Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe
logo-black small
earhart-launch_main-image
earhart88-text

Introducing our first ski designed for women.

A limited release of the new 2021 Earhart 88.

$899 — ships today​
earhart-launch_video_thumb_02
Here's the story
earhart-launch_separator_02

It's 2020 and most women’s skis are still designed and tested by men. A bunch of guys get 'input' from one female and call it good.

It's a bit like this:​
earhart-launch_sub_1

So how should it be done?

Flip the script.

Kick out the guys, bring in the gals. Start fresh from the ground up. Build some prototypes, test them. Do it again. Test some more. Repeat.​
earhart-launch_sub_2

Most ski companies will tell you a women's design is special. The truth? It's usually a men's ski with a different graphic and a softer flex — in the industry it's called "shrink it and pink it" — and it has no place in 2020. We can do better than that.​
earhart-launch_sub_5

Instead, we gathered a diverse group of female rippers of various ability levels and skiing styles who became our testing power crew over the next few months.

Each prototype was a slight variation of a 'control ski' — only one variable was tested at a time. At the end of each day, we'd discuss the merits of each and go back to the drawing board for the next batch of prototypes.

In all, the Earhart 88 became our most tested and refined ski we have ever built. We couldn't be more proud.​
earhart-launch_sub_3
Final Prototype Version R2.02.3.005

"We're not trying to re-invent the wheel here. There are a few ski companies who design women's skis the right way — we just want to make sure Renoun is one of them"
— Rhiana, Operations @ Renoun
earhart-launch_sub_4

So, how would we describe the Earhart 88?

An all-mountain machine.

High performance on groomed terrain & versatile in trees, bumps and light powder. Plenty of stability thanks to two partial strips of titanal metal and our patented non-newtonian HDT™ polymer — you will never feel more confident on a pair of skis.

Many skiers hear "metal" and get intimidated... We adjusted the ski's flex for each size resulting in an extremely balanced and playful flex. Oh, and add 8 inlays of our patented non-newtonian HDT™ polymer? There's no ski like it out there.
earhart-launch_photo-slider
Ships today with guaranteed delivery by Valentine's Day
for orders placed by 11am EST 02/12/20​
 

CalG

Out on the slopes
Pass Pulled
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Posts
1,962
Location
Vt
It would be curious to know the gender exclusive design differences compared to the "shrink it and pink it" approach.

Asking for my wife.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe
Why wouldn't a smaller sized guy (me) want one for himself? I find myself eyeing the 170 length.
You may like them.
Honestly, I got a set of these prior to leaving for OR but never had a chance to really get them set up to ski. I'll let you know.
 

In2h2o

Getting on the lift
Skier
Joined
Dec 25, 2019
Posts
139
Location
West Coast
The "recommended size" per the size chart is 'interesting' for a ski with tip and tail rocker.
@Tricia what size are you on?
 
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
3,635
Nice - but then ruin the empowerment with a line implying that its something for Valentine's Day at the end.

I know commercialism rules all but...somewhat contrary to independent women etc etc

If I can spot it as a luddite male then someone more woke than me almost certainly would.
 

lisamamot

Lisa MA MOT
Skier
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Posts
323
Location
West of Boston, MA
The sizing is a bit interesting.
The "recommended size" per the size chart is 'interesting' for a ski with tip and tail rocker.
I am curious what your thoughts are on the sizing.

The 163/170 lengths have not worked for me with Volkl, but hopefully this skis more playful than the Kenja and Secret. I am 5’9”/140 and my daughter is 5’11”/150 and they are tiring. We own other women’s skis in 170, 172 and 177 that are not.

Since the Earhart tops out at 170 and a size chart height of 5’10”, I expect the rocker profile is small and hope the two partial sheets of metal are well-placed. If not, they may not have captured enough of the intended market.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe
Nice - but
Any time you feel like saying Nice - But....
Don't.

I'm not sure how a mention of guaranteed delivery by Valentines Day negates an empowerment message. Maybe the empowered woman wants to buy herself a gift.
Fortunately, this ski is not marketed for you so you won't have to worry about it.

I am curious what your thoughts are on the sizing.

The 163/170 lengths have not worked for me with Volkl, but hopefully this skis more playful than the Kenja and Secret. I am 5’9”/140 and my daughter is 5’11”/150 and they are tiring. We own other women’s skis in 170, 172 and 177 that are not.

Since the Earhart tops out at 170 and a size chart height of 5’10”, I expect the rocker profile is small and hope the two partial sheets of metal are well-placed. If not, they may not have captured enough of the intended market.
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs and am skiing this ski in 170. At your height, you may want something longer, but at your weight, you should be fine. You're kind of in a middle ground there.
*Disclaimer - I was on the prototype ski and will be on the production version soon so I'll be able to give a better idea.
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
3,635
Fortunately, this ski is not marketed for you so you won't have to worry about it.

So I wouldn't be able to buy it as a present for a friend or partner or spouse. Good to know. (Not that I'd presume to)

BTW I really meant the nice - great that someone is breaking the mould
 
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe
@Tricia at 5'4" the recomended size is 156 relaxed and agressive - that seems extreemly short for a ski with rocker. I will await your review on the 170 :popcorn:
How much do you weigh?
I would also think of a 163 for you, depending on your ability and what kind of terrain you like to ski.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
20,285
Location
Tahoe
So I wouldn't be able to buy it as a present for a friend or partner or spouse. Good to know. (Not that I'd presume to)

BTW I really meant the nice - great that someone is breaking the mould
I said it wasn't marketed for YOU.
Wasn't aware that you've woo'd a partner or spouse for whom you'd like to purchase a set of skis. Congratulations.
 

Winks

Phil just gave me a raise, from $0 to $00
Industry Insider
Joined
Feb 10, 2018
Posts
303
Location
Does it snow in CA?
I am curious what your thoughts are on the sizing.

The 163/170 lengths have not worked for me with Volkl, but hopefully this skis more playful than the Kenja and Secret. I am 5’9”/140 and my daughter is 5’11”/150 and they are tiring. We own other women’s skis in 170, 172 and 177 that are not.

Since the Earhart tops out at 170 and a size chart height of 5’10”, I expect the rocker profile is small and hope the two partial sheets of metal are well-placed. If not, they may not have captured enough of the intended market.

I have always been curious about why most women's ski lines stop at 170, I know there are plenty of skiers over 5'7" or so that would enjoy having a larger ski. I would like to see some of the sales numbers for sizing because for some reason I imagine that the shortest size is probably the least sold size. I say 177 or so should be the largest offering, but that is just one opinion among many i'm sure.
 

lisamamot

Lisa MA MOT
Skier
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Posts
323
Location
West of Boston, MA
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs and am skiing this ski in 170. At your height, you may want something longer, but at your weight, you should be fine. You're kind of in a middle ground there.
*Disclaimer - I was on the prototype ski and will be on the production version soon so I'll be able to give a better idea.

I am happy on the Sheeva 9 172 and really enjoyed the Stöckli Stormrider Motion 85 168.
I think the 170 is a good length if the rocker profile is small - just wondering what the stiffness is like. Looking forward to your review!
 

Brian Finch

PT, CSCS, Cert- DN, FRCms, M|WOD Coach
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
2,076
Location
Vermont
Too funny, I thought I had the 1st one; the ski SIA rejected as a Renoun Women's submission: athletes' version of the E104 in Pink
 
Top