2008 Independent Ski Tests

[DW]

Continuous Improvement is always a good thing.  I thought the test went very well, you do a great job with it and offer the skiing public a great service.  It is interesting to think that the boat test is always highly anticipated, but in reality the real way to improve your ski scores is with the ski.  Remember, there is unfinished business in the ski test.  One area to consider, but potentially difficult to add would be a specifications sheet or page for each ski (flex numbers, weight, ???).

[Horton]

If time and money (and politics) were not in the way the whole thing could be far more complex. Would it be better? I don’t know and kind of doubt it. I learn stuff every year and this year some stuff came up under the radar that gave me other ideas about ski choice. There should be a side bar in the article when it comes out. If not, it will be on the Ski Test web site.If I could get the event paid for without the magazine and get the all the skis without the factories involved it could be a totally different affair again. But, I was sure happy to have the factories on site this year and I think the skiers got a better view of the skis that way. What ever happens in 09 if I am involved or not I think the test is way better with factory reps on site. In 06 we were sure we did not want the factory people around and now I see that it is the other way around. In the end I think the way we did it this year the reader gets a pretty darn good view of that is out there. With 150 -200 words from me on how the ski rides and 150 -200 words worth of quotes from the skiers, I think that is a pretty tough for a buyer getting ready for a $1000 purchase. Honestly there is no longer a bad ski in the group. The differences are more subtle every year.  Every one of the skis is fast or fast enough and honestly they were all described as forgiving by the majority of the skiers. As the skis get better every year the differences are increasingly minute and esoteric. As the author it is starting to be like rating beers. They are all wet and to some extent they are all malty. What beer is best? If you are Eric, it is the cheap one that gets you hammered, if you are Nicole it is that awful Michelob Ultra crap. Part of me wishes we had Kent Whites GPS system or a statistical data DW would build or engineering data but I am unconvinced that any of that data helps skiers choose a ski. To me the problem is that readers are about to drop $1000 on a ski that they might spend a few seasons on. If they make the wrong purchase that is a huge bummer for them. On the other hand if we give a ski an unfair review and the factory sells a 100 less skis that is $100,000 in sales. Across all the industry the review can easily affect the sales of $1,000,000 worth of skis.If it sounds like I am discounting the effort   . . . . No, I am just self critical and looking at lessons learned. This years ski test is the best yet and will tell the reader what the F1 is like off the ball, how the RC feels from the ball to the wakes, what kind of skier will do best on the SS, is the AM Senate for real, how the 08 Monza feels compared the 07 Monza and much more. Lastly since this is an honest and detailed post I would ask that you guys not repost or quote elsewhere. Enthusiastic posting usually means misinformation and frankly some pretty dumb stuff gets said on to the forums.

[Horton]

 

If time and money (and politics) were not in the way the whole thing could be far more complex. Would it be better? I don't know and kind of doubt it. I learn stuff every year and this year some stuff came up under the radar that gave me new ideas about ski choice. There should be a side bar in the article when it comes out. If not, it will be on the Ski Test web site.

If I could get the event paid for without the magazine and get the all the skis without the factories involved it could be a totally different affair again. But, I was sure happy to have the factories on site this year and I think the skiers got a better view of the skis that way. What ever happens in 09 if I am involved or not I think the test is way better with factory reps on site. In 06 we were sure we did not want the factory people around and now I see that it is the other way around. In the end I think the way we did it this year the reader gets a pretty darn good view of that is out there.

With 150 -200 words from me and 150 -200 words worth of quotes from the skiers, I think that is a pretty tough for a buyer getting ready for a $1000 purchase. Honestly there is no longer a bad ski in the group. The differences are more subtle every year.  Every one of the skis is fast or fast enough and honestly they were all described as forgiving by the majority of the skiers. As the skis get better every year the differences are increasingly minute and esoteric. As the author it is starting to be like rating beers. They are all wet and to some extent they are all malty. What beer is best? If you are Eric, it is the cheap one that gets you hammered, of you are Nicole it is that awful Michelob Ultra crap.

Part of me wishes we had Kent Whites GPS system or  statistical data DW would build or some engineering data but I am unconvinced that any of that data helps skiers choose a ski.

To me the problem is the readers are about to drop $1000 on a ski that they might spend a few seasons on. If they make the wrong purchase that is a huge bummer for them. On the other hand if we give a ski a unfair review and the factory sells a 100 less skis that is $100,000 in sales. Across all the brands the review can easily affect the sales of $1,000,000 worth of skis. I take this pretty seriously. 

This years ski test is the best yet and will tell the reader what the F1 is like off the ball, how the RC feels from the wakes to the ball, what kind of skier will do best on the SS, is the AM Senate for real, how the 08 Monza feels compared the 07 Monza and much more.

Lastly since this is an honest and rambling(pointless?) post.  I would ask that you guys not repost or quote elsewhere. Enthusiastic posting usually means misinformation and frankly some pretty dumb stuff gets said on the other forums.

[BillBarton]

The beginning of your post mentioned factory support. I didn't do this test last year or the year before, so I have nothing to compare it to, but having factory support out there was HUGE and I think it played a very large part in the quality of the results.

"So you're standing there with an MPD in your hand and it's not quite where you want it yet. Who do you want to talk to? One of your buds out there testing with you???" No offense guys, but not with EDDIE ROBERTS standing there. I'm going to go and respectfully lay that thing at his feet and let him do it. Same applies for the D3/Paul Crawford, Fisher/Jodi Fisher pairings. With those guys taking time out to be with us, things got straight really quick which meant more passes and better data. I hope the tests always have that.

Bill

[lkb]

Horton, you mentioned Kent WHite's GPS system. Is that what I have heard called "Lisa"? What does it do?

[Horton]

It is not really lisa. It builds on the lisa idea and records speed and path data of a skier. Very cool stuff but there does not seem to be enough money in the sport to get it done . . .

[lkb]

Garmin makes some wearable gps receivers that an athlete puts on while running or cycling, etc. They apparently store data during the workout/race. The data can later be downloaded to a computer program that garmin has out and it gives you a lot of ways to analyze your performance.

It's tantalizingly close to what we need but it's just not there. For skiing it would need to record a data point every tenth of a second.

[Horton]

I would want to get path, speed, (excel - decel) and then if mounted to the ski . Pitch and roll. I am sure DW could tell us what else we want . . . .

[auskier]

G's would be interesting... 

[DW]

The key would be to attach a six axis accelerometer to the ski and you will have all the data you need off the ski.  The interesting addition would be to track the handle and/or the CG of the skier to really see what is going on.  Starting point would obviously be with the ski and progress from there.  I really don't think we care if it is GPS based or not, if it can detail the path that works.  Part of the trick will be the waterproofing of the sensor itself.

[Skihack]

What is the AM Senate? Is this a new ski that was tested?

[Horton]

It is wider and lower tech Radar. I still ran into 38 on it.

Will two 4 axis accelerometers give me the axis I really need? Or is that really messy?

[DW]

2 three axis accelerometers will do the trick.  Not messy just need to orient 90 degrees from each other so they catch all six axis.  Comments on data rate, I think we need to be more in the 100 Hz rate to get good data.  One has to always remember that there are "bad" data points and if you get a peak between the points you miss it.  I just think the relatively short time frequency of a ski run justify's more than 5-10 Hz resolution.  Don't worry, I'm a cheap ba_t_rd so I will look for the low cost options out there.

On the race car stuff, we allow low frequency for things that we feel won't change much or very fast, such as atmospheric conditions, oil pressure and temperature and things like that.  Accel's. shock positions and things we end up being really interested in we usually go for 500-1000 Hz data fidelity.  Shocks in particular, high speed is needed.  For a short run like a ski pass or even several, memory won't be a big problem, we have a slightly bigger problem when we are storing a bunch of stuff for a long race.

[kstateskier]

We're ALL big nerds! 

[kstateskier]

Next years lunch should be catered exclusively by In & Out Burger and Hooters girls!

[BillBarton]

YA BABY! I'm all in for that!

[BillBarton]

Hey John,

How goes the article? 

[roda]

John,

As a member of the "buyer getting ready for a $1000 purchase" club I have not seen mention of the test skiers trying various sizes of the same ski and commenting on which they like better.   I have recently tried a 65" and 66" RC and like each one but for different traits.  It appears to me that had I tried only one vs. the other I would have come away w/ different conclusions about the ski.  I understand that that would add quite a few more rides to the tests but am interested to hear how the testers have come to decide what is right for them.

 I still haven't decided what's right for me (leaning towards 65"): 150lbs, 34mph, 15 & 22.  If anyone wants to comment I'm interested.   I keep hearing comments to wait on the '08s regardless of ski size.

 Thanks very much to John & all the testers for all the effort.

 -Rod A.

 

[lkb]

Rod A,

I'm 155 34mph and have always used a 66(currently on an MPD which rocks!!). Before I bought it Rossi said that was the size I should go with. However, it's always puzzled me a little as to how we determine which length is right because when you look around you will see small guys on big skis and bigger guys on smaller skis. So I think different things can work. As far as waiting on the 08's, if you're not getting to ski much because of winter I would wait.

LKB

[roda]

Thanks LKB,

I'm in the Orlando area so I am lucky and get to ski all year.  I might just pick up a used ski to ride for a few months waiting for the new models.  At my level of ability I wonder if it really matters.  I am consistent enough though that I can definately feel a .02 fin adjustment so I am guessing that I would also notice a difference in skis from year to year if the model has been updated.

-Rod A. 

 

[Old MS Accout]

I do think that once you figure out a ski size it should take you across the board with that size unless you get into the shaped skis or somthing out of the normal width. LKB said it correct. It is a personnel prefrence. I tried a 66,67 and 68 Monza and came away with the 67. Itried all colors of the Fish in both sizes and none of them worked. The 67.5 Sixam was too long and the 66 was to short. All that said, my last 3 skis have been 67s.

Wim Decree, 5'6, 160 soaking wet. He skis on a 67 radar.

Trent F, 6'somthing and 190ish maybe less, but he skis on a 66 radar. Go figure.  

[Horton]

It is different for each brand and model. I will cover this a bit in the ski test report.

[kstateskier]

Rod as a guy who is similiar in size to you, 5-11 160lbs I have been on a 67 Monza for 3 seasons and a 67 CDX before that...  I just made the switch to a 66 because I rode the 66 and liked how it turned much better without sacrificing and speed... 

 

FWIW i think unless you plan on packin on some lbs over the winter a 66 would be great for you!

 

Brad B. 

[Horton]

I would love to be 5 11 and 160! Heck I would love to be 160 at any height.