Ski reviews: Qualitative vs Quantitative

[Skibumsmith]

When reading a review for a ski or the description on a manufacturers website, words like ‘poppy’ or ‘playful’ often come up. The opposite of ‘playful’ might be ‘dead’ which has negative connotations. But a ski that feels dead might have been intentionally designed that way to keep it smooth through chatter and crud. These descriptors are so subjective to the each rider. Other characteristics like the dimensions, turning radius, effective edge are all quantitative and unambiguous. If you were given the task of describing every detail of a ski in a quantitative manner how would you do it? How would you measure stiffness or dampness for example in a standardized way that quantitatively captures exactly how the ski feels. Would you rate dampness on a scale or would you be more scientific and use damping coefficients? What other characteristics or measurements would you include?

 

[LukeTheWaffle]

i still want a universal flex system, maybe put a determined mass (something like 50kgs) on the center of the skis flex pattern, or on the nose tail and middle respectively, and make a system based on how far the ski travels

 

[Kyguyy]

Big brain time

i still want a universal flex system, maybe put a determined mass (something like 50kgs) on the center of the skis flex pattern, or on the nose tail and middle respectively, and make a system based on how far the ski travels

 

[Skibumsmith]

i still want a universal flex system, maybe put a determined mass (something like 50kgs) on the center of the skis flex pattern, or on the nose tail and middle respectively, and make a system based on how far the ski travels

Ya so in materials science they use something called a 3-point bend test to measure modulus of elasticity which is pretty much what you’re describing. I think it’s a good idea.

 

[little1337]

i still want a universal flex system, maybe put a determined mass (something like 50kgs) on the center of the skis flex pattern, or on the nose tail and middle respectively, and make a system based on how far the ski travels

I can get behind this, this would be a really nice way to accurately compare flex between skis rather than just feeling it out.

 

[OregonDead]

I agree it should be like science but when big brands are funding ad campaigns that say it is magic and tigersnake technology I kinda doubt that’s gonna happen

 

[Skibumsmith]

I agree it should be like science but when big brands are funding ad campaigns that say it is magic and tigersnake technology I kinda doubt that’s gonna happen

But for real we should take a sec to recognize Volkl’s Tigersnake Tech. Shit is truly revolutionary.

 

[BigPurpleSkiSuit]

I think more ski reviews should be comparisons to other skis. When you say, a ski is playful, or it's a charger, I have a vague idea of what the reviewer means, but if they could compare it to a previous ski that many have skied, that would be fantastic. It feels like a _______ but with ____ ____ and ____ slightly changed up in x y z ways.

 

[OregonDead]

But for real we should take a sec to recognize Volkl’s Tigersnake Tech. Shit is truly revolutionary.

Line has the Tigersnake tech. They told me I have one inside my Line prophets. Does Volkl have a tigersnake too to complement their race tigers?

 

[Skibumsmith]

Line has the Tigersnake tech. They told me I have one inside my Line prophets. Does Volkl have a tigersnake too to complement their race tigers?

Frig if i know. I was jus talkin out of my ass.

 

[270on420out]

Instead of “dead” companies will just describe their boring bland stiff ass camber skis using adjectives like “rigid” or use vague shit like “sturdy”. Ski reviews are all shit. You ever notice how all the reviews for App Store apps are mostly positive? Same idea with ski reviews. Somehow every ski ever made is the best ski ever produced and it adds inches on your dick.

**This post was edited on Aug 8th 2020 at 2:00:18am

 

[Lonely]

Universal length measurement would be kinda cool

 

[LukeTheWaffle]

Universal length measurement would be kinda cool

Material length or straight tip to tail?

 

[mattm7]

Instead of “dead” companies will just describe their boring bland stiff ass camber skis using adjectives like “rigid” or use vague shit like “sturdy”. Ski reviews are all shit. You ever notice how all the reviews for App Store apps are mostly positive? Same idea with ski reviews. Somehow every ski ever made is the best ski ever produced and it adds inches on your dick.

**This post was edited on Aug 8th 2020 at 2:00:18am

Well I guess once you get on a new pair of skis from your daily drivers it's gonna feel nice, plus I think with the amount of R and D and the tech they put into ski development now it would be really hard to make a bad pair of skis

 

[mattm7]

I don't mind these descriptors for ski characteristics, use them as a guide to find what I'm looking for. I think a flex scale cant be universal for all ski categories because a soft park ski would be softer than a soft all mountain ski. Maybe that's why brands have their own individual scales because they can measure against the skis in their line up easily.

 

[Youngm_IPCME]

Ya so in materials science they use something called a 3-point bend test to measure modulus of elasticity which is pretty much what you’re describing. I think it’s a good idea.

Okay, but where do you perform the bend? True center, at the recommended mount point? Should there be one for the tip and the tail too? Should the bend direction be changed for rockered portions or entirely rockered skis?

The problem is getting a useful amount of information while not boring the shit out of the customers. I actually like bigpurples the best because it's something people can actually make sense of without needing to force manufacturers to deal with, numbers, tests, and standards.

 

[Skibumsmith]

Okay, but where do you perform the bend? True center, at the recommended mount point? Should there be one for the tip and the tail too? Should the bend direction be changed for rockered portions or entirely rockered skis?

These are the questions we need to be asking. I’m sure materials science has the answer though. Don’t stop at just doing the tip and tail though. We can do better than just measuring discrete points. There’s gotta be a way to do deflection tests for nearly infinitely small sections so that you could plot a continuous profile for the entire length of the ski.

 

[Poikenz]

In most cases you could test the skis you want either on hill (test days- should be test weekends, because fuck) or from a local shop for a fee. Unfortunately this isn't possible for smaller brands. The majority of people probably aren't wishing for some sort of universal flex scale when they only "rip" blues twice a year. Companies or reviewers won't take it upon themselves to create a system to do this as only a few out of the majority will actually care. It won't result in profit for either to pursue it as they would also have to interpret the data for most to understand, leaving us where we are now. No one is going to want to research what modulus of elasticity is or what an extra .5 GPA feels like. It's like quality content vs buzzword clickbait bullshit, typically the bullshit wins in terms of ease, viewership and $$$. That is why advertising/ marketing exist and no one is talking about the addition of more monopotassium phosphate to their favorite sports drink.

 

[FruitBootPro]

I think the objective things that define a ski are rocker profile, sidecut, flex pattern, and density distribution. Nowadays we'll have to show close ups of spoon concave as well if the ski has it.

Rocker profile and sidecut can be examined via images with dimensions on them, flex pattern and density distribution can be mapped out via a color diagram where darker/brighter colors represent stiffer/flexier areas or denser/less dense areas.

But ultimately I don't think that you can really figure out exactly how a ski is going to feel even by examining even the most detailed diagrams. The skiers and engineers themselves at these companies can see all these diagrams on computer programs before the ski is even made, and still they have to go out and test several prototypes of skis before they finalize the design.

 

[highpeak]

Agreed with everything in this thread. Only reviews I trust are blister, people I know in person, and general trends from NS/TGR

 

[FitzRoy]

For a universal flex scale I think it might be worth taking hockey sticks as an example. A 85 from ccm is probably gonna feel similar to an 85 from true despite a given stick having a different kickpoint or shaft profile (i.e rocker/tip taper). What if a similar system for flex was adopted for skis? It’s a somewhat arbitrary number but still gives a fairly reliable metric for determining if a stick is right for you in hockey, I’d imagine it could translate fairly well into skiing if numbers were scaled correctly.

(For ref hockey flex numbers are from a simplified 3pt bend test where two parts of the stick are supported and the weight in lbs required to deflect the centre by an inch is the flex rating)

**This post was edited on Aug 10th 2020 at 11:12:24am

 

[Twig]

Years and years ago, Fri Flyt (which was Norwegian I believe) worked on a 'scientific' flex chart for skis. You can still find the details here!

I have to say, I didn't actually find that close a correlation between how skis on the list (that I'd tried) felt, and how their scores suggested they would feel. But it's the only case I can think of where this kind of idea was executed.

**This post was edited on Aug 11th 2020 at 9:49:18am

 

[RudyGarmisch]

I want a true blind ski test. Black top sheets, black bases, independent 3rd party manages testers and ski manufacturers so there is no confidentiality breach.

 

[CalumSKI]

i still want a universal flex system, maybe put a determined mass (something like 50kgs) on the center of the skis flex pattern, or on the nose tail and middle respectively, and make a system based on how far the ski travels

Dude this is such a good idea

 

[LukeTheWaffle]

Dude this is such a good idea

Thank you calum

 

[CalumSKI]

Thank you calum

No problem Mr. Waffle man

 

[shinbangclan]

There should be an easily replicable, exact method to test the dampness of a ski. That way everyone could do it at home, and we could have an NS spreadsheet of hundreds of skis by dampness. The bonus is that all the marketing teams will have panic attacks and will have to retract previous claims on the "world's softest ski".

 

[G5_KiD]

I want a true blind ski test. Black top sheets, black bases, independent 3rd party manages testers and ski manufacturers so there is no confidentiality breach.

Have you seen the "stab in the dark" videos? It's essentially this concept but with surfing. They are pretty clear cut with it being about a performance model and is judged by world tour surfers. Cool videos and a good way to hear people just judge their tools based on only the ride and no company description or any of that BS.

Tough thing is the reviewers themselves - The point of a review is to hear about some performance characteristics and see if they apply to the way you might want to use that ski. So comparisons are great but those comparisons are coming from another skiers perspective, which is honestly kinda useless if they don't ski in a similar style to yourself.

Ski companies should really be trying harder to get people onto their skis, even if only for a run or two. IF you're building skis and are truly convinced that they are the best of their class, why not let all of us try all of them and make our own decision. I have been dying to try several brands but the price without being able to try is really tricky, especially when trying out new designs, flexes, rocker profiles, etc. (plus the resale after mounting and skiing a few times is not great) I know it won't happen but i really wish brands would go out of their way a bit more to offer a free demo fleet (combo'd with a demo/pro tour of sorts? i'd be psyched). I just wish brands would spend a little more to get the everyday skier on their skis to convince us instead of everyone googling ski reviews and coming away super confused.

 

[dolanslebensraum]

Op, there is probably an enormous list of Meaningful quantitative measurements you could take of a ski.

Either way a quantitative measurement is useless unless it can be put in the context of how it makes the ski perform/feel to the rider.

 

[patagonialuke]

I want a true blind ski test. Black top sheets, black bases, independent 3rd party manages testers and ski manufacturers so there is no confidentiality breach.

I've always wanted to try this. I'd still have some pre-conceived notions just looking at the shape, rocker profile, and where the bindings are mounted, but I do kinda miss not knowing things like the measured mount point, weight, sidecut radius, and general flex pattern before getting on a ski. For me, that would just make it more entertaining.

At Blister I do our measured specs before getting on most skis, just since it's more reliable to do that (and rocker pics) before mounting them. But I'll often ask other reviewers to guess things like weight, mount point, and radius when they're on a ski I measured and they don't yet know the specs. Most of the time it's pretty close, but there are always a few skis that perform very differently than you'd expect, based on their specs. The upside is I now have a super lame party trick of being able to guess most ski's weights within 50-100 g just by holding them, so I guess there's that...

 

[BigPurpleSkiSuit]

Thos kinds of things are worth you know. My mom who's a pediatrician once won a 5 lbs 4 oz lobster by guessing its weight since she just handled a lot of newborn's and handled that lobster like a newborn.

I've always wanted to try this. I'd still have some pre-conceived notions just looking at the shape, rocker profile, and where the bindings are mounted, but I do kinda miss not knowing things like the measured mount point, weight, sidecut radius, and general flex pattern before getting on a ski. For me, that would just make it more entertaining.

At Blister I do our measured specs before getting on most skis, just since it's more reliable to do that (and rocker pics) before mounting them. But I'll often ask other reviewers to guess things like weight, mount point, and radius when they're on a ski I measured and they don't yet know the specs. Most of the time it's pretty close, but there are always a few skis that perform very differently than you'd expect, based on their specs. The upside is I now have a super lame party trick of being able to guess most ski's weights within 50-100 g just by holding them, so I guess there's that...

 

[broken_skier0]

I would like to see a flex rating for skis, like there is for boots. Boot flex numbers are arbitrary, but at least you know a 130 is stiffer than a 110.