Whats the Skinny on the Fatties?

This is all a marketing conspiracy. Just when you think you've got a ski that can handle almost any day, they tell you, nope, another thousand bucks, please.
 
I view it as wishful thinking: Wouldn't you prefer to ski a foot of powder on a 100mm+ every time you go? So that's the ski you want. Most of the time, we get hardpack, or maybe corduroy, but I know I'm still dreaming about 12" of dry fluff...
It’s the old adage “Dress for the job you want…….”
 
I went from 80 to 88 with more rocker and liked the difference. Cuts through the high traffic generated crud better.

I'm probably gonna look for something like Blizzard Bonafide (97/98) over the summer.

Last year I tried my sons Fischer Progressors and hit some crud and almost wiped out. :)

I rented some 116 once for a powder day and I could not imagine ever wanting those on groomers, especially with my limited talent. :)
 
I think what I call hard packed compared to what everyone on here calls hard packed or packed powder may be different. I’m 10 mm fatter on all applications across the board.
 
I went from Rossignol B3’s at 83mm to Liberty Origin 96’s and now I went back to Shaggy Brockway 90’s. When I tried to ski my Bandits after the Origins it felt like there wasn’t much of an edge under my feet. Now my Shaggy’s are a little less ski than my Liberty’s are but it has more camber and less rocker and I think that is making up the difference in width.
 
I grew up skiing long and skinny. First time I skied 88s I thought they were crazy fat! Today my daily drivers are Ripstick 88s. They're 12 cm longer than me and I think that helps the floatation in powder. I have a pair of 106 waist for real powder days, same length but a lot more rocker. On my off-season shopping list is a pair of Ripstick 96 with a set of Salomon shift bindings. Then I'll just need to bring one pair when I travel....
 
Back
Top