On Surface getting so much play...

and as for the tight pants no surface has nothingto do with tight pants it just happens that a few of their riders wear them but those riders also represent what surface is all about HAVING FUN and doing things your own way! tanaka is not tight pants becker was not tight pants none of the skiers they hope to work with soon are tight pants..and the owner well he is just a dirty alta hippie!
 
That's because Ninthward sold skis and never delivered them, so people got mad.  That, and they are, from what I hear, not very easy to work with. 

Surface is the exact opposite.  I ordered skis late one night on a weekend, and they were in a box on my porch the next morning with mountains and hearts drawn all over it.  
 
all hate aside...who cares? seriously...if you like what surface represents and you enjoy using their product...buy their skis. if you like what ninthward represents, and you enjoy using their product, buy their skis.

in the end, were all just skiers skiing...and thats what counts
 
no they don't, LTs, Comte, Butterliscious, THA 1-8-7, MIP, First Blood, and there's a new one coming out that you'll just have to wait and see.
 
i had a pair of skis with no camber, they really sucked, no kidding, they used to make skis back in the 60s with no camber then makers wised up. this is stupid and will be done in a year as it's regression, not progression.
 
hahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahah

because the 215 50 inderfoot perfectly straight 2x4s from 1960 and the 179 16m sidecut 112 underfoot super soft twin surfaces of 2008 will ski really similar......
 
i never heard about this self hand shooting incident.... that sounds rather rediculous for a skier to be carrying a gun of some sort? unless ovecourse they were worried about bears on the hill then i can see a reason for it!
 
actually they were pretty sick. I would be pretty angry to get custom skis that sucked.

They were fun, just too god damn short.
 
dude...what are you talking about?

1. there's a 5mm difference underfoot between the msp and watchlife, not really that similar

2. the livelife is 112 underfoot, definitely not a park ski

3. are you serious about your recommendations there? make a "1 year cheap ski"? that's pretty retarded, even for newschoolers.com, but maybe take those ideas to wal-mart or something; if they're looking to get into the ski industry, that might be just the ticket for them

surface started out with a good business decision - make 2 models of quality skis - rather than trying to do something crazy that may or may not work and may or may not bankrupt everyone involved. this year they're starting to branch out a little, making the same two models of quality skis, plus a pair of soft, fat 0-cambers (meaning that they'll ride almost like reverse cambers in soft snow but won't be completely worthless on everything else)..

as far as the whole tight pants thing goes...who cares? surface isn't all about tight pants, it just so happens that some of their sickest riders (blake, ian, and jordan) don't have the same XXXXXL lime green oakley pants as everyone else in this previously uncreative, unexpressive, cookie-cutter industry. and if all the 14 year old wiggers want to hate on surface and holden and shifties and the diversification of style in our sport and music other than tupac, fine. i guess that happens with growth.
 
malone is on surface skis but not on surface...

this whole entire ninthward and surface bickering probably isn't impressing a lot of people. i think its pointless. you can't change the way people feel.
 
1. do you have any idea how small 5 mm is? 1/2 a centimeter, 1/2 your pinky finger's nail. i mean the msp kicks ass, a good ski to emulate, but just be honest about it.

2. yea i'm retarded. thought it was a park ski for some reason. but i do know that the "different" company has an msp clone and a bacon clone.

3. first off, i guarantee there actually is a market for that ski, say for the parkrat that only goes outside teh park when it snows 8+ and wants to spend ~150. and that was one of four ideas that i made up in 30 seconds, give me a break.

"a pair of soft, fat 0-cambers (meaning that they'll ride almost like reverse cambers in soft snow but won't be completely worthless on everything else).."

jea fucking right dude. if you think that a soft zero camber ski will ski like a rev camber your brain has serious aids.

dp skis - one of if not the most progressive ski company out there (carbon fibre, rev-camber-w/-sidecut-underfoot *cough* inspriation for the ARG *cough*). dp increased the lotus 138's tip rocker 20% from last years' model. why would they do that if a floppy zero camber ski performs "almost like" a rev camber ski?

http://www.dpsskis.com/page.php?pname=skis/lotus/138

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73501&highlight=lotus+camber

this post is already waaaaay too long. but i would like to point out that i fully support the different steeze and direction of surface riders, but i think the company is hypocritical and many brainwashed NSers are dogmatically gay for them.
 
This is a thread about Surface skis, for some reason the 9thward GANGSTA GANGSTAS try and bring the hate...they're just asking to be put in their place.

That place being the trash, right next to their skis.
 
this year surfaces were only labeled pale skis. anyone knows, if they change their shapes in 07/08 or will they be the same. I like the graphics, but there is nothin progressive about to order some stock skis at pale...
 
no my no camber skis had sidecut and twin tip, im just saying it's old technology, they work good in pow, though no where near as good as rockered skis, but suck ass on hardpack.
 
meaning what? getting caught up in the image again? 4frnt's product is top-notch. the msp is the most versatile, bomber, fun ski on the market.
 
There's a lot more to ski design that dimensions. You're forgetting where the sidecut is in relation to the running surface, what sidecuts are being used (read multiple sidecuts splined into a continous sidecut) and where they are used in the effective edge of the ski, (if multipe sidecuts are being used at all) core profile, orientation and weight of reinforecement, the type of reinforcement (fiberglass, carbon fiber, metal, combination). You can have two skis that literally come out of the same mold that ski nothing like each other based on all the other variables I've listed.

I've actually skied all of Surface's skis, the MSP, and the Bacon, and they are all very unique and different skis.
 
Um I've used an iphone, and why shouldn't there be hype about it, they're amazing. You're just one of those kids in denial when something gets popular, even if there is a good reason for it. In this case, Surface brings a fresh approach to the industry, so what if a lot of it is just their style, skiing is all about style unless your a gaper.
 
there's nothing lamer than having a conformed "anti-conformist" company. and by that i mean the idea that -- if you want to be an 'indie skier', you should ride surface, b/c all the indie kids are doing it. thats not fresh and original, its just a different flavor of conformity.

if you want do do s/t fresh and original you should just listen to your inner self and fucking do it.
 
Oh wait, I think I hear my inner self talking...yes there it is...what was that? OK.

My inner self just told me to never take myself as seriously as you do.
 
was making a thoreau reference but whatever. and i spend all day on ns at my internship so i come up with some 'serious'/good points.
 
I don't wear tight pants, but don't hate on it. I do have one question though, how the hell do you tight pant wearers keep your peckers warm?
 
icy hot does do the trick.... fidel you must have played or play baseball!!

as for wheni ski in my wranglers i wear 2sets of thermals my jeans have who knows how many cans of waterproof spray on them..... seems to work fine!
 
well Nordica will have a couple skis with that coming out soon however I highly doubt Surface and Nordica are working together to come up with the same technology. Both companies decided to put this out on their own
 
Having skimmed through this post I"ve found nothing inteligent in it and am not going to waste my time reading it through well.

One thing that is absolutly ridiculously obvious and is pissing me off that nobody pointed it out after your first post is that there are plenty of skis that have similar dimensions and that there is way more to how a ski rides than the dimensions. If all that mattered to skis where the dimentions what would be the difference between the Nordica Blowers and the Line Elizabeths? I mean both have a 110 waist right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top