Skis for maximizing your bump skiing practice time?

[MissySki]

Whew, lots to process...
I think at your size you will likely enjoy the 156 better.
The Cheyenne changed to the BP 78 if you can still find one. The BP82 is the next option in this area.

If you can find an old BP78 or Cheyenne hanging around, snag it.

Thank you!

 

[MissySki]

I dunno; I skied a 160’s Black Pearl on Mary Jane bumps (demo), and it was great for me. I was surprised at its stability on the groomers back to the lift, and I was not taking my time. I also had it in powder in the trees and it was super fun. I giggled the whole time there! I’d say stay in the mid to high 150’s.

Do you remember which width Black Pearl you were on? Thanks for mentioning this on the length, given how much taller you are than me it makes me feel much better about a 150s length for bumps!

 

[skiki]

You can but at any point, more their more respected and knowlegible members are over here than over there.

Then I guess I got more bang for my buck-- I posted there first and that prompted @MissySki to carry it over here, so now I get to read responses from the respectable and knowledgeable members from both sites (and maybe even from the riff raff from both too

 

[MissySki]

Then I guess I got more bang for my buck-- I posted there first and that prompted @MissySki to carry it over here, so now I get to read responses from the respectable and knowledgeable members from both sites (and maybe even from the riff raff from both too

This is true! I asked here because no one was really throwing out ski recommendations on your thread. We got hung up on the merits of East versus West bump skiing.. and I thought there might be some good ideas here on the skis piece since that’s what I am interested in. And happily there was a bunch of food for thought here which I very much appreciate!

 

[ted]

Despite a nearly endless diversity in skis, the narrowest wide ski options are limited. Once you get 80ish and under most skis armore carve oriented.

For your purposes from current models, the black pearl 78 and Nordica Astral 78 would likely be the best options. The mens Navigator 80 is a slightly stronger version of the Astral.

I’d lean towards the Nordicas as the tip has a more tapered shape that is less likely to hook against a bump.

 

[MissySki]

Despite a nearly endless diversity in skis, the narrowest wide ski options are limited. Once you get 80ish and under most skis armore carve oriented.

For your purposes from current models, the black pearl 78 and Nordica Astral 78 would likely be the best options. The mens Navigator 80 is a slightly stronger version of the Astral.

I’d lean towards the Nordicas as the tip has a more tapered shape that is less likely to hook against a bump.

Thank you! Yeah this exact point has been the source of my confusion as I didn’t want to get into a very stiff and/or very carve oriented ski, and I wasn’t sure which skinnier options would actually fit my needs. Happy to have a little more direction now!

 

[Wendy]

Do you remember which width Black Pearl you were on? Thanks for mentioning this on the length, given how much taller you are than me it makes me feel much better about a 150s length for bumps!

I was on the 82. Incidentally, my telemark ski is a 166cm Black Pearl 82. My all mountain alpine ski is a 170cm Black Pearl 88.

I've skied on a 163cm K2 mogul ski at 64cm underfoot! Too quick for me in the bumps, but super fun, and I also skied it all over the mountain with no issues. It's just about balance, and you don't have to worry about that. I say that to reiterate that even though I'm quite bigger than you are, I can ski a shorter ski as well, not to say get a mogul ski. Mogul skis are QUICK.

Don't overthink this! If you find a good deal on the Black Pearl 78, or the older Cheyenne, grab it! And then don't go wondering if the Astral would've been better! Get whatever you get the best deal on. A benefit of the BP....still fun carving the groomers going back to the lift. You won't feel as if you need to switch skis. Even if you find the best deal on the 82mm Black Pearl, that would be good, too!

 

[Tony S]

Despite a nearly endless diversity in skis, the narrowest wide ski options are limited. Once you get 80ish and under most skis armore carve oriented.

For your purposes from current models, the black pearl 78 and Nordica Astral 78 would likely be the best options. The mens Navigator 80 is a slightly stronger version of the Astral.

I’d lean towards the Nordicas as the tip has a more tapered shape that is less likely to hook against a bump.

Thank you! Yeah this exact point has been the source of my confusion as I didn’t want to get into a very stiff and/or very carve oriented ski, and I wasn’t sure which skinnier options would actually fit my needs. Happy to have a little more direction now!

I guess I'm just slightly at odds with the Armstrong vid and @ted in that I think that the ski design and flex pattern is much more important than the width. In other words, narrow is nice, but a tapered tip and an easy-going tip and tail flex trumps it. I'd much rather ski an off-piste oriented 88mm ski in the bumps - even crapola Sunday River bumps - than, say, a Laser AX.

 

[KingGrump]

I guess I'm just slightly at odds with the Armstrong vid and @ted in that I think that the ski design and flex pattern is much more important than the width. In other words, narrow is nice, but a tapered tip and an easy-going tip and tail flex trumps it. I'd much rather ski an off-piste oriented 88mm ski in the bumps - even crapola Sunday River bumps - than, say, a Laser AX.

What is shown in the video is what I called the direct line. Not competition style but still a direct line. Great tool in zipper line bumps found at places like Mary Jane.

When the terrain gets steeper. The bumps generally gets bigger (length, width & depth). A quick turn is often not necessary. One is usually engaged with the same bump for a while. Speed control is usually at the top of the list of urgent items for big steep bumps like the ones found at Taos.

A wider and slower line through the big steep bumps is what is taught at Taos due to the prevailing conditions. That's what works for most. That is why most locals/regulars are often on 85 to 95. The AM skis allows for some drift and slip through the turn to achieve the wider line.

 

[Lauren]

I guess I'm just slightly at odds with the Armstrong vid and @ted in that I think that the ski design and flex pattern is much more important than the width. In other words, narrow is nice, but a tapered tip and an easy-going tip and tail flex trumps it. I'd much rather ski an off-piste oriented 88mm ski in the bumps - even crapola Sunday River bumps - than, say, a Laser AX.

100%

Armstrong and Aldigheri lost me pretty quickly with their opening statements that were so black and white. "You can't ski moguls with anything...92 or 97 or 98 underfoot". Personally, my experience is very different, I would rather ski my Santa Ana 100 over my RTM 84 in most bumps. This is due to the tail shape and rocker (more rocker in the wider ski, and a rounded-off tail), less camber in the middle of the ski, a flat mount binding, and a softer flex pattern (especially in the tip and tail). Maybe I would skew towards the RTM in very icy bumps where I need extra grip...but I don't want to be in icy, hard bumps anyways.

 

[Tony S]

Maybe I would skew towards the RTM in very icy bumps where I need extra grip

Not me. Extra grip on a torsionally rigid ski is the last thing I want in icy bumps, because it will just hook up and accelerate me. (Yes, I totally understand that modulating that grip is part of my job as a competent mogul skier, regardless of the ski. I accept that assignment. It doesn't change what I think about whether a given ski makes doing that harder or easier.) In practice, I might very well want to be on that ski for the day because when I'm NOT in the bumps I really need that grip. But in that moment, in moguls, no.

Not being contentious; I think we agree, and it's an interesting topic.

 

[mdf]

I guess I'm just slightly at odds with the Armstrong vid and @ted in that I think that the ski design and flex pattern is much more important than the width. In other words, narrow is nice, but a tapered tip and an easy-going tip and tail flex trumps it. I'd much rather ski an off-piste oriented 88mm ski in the bumps - even crapola Sunday River bumps - than, say, a Laser AX.

Two points -- I firmly believe that width matters more as a proxy for the designer's intent than in its direct effect. So fewer narrow skis are going to have "easy-going tip and tail" but there will be exceptions to the trend.
The shortest AX (which I would normally consider way-too-short for me) made a wonderful bump ski.

 

[Tony S]

What is shown in the video is what I called the direct line. Not competition style but still a direct line. Great tool in zipper line bumps found at places like Mary Jane.

When the terrain gets steeper. The bumps generally gets bigger (length, width & depth). A quick turn is often not necessary. One is usually engaged with the same bump for a while. Speed control is usually at the top of the list of urgent items for big steep bumps like the ones found at Taos.

A wider and slower line through the big steep bumps is what is taught at Taos due to the prevailing conditions. That's what works for most. That is why most locals/regulars are often on 85 to 95. The AM skis allows for some drift and slip through the turn to achieve the wider line.

Well, when I'm at Taos I'm a lot less, um, grumpy than I am at Sunday River, where the OP skis. That changes just about everything, sensei. Maybe a dose of Mary Jane is in order to cure that.

 

[Tony S]

I firmly believe that width matters more as a proxy for the designer's intent than in its direct effect. So fewer narrow skis are going to have "easy-going tip and tail" but there will be exceptions to the trend.

Yeah, I think I was trying to say something similar.

 

[Lauren]

Not me. Extra grip on a torsionally rigid ski is the last thing I want in icy bumps, because it will just hook up and accelerate me. (Yes, I totally understand that modulating that grip is part of my job as a competent mogul skier, regardless of the ski. I accept that assignment. It doesn't change what I think about whether a given ski makes doing that harder or easier.) In practice, I might very well want to be on that ski for the day because when I'm NOT in the bumps I really need that grip. But in that moment, in moguls, no.

Not being contentious; I think we agree, and it's an interesting topic.

Generally speaking...if I need more grip in moguls, I don't even want to be in them ha! I think we agree as well...point being there are a lot more important properties of a ski to take into account...not just width.

 

[cantunamunch]

Not me. Extra grip on a torsionally rigid ski is the last thing I want in icy bumps, because it will just hook up and accelerate me. (Yes, I totally understand that modulating that grip is part of my job as a competent mogul skier, regardless of the ski. I accept that assignment. It doesn't change what I think about whether a given ski makes doing that harder or easier.) In practice, I might very well want to be on that ski for the day because when I'm NOT in the bumps I really need that grip. But in that moment, in moguls, no.

Not being contentious; I think we agree, and it's an interesting topic.

Do you have (subquestion: boots that will let you do) the competition line 'gating' move?

 

[Tony S]

Do you have (subquestion: boots that will let you do) the competition line 'gating' move?

I don't know what that is, so probably not!

 

[cantunamunch]

I don't know what that is, so probably not!

Instead of absorbing, they just do a knee hinge to 'let the bump through'. The pelvis moves downhill relative to the feet.

Take a pair of inlines to a pump track and you'll figure it out in 20 minutes.

The point is that, people who have that move (and ski boots that let them do it), will be on skis that are a lot shorter than your or my 'usual'. Not quite Snowblade short, but definitely clownish anywhere else on the hill. And, that short, grip is good. </GordonGekkovoice>

 

[ilovepugs]

Well, crap, after reading through this thread and my teaching ski thread, I thought I’d pull my BP 78s from consignment since I just put them up for sale on Friday night. It’s been three days and 2 out of 3 pairs of skis and both snowboards I consigned both already sold.

On the upside, my trip to Banff is now fully paid for with credit card points and gear sales, AND I bought a new snowboard…

 

[ted]

I guess I'm just slightly at odds with the Armstrong vid and @ted in that I think that the ski design and flex pattern is much more important than the width. In other words, narrow is nice, but a tapered tip and an easy-going tip and tail flex trumps it. I'd much rather ski an off-piste oriented 88mm ski in the bumps - even crapola Sunday River bumps - than, say, a Laser AX.

I think you are missing my point. I agree with you that the all mountain design is better in bumps than a carver like a laser. But a narrower all mountain than an 88 will slip through the bumps easier and roll edge to edge faster.