Volkl AC50 in Powder?

[pkerr]

All the reviews I have read rate this ski pretty high except in the "float" category. It's 85 under foot yet other skis of the same width or even narrower get rated higher. Can someone explain this to me?
Thanks

[Admin]

Personally I consider an 85mm-waisted ski to be a submarine.

[pkerr]

Personally I consider an 85mm-waisted ski to be a submarine.

Well yeah O.K. if you never ski in bounds and are a hip deep, back country, don't get out of bed unless there is at least a foot of fresh kind of skier, it would be.

But for the skiing I do and the amounts of powder I run into, what makes one 85'er better or worse than another?

[Admin]

Personally I consider an 85mm-waisted ski to be a submarine.

Well yeah O.K. if you never ski in bounds and are a hip deep, back country, don't get out of bed unless there is at least a foot of fresh kind of skier, it would be.

Or if you're going to occasionally ski that foot of snow in-bounds on something groomed beneath the new snow, it will be the same submarine.

Simply stated, the 85mm waist just doesn't provide a sufficient platform to stand on and float. Now, that's not to say that it can't be done -- of course it can, we all did it for decades -- but why make things more difficult and unpleasant than they have to be?

Float in powder is a product of several factors, not the least of which is waist. You also have to consider the ski's flex (particularly in the forebody), shovel dimensions (to initiate the floatation), sidecut, etc. Keep in mind that a good groomer ski and a good powder ski are going to be on the opposite ends of the continuum, such that you won't find a ski that does both well.

[pkerr]

Personally I consider an 85mm-waisted ski to be a submarine.

Well yeah O.K. if you never ski in bounds and are a hip deep, back country, don't get out of bed unless there is at least a foot of fresh kind of skier, it would be.

Or if you're going to occasionally ski that foot of snow in-bounds on something groomed beneath the new snow, it will be the same submarine.

Simply stated, the 85mm waist just doesn't provide a sufficient platform to stand on and float. Now, that's not to say that it can't be done -- of course it can, we all did it for decades -- but why make things more difficult and unpleasant than they have to be?

Float in powder is a product of several factors, not the least of which is waist. You also have to consider the ski's flex (particularly in the forebody), shovel dimensions (to initiate the floatation), sidecut, etc. Keep in mind that a good groomer ski and a good powder ski are going to be on the opposite ends of the continuum, such that you won't find a ski that does both well.

Thanks...
I don't get enough powder days (just luck into them when I do get them) to justify a specialty powder ski so I have to go with finding a good "all mountain" ski. Heck a few years ago 85 would be considered a fat boy. Now it's the new mid fat.
Thanks for the info.

[Admin]

If that's the case then don't worry about the floatation - just enjoy the AC50s and rent powder sticks when you happen to luck out.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[pkerr]

If that's the case then don't worry about the floatation - just enjoy the AC50s and rent powder sticks when you happen to luck out.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Good point...

[Tony Crocker]

Heck a few years ago 85 would be considered a fat boy. Now it's the new mid fat.

When I bought my Volant Power's in 1999, they were the widest midfat at 73mm.

Keep in mind that a good groomer ski and a good powder ski are going to be on the opposite ends of the continuum, such that you won't find a ski that does both well.

Sound advice, and the reason most skiers should have at least 2 pair of skis.

rent powder sticks when you happen to luck out.

You're not always going to be in a location with enough time/availability to do that. I've learned the hard way over decades of ski vacations that powder shows up on its own schedule, not yours. So if you only ski powder sporadically I think it's important that at least one of your own skis should be an assist not an impediment in those conditions. A lot of the all-mountain skis have a wide versatility range. Both BobbyD and my son Adam use the 100+mm underfoot Gotama as an everyday ski. Not necessarily plugging that ski for someone with a different ability/location profile, just an example.

[Admin]

My everyday go-to ski is a 191 cm 135-108-124 stick, but remember that the OP lives in St Louis.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Tony Crocker]

remember that the OP lives in St Louis.

But if he skis a lot it's not unreasonable that he should have a carving ski in the 70's range underfoot plus an all-mountain ski in the 90's underfoot. If the latter ski has the other characteristics admin described it should serve the OP just fine in powder. Recall that my Chubbs (which still do fine in Baldy's not-the-easiest powder) are 110-90-100. I would recommend that the all mountain ski NOT have a lot of sidecut if powder is a priority for it.

[pkerr]

I've got a 3 yr old pair of Recons (78 under foot). But I'm looking to go wider while still retaining the ability to hold an edge. Most of my skiing is on the hard pack here at out little hill. I get out west twice a year for about 6 days each trip. The Recons worked pretty well last year when we lucked into about 2 ft of new.

[Tony Crocker]

The Recons are my everyday ski and are very versatile. Last year at Snowbird I was on them during the storm day March 9, and by the afternoon enough powder had built up for me to get some flotation, certainly on anything with intermediate pitch. Next day at Alta with 22 inches new I demoed the K2 Obsethed, which are 102mm underfoot have a modest amount of rocker. On March 11 at Snowbird there was still fresh in Little Cloud/Bookends/Tigertail which had been closed the previous 2 days. I was on my Volkl Mantras 94mm underfoot for that one, fine in the open bowls but more work that I prefer in the trees.

[icelanticskier]

85 is fine. i have one pair of skis and one pair only for all of my east/west, inbounds/bc and it works great for everything and i ski over 100 days a year. atomic rt 86
128-86-114. i love sidecut and a lot of it for everything including pow and steeps. my last skis were 140-105-130 and i have no less fun in the pow on my atomics, plus i get more face shots now! heck, my xc rig rips it in the pow.

rog

[rfarren]

85 is fine. i have one pair of skis and one pair only for all of my east/west, inbounds/bc and it works great for everything and i ski over 100 days a year. atomic rt 86
128-86-114. i love sidecut and a lot of it for everything including pow and steeps. my last skis were 140-105-130 and i have no less fun in the pow on my atomics, plus i get more face shots now! heck, my xc rig rips it in the pow.

rog

I thought you were on the nomads?

[icelanticskier]

85 is fine. i have one pair of skis and one pair only for all of my east/west, inbounds/bc and it works great for everything and i ski over 100 days a year. atomic rt 86
128-86-114. i love sidecut and a lot of it for everything including pow and steeps. my last skis were 140-105-130 and i have no less fun in the pow on my atomics, plus i get more face shots now! heck, my xc rig rips it in the pow.

rog

I thought you were on the nomads?

i was 2 seasons ago......here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A89G7SLbRkE

and on mt washington......here: http://s177.photobucket.com/albums/w218 ... I_3862.flv

my atomics all last year.....here, on mt washington: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb7zMIFN ... ture=email

gonna ski on my atomics this season once again. my only ski quiver.

rog