Print

Print


Just finished quickly flipping through the Ski mag gear guide - now I’m by
no means asserting that just cuz Ski mag sez it’s so makes it so, but I
think they are pretty good at summing up the conventional wisdom, as
follows:
- for more hard snow than soft snow? then 68-72mm in the waist (“low fat”)
- mostly soft? then 75-80
- over 80?  “probably best reserved for bona fide powder days”

However, Atomic clearly thinks otherwise, touting its new 84mm M:ex (w/ or
w/o $1,099 electronic binding featuring radio communication between toe and
heel) as the quiver of one no matter what you ski.  (It acknowledges that
previously such wide skis were not optimal for firm snow, but now thanks to
all sorts of special Atomic innovations, etc etc.)

The Ski review was positive, but noted “shorter turns on harder snow are a
lot of work.”  However, the tested length was not specified, which is one
of the few pet peeves I had in what is otherwise a pretty good issue.
(Although maybe my K-Mart cheapo pass is already gaperfying me and thus
making me more receptive to Ski mag.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html