Are light materials helpful for beginner?

[LiquidFeet]

No beginner as in beginner has ever said: Skiing is great fun tho. You will hear all kinds of descriptions of skiing, none of which will include fun.

The enjoyment part comes considerably later.

Not quite true. I was instantly in love with skiing on day one. I can't be the only one.
However, many adult beginners do struggle. Are they having fun? Maybe. Maybe not.

 

[KingGrump]

No beginner as in beginner has ever said: Skiing is great fun tho. You will hear all kinds of descriptions of skiing, none of which will include fun.

The enjoyment part comes considerably later.

You are hanging out with the wrong crowd.

 

[cantunamunch]

Loose boots make a ski heavier? 'Cause the question was 'why is rental gear so darn heavy?'

I stand by my answer.

Neither you nor I nor anyone else actually expects the questioner to have weighed their rental gear on a scale.
Neither you nor I nor anyone else actually expects the questioner to have compared rental weights to other gear appropriate to their size.

(The appropriate to their size part will be important later)

The question is therefore about subjective feeling of weight and my answer is entirely appropriate. A loose rental boot makes skis feel heavier. And harder to control. But heavier even in non-control situations like sitting on the lift.

We even have proof of this on this very forum when 100kg nominally healthy fit men complain about the hanging weight of gear. Ask a few more questions and you find out they're skiing in a "shoe size fit" boot and their skis are of a size intended for 60kg women.

 

[cantunamunch]

No beginner as in beginner has ever said: Skiing is great fun tho. You will hear all kinds of descriptions of skiing, none of which will include fun.

You are hanging out with the wrong crowd.

Well, not here anyway.

You would totally expect all the true beginners that actually had massive fun on their first, second, third through tenth day to wind up posting on forums like this

 

[mister moose]

My first day I had a blast. I was a child, had done some sledding and snow fort building. The whole first day was going straight down into a small ravine and up the other side. There was enough pitch to move, to be fun. You stopped by going up the other side. I learned to go straight and survival side-step. Nothing more. I remember being scared of "The big hill". Unknowingly, you also learned to stay over your feet, and adjust as needed. I watched my siblings successes and failures. I don't think equipment weight mattered that much. And what little there was probably mattered most when side stepping, lifting the ski over and over.

I fell a lot. There was no lift ticket. Mom and Dad were my completely amateur instructors. We lasted about 3 hours.

Weight doesn't matter when you edge a ski.
Weight doesn't matter when you apply rotary to a ski (Enough to matter at a beginner level)
What else is there to matter to a beginner?

Boot fit, ski length, physical fitness and appropriate terrain matter far more.

 

[geepers]

No beginner as in beginner has ever said: Skiing is great fun tho. You will hear all kinds of descriptions of skiing, none of which will include fun.

The enjoyment part comes considerably later.

Suppose it is possible to suck the last vestige of human enjoyment from what should be a sublime experience - majestic mountains, fresh air, physical activity, crisp white snow. (After all life is basically a struggle for survival against overwhelming odds which are going to win sooner or later so we may as well break the news to them now...) Do they run courses on how to do this or is that what ski instructor pay is designed to do?

Ancedote.... did a ski day recently with bro-in-law, his daughter and grand daughter. Thankfully the daughter booked the grand kid into a lesson. Every time we passed the magic carpet a young lady instructor was working hard - skiing backward holding tips sort of thing - but by the end of the lesson tears of frustration had turned to shrieks of delight and the little one did not want to stop doing laps. Who cares all she learnt was a sort of braking wedge - she's thrilled to have gone skiing and will progress more next time.

 

[geepers]

We even have proof

You want proof?

Go try some 2014 Blizzard Bushwackers - was same as the Brahma but without metal - from the rental shop with that beefy, adjustable, tracked, rental binding. Buy a new pair of same ski and have a normal non-track heel/toe-piece binding fitted. Ski/binding drops in weight significantly.

The extra weight makes a difference when carrying skis, skating, side stepping up hill, lifting skis on to footrests on lifts, etc.

 

[cantunamunch]

You want proof?

Go try some 2014 Blizzard Bushwackers - was same as the Brahma but without metal - from the rental shop with that beefy, adjustable, tracked, rental binding. Buy a new pair of same ski and have a normal non-track heel/toe-piece binding fitted. Ski/binding drops in weight significantly.

The extra weight makes a difference when carrying skis, skating, side stepping up hill, lifting skis on to footrests on lifts, etc.

Meh. I was on the 2011 Bushwacker when @Philpug had them at A-basin. The demo Markers were fine; the entire front of the ski flapped at fat jogger speeds.

Going back to my metal topsheet Volant Platinum Ms with NEOX and plate (>3800g per foot) was sweet, sweet bliss. Boots: Atomic Race 11.50 with laceup liners.

 

[markojp]

Is it for the same reason as Tony Sotaro, ie lighter boots are likely to be softer/lower flex? Or something else?

Not necessarily. I had a pair of Gryllimid touring boots that were very light, but brick stiff. Gryllimid doesn't absorb shock/vibration well.

My alpine boots are pretty heavy. They're never checked baggage, and I don't mind carrying them on board. I don't want to do a lot of hiking in them though. If that's in the cards, a touring boot with more traditional PE/PU is my choice much of the time. If loads of vertcal were on tap, then yes, I'd go lighter and just deal with the fact that a true mountaineering boot just isn't going to ski as well as my alpine boot.... horses for courses.

For beginners, sure, there are some advantages of having light(er) boots, particularly when just walking around in footware that's not designed for that particular task. So why aren't rental boots light? Durability. That's the short sweet answer. Light also costs $$$ .

 

[geepers]

Meh. I was on the 2011 Bushwacker when @Philpug had them at A-basin. The demo Markers were fine; the entire front of the ski flapped at fat jogger speeds.

Going back to my metal topsheet Volant Platinum Ms with NEOX and plate (>3800g per foot) was sweet, sweet bliss. Boots: Atomic Race 11.50 with laceup liners.

So you prefer burlier skis, stiffer boots Which has nothing much to do with what any particular beginner (or any other skier for that matter) may need/like.

Seems like a case of imposing your desires and asperations onto everyone else.

 

[cantunamunch]

So you prefer burlier skis, stiffer boots Which has nothing much to do with what any particular beginner (or any other skier for that matter) may need/like.

Seems like a case of imposing your desires and asperations onto everyone else.

So you prefer to reinterpret what I actually said and construe a complete misrepresentation fantasy of bullshi*t that you both piled up and made personal.

I stand by my answer.

...

The question is therefore about subjective feeling of weight and my answer is entirely appropriate. A loose rental boot makes skis feel heavier. And harder to control. But heavier even in non-control situations like sitting on the lift.

We even have proof of this on this very forum when 100kg nominally healthy fit men complain about the hanging weight of gear. Ask a few more questions and you find out they're skiing in a "shoe size fit" boot and their skis are of a size intended for 60kg women.

I freely admit that english is a third language for me but that sure has absolutely nothing to do with desires or aspirations.

So...thanks...ignore function acivated. You've proven your own irrelevancy.

 

[markojp]

Oooooophfff .... the season will be here soon.

 

[François Pugh]

Sure lighter is better for beginners, IFF (mathematicians will get it) your goal is to convince them that they shouldn't be skiing over 10 mph.

 

[geepers]

Sure lighter is better for beginners, IFF (mathematicians will get it) your goal is to convince them that they shouldn't be skiing over 10 mph.

Think this is confusing light weight with noodle.

Sure, there's a correlation but it's not linear. Those non-metal Bushwackers were certainly good for 5 to 6 times the speed mentioned above. Equally was recently on some Rossi beginner/intermediate things when I had to rent at Treble Cone that felt unsafe at any speed. (They were the only under 80 skis they had available.)

Which raises the question - what is the real difference between a beginner/intermediate ski and an advanced/expert ski and why are they made that way?

 

[Tony Storaro]

Sure lighter is better for beginners, IFF (mathematicians will get it) your goal is to convince them that they shouldn't be skiing over 10 mph.

In all fairness beginners have no business skiing over 10 mph.

 

[Wilhelmson]

Got it. Heavy skis are good for lean medium and heavy beginners of all sizes fitness and athletic background. Thanks for clearing that up! I feel much better knowing that all beginners are being outfitted with the appropriate weight gear.

 

[Tony Storaro]

Got it. Heavy skis are good for lean medium and heavy beginners of all sizes fitness and athletic background. Thanks for clearing that up! I feel much better knowing that all beginners are being outfitted with the appropriate weight gear.

The weight of the user has no bearing whatsoever on the weight of the equipment in this case. We are talking ski here not kettlebells and dumbbells. The user in this case is supposed to learn how to drive the vehicle, not carry it. And as surprising as it may be, heavy skis are much better for lightweight users. Lightweight user on a lightweight ski is like a ping pong downhill.

Of course I am talking here piste ski and the process of learning how to drive them properly, if said user wants just to have fun it doesnt matter what weight, length, width or other insignificant parameters the vehicle may have. Just put them on whatever boots happen to lie around, strap them to whatever ski and push them downhill. That'll teach them.

 

[MikeHunt]

How about older skiers who were advanced to expert skiers for years and decades in their youth and middle age, but injuries and wear and tear have started to limit their skiing ability in old age? Are lighter skis and boots good for them?

My assumption is the drive to carbonize skis and boots in the last 10 years was exactly for the above demographic. It may have been sold for touring and "lighter is better" reasons, but my gut feel is that the large majority of the ski market is aging boomers anyway. But the ski marketing departments risk tarnishing their brands by making it an "old skier" brand. They would rather market it differently without any reference to "old". But the old are really the target market for lighter everything. Am I right or have an idiotically laughable opinion?

 

[François Pugh]

I suppose it might help for people with bad knees who's doctor won't sign off on an operation.
The light skis won't be quite as bad in powder, but their response to frozen snow and ice is not good for lighter skiers. I will never forget the day I rented some Head "lightning" women's skis for my daughter. No Beuna.

 

[markojp]

One

How about older skiers who were advanced to expert skiers for years and decades in their youth and middle age, but injuries and wear and tear have started to limit their skiing ability in old age? Are lighter skis and boots good for them?

My assumption is the drive to carbonize skis and boots in the last 10 years was exactly for the above demographic. It may have been sold for touring and "lighter is better" reasons, but my gut feel is that the large majority of the ski market is aging boomers anyway. But the ski marketing departments risk tarnishing their brands by making it an "old skier" brand. They would rather market it dgear that's ifferently without any reference to "old". But the old are really the target market for lighter everything. Am I right or have an idiotically laughable opinion?

The bigger issue for elderly skiers is getting in and out of the boot, never mind the weight issue.

Go ahead and get yourself lighter gear if it suits your needs. There's plenty out there, and yes, manufacturers are making lighter gear that's easier to walk in, etc... It seems they're already delivering what you're asking for, so I guess I'm not really understanding where this is going.