Jump to content

Were wide ride skis just a phase?


ballsohard
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Baller

Do you mean things like the goode wide ride obrien syncro and HO charger?

 

I think the ski companies have just gotten savvy, many skis are a bit more generous on the width overall. HO and Connelly have both introduced all around skis like the Omni and Connelly V that have wider bodies.

 

But 10 years ago a wide ride was a wide version of another ski, I think they're getti ng better at defining a shape for a wide ski. And don't overlook things like Katanas and freerides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I have been skiing this year on a Radar Katana which would qualify as a “wide” ride ski. I have been skiing 30 mph on it and it is a lot of fun. I ran 28 off this morning on it and it turns well and works through the wakes. The Katana is a carbon ski and is light and responsive but provides plenty of forgiveness. I think for people learning to run the course this would be a great ski. Better than a high end ski because you can make mistakes on it.

 

If you mean skis like the Goode Wide and Mid I think skis in general have gotten a little wider but not like that. Once I am comfortable my body can handle it I am going back on my Goode Mid. I made a mistake and moved off that for a Nano 1 which I hated then couldn’t get comfortable on a D3 Helix or the Blue Radar Senate before I got another Mid. I won’t get rid of this ski until I am sure the new one is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
There were quite a few people on the Mid Ride and Wide Ride, I dont know if this is a fact but I do recall some people saying that they thought various injurys may have come about riding these skis, as I say I do not know, maybe these people may have got these injuries anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Supporting Member
I'd regard it more as an evolution than an abandoned direction. Many high end skis today are considerably wider than the top skis of a decade or so ago. The Wide Ride itself seemed to only be suitable to a small fraction of skiers, but I think the lessons of the Mid and Wide Rides carried directly into the N1/XT/XTR as well as many other ski brands. The Denali is quite wide, for example, in part to accommodate the huge tunnel for lift that is a key element of the design.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I rode the Mid and Wide Ride Goodes when Perfect Pass was our only speed control, and set PB's in the 39's. Were great back then, but ZO would put so much load on you so fast with these skis, they became impractical, unless you used really slow speeds.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I built my first ski because I didn't like the feel of the narrow tips of most of the offerings at the time. It was wider at the tip only. I experimented with wider all over and had good sets on those skis. It is possible to go too wide (especially at high speeds). I ended my quest for ever wider skis on a ski that would skip out and stress my ankle (a session with the sawzall cured that problem and it was a reasonable ski once trimmed a bit).

 

After my hip injury, I pulled an old ski out of storage to ride. While narrower than the ski I replaced, it was still relatively wide. The replaced ski had a rocker that had a small sweet spot that required more skill than I can maintain with the few sets my body allows now. The old ski is easy to ski but I'm a long ways from my past performance buoy count. It's a consistency vs top score tradeoff - not a width thing.

 

INT had specs for a wide ride division. That drove some ski designs. I'm not sure if they are still doing that but I haven't seen an INT tournament for a while.

 

Marketing hype changes. When all the skis are a bit wider, "wide ride" doesn't work. Add a couple skis that were too wide and that marketing backfires.

 

If you liked a wide ride from a while ago, either keep enjoying it or look for a new equivalent that has something similar still out there.

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I have been trying my new Danali CG fin on every ski I can get my hands on. What’s impressed me the most is on wider skis that I had trouble getting up on edge the CG fin has allowed me to get these skis to hold great angle. Two wide skis that I tride that normally hit their grove 32 mph now are very comfortable at 34. The CG fin on the wide ride skis have become my favorite and very much worth a try.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

The beginning with the wide rides was like having one of the first parabolic skis on snow. They were very cool, and seemed to roll way out and back effortlessly. The issue I had with them was at the very short lines, if you needed to dig a big or were late, I could not keep the ski engaged at the wakes and trough. It was too large up front, and the waterpressure/hit would flatten it out. For me , the mid-rides solved the problem. I suspect a heavier skier might make it work a bit better. Tgas made it work for quite a while.

 

If you've never been on one, the first few passes will be eye openers. If you're not the type to dig and go for the last bouy possible, they are a lot of fun to ride. Very easy turning skis. My experience was with the Goode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@liquid d in my best day I was a deep 35 skier I only ran 35 once and it was on a mid-ride. I am a bigger skier when I ran 35 I was about 215 pounds. I got lost and wandered looking for a ski for a while before I came back to the Mid. I have been off the water for a couple of years due to some health issues but I am getting ready to get back to full speed and will put the Mid back in the water. I never tried the Goode Wide but at 215 pounds and 34 mph the Mid was plenty of ski in a 66".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
I had a conversation today with one of the most successful ski designers in the sport about this very topic. I can't really divulge too much of the conversation because it was in confidence but this designer would like to go back down that path of short wide skis again for super short line slalom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
we were discussing if the old axiom of "ride the longest ski you can turn” is still valid in the modern era. I tend to think this was a valid idea with PU core fiberglass skis but is now outdated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Lapoint’s were some of the first to widen the forebody for speed but left the tail narrow to sit in the water throughout the turns.

 

I tried Ed’s Wide Ride for a while and it just wasn’t my cup of tea. Didn’t beat my aging 9500’s scores. I like the 69” Senate but it’s hard for me to keep the tail in the water at 34 mph on a hard turn. That was the reason going to the 69.5 Pro Build. Could just be the length of these longer skis not wanting to turn sharply.

 

One of the Mapple skis was wider up front if I recall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
A guy I interviewed back when I had the podcast used to ski a wider ski and at the time I thought it was the best idea ever,. He said it lost its goodness in chop. But I guess nobody skis in wind or poor conditions anymore, so it should come back
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Hydrodynamics and aerodynamics are very close cousins...aircraft wings and water skis share the same traits...a short thin wing rolls quick, has a high load per square foot, goes fast but doesn’t like to behave well at slow speeds....a long, thick wing has a light load per square foot, rolls slow, goes slow but has excellent low speed control...sound familiar??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...