OT: ski goggles

[vqdriver]

EDIT: I've been talked out of ski blades. i have a question re: goggles on page 2 tho... ;)


so i get that they're short, like really short. but what's the purpose? to do tricks and such? i assume that they're more skittish and harder to control at speed? they look like fun.....
i'm a casual skier at most and it's appealing because they seem like they'd be easier to control at slow to moderate speeds. a hard blue square is about the limit of my comfort zone.

on a related note, why do people hate them?

[Buzz Killington]

Ski blades? Please no. Showing up with those is tantamount to showing up for the next group ride on an Elliptigo.

[Dead Man]

They shine for certain ski mountaineering applications.. I don't think I'd just go do lift service with them

[Birddog]

There are 2 types, those with safety bindings and those without. The ones with, suck a little less than those without. There is no stability with the short surface so as you go faster you have less control. Other than having what looks like a short ski on your boot and balancing on same, there is little related to real skiing.

[beeemmjay]

Snowblades, miniskis, whatever you want to call them... They're not what you'd call the norm.

A ski school I taught with was sponsored by Salomon. Years ago when Snowblades came out (we're talking almost 20 years ago), we used them sparingly, somewhere between a sponsor gimmick and and a tool to help emphasize certain elements of skiing (balance, pivoting, etc.), but I wouldn't call miniskiing skiing.

You may see the odd guy out there today trying to see how close he can get his hip to the hill layin' out a carve, or another trying not to kill themselves off of some mini jumps.

You are more likely to see someone in jeans wearing a skidoo jacket, sporting some rear-entry boots, and thumbdestroyer poles.

If you are asking: 'should I buy these?'
'No' is most definitely the answer.

That is of course, unless Saucer Boy lives, and this is a tongue in cheek way of speaking from beyond the grave.

[tele]

Only good for a personal shot ski.

[alexstar]

I have a pair. They are fun for tooling around, but they are definitely not super stable at high speed. More of a toy than anything else.

[vqdriver]

thumbdestroyer poles.


Gotta ask what those are

[sitzmark]

Gotta ask what those are

http://thumbs.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/pict/141781066351_4.jpg

Hand basically locked in position which often positions the thumb snow-side down when falling forward or to the side. Many, many, many thumb dislocations as a result.

Ski blades just another snow device. Manly men are afraid to ski them because ... well manly men are afraid to wear pink too. :D

They are easy to transport and much easier to turn and maneuver. For accomplished skiers with good skills, they can be an effective training tool. Staying centered, dynamically balanced, and carving turns, especially at higher speeds is not easy. Typically less accomplished skiers (or novices) get their hands on them and end up flailing away on terrain far more advanced than their skills support. A danger and a nuisance to all.

[Dead Man]

http://thumbs.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/pict/141781066351_4.jpg

Hand basically locked in position which often positions the thumb snow-side down when falling forward or to the side. Many, many, many thumb dislocations as a result.

Ski blades just another snow device. Manly men are afraid to ski them because ... well manly men are afraid to wear pink too. :D

They are easy to transport and much easier to turn and maneuver. For accomplished skiers with good skills, they can be an effective training tool. Staying centered, dynamically balanced, and carving turns, especially at higher speeds is not easy. Typically less accomplished skiers (or novices) get their hands on them and end up flailing away on terrain far more advanced than their skills support. A danger and a nuisance to all.

Well said.

I don't wear pink for totally different reasons, though.

[jwess1234]

Fun to try out once or twice on a rental. I haven't tried them in years, but the lack of stability and ease with which they can turn fast would have me scared of twisting a knee/ankle (and being off the bike because of it:( ). I suggest trying them on groomed trails your first time.

[christian]

I have a pair of Kneissl Big Foots, the original ones. They were fun in 1992. I suspect they'd still be fun.

[m_sasso]

Snowblades, miniskis, whatever you want to call them... They're not what you'd call the norm.

A ski school I taught with was sponsored by Salomon. Years ago when Snowblades came out (we're talking almost 20 years ago), we used them sparingly, somewhere between a sponsor gimmick and and a tool to help emphasize certain elements of skiing (balance, pivoting, etc.), but I wouldn't call miniskiing skiing.

You may see the odd guy out there today trying to see how close he can get his hip to the hill layin' out a carve, or another trying not to kill themselves off of some mini jumps.

You are more likely to see someone in jeans wearing a skidoo jacket, sporting some rear-entry boots, and thumbdestroyer poles.

If you are asking: 'should I buy these?'
'No' is most definitely the answer.

That is of course, unless Saucer Boy lives, and this is a tongue in cheek way of speaking from beyond the grave.

Funny, "Snowblades" 20 years ago, don't think so!

People skied on barrel staves hundreds of years ago.

When I started skiing 58 years ago and only wooden skis existed, people just cut off the back 3/4 of old, broken, de-cambered.......skis to make "Snowblades". So no "Snowblades", ultra short skis did not come out 20 years ago and there use as a teaching tool certainly didn't begin 20 years ago.

More like when some one put a marketable name on ultra-short skis 20 years ago.

[Birddog]

Probably the most well known inventor and proponent of the "short ski" was Cliff Taylor who introduced the GLM (graduated length method) to skiing. !00CM skis were the starting point. Blades and such are not new.
http://www.skimuseum.net/halloffame/hall_of_fame_details.php?HallOfFameID=129

[beeemmjay]

Funny, "Snowblades" 20 years ago, don't think so!

People skied on barrel staves hundreds of years ago.

When I started skiing 58 years ago and only wooden skis existed, people just cut off the back 3/4 of old, broken, de-cambered.......skis to make "Snowblades". So no "Snowblades", ultra short skis did not come out 20 years ago and there use as a teaching tool certainly didn't begin 20 years ago.

More like when some one put a marketable name on ultra-short skis 20 years ago.

Snowblades (by Salomon) came out in the late 90s - or roughly 20 years ago. They were not the first miniski, but they were incredibly marketed, and for a period, very successful. Salomon as a company and as a brand has always had a great knack for marketing.

Should you miniski? Just look at Saucerboy - he's having a blast!

Winter, however you choose to enjoy it, be it skiing, snowboarding, miniskiing, or other, is a pleasure. If you're winter minded, an alpine enthusiast, by all means, be just that in whatever form you choose (even if it means being a miniskier).

[christian]

Let's face it, as dumb as miniskis are, they're still way better than snowboards.

[gforce]

^^^^^ I think Jeremy Jones would laugh at that statement.
Ski Blades never had nor deserve any respect.

[verticaldoug]

^^^^^ I think Jeremy Jones would laugh at that statement.
Ski Blades never had nor deserve any respect.

He's the guy who cut a snowboard in two and said 'look touring skis'.

I lost respect for him on his 'Going Further' series. He turned into a snowboarding Bear Grylls. Too much reality tv

[AJM100]

In the 1980s the only real "shorter" ski I remember seeing the hot dogs skiing on were the Olin Ballet skis - very short and with a curved up tail.

That was back when you would ski on much thiner and a properly fitted ski was taller than you. Coming from the Northeast (think narrow trails and ice or cat packed surface) and skiing there on those sticks during my formative years make skiing on "shaped" and shorter skis easy peasy.

[moose8]

Didn't these things used to break people's legs with alarming frequency? Something about the torque they could end up putting on your tib-fib? I may be misremembering, but I think they were fairly dangerous in that regard.

I'm all for whatever gets people out in crappy weather though.

[Birddog]

Didn't these things used to break people's legs with alarming frequency? Something about the torque they could end up putting on your tib-fib? I may be misremembering, but I think they were fairly dangerous in that regard.

I'm all for whatever gets people out in crappy weather though.

I don't know about alarming frequency but you're right about injuries. Many of the early versions and many of the current cheap versions do not have a safety release binding. The Ski School I work for won't give lessons to people who are on the non release versions. We have one crappy rental shop that keeps sending people out on these POS, then they are bummed when they can't get a lesson.

It's pretty easy for a newb to get going out of control then take an eggbeater fall. With non release bindings you can imagine what might happen.

[pitonpat]

On my first trip to the Alps, climbing the Finsteraarhorn, i met a guy carrying short skis (maybe 30" or so) strapped to his backpack. When asked, he said they were made for rapidly descending on firn snow- settled, old snow in places like the Alps which gets snow year-round.

After summiting, and once we reached the base of the rocky summit ridge, the guy donned his shorty skis and promptly rocketed down to the Aletsch glacier a couple of thousand feet below! It's usually possible to boot-ski on sun softened corn snow like this, but way slower & with less fun than this guy was having.

This was in 1970 and I think the skis were made by Salewa, a German climbing equipment manufacturer.

[vqdriver]

alright alright. clearly the cool kids on the mtn won't approve so forget i asked, i'll stick to normal rentals :D

on a related note, what's the difference between $40 goggles and $200 goggles? all i need from them is shade and to not fog. never fog. ever. like never ever fog.

[verticaldoug]

You don't need to go all the way out to 200 pair. But generally, the more expensive goggles will have wider optics so you get a wider field of view which is nice on the slope. The goggle may have interchangeable lens. Different lens color for Bright vs flat vs snowing vs night light conditions. The improved contrast really helps seeing the terrain in poor light. The more expensive goggle may have better venting, probably has a better anti-fog coating, and may be a bit more durable.

All that being said, pre-christmas, Oakley was giving out 50% coupons. 50% off a $110 - $150 crowbar/flight desk goggle and for 55-75 bucks you have a pretty nice goggle. Just wait for a sale.

[djg21]

EDIT: I've been talked out of ski blades. i have a question re: goggles on page 2 tho... ;)


so i get that they're short, like really short. but what's the purpose? to do tricks and such? i assume that they're more skittish and harder to control at speed? they look like fun.....
i'm a casual skier at most and it's appealing because they seem like they'd be easier to control at slow to moderate speeds. a hard blue square is about the limit of my comfort zone.

on a related note, why do people hate them?

If you want to try something different on snow, lose the training bindings and try telemark. If you can carve p-turns on alpine gear, you can carve p-turns on free-heel gear. Telemark gear opens up trees and terrain that aren't as accessible on alpine gear, and skinning up is a great workout. Take a weekend clinic and you'll be free-hill skiing fairly competently.

[Dead Man]

I use Smith's cheap-o $25 variety in yellow and clear.... NO COMPLAINTS!