This thread is for the general discussion of the Article You want to know what is going on in the US ski market? All you have to do is look at the automotive industry.. Please add to the discussion here.
You're just happy they're bringing yellow back![]()
So wide skis on icy conditions is the same fopah as narrow skis in powder.
So wide skis on icy conditions is the same fopah as narrow skis in powder.
Now cue the outrage from the “Wide skis are more stable” crowd in 3…2…1![]()
How about a '05 Boxster S? Oh that was mine before the Intermediate Shaft Bearing issue raised its ugly head.That’s a beautiful colour innit? Not for cars tho. Unless it is a 911. Or more to the point in the article-an Urus.
Bit one dimensional ( literally). There are far more lessons to take from the auto industry like the race to premiumisation, the idea that your skis are a reflection of you as a person rather than a tool,
How about a '05 Boxster S?
is there anyone on this site over the age of 40 that didn't ski powder on a long skinny waist ski and did just fine?
I book ski trips to the Rockies months in advance and ski what that date gives me. From Telluride to Revelstoke I've skied many more old snow days than new snow days.The biggest problem I see with Colorado front range skier purchasing choices are very limited to things that would be best of a powder day.
Most folks have one ski quivers, and limited outings. They buy what they want from experience and it suits them, fairly often,
at least in Colorado.
Well ....No, don't buy it - that article, I mean. Smug stuff.
Most folks have one ski quivers, and limited outings. They buy what they want from experience and it suits them, fairly often,
at least in Colorado.
Yeah, most folks might be better off without the 4 wheel drive huge high clearance vehicles.
Especially in flat land cities.
But not here for skiers in the Rockies, or folks who live in the mountains up north and/or out west:
that medium Nissan 4 wheeler SUV has saved my butt many times,
made driving to ski possible the large number of times I've done it, with many skis on board.
And the bigger SUVs make things safer and better for full sized families in ski country, as long as no rail system works.
Bottom line, to me it's legit for a good young (or old) skier to pick a 96 to 112 ski for a one ski quiver, especially out west.
And to get an even wider ski if they have a quiver of two or more.
In my experience, one has to build up, in terms of conditioning, to fat skis, as much as to cross country running.
(At least I do.)
Lots of folks manage to get in shape for both, sure seems like.
P.S. I keep track of conditions on ski days. Consistently, one third of my days are on soft snow powder days of some kind, here in Colorado.
(Not counting "dust" days up to an inch.) That's enough for my second ski to be for soft.
(Yeah, and I skied my GS and SL straight skis in powder too.)
Sorry.![]()
and assumptions that people aren't in shape to ski fat skis...Odd assumptions, @ Paul Lutes. Lots of weird detail about my skiing and Colorado skiing, warped. Please don't do that.
Please don't do it either.In my experience, one has to build up, in terms of conditioning, to fat skis...
No, you are not and quite frankly, this article wasn't directed to or at you but the Joe and Jane Skier that might get out 5-10 times a year and the odds they will need a 100 mm wide ski are aspirational.Yeah, I'm not typical...