skis for coastal snow

[Knowsam]

Hey all,

 

Thinking of spending some time skiing on BC Southern Coast and Northern Washington. Coming from the Canadian Rockies where the snow is very little (though scarce) there is a tonne of value in getting skis with a bit of a rocker - is that value there with the damper/heavier coastal snow pack? I'm looking at either coombacks or sidestashes.

 

Cheers

[Pete_H]

Rocker is a tonne more valuable in deeper heavier coastal snow than in a more continental snowpack. Fatter skis with some rocker are good for area and touring 'round here, IMHO.

[lightD]

I picked up a pair of Coombacks a month ago that I use almost 100% for touring. They do a great job of staying on top of our sticky heavy snow.

 

They're also surprisingly nimble. They get around quickly and can change lines easily. The rocker and maybe the elongated tip seem to help with that. The tip is just less locked in and stays nearer to the surface.

 

Plus, 8.1lbs a pair (3.6kg?) seems pretty good for getting 100+ mm under foot. That's really what got me interested in the ski.

 

BTW, the G3 Tonic skied close to the Coomback. It might be a good plan B for the right price. I think its just a touch heavier.

 

Just one guy's POV. Hope it helps.

 

Have a good trip out to the coast.

[snodger]

lightD,

 

By any chance did you try out the Manaslu also? There's been many good reports of it's "quiver of one" status but I kinda get the drift that it's got more of a soft snow bias.

 

Don't know why I'm asking, can't afford new skis anyway...

[lightD]

Yeah, I demo'd the Manaslus and got some great reviews from Manaslu owners who really really liked the ski for soft snow. The weight is clearly an asset. But they just felt a lot lighter and less substantial, and were a little more work to ski.

 

To be fair, I was not demoing the Manaslus in soft snow, which is where they're supposed to shine. But I figured that the Coombacks wouldn't do any worse in soft snow, and they certainly let you get away with a lot more while still feeling more substantial underfoot - probably a weight thing. The Manaslus certainly did hold an edge just fine. So I went Coomback and paid the weight penalty. But that's working pretty well so far.

 

Hey - isn't REI having a sale this weekend? It never hurts to look right?? Good luck with your financial planning!

 

 

Edited February 9, 2010 by lightD

[hafilax]

I thought the Manaslu was the ideal at first but I'm a little worried about durability with the thin edge and base. IIRC they have a new freeride ski out (for next year) that looked good. Can check wildsnow.

 

I'd look at the Coomback, Kilowatt, Zenoxide and if you're not afraid of spending a lot of money the Bro (the new 183 is a glass carbon fiber hybrid) or DPS Wailer 105 might be options.

 

I'm on an old set of 168 Gotamas and like the 105 waist although I don't have a lot of experience on modern skis since I recently returned to skiing after a 16 year snowboarding hiatus. The only complaint I have about the Gotamas is that the tail is too short. Right now I think my ideal ski would be similar but have a more centered mount with the same amount of ski in front of the boot, a bit of tip rocker and less upturned tail with more of a pin profile.

[dbconlin]

Coombacks look sweet! Wish I had the duckets...

[i_like_sun]

Atomic Bent Chetler.

 

Camber under foot is great for skinning, rocker in the nose and tail sits on top of pow super rad...