my new/old play toys

[Harris]

A buddy gave me a freebee pair of his son's old 170cm GS race skis. He had previously given me a pair of his son's 160cm Volkl Race Tiger slalom skis, which were awesome but because they were so short in the bumps the tips would catch under the binding. When I switched the bindings over I had some doubts, being that these were GS race skis, but these things rock! I fully recommend them for resort and side-country in everything but deep pow. Surprisingly for being GS skis they telemark as tight as I can, you can shut them down hard on a dime and the beauty is that the tips turn in during transition the way my favorite post skinny skis of yore did (Dynastar Course GS). Been searching for this ski a long time. Buy a good fat, rockered ski for the unusual day, score a used alpine GS race ski for the regular day and you'll feel like a hero on them. There is no such thing as a one ski quiver, all-mountain ski. A GS will make the fat skis seem clown-footed stupid.

[Woodserson]

This is why I love my 74mm Big Bangs.

How did you decide to mount these, and what is your boot size?

[lowangle al]

Slalom skis used to be the alpine ski of choice for telemarkers looking for a performance ski before tele specific stuff was available in the early 80s. Back then slalom type turns were also the norm. Todays skiing is more gs type turns so I'm not surprised they work well. I would think a fun carving ski would not be much wider than 80mm waist.

[Harris]

This is why I love my 74mm Big Bangs.

How did you decide to mount these, and what is your boot size?

I mounted them boot center to Volkl's recommended alpine ski mark. I use 28.5 Garment Garas.

About mount points: my thinking...

I'm a firm believer that mounting bindings aft of boot center is a mistake. The thought for aft mounting is based on a theory that in reality doesn't jibe with the physics of the turn, meaning: in reality because telemark is a two ski turn it can't flex the ski(s) to their bend radius limit the way a downhill ski weighted alpine turn can, and that means that although "true" we work the skis differently than an alpine rig, however, 2 things on that: 1) a good tele does still in fact use a lot of downhill ski to do its work. So mounting the binding to an aft of boot center BOF center point will reduce the already handicapped ability to flex the more purposed ski properly. 2) because we can't use the boots tongues as aggressively as an alpine rig to initiate the tips turning in, to move the boot aft on the ski only makes the initial turn in even more handicapped. I accidentally discovered this when changing boots and bindings on a pair of skis andI mis-calculated my boot centers on an unmarked boot, which inadvertantly put me back a half inch, and the difference was profound; I was fighting to get the tips turned and was way more tail heavy than I was accustomed to. The only benefit I could possibly see in aft mounting would be on a skinny 80's era alpine ski being used in powder. Maybe.

[Harris]

Slalom skis used to be the alpine ski of choice for telemarkers looking for a performance ski before tele specific stuff was available in the early 80s. Back then slalom type turns were also the norm. Todays skiing is more gs type turns so I'm not surprised they work well. I would think a fun carving ski would not be much wider than 80mm waist.

My go to turn is still a slalom and often tighter "bump skiers" turn. If I want to open the skis up GS and fly I generally will ply my old alpine racing turns to save gas and enjoy the hard, line in snow rail carve. But that is the thing I was trying to point out that surprised me with these new "old" skis... They quick turn like crazy. How? Well, telemark quick turn aren't exactly carved radius turns. There is a bit of whipped slide slide at initiation and hard edging at finish. These skis have a lot of camber, and so they literally pop out of one turn into the next.

Back in the 80s slalom skis were generally in the 200 to 205 range and they popped well. GS skis back then did as well. In fact a lot of my buds who were competitive alpine bump skiers preferred GS skis.

[Woodserson]

So mounting the binding to an aft of boot center BOF center point will reduce the already handicapped ability to flex the more purposed ski properly.

I agree with the above, but I'm wondering about this sentence-- you're mounting boot center to boot center alpine or you're putting BOF on the boot centerline and you don't want to be further aft than that?

[StormyMonday]

I raced the Course SLs amd loved them till they were stolen, then I mounted Atomic ARC SLs up tele and they were good on the resort. Rossi Stratos were a go to tele ski early on and I'm sure my Rossi 3g in something under 205 would turn plenty quick. I see those Volkls cheap a lot, maybe I'll grab a pair!

[Harris]

I agree with the above, but I'm wondering about this sentence-- you're mounting boot center to boot center alpine or you're putting BOF on the boot centerline and you don't want to be further aft than that?

I mount exactly like I would an alpine boot; boot center to ski center mark.

[Harris]

I raced the Course SLs amd loved them till they were stolen, then I mounted Atomic ARC SLs up tele and they were good on the resort. Rossi Stratos were a go to tele ski early on and I'm sure my Rossi 3g in something under 205 would turn plenty quick. I see those Volkls cheap a lot, maybe I'll grab a pair!

I think there is still a lot of room left for developing a better telemark specific ski. One thing I would like to test is a ski that is straight edged on the outside but parabolic on the inside, Or perhaps visa versa. Another thing I would like to test is a modern ski with more camber than is currently fashionable. And another thing I would like to see is a ski with a more retro tip rise to help keep that inside ski from slipping under the outside ski when things go wrong in deeper snow.