Free skier magazine gear reviews
- Thread starter Maxptrson
- Start date
Mitch_7495
Member
Its all about the money, if you read freeskiers mag there was not one armada ski in any category even with their new tracer series, meanwhile j skis had a ski in the top 3 in most of the categories and they didn't change much. I don't have a problem with j skis it's just shows something was involved other than pure unbias.
**This post was edited on Sep 19th 2017 at 9:39:34am
**This post was edited on Sep 19th 2017 at 9:47:36am
**This post was edited on Sep 19th 2017 at 9:39:34am
**This post was edited on Sep 19th 2017 at 9:47:36am
patagonialuke
Active member
*full disclosure: I work at Blister, so take anything I say with a very large grain of salt*
I won't speak to any specific magazines or sites, but in general, the traditional review model is very much a pay-to-play environment. I know people at manufacturers that had magazines straight up tell them that if they paid a certain amount of money or bought a certain-sized ad, that the magazine would give their product an editor's choice award. This creates an inherent conflict of interest, which is why pretty much every review in these guides follows the same format:
*click-baity statement about how great the ski is
*copy and paste the marketing copy from the brand
*"floats in pow and rips groomers"
I don't blame the manufacturers at all — the exposure they get in these magazines is extremely important for sales, so it's kind of a shitty, but debatably necessary move for many of them. (if I made skis, I wouldn't like doing it, but I'd probably pay to get in the guides if it meant I could sell significantly more skis)
At Blister, we don't take any money from manufacturers, which means we don't have to worry about losing any of our income if we actually bring up a negative aspect of of product. We also try and focus on making our reviews useful, so rather than saying a ski is simply good or bad, or that every ski somehow "charges hard, floats in pow, and rails corduroy like a GS ski," we try and fit it into a spectrum of other similar skis, and offer suggestions as to what kind of customer might enjoy it most.
We will be putting out our 17/18 guide in October, and I can guarantee it will be, at the very least, honest, and I am very confident that you'd find it more useful.
I won't speak to any specific magazines or sites, but in general, the traditional review model is very much a pay-to-play environment. I know people at manufacturers that had magazines straight up tell them that if they paid a certain amount of money or bought a certain-sized ad, that the magazine would give their product an editor's choice award. This creates an inherent conflict of interest, which is why pretty much every review in these guides follows the same format:
*click-baity statement about how great the ski is
*copy and paste the marketing copy from the brand
*"floats in pow and rips groomers"
I don't blame the manufacturers at all — the exposure they get in these magazines is extremely important for sales, so it's kind of a shitty, but debatably necessary move for many of them. (if I made skis, I wouldn't like doing it, but I'd probably pay to get in the guides if it meant I could sell significantly more skis)
At Blister, we don't take any money from manufacturers, which means we don't have to worry about losing any of our income if we actually bring up a negative aspect of of product. We also try and focus on making our reviews useful, so rather than saying a ski is simply good or bad, or that every ski somehow "charges hard, floats in pow, and rails corduroy like a GS ski," we try and fit it into a spectrum of other similar skis, and offer suggestions as to what kind of customer might enjoy it most.
We will be putting out our 17/18 guide in October, and I can guarantee it will be, at the very least, honest, and I am very confident that you'd find it more useful.
That's pretty much how I read the reviews I could read on the blister site - they read really well - lots of info. it's hard to sift thru the shit sometimes that's why I joined this site- so thanks for helping cut thru it.
I'll be getting it in October for sure
Any chance you know anything about the libtech wunderstick? Put a tread up earlier in the week but still no info coming on it
I live in Aust and can't demo it here or where I ski in Jackson WY. I've had the libtech FF5 185cm and loved it - so I got a deal on the wreckreate 110 and 115 last year in the 188 and 191 but they were just too burly and stiff for me (the 110 supposed to be the same flex as FF5)
I was bumbed - can't ride them and don't want to make the mistake if the wundersticks going to be the same
Any info appreciated
Cheers
I'll be getting it in October for sure
Any chance you know anything about the libtech wunderstick? Put a tread up earlier in the week but still no info coming on it
I live in Aust and can't demo it here or where I ski in Jackson WY. I've had the libtech FF5 185cm and loved it - so I got a deal on the wreckreate 110 and 115 last year in the 188 and 191 but they were just too burly and stiff for me (the 110 supposed to be the same flex as FF5)
I was bumbed - can't ride them and don't want to make the mistake if the wundersticks going to be the same
Any info appreciated
Cheers
patagonialuke
Active member
13837496:Paddy75 said:
Glad to hear you're finding the content useful!
Unfortunately we haven't had any reviewers on any Lib Tech skis, so I can't offer any direct advice. Looking at your thread I think there were some good suggestions made in there.
If you liked the old Sick Days, I'm guessing you might like the new version (and might like it even more — I haven't been on the previous version but I really like the new version, and people who have been on the old ones seem to prefer the new). These are especially attractive if you're looking to tour on the ski as well.
The Nordica Enforcer series (100, 110, and Pro) might be worth a look — they all ride pretty similarly and have a nice blend of stability and forgiveness.
A more playful alternative to the Enforcers would be the J Skis Metal, which I haven't skied but I know Jonathan was a huge fan of it as a playful ski that still maintained good stability at moderate speeds.
ON3P Wrenegades and Kartels would also be worth a look.
Unfortunately without riding any of the Lib Tech's I can't offer much useful advice, but the above skis are all pretty versatile, though each have their unique characteristics better fleshed-out in our reviews.
-eREKTion-
Active member
13837536:patagonialuke said:
How big does the 190 Sick Day 114 feel? It's certainly piqued my interest but it only comes in a 180 and a 190.
patagonialuke
Active member
13837560:-eREKTion- said:
My experience has been predominantly on the 180, which I really like (I'm 5'8", ~155 lbs, normally ski stuff 180-186 cm)
Even though it's on the shorter end of my usual length spectrum, I haven't felt like the ski is the weak link in my setup (they're currently mounted with Dynafit Rad 2's, which are definitely the limiting factor). They are a ton of fun in anything soft, and are more composed on firm conditions than I expected given their width and rocker profile. I have mine mounted +3 and really like them there, but I know more traditional skiers are very happy with them at recommended.
I did get 1 day on the 190, but I had unfortunately tweaked my knee earlier that day so I was taking it relatively easy and wasn't at 100%. That said, the 190 did feel more stable at speed, and it felt like it was noticeably stiffer than the 180. The big caveat here is that I wasn't feeling too confident in my legs / knee, and I rode the 190 at recommended, which meant I had a bit more tip in front of me. All that said, even with a weak knee, I didn't think the 190 felt all that huge (it does have a good amount of rocker and is fairly light), and Jonathan (who spent more time on it) was making comparisons to the 190 Sick Day 114 as a lighter, less-chargy 190cm Bibby.
What similar skis are you coming from?
-eREKTion-
Active member
13837565:patagonialuke said:
Nothing super similar, I'm on 185 JJ's and I've had 186 Mordecai's. I also have a few days on my buddy's 184 Bibby Pro's which were right up my alley. I'm 6' 170 so I think the 180 is definitely too short but I think the 190 will be too big especially if it's being compared to the 190 Bibby. I've been wish washy as fuck when it comes to my next ski purchase, I want a pow ski that I can ski like 50% of the time. I was thinking 187 Meridian originally but decided I might want to go a bit wider so I was thinking 184 Bibby. Now I'm wondering if something more directional will be a better fit for my pow/crud/badass semi-daily ski; I'm looking at the Sick Day 114, Billy Goat, and the Moment Governor.
patagonialuke
Active member
13837571:-eREKTion- said:
Yeah the sick day and Bibby are definitely not extremely similar, the comparison was more in regard to them both being pretty versatile skis in the same width that are both pretty playful but can still be pushed fairly hard. Jonathan said the 190 Bibby definitely has a noticeably higher top end than the 190 Sick Day 114 though.
From what you're saying, I think the 184 Bibby sounds like a great option, especially since it's so popular with both directional and more playful-style skiers.
-eREKTion-
Active member
Thanks for the awesome replies dude. I look forward to the gear guide and this years slate of reviews.
patagonialuke
Active member
FYI, the pre-order for the guide is live, aiming to publish by mid-October.
http://blistergearreview.com/blister-products-and-services
http://blistergearreview.com/blister-products-and-services
cydwhit
Active member
13837683:Paddy75 said:
I'd echo Lukes's thoughts all through this thread. One thing to add, the resort shop at the Ghee has Line if you end up wanting to demo Sick Days and make it to this side of the pass. Also, intrigued to hear your thoughts on the Lib Tech's, have been half-heartedly wondering if they're any good for a while now so it's interesting to hear your review.
Well here you go ..., I'm no pro I live in Aust and only ski 6 wks a year in the mid west but I found them too stiff for me
I'm currently riding sick day 95 185cm and lib ff5 185cm both 2014.
I want a 2 ski quiver that will do both front and back mt..... More back than front.
I love my ff5 but these wreckreate 100 (188cm) and 115 (191cm) kick my arse. Send me straight when I want to turn they are just too burly for me. I need a little more flex. The flex is supposed to be the same as my old ff5 but it's definitely stiffer- much stiffer. I was bumbed I really love the fully functional 5.
I've been looking for unbiased review on the new Libs but can't find anything at all. Found a guy on this site who runs the wunderstick and likes it. It's hard to tell when you can't demo and no reviews out there.
I'm currently riding sick day 95 185cm and lib ff5 185cm both 2014.
I want a 2 ski quiver that will do both front and back mt..... More back than front.
I love my ff5 but these wreckreate 100 (188cm) and 115 (191cm) kick my arse. Send me straight when I want to turn they are just too burly for me. I need a little more flex. The flex is supposed to be the same as my old ff5 but it's definitely stiffer- much stiffer. I was bumbed I really love the fully functional 5.
I've been looking for unbiased review on the new Libs but can't find anything at all. Found a guy on this site who runs the wunderstick and likes it. It's hard to tell when you can't demo and no reviews out there.
ive been meaning to get over there, it's funny I come 18 hrs to get to JH but struggle to do the drive over the pass. I saw lines stocked over your way I want to demo the pescado and the new sickdays 104.... Looks like it's going to be worth the trip over the pass- if you know anyone who wants to demo these wreckreate slept me know
skidemon22
Active member
13837349:patagonialuke said:
So fucking true
patagonialuke
Active member
13842949:KyleA said:
Sure, but with some context that I'll explain below. Just off the top of my head I know our Bike Editor Noah didn't love the new Smith Rover helmet that he just recently reviewed.
As far as skiing goes, here are a few that come to mind:
Volkl's Vacuum Skins
Volkl Mantra (this one's interesting, since JE loves the 177, but really didn't get along well with the 184)
Salomon BBR
My caveat is that, just because we are honest, it doesn't mean our goal is to focus and dwell on the negative aspects of every product. We'll definitely identify anything we're experiencing (negative or positive), but will also, at the very least, keep an open mind through the entire review. Our reviews are indeed honest, and they're also meant to be useful. Rather than simply saying a product is "good" or "bad," our goal is always to try and figure out who the product would best suit. There are some cases where products are pretty much just "bad," but in the vast majority of cases, there is an end-user that will enjoy a specific product, and sometimes that user is very specific, which is why we always make an effort to clarify. But that's why you'll very often see us recommend a product to at least some specific type of person, since most products do have at least some people that would appreciate them.
For example, I know I would hate the new Faction Dictator 3.0 — it's super stiff, light, has a traditional mount, and not a ton of rocker — essentially the antithesis of what I want in a ski. So, I could write a review coming solely from my perspective and talk about how bad of a ski it is because it's not the type of ski I'd like, but that would alienate plenty of people that would like the ski. Instead, if you look at Jonathan's review, particularly the "So where does the Dictator 3.0 Shine?" section, you'll see that he does recommend the ski to a certain consumer, but that recommendation is pretty specific. So our goal is always to attempt to identify who we think might like the product, and sometimes that's a lot of people, and sometimes that's pretty much nobody.
We are certainly far from perfect, and I'm always eager to hear if/when people have conflicting experiences with products we've reviewed, but I think it's useful to recognize the approach we take, as it helps give some context to the reviews.
Apologies if that sounded too preachy / defensive, I just wanted to give some background on our approach.
Hope that helps, and let me know if you have any other questions / comments.