It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
What was the first women-specific twin tip park ski?
ChunkyloverHmmm Greta Eliessen had the Armada ARW pressed in 2005/2006.
I think this was give or take the first year that the missdemeanor came out too. The very first PE came out in like 03 so Idk that there would have been any women’s park skis older than that since there was barely even men’s park skis in the first place at that era
tomPietrowskiIm pretty sure it was the K2 and I think it was called the Missdemeanor
CaseyI think this was give or take the first year that the missdemeanor came out too. The very first PE came out in like 03 so Idk that there would have been any women’s park skis older than that since there was barely even men’s park skis in the first place at that era
Looks like the Missdemeanor came out 2005/2006, putting it there with Line and Armada.
ThaLoraxYa, pretty sure it was the misdemeanor, which was just the public enemy with different graphics
It appears that the K2 Missdemeanor is the answer I was looking for.
Thanks so much everyone!
Although the other skis came out the same year, the Missdemeanor must've been first - with Line and Armada following suit.
Wonder what other women's park skis came out that year and the year after?
Down the rabbit hole a bit, it looks like the construction differs a bit from the Men's.
Kind of begs the question: what was the first pure "shrink and pink" women's park ski? Like totally identical construction, flex, width ratios, mount point, etc... just that it's in shorter lengths and pink.
It appears that the K2 Missdemeanor is the answer I was looking for.
Thanks so much everyone!
Although the other skis came out the same year, the Missdemeanor must've been first - with Line and Armada following suit.
Wonder what other women's park skis came out that year and the year after?
Down the rabbit hole a bit, it looks like the construction differs a bit from the Men's.
Kind of begs the question: what was the first pure "shrink and pink" women's park ski? Like totally identical construction, flex, width ratios, mount point, etc... just that it's in shorter lengths and pink.
Nice. I always thought the first iteration was a shrink it and pink it ski. Unfortunately, most female "specific " skis are just that. Or they'll just make it slightly more narrow (looking at you, Elan Ripstick).
Piss_BoyWOMEN SKIS ARE A SCAM WOMAN SKIS ARE A SCAM
Reeeee!! We got a screecher!
That's alright, I'll drop a little knowledge on ya and u can sit with us at the adults table.
For many women skiers sliding around on beginner-spec'd gear, it's completely practical to have smaller, softer, gender-specific skis with inviting graphics.
For expert skiers skiing high performance skis, the somewhat disdainful shrink and pink treatment of womens skis is consistent with a market traditionally dominated by men on the design and consumer side.
The needs, physiology, and purchasing power of women are not being grasped. Instead we're offered modified versions of men's skis that are these flimsy little low performance noodles that don't meet our performance demands.
Taller women can just buy the men's ski. An option that isn't really designed for our anatomy as far as size, flex, flex points, stance, mount, and geometry go.
Shorter women get excluded from the size range and gotta go overpower their crappy watered-down gear. It kinda locks em into a category of intermediate skiers and makes it difficult to progress.
I mean, personally, I'm a tall muscular woman too big for women's sizes and trying to dork out over niche-y skiing styles. As much as I like following women's gear, not really any of it is being designed on the fringe. Thus, I only really like to ski shit that's at the upper performance boundaries of the men's market. Hell, all my outerwear fits like garbage bags too.
However! I watch the progression of the women's market very closely and look forward to the day that I buy a big amazing women's ski that I can feel super confident on.
Good news is, we seem to be in the middle of a fast-paced renaissance of women's ski design!
41% of skiers are women. Now that we have our own jobs and can travel unrestricted, we're spending a shit load of money liberating ourselves by aggressively pursuing athletic endeavors.
In the last decade, we just kind of overpowered all the women's gear offerings and are thirsty for blood, demanding the real pain and forcing the outdoor industry to design better stuff if they want to sustain the rocketing women's market growth that's currently happening.
ChunkyloverShorter women get excluded from the size range and gotta go overpower their crappy watered-down gear. It kinda locks em into a category of intermediate skiers and makes it difficult to progress.
idk if this is true cause I have a friend who is 5' and she rips on magnus that are like 171 or something, and a lot of park skis come in even shorter lengths than that
VT_scratchhmm anyone remember what year roxy rebranded some rossi skis and put out women's twins?
I got Roxy twins in 2008 that were the Dynastar Big Troubles rebranded. Dynastar also sold them as a women's ski with a different top sheet, so you had three options to choose from for exactly the same ski.
That said Quicksilver owned both Dynastar and Rossi back then, so it wouldn't surprise me if they rebranded Rossi twins as well at some point.
That's alright, I'll drop a little knowledge on ya and u can sit with us at the adults table.
For many women skiers sliding around on beginner-spec'd gear, it's completely practical to have smaller, softer, gender-specific skis with inviting graphics.
For expert skiers skiing high performance skis, the somewhat disdainful shrink and pink treatment of womens skis is consistent with a market traditionally dominated by men on the design and consumer side.
The needs, physiology, and purchasing power of women are not being grasped. Instead we're offered modified versions of men's skis that are these flimsy little low performance noodles that don't meet our performance demands.
Taller women can just buy the men's ski. An option that isn't really designed for our anatomy as far as size, flex, flex points, stance, mount, and geometry go.
Shorter women get excluded from the size range and gotta go overpower their crappy watered-down gear. It kinda locks em into a category of intermediate skiers and makes it difficult to progress.
I mean, personally, I'm a tall muscular woman too big for women's sizes and trying to dork out over niche-y skiing styles. As much as I like following women's gear, not really any of it is being designed on the fringe. Thus, I only really like to ski shit that's at the upper performance boundaries of the men's market. Hell, all my outerwear fits like garbage bags too.
However! I watch the progression of the women's market very closely and look forward to the day that I buy a big amazing women's ski that I can feel super confident on.
Good news is, we seem to be in the middle of a fast-paced renaissance of women's ski design!
41% of skiers are women. Now that we have our own jobs and can travel unrestricted, we're spending a shit load of money liberating ourselves by aggressively pursuing athletic endeavors.
In the last decade, we just kind of overpowered all the women's gear offerings and are thirsty for blood, demanding the real pain and forcing the outdoor industry to design better stuff if they want to sustain the rocketing women's market growth that's currently happening.
As a 5'2" male, I feel this struggle too. Women's skis are too soft for me, and most men's skis are too long for me. But I also only weigh 115lbs, so I don't like super stiff metal, directional skis, and that seems like the only options in the 160-170cm range. I had to go to brands who make skis with short effective edges, like Moment. My height is 157cm, while my Moment skis are 169, 171, and 174.
pinkcamo1000idk if this is true cause I have a friend who is 5' and she rips on magnus that are like 171 or something, and a lot of park skis come in even shorter lengths than that
See above anecdote about effective edge length. The Opus is in that category too. Im kind of lumping myself in with the women here.... but just cuz we rip it, doesn't mean we wouldn't rip it even harder on a properly fitting ski. We don't want shorter park skis. We want better all skis. Woman, and short guys alike. The trend of skis is going back to longer effective edges (after a short stint of huge rocker, short edges, which favored us). I got a pair of 172 Faction Prodigy 3.0s last season and they were too long for me, but they don't even make a shorter size, so I had to sell it. Meanwhile, my Moments of the same length are awesome.
TLDR, by not making solid skis in shorter lengths, companies are only perpetuating gender (and in my case, height) exclusion and minimize the progression of the sport.
paige.I got Roxy twins in 2008 that were the Dynastar Big Troubles rebranded. Dynastar also sold them as a women's ski with a different top sheet, so you had three options to choose from for exactly the same ski.
That said Quicksilver owned both Dynastar and Rossi back then, so it wouldn't surprise me if they rebranded Rossi twins as well at some point.
If you really wanna go down the rabbit hole, or if anyone wants to read some OG pinkname cattiness, check out this thread: https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/185352/Roxy-skis- Apparently the creation of twintip skis with polkadots on them back in 2005 signified the end of progression in women's skiing because the wrong sort of women would buy them for the sole purpose of wooing skier bros. Roxy's website describes it as "the imminent arrival of Roxy Ski, a line of skis and boots produced in partnership with Rossignol's Dynastar brand". A press release from 2005 also mentions "Using Dynastar's Autodrive® technology that adapts to a woman's physiology, Roxy Skis are 25% lighter than most unisex skis, delivering greater maneuverability." Various ski review sites/magazines from that era agree that they're Dynastars, although often mentioning that Rossignol owns Dynastar.
paige.If you really wanna go down the rabbit hole, or if anyone wants to read some OG pinkname cattiness, check out this thread: https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/185352/Roxy-skis- Apparently the creation of twintip skis with polkadots on them back in 2005 signified the end of progression in women's skiing because the wrong sort of women would buy them for the sole purpose of wooing skier bros. Roxy's website describes it as "the imminent arrival of Roxy Ski, a line of skis and boots produced in partnership with Rossignol's Dynastar brand". A press release from 2005 also mentions "Using Dynastar's Autodrive® technology that adapts to a woman's physiology, Roxy Skis are 25% lighter than most unisex skis, delivering greater maneuverability." Various ski review sites/magazines from that era agree that they're Dynastars, although often mentioning that Rossignol owns Dynastar.
