) check for trees and drop down under for the next turn.
All of my inhale on the rebound turns were above timberline, no need to check for trees.
<execrable rant>
I call total BS on this thread and the many like it. What I see, on the rare occasions when I get to ski powder, is that the vast majority of skiers are either studiously avoiding the ungroomed, or else flailing hideously, in a way that aligns not at all with their accounts in the bar last night of long-past powder exploits. In short, they need all the help they can get.
Very true, but then there are also quite a few skilled powder skiers, even on the east coast. Quite a few were in attendance yesterday.
I know I, for one, am nothing but grateful for my modern powder skis. I am utterly uninterested in trading them in for my old Olin 195s. None of my ski buddies is, either.
I'm sure you have a point there, and not just about powder skiing. There are 2 kinds of narrow (Sub 65mm) skis out there today: Carving/racing, and bump skis. There is no 65mm powder ski on the shelf at any of the half dozen ski stores I skulk through. I'm not sure what my minimum would be today... I know I'm quite happy on 80 for anything lighter than snowball snow.
Yes, I've been skiing for 55 years, so I know all about skinny skis. Compared to today's gear they sucked in every conceivable way. Getting back on a pair will NOT bring back that one day you vaguely remember from when you were 19 and there were only 20 other people skiing the back bowls. It's not the skis you're attached to; it's the context, with its accumulated patina from having been fondled in a pocket of your memory all those times, like Bilbo's ring. If you really were and really continued to be a skilled frequent practitioner of powder skiing, you'd be down at the bench waxing up for tomorrow, not talking about how good things were yesterday.
</execrable rant>
Not so fast, oh skinny ski veteran. Here's a photo of me on said old school skinny skis. Notice you can't see them whatsoever. The pompom, the goggles and the pole baskets might help you date that photo.
And yet I'm not in the basement waxing up for tomorrow. Or for Saturday, which unfortunately just might be boilerplate.
This is Killington yesterday. Day 2 of an 18 inch storm. 2 of those tracks are mine, the rest are some interlopers that were skiing my trail. It really felt like my own trail as the associated lift wasn't running, and few people ventured there. Notice the hideous flailers haven't arrived yet.
The best powder days are when the lift cable has no gondolas on it.
