I love my new Ripstick 88s (179): very playful, light weight, soft flex, but can still somehow hold an edge and arc turns.
I had an interesting day at Baker last time up. Conditions were a thin layer of refrozen melt on top of 4 inches of new snow on top of hard chalk. I started the day on my Ripsticks, but the upper layer was causing my skis to bounce all over the place. After two runs I switched to my heavier Fischer Ranger FR 102s and had a much better time of it.
This got me wondering: How would a lightweight ski perform like the Ripstick in chunkular conditions by adding weight to the tips and tails? Say you carried around a few pucks of depleted uranium in your pocket and if the conditions called for it, you would clip the DU on the ends to increase the moment of inertia -- ok, maybe tungsten. By concentrating the medal at the ends, you could get the same inertia of a burlier ski, but with lighter weight. Has any manufacturer or enthusiast played with the idea of on-the-hill adjustable moment of inertia?
I had an interesting day at Baker last time up. Conditions were a thin layer of refrozen melt on top of 4 inches of new snow on top of hard chalk. I started the day on my Ripsticks, but the upper layer was causing my skis to bounce all over the place. After two runs I switched to my heavier Fischer Ranger FR 102s and had a much better time of it.
This got me wondering: How would a lightweight ski perform like the Ripstick in chunkular conditions by adding weight to the tips and tails? Say you carried around a few pucks of depleted uranium in your pocket and if the conditions called for it, you would clip the DU on the ends to increase the moment of inertia -- ok, maybe tungsten. By concentrating the medal at the ends, you could get the same inertia of a burlier ski, but with lighter weight. Has any manufacturer or enthusiast played with the idea of on-the-hill adjustable moment of inertia?