SL Skis Experience

[Jelder]

I'm an OK skier. Live in the Midwest so don't ski powder and there aren't a ton of bump runs to practice on (learning to ski moguls is an aspirational goal). I'm NOT versatile, but can hold my own pretty well on groomers in all conditions, and have learned how to bend a ski and carve pretty well. Anyway, I've had a pair of Elan Wingman 86cti's for almost four years, which have been really fun do-everything skis. Two things over the last couple years, though, made me want to get a pair of "real" slalom skis: 1) our big hills are 500' tall, so maximizing my number of turns is a benefit, and 2) watching race kids from the lift zip their skis back and forth across their bodies looked like so much fun!

This past fall I bought a new pair of Head e-sl's. I know...they're not FIS, and they're not even the pro model, but they are short, heavy, stiff, and have a 12m turn radius. As far as I can tell, they're no joke, and here's the point of my post. If you are already a competent skier, but want to learn how to really manage balance, tip pressure, ankle/knee rolling, timing, and body movement, do yourself a favor and get a pair of this type of ski. If your edge angles aren't similar, they will let you know. If you get in the backseat while carrying any type of speed, they definitely will let you know when they try to shoot out from under you and launch you into next week. They are the most fun I've ever had on skis, and they've made me better because they are so good at revealing technical flaws.

TL;DR- if you've already skied a bit and want a coach attached to your boots, buy SL skis and start ripping short turns.

 

[KingGrump]

Why Suggest FIS Skis?

It seems to me that whenever somebody wants a frontside/carving ski recommendation around here, many are quick to suggest an FIS Slalom ski. I am curious as to why? As somebody that has spent significant time on race specific skis, I cannot wrap my head around this. I actually feel this is...

www.skitalk.com

 

[Jelder]

Why Suggest FIS Skis?

It seems to me that whenever somebody wants a frontside/carving ski recommendation around here, many are quick to suggest an FIS Slalom ski. I am curious as to why? As somebody that has spent significant time on race specific skis, I cannot wrap my head around this. I actually feel this is...

www.skitalk.com

Well that was a fun thread to catch up on! Thanks

 

[Snowplow Skip]

Race skis are great for skiing gates; but not so much for a daily driver.

Back in the day, if you wanted a top end ski it invariably said "Comp" on it. We all knew we were not getting the skis that World Cup skiers and Pros got; but they were a detuned version. Most skis had similar widths; and two choices of sidecuts, SL or GS.

So, that leads to the skis of today, with skis called things like Mindbender, Dobermann, Stormrider, Laser, Enforcer, Dancer, Ranger, Rustler, Ripstick, Maverick, Disruption, Blade, Sender, Deathwish and more!

Frontside-narrow 80+ to 90-ish
Frontside-wide/All Mnt Narrow 90-102
All Mnt 98-104
All Mnt Wide 104-110
Pow 110+
Pow wide 115-surfboards
Carving 65-80

Basically, width is one of the defining pieces of the pie; but so is construction, the amount of metal, type of wood etc. Rocker, camber, twin tip, stiffness, sidecut

Most skiers are probably skiing on a ski that is really too wide. I feel that most resort skiers would probably have more fun on a ski between 85 and 95 for most conditions (frontside narrow.) I think the sweet spot is 88-94.
The skis wider than 94 (frontside wide to All Mnt) may be more versatile in some conditions like fresh snow or plowing through crud; but you are likely sacrificing somewhere else.
Carving skis are a very specific animal, think scalpel vs. chef knife. Most of your Carving skis are based on race ski tech and pedigree. They tend to not be particularly forgiving, and certainly aren't for everyone.
Your Frontside skis and All Mnt skis are much more versatile.

Wider skis designed for deep freshies, back country, touring have their place for those special uses; but may not be the right tool for the average resort. Park skiing, moguls, freestyle, racing all have different demands and a ski suitable for one may kinda suck at another. There may be crossover; but you have to be realistic about your ability, where you ski and the type of runs you excel at.

Now, I am an aggressive, advanced skier and I love my carving groomer destroyers (80 under foot); but when the conditions aren't right for them, I have an excellent all mountain ski (100 under foot), that really can do just about anything (somethings better than others!) This season I got a pair of 88's and they are the bomb and are now my daily drivers. (Peak 88 by Bode) I like a longer, somewhat stiffer ski than many skiers my size. But, you won't find me in the park or in the halfpipe, you won't find me touring, climbing mountains, skiing off cliffs or down steep, narrow couloirs or for that matter chest deep pow.

Now, how do "you" ski? Are you trying to up your game? Do you ski many days a year or just a few? When you read reviews take all that into account. Also, what was the reviewer's thing? The reviewer may love a ski that just isn't for you. Maybe they are way into touring or park skiing, skiing switch, hucking tricks, blower pow and hopping pillows-is that what you do?

For instance, there are 8-10 characteristics that skis are evaluated by. What are your priorities.
1. Stability at speed-for me critical, for you maybe not so much
2. Versatility/Balance of skills
3. Playfulness-less important to me
4. Hard snow integrity-again critical
5. Crud performance-important
6. Quickness/Maneuverability
7. Forgiveness-not as important to me
8. Floatation
9. Carving
10. Responsiveness

What I want and need from a ski, may not be what you need or want.

I have found that most skis that score high marks in 3-4 areas, score lower in 3-4 others. Stability, hard snow, crud and carving with high scores, lower in forgiveness, playfulness, floatation etc. Skis that score higher in the latter, typically lower in the former etc. One ski, let's say a Nordica, gets top scores in versatility, crud performance and floatation. In the same test a Volkl comes 2nd in stability at speed and hard snow, 3rd in crud performance and 4th in versatility; but 1st in overall impression. An Armada came in with top scores in quickness and playfulness, 2nd in versatility and tied for 3rd with the Volkl in crud. All are undeniably great skis; but which has the attributes most important to you?
What are your needs? What is your level of expertise? Do you want a burley charger or something that if you relax a bit doesn't throw you on your face?
Oh, and remember that no matter how good your skis are, no matter how good they fit your style and needs, it all starts with good fitting boots!!!

 

[Tony Storaro]

Race skis are great for skiing gates; but not so much for a daily driver.

Back in the day, if you wanted a top end ski it invariably said "Comp" on it. We all knew we were not getting the skis that World Cup skiers and Pros got; but they were a detuned version. Most skis had similar widths; and two choices of sidecuts, SL or GS.

So, that leads to the skis of today, with skis called things like Mindbender, Dobermann, Stormrider, Laser, Enforcer, Dancer, Ranger, Rustler, Ripstick, Maverick, Disruption, Blade, Sender, Deathwish and more!

Frontside-narrow 80+ to 90-ish
Frontside-wide/All Mnt Narrow 90-102
All Mnt 98-104
All Mnt Wide 104-110
Pow 110+
Pow wide 115-surfboards
Carving 65-80

Basically, width is one of the defining pieces of the pie; but so is construction, the amount of metal, type of wood etc. Rocker, camber, twin tip, stiffness, sidecut

Most skiers are probably skiing on a ski that is really too wide. I feel that most resort skiers would probably have more fun on a ski between 85 and 95 for most conditions (frontside narrow.) I think the sweet spot is 88-94.
The skis wider than 94 (frontside wide to All Mnt) may be more versatile in some conditions like fresh snow or plowing through crud; but you are likely sacrificing somewhere else.
Carving skis are a very specific animal, think scalpel vs. chef knife. Most of your Carving skis are based on race ski tech and pedigree. They tend to not be particularly forgiving, and certainly aren't for everyone.
Your Frontside skis and All Mnt skis are much more versatile.

Wider skis designed for deep freshies, back country, touring have their place for those special uses; but may not be the right tool for the average resort. Park skiing, moguls, freestyle, racing all have different demands and a ski suitable for one may kinda suck at another. There may be crossover; but you have to be realistic about your ability, where you ski and the type of runs you excel at.

Now, I am an aggressive, advanced skier and I love my carving groomer destroyers (80 under foot); but when the conditions aren't right for them, I have an excellent all mountain ski (100 under foot), that really can do just about anything (somethings better than others!) This season I got a pair of 88's and they are the bomb and are now my daily drivers. (Peak 88 by Bode) I like a longer, somewhat stiffer ski than many skiers my size. But, you won't find me in the park or in the halfpipe, you won't find me touring, climbing mountains, skiing off cliffs or down steep, narrow couloirs or for that matter chest deep pow.

Now, how do "you" ski? Are you trying to up your game? Do you ski many days a year or just a few? When you read reviews take all that into account. Also, what was the reviewer's thing? The reviewer may love a ski that just isn't for you. Maybe they are way into touring or park skiing, skiing switch, hucking tricks, blower pow and hopping pillows-is that what you do?

For instance, there are 8-10 characteristics that skis are evaluated by. What are your priorities.
1. Stability at speed-for me critical, for you maybe not so much
2. Versatility/Balance of skills
3. Playfulness-less important to me
4. Hard snow integrity-again critical
5. Crud performance-important
6. Quickness/Maneuverability
7. Forgiveness-not as important to me
8. Floatation
9. Carving
10. Responsiveness

What I want and need from a ski, may not be what you need or want.

I have found that most skis that score high marks in 3-4 areas, score lower in 3-4 others. Stability, hard snow, crud and carving with high scores, lower in forgiveness, playfulness, floatation etc. Skis that score higher in the latter, typically lower in the former etc. One ski, let's say a Nordica, gets top scores in versatility, crud performance and floatation. In the same test a Volkl comes 2nd in stability at speed and hard snow, 3rd in crud performance and 4th in versatility; but 1st in overall impression. An Armada came in with top scores in quickness and playfulness, 2nd in versatility and tied for 3rd with the Volkl in crud. All are undeniably great skis; but which has the attributes most important to you?
What are your needs? What is your level of expertise? Do you want a burley charger or something that if you relax a bit doesn't throw you on your face?
Oh, and remember that no matter how good your skis are, no matter how good they fit your style and needs, it all starts with good fitting boots!!!

Gee…I seldom see posts in this forum so full of points I wholeheartedly disagree with. Well done!

You completely lost me here:

carving groomer destroyers (80 under foot)

There is no such animal in nature. Skis are either 80 mm underfoot or carving groomer destroyers. Can’t be both.

This is what carving groomers destroyers look like:

Exhibit A:




Exhibit B:




80 mm underfoot is a a fat AM skis.

 

[jt10000]

I am an aggressive, advanced skier

Noted.

 

[silverback]

Chatgpt, is that you?

 

[François Pugh]

Race skis are great for skiing gates; but not so much for a daily driver.

Nonsense!
"Back in the day, if you wanted a top end ski it invariably said "Comp" on it. "
Actually, it said, "KASTLE RX National Team SG" on it AND

Of course, the meaning of short turns was a little different back then.

It still makes good high speed long turns, but I prefer SL for today's short turns.

 

[dbostedo]

I feel that most resort skiers would probably have more fun on a ski between 85 and 95 for most conditions

SS I think your Washington state location colored a lot of that post, and that's what folks are reacting to.

All your description were a level off, or two, for much of the rest of North America. You'll see many fewer 95+ daily drivers in some places in the Rockies, and almost none in the east.

And 80+ is sort of wide in the east... carvers are sub-80, and some are sub-70.

 

[Even_Stevens]

My 96mm daily drivers in Washington State would be looked at as kinda narrow in Utah or Tahoe.

Went to a demo day recently at one of our local areas and there was hardly anything narrow than 80mm there. Head brought e-Rallys, and Stöckli had more of a selection under 80mm. But that was basically it.

 

[François Pugh]

I've noticed that 84 mm wide skis on groomers are much more tolerable at Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island than they are on our local boiler plate.

 

[DocGKR]

"My 96mm daily drivers in Washington State would be looked at as kinda narrow in Utah or Tahoe."

Hmmmm.....I ski at Tahoe every week and find my daily drivers to most often be 65-70mm wide in the morning and maybe 88-90mm in the afternoon depending on what we are skiing. The only time I go much wider is when there is lots of fresh snow, then I like my 115's.

 

[Even_Stevens]

At Palisades last May my Ripsticks were some of the narrower skis there. A lot of people had stuff like Enforcer 104s and Rustler 10s.

And this was spring skiing too! You’d think stickier snow = narrower skis, but it didn’t work out that way.

 

[oldschoolskier]

Daily drivers FIS SL and FIS GS, if I need a do it all ski it's hands down FIS GS.

I started on old straight skis and the rule was GS for everything. I find the shaped GS now are way more stable at speeds and if skied the way they should be require your attention. However, in other than GS style turns, because of how they are built and there length/stiffness, I ski them old school and they perform like the older race skis did.

It comes down to being able to ski the different styles.

 

[SpeedyKevin]

"My 96mm daily drivers in Washington State would be looked at as kinda narrow in Utah or Tahoe."

Hmmmm.....I ski at Tahoe every week and find my daily drivers to most often be 65-70mm wide in the morning and maybe 88-90mm in the afternoon depending on what we are skiing. The only time I go much wider is when there is lots of fresh snow, then I like my 115's.

Started with 110 wide skis these past two days at alpine. They were awesome in the 10 to 15 inches of snow. By 10am, I was wanting my 80ish wide skis (which I regrettably left at home).

Could folks daily drive a mid 90 at Tahoe? Sure, I did for a few years. But boy....after trying a 80ish wide, my world has changed lol.

 

[silverback]

It was warm and spring-like last week. I waxed and brought several different skis up including FIS SL, Head e.speed pro, mx83, mx98, Billy Goats and Pescados. I kept starting on the Slaloms for the icy/firm morning groomers and could never find a compelling reason to change them out. They are just so fun in the slush and corn.

 

[Paul Lutes]

Started with 110 wide skis these past two days at alpine. They were awesome in the 10 to 15 inches of snow. By 10am, I was wanting my 80ish wide skis (which I regrettably left at home).

Could folks daily drive a mid 90 at Tahoe? Sure, I did for a few years. But boy....after trying a 80ish wide, my world has changed lol.

Next stop ..... 70s!

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Next stop ..... 70s!

Examining options...

 

[Tom K.]

Skis are either 80 mm underfoot or carving groomer destroyers. Can’t be both.

Purty one dimensional thinking there, sir.

I've got a pair of 80 mm and 89 mm skis that absolutely are carving groomer destroyers -- but my groomers are purty soft 99% of the time.

 

[Tony Storaro]

Purty one dimensional thinking there, sir.

I've got a pair of 80 mm and 89 mm skis that absolutely are carving groomer destroyers -- but my groomers are purty soft 99% of the time.

Nah, you are just destroying groomers on a ski that you can make carve. That doesn’t mean they are groomer destroyers by nature.

You know, this is a common misconception around here. Every now and then you see someone claiming they can make pigs fly. Well yeah, if you kick them hard enough you can surely get them airborne for some time/distance. This fact however doesn’t make pigs flying creatures. It just makes you good at scoring field goals.