Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
The problem with the Freeskier buyer's guide
Posts: 4916
-
Karma: 66
The people who do these tests seem to be obsessed with skiing every ski everwhere except the park, and i see Freeskier as the park skiers magazine, maybe im wrong. For example, the Pontoon is given a 9 rating and they rave about its powder abilities but say you cant ski it anywhere else. Then when they review the K2 Silencer they give it a 5 because it is "skittish" outside the park. They are so fuckin biased towards powder skiing it kills me. The fatypus too is given one of the highest ratings and i guarentee those wont perform in the park. half the pictures in your magazine are of the terrain park but you dont give fair ratings to your park skis because your testers are a bunch of old guys
Posts: 76
-
Karma: 54
Very true, but you have to consider that you probably have only paid $12 for 5 years of subscriptions and the reason they are so cheap is because of the advertising. I don't put too much faith in a buyers guide for the the reasons you stated, but I do enjoy getting magazines for free
Posts: 6753
-
Karma: 68
I... like that phrase alot of alot.
Posts: 12055
-
Karma: 913
WOW.... Hopefully.... consideration will given to us ice coasters someday. BTW - for what it is worth, what I bought last season for a "western ski" is now, surprisingly, my every day, every where ski. (83mm under foot)
Posts: 652
-
Karma: 9
^ i've skied 85 mm underfoot for the last two years, full seasons in the East with the exception of two weeks in Tahoe and one in Whistler. Where, of course, I developed a skinny ski complex.
Posts: 384
-
Karma: 11
they do that because powder can kick parks ass anyday
Posts: 229
-
Karma: 224
Got it. So your geographical situation has you down, and you really don't care about the Freeskier Buyer's Guide. Right?
Personally, I think you can ski a fatter ski underfoot on hard or icy snow, provided you know how to lay the ski on edge and the ski is properly tuned. This includes skis that are 90 and even bigger underfoot. I've done it, and I know. But I also have a racing background, so maybe that helps.
My opinion, and this is just that, an OPINION AND MAY NOT BE YOUR TRUTH, is that the only time you need something skinny (less than 85) is in bumps, or if it's a dedicated park ski and you are a dedicated park skier.
It's also interesting that the Backcountry Magazine guys ski pretty fat skis, exactly what the boys out west ski, and there seems to be - if the pics in that mag are any indication - a lot of pow in them eastern woods. Of course, they're on skis that are 90+ underfoot, short, fat and very quick for those really tight lines.
Maybe you should try to hook up with them this season. It could improve your attitude.
Posts: 1023
-
Karma: 21
it was good that they got so many skis in there though, but i agree that they totally thrash everything under 85mm
Posts: 15084
-
Karma: 731
yea camron i agree. Freeskier needs more park and urban focus . RIP Freeze
Posts: 5117
-
Karma: 65
i agree with you, i wish there was more park related reviews, but i cannot blame them for focusing on powder
Posts: 6153
-
Karma: 199
The kid was saying that Freeskier is "run by old guys."
As an intern it's kind of up for debate what exactly you're running.
Posts: 1772
-
Karma: 11
i got Ski Canada's fall anual buyers guide, its solid, it doesnt have all the skis tested, but it has a good variation of skis, like powder, all mountain twins, carve skis, etc...
I think its a solid buyers guide
Posts: 731
-
Karma: 9
its not called "powder" either
Posts: 6343
-
Karma: 4,415
why dont you write to freeskier so your voice gets heard rather than bitching about it on the fucking internet.
i do agree with what ur saying though man it makes me mad to.
All times are Eastern (-5)
