How much of a difference do pow skis actually make?

hamsauce

hamsauce

Member
A buddy and I were getting stoked for the season and the conversation turned to his new Bent 120s. That got me thinking- whats the point of a dedicated pow ski? (115+)

i got almost 50 days last season in one of the best seasons Montanas had in a while. We had multiple 2ft dumps, and yet i still found myself reaching for my wildcat 108s over my JJs. I just have more fun on them. On paper, a wider ski has more float through powder. Greater surface area = more buoyancy. But I never sank or struggled to ski at all with my wildcat 108s, and still had great days. Yes i may have floated better on wider skis, but i couldnt justify the cost per use of having skis i only break out a couple times per year when i liked my 108s with a decent amount of rocker just as much, so i just sold my jjs. The only day in the last 3 years where i was truly glad i had a 115+ ski was on a cat skiing trip that was waist deep all day. Realistically though, most if not all of my days on skis in the next 5 years will not have more then 2 or 3 feet of new snow

Does anyone else echo my feelings of not being able to justify a setup you only ski a couple times per year, when my 108 daily drivers still do the trick? Do i just need to try a different pow ski? Does waist width matter as much as rocker when skiing pow? Any of you guys out west not have a dedicated pow setup?

**This thread was edited on Nov 11th 2023 at 1:30:07am
 
It seems to me like pow skis make the most difference when you’re in some wet, heavy, less than ideal fresh snow. I was up on mt Washington a couple seasons ago in April and it had snowed like 8 inches of insane hot pow and then it was like 55 during the day. Everyone was struggling except for my bro on his jj ULs he seemed to be having a fine time.

my pow skis are 109 underfoot. I skied a whole season on wets in Utah and it was fine in up to like a foot of fresh, but that’s Utah snow.
 
Depends on the mountain. When I lived in Utah for a season, I mostly skied my 108 waisted skis even on deep days since the terrain was generally steeper and you can gain speed easier. Here in Breck, I can make much more use of a 120mm waisted ski since the terrain is generally a bit mellower and you want the extra float to keep speed/flow.
 
The comparison between a wildcat 108 and a jj is bound to be skewed. I’m biased because I find jjs to be one of the worst popular skis ever but still, they have a shorter radius and ski differently than the wildcats based on layup/dampness/rocker/etc. You might just like the way the wildcat skis more, compare it to a wildcat 116 and it may be more obvious why the 108 isn’t quite as good on the deep days. Also the inverse can happen. Sometimes you find a pow ski that you really like and you end up wanting to ski it even on the beater days because it’s more fun and feels right. Wider skis do make cliffs a little easier but whatever, ski what feels good.
 
I dunno but I'm on the front range and there are about 2 or 3 days a season when I take my 112's out, and even then I don't really need them. Every other day I'm on 102 or narrower. I feel like the vast, vast majority of skiers on fat skis do not need them and would be better served on a narrower ski.
 
Ive been able to work with waist deep wet pnw pow on 95 waist chronics. It wasn't horrible, kinda just had to manual down everything while going 60mph wich is fun, not many turns get made, just gotta get into that hydroplane or else your gonna be hiking out of there.
 
I’m one of those people who likes a fatty even if there’s only a few inches of fresh. Big skis allow me to bomb through moguls and crud and hit cliffs with more confidence. I also like the weight of them in the air when I’m doing a bigger straight air or 3. They slow me down and keep me stable. In terms of skiing pow, i think they hook a lot less and allow you to ski in a more aggressive stance. They also butter better.
 
I got rid of my powder skis because working M-F only gives me weekends to ski. I'm rarely getting fresh snow, maybe 1-2 runs. Cochise 106 has been perfect for most of what I do since charging through tracked snow is more common for me than float.
 
there’s more that goes into it than just waist size, however you have some good points. I believe the freestyle oriented pow skis don’t have as much of a place when compared to a more directional pow ski. My problem is I acquired my pow sticks back when I was a park rat, and I wanted them to behave like a park ski. The chances of me spinning or skiing pow switch are very low these days. I’d rather have a slightly narrower, directional, set back stance pow ski these days. That’s how I know I’m old.

Like someone said above, JJ’s are sick but not many people will ski them the way they are designed to be skied and there are lot of skis like that.
 
My friend lived in Big Sky for 5 years and rocked Edollo’s every year he lived out there. Would ride most of the headwaters chutes with him and I would be riding my arv 96’s right behind him. If its hip deep snow or extra dense, then pow skis make sense. I have tried 116’s and I sold them to get a pair of more nimble 110’s and thats my widest ski now.

Just watch an old pro ski video, if you have strong legs and good technique you can have fun on any width ski in most conditions.
 
Lots of great points that i didnt think of. Takeaways for me:

- JJs may not be a ski i like, so it may be worth trying out some other wide skis.

- Montana/Idaho snow (where I ski 95% of the time) is a lot lighter than coastal snow that gets heavy, and therefore a factor in why i feel fine in my 108s

- modern skis have a good chunk of rocker

- OGs skied pow on toothpicks, strength and technique may have more to do with it than i thought.
 
In my experience I think its moreso where the skis are mounted. Cuz any ski can float with enough speed but its way more enjoyable to not have to sit fully backseat which I feel like I had to do with my narrower skis
 
Very similar thoughts to OP.

I have the new JJs and dislike them compared to the older ones. Live in UT and last year (deepest year) I just didn’t to ski em. Would always say 106 is pretty close to a perfect width.

Maybe it’s just the ski but out here I don’t see a reason to own em anymore.
 
I agree OP. my 4frnt devs are 108 underfoot and I don't think there was a single day last year where I genuinely would have benefited from a wider ski. I never felt my tips dive or anything. I am only 125 lbs tho so I'm not that big, I guess I could see how a dedicated pow ski could benefit a bigger person.
 
Just to weigh in again with the recent responses, I skied my Meridians (107) just about every day from February on and I really didn't need anything wider. Unless you are skiing absolute blower champagne pow in a heavy pitch slope, I don't really see the need for a super wide ski. It's fun to have a pair for a bit, I think most of us have done it. I have a pair of Moment Ghost Chants mounted to my wall, and some Majesty Lumberjacks that might get mounted to the same wall. Both fun skis, but I will likely never ski the conditions either of those skis were built for. Floating tips and sinking tails make for more fun pow skiing than a THICC waist based on my experience.

And ya, the old school way of technique has a lot of merit .
 
I ride blackops 118s almost every day even though I would much rather have a ~108ish wide ski, I just don't have anything that feels as good as they feel on variable chopped up gunk
 
To me, a pow ski makes the most difference in denser powder. They also differentiate themselves most from narrower skis by their ability to pivot/slarve/drift in deep snow.

That being said, powder performance in 90-110 mm wide skis is the best it’s ever been
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top