Salomon Hurricane

I would love to get some feedback regarding those skis to know if I should
just get rid of them or invest more time on them. There are 172cm, I weight
199 pounds..., I am an advanced skier.

They might be good in Powder (but powder is so easy a ski does not have to
be that special) but I need a ski that is still a ski between powder staches
and that is pleasant and dynamic on the groomed runs between powder days. I
am a ski instructor who quickly adapted in minutes to any new decent
equipment.

I tried them on a mixture two centimeters of heavy snow over a very firm
base. I tried them first on a long and varied run that goes for 7km to be
able to experiment with them. After four runs I still could not feel them at
all. No feeling of being in any kind of dynamic turn, no responsiveness of
any kind, in brief no kinesic skiing pleasure at all. If they had been
rentals I would have turned them in for another pair immediately.

I also had the weird feeling that they were mounted too far forward. I
checked in a local ski shop after and this is how that ski is normally
mounted. I was told something like: it is to give a more stable support for
those who sit back in powder??? Is this really an all mountain ski for
expert skiers who have a heavy dose of powder and tree skiing on their diet,
or is it some kind of noodle to help intermediate skiers to deal with powder
and tigher spots between the trees???

I am looking forward to hearing from others on this.

PaulP

Paul Picard ACL Master Trainer/Consultant wrote:
I would love to get some feedback regarding those skis to know if I should
just get rid of them or invest more time on them. There are 172cm, I weight
199 pounds..., I am an advanced skier.

They might be good in Powder (but powder is so easy a ski does not have to
be that special) but I need a ski that is still a ski between powder staches
and that is pleasant and dynamic on the groomed runs between powder days. I
am a ski instructor who quickly adapted in minutes to any new decent
equipment.

I tried them on a mixture two centimeters of heavy snow over a very firm
base. I tried them first on a long and varied run that goes for 7km to be
able to experiment with them. After four runs I still could not feel them at
all. No feeling of being in any kind of dynamic turn, no responsiveness of
any kind, in brief no kinesic skiing pleasure at all. If they had been
rentals I would have turned them in for another pair immediately.

I also had the weird feeling that they were mounted too far forward. I
checked in a local ski shop after and this is how that ski is normally
mounted. I was told something like: it is to give a more stable support for
those who sit back in powder??? Is this really an all mountain ski for
expert skiers who have a heavy dose of powder and tree skiing on their diet,
or is it some kind of noodle to help intermediate skiers to deal with powder
and tigher spots between the trees???

I am looking forward to hearing from others on this.

PaulP

Here in the East, the hot Salomon set up seems to be the
Tornado. From those who ski it, it is the nearest Salomon
comes to a one ski quiver. I'm also told it's almost as
good as my Metron B5-M11's.

Oops, not sure where my post went. Second try.

On Feb 15, 8:27 am, "Paul Picard ACL Master Trainer/Consultant"
wrote:
I would love to get some feedback regarding those skis to know if I should
just get rid of them or invest more time on them. There are 172cm, I weight
199 pounds..., I am an advanced skier.

Have you tried to ski the same ski with one size smaller? The other
day I demoed the Salomon 1080 Foil, which is claimed to be powder/all-
mountain/park skis. The first size I tried was 174 [cm], and it carved
beautifully; it was a solid and stable ski on the grooms; however, the
performance on moguls was quite sluggish, and I was behind the skis.
My feeling was the skis maybe a little big for me, so I switched to
166 [cm], and it worked out. With the 166, I can carve, short-swing,
and rip the moguls and trees without feeling any hesitation/
uncertainty.


They might be good in Powder (but powder is so easy a ski does not have to
be that special) but I need a ski that is still a ski between powder staches
and that is pleasant and dynamic on the groomed runs between powder days. I
am a ski instructor who quickly adapted in minutes to any new decent
equipment.

Yes, and I've made a point not to want/have a fat ski "designed" for
Powder. An all-mountain ski should do the trick and more.


I tried them on a mixture two centimeters of heavy snow over a very firm
base. I tried them first on a long and varied run that goes for 7km to be
able to experiment with them. After four runs I still could not feel them at
all. No feeling of being in any kind of dynamic turn, no responsiveness of
any kind, in brief no kinesic skiing pleasure at all. If they had been
rentals I would have turned them in for another pair immediately.

The same feeling I had when I skied the Foil 174, even though they
carved well and went fast.


I also had the weird feeling that they were mounted too far forward. I
checked in a local ski shop after and this is how that ski is normally
mounted. I was told something like: it is to give a more stable support for
those who sit back in powder??? Is this really an all mountain ski for
expert skiers who have a heavy dose of powder and tree skiing on their diet,
or is it some kind of noodle to help intermediate skiers to deal with powder
and tigher spots between the trees???

Nowadays, on many new shaped skis, the bindings are mounted forward/
center to facilitate the modern carving turns, whereas the normal/
behind the center mounting is easier for skidding/slipping turns.

Skidding/slipping parallel turns are more efficient than carving turns
when dealing with powder, and the tight spots between trees.


I am looking forward to hearing from others on this.

Try the small size first, if it doesn't work out, you may want to get
rid of it. A wrong size ski is no fun to ski with.

Have fun,
IS


PaulP

Hello,
Today I gave them a quick try where they should shine: I went aggressively
into some tight trees with some older left over snow that was sheltered from
sun and still had a smooth feeling to it. This slope had a very easy grade.
When I was really busy going fast through the trees not worrying about the
feedback from the skis, I realized that I could ski as fast as I wanted
without any hesitation. I kept the same aggressive attitude once out of the
forest. They are not extraordinary once on the groomed. But at least they
are honest. I think that I will keep them for those days of variable snow in
the trees. Then their behavior on the groomed is at least honest. None of my
friends skis of about the same lenght have the bindings mounted so far
forward. They are at least a full two inches more forward that other shaped
skis of identical length.
I am still curious to hear from people who enjoy them. What is best about
them? When do you enjoy them the most? What kind of skier are you both
physically and technically? What do you like the least about them? Did you
move the binding on the plate, if so how much with what result?
I would appreciate any feedback. I am the only skier in my little village
with those skis.
Regards,
PaulP

--
Paul Picard ACL Trainer/Consultant
Master Trainer for ACL Europe from 2001 to 2005
Box 223 Rossland BC
Canada V0G 1Y0
Tel: 1-250-362-7642

"taichiskiing" wrote in message
ups.com...
Oops, not sure where my post went. Second try.

On Feb 15, 8:27 am, "Paul Picard ACL Master Trainer/Consultant"
wrote:
I would love to get some feedback regarding those skis to know if I
should
just get rid of them or invest more time on them. There are 172cm, I
weight
199 pounds..., I am an advanced skier.

Have you tried to ski the same ski with one size smaller? The other
day I demoed the Salomon 1080 Foil, which is claimed to be powder/all-
mountain/park skis. The first size I tried was 174 [cm], and it carved
beautifully; it was a solid and stable ski on the grooms; however, the
performance on moguls was quite sluggish, and I was behind the skis.
My feeling was the skis maybe a little big for me, so I switched to
166 [cm], and it worked out. With the 166, I can carve, short-swing,
and rip the moguls and trees without feeling any hesitation/
uncertainty.


They might be good in Powder (but powder is so easy a ski does not have
to
be that special) but I need a ski that is still a ski between powder
staches
and that is pleasant and dynamic on the groomed runs between powder days.
I
am a ski instructor who quickly adapted in minutes to any new decent
equipment.

Yes, and I've made a point not to want/have a fat ski "designed" for
Powder. An all-mountain ski should do the trick and more.


I tried them on a mixture two centimeters of heavy snow over a very firm
base. I tried them first on a long and varied run that goes for 7km to be
able to experiment with them. After four runs I still could not feel them
at
all. No feeling of being in any kind of dynamic turn, no responsiveness
of
any kind, in brief no kinesic skiing pleasure at all. If they had been
rentals I would have turned them in for another pair immediately.

The same feeling I had when I skied the Foil 174, even though they
carved well and went fast.


I also had the weird feeling that they were mounted too far forward. I
checked in a local ski shop after and this is how that ski is normally
mounted. I was told something like: it is to give a more stable support
for
those who sit back in powder??? Is this really an all mountain ski for
expert skiers who have a heavy dose of powder and tree skiing on their
diet,
or is it some kind of noodle to help intermediate skiers to deal with
powder
and tigher spots between the trees???

Nowadays, on many new shaped skis, the bindings are mounted forward/
center to facilitate the modern carving turns, whereas the normal/
behind the center mounting is easier for skidding/slipping turns.

Skidding/slipping parallel turns are more efficient than carving turns
when dealing with powder, and the tight spots between trees.


I am looking forward to hearing from others on this.

Try the small size first, if it doesn't work out, you may want to get
rid of it. A wrong size ski is no fun to ski with.

Have fun,
IS


PaulP

I have sold them and did cut my loss.
Regards,
PaulP

--
Paul Picard ACL Trainer/Consultant
Master Trainer for ACL Europe from 2001 to 2005
Box 223 Rossland BC
Canada V0G 1Y0
Tel: 1-250-362-7642

"VtSkier" wrote in message
...
Paul Picard ACL Master Trainer/Consultant wrote:
I would love to get some feedback regarding those skis to know if I
should just get rid of them or invest more time on them. There are 172cm,
I weight 199 pounds..., I am an advanced skier.

They might be good in Powder (but powder is so easy a ski does not have
to be that special) but I need a ski that is still a ski between powder
staches and that is pleasant and dynamic on the groomed runs between
powder days. I am a ski instructor who quickly adapted in minutes to any
new decent equipment.

I tried them on a mixture two centimeters of heavy snow over a very firm
base. I tried them first on a long and varied run that goes for 7km to be
able to experiment with them. After four runs I still could not feel them
at all. No feeling of being in any kind of dynamic turn, no
responsiveness of any kind, in brief no kinesic skiing pleasure at all.
If they had been rentals I would have turned them in for another pair
immediately.

I also had the weird feeling that they were mounted too far forward. I
checked in a local ski shop after and this is how that ski is normally
mounted. I was told something like: it is to give a more stable support
for those who sit back in powder??? Is this really an all mountain ski
for expert skiers who have a heavy dose of powder and tree skiing on
their diet, or is it some kind of noodle to help intermediate skiers to
deal with powder and tigher spots between the trees???

I am looking forward to hearing from others on this.

PaulP

Here in the East, the hot Salomon set up seems to be the
Tornado. From those who ski it, it is the nearest Salomon
comes to a one ski quiver. I'm also told it's almost as
good as my Metron B5-M11's.