Snow blades in powder?

Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years ago. I love
them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and manmade snow.
In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested Butte. Will my blades
"float" well enough for the snow out there? I have long skis too, but they are
'way old and out of date and not worth hauling along, but I'm willing to bring
shorties and boots.

******************************
Got wood?
Check out my exotic hardwood pennywhistles at fair
prices...http://www.Busmanwhistles.com

"BREWERPAUL" wrote in message
...
Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years ago. I
love
them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and manmade snow.
In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested Butte. Will my blades
"float" well enough for the snow out there? I have long skis too, but they
are
'way old and out of date and not worth hauling along, but I'm willing to
bring
shorties and boots.

Heh. Have some one take pictures to post here.

ospam (BREWERPAUL) wrote in
:

Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years ago.
I love them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and
manmade snow. In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested
Butte. Will my blades "float" well enough for the snow out there? I
have long skis too, but they are 'way old and out of date and not
worth hauling along, but I'm willing to bring shorties and boots.

******************************
Got wood?
Check out my exotic hardwood pennywhistles at fair
prices...http://www.Busmanwhistles.com



In short, no. Don't even try it in deep powder or they may not find you
until next spring. ;-)

If you want to ski deep powder but not haul the long boards - rent when you
get there.

"BREWERPAUL" wrote in message

Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years ago. I
love
them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and manmade snow.
In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested Butte. Will my blades
"float" well enough for the snow out there? I have long skis too, but they
are
'way old and out of date and not worth hauling along, but I'm willing to
bring
shorties and boots.

There are a few things you should know about this.

According to the father of all short ski skiing, it is quite possible
to ski powder on three foot skis, but you must get way back
on the heels of the skis. I've done it, and such I know he's
right, but this is a bit of an unnatural technique that has little
relevance to "normal" skiing.

It won't work at all unless you're skiing a slope that's
reasonably steep. You'll just sink in the pow and stop on a
gentle slope or flat.

Now, another aspect of this situation. I like to refer to the
time that an employee of a very well know destination resort,
who had the reputation for *ripping* the mountain on
showblades, dropped off a famous cornice into a chute.
He kept going, his legs didn't (he "postholed") and he
broke both his legs. You have to watch for that, you
also have to be careful about going flat out on pack or
groom, then heading into some deep stuff. You'll likely
go over the handlebars.

Besides all that, if they're those wire binding things, put
them in the fireplace and get short skis with real bindings.
You'll destroy a knee or break one or several bones on
those wire things. It happens all the time, and apparently
it will continue to, hopefully though, not to you.

BREWERPAUL wrote:

Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years ago. I love
them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and manmade snow.
In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested Butte. Will my blades
"float" well enough for the snow out there? I have long skis too, but they are
'way old and out of date and not worth hauling along, but I'm willing to bring
shorties and boots.

Several good responses so far. To put it bluntly, if you encounter
fresh Colorado snow, your blades will be decidedly sub-optimal. But
there's no guarantee that you will. If it's been a week since the last
snowfall, Colorado pistes can be pretty firm.

I'd concur that bringing your old out of date skis is probably more
trouble than it's worth, so just bring your blades, and rent a pair of
all-mountain skis if you need them. Good luck, have fun.

--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Volkl Conspiracy

foot2foot wrote:
"BREWERPAUL" wrote in message

Hi-- I'm a Northeast skier who got a pair of blades about 2 years
ago. I love them, and they work great on northeast packed powder and
manmade snow. In Jan, I have a chance for a quick trip to Crested
Butte. Will my blades "float" well enough for the snow out there? I
have long skis too, but they are 'way old and out of date and not
worth hauling along, but I'm willing to bring shorties and boots.

There are a few things you should know about this.

According to the father of all short ski skiing, it is quite possible
to ski powder on three foot skis, but you must get way back
on the heels of the skis. I've done it, and such I know he's
right, but this is a bit of an unnatural technique that has little
relevance to "normal" skiing.

It won't work at all unless you're skiing a slope that's
reasonably steep. You'll just sink in the pow and stop on a
gentle slope or flat.

Now, another aspect of this situation. I like to refer to the
time that an employee of a very well know destination resort,
who had the reputation for *ripping* the mountain on
showblades, dropped off a famous cornice into a chute.
He kept going, his legs didn't (he "postholed") and he
broke both his legs. You have to watch for that, you
also have to be careful about going flat out on pack or
groom, then heading into some deep stuff. You'll likely
go over the handlebars.

Besides all that, if they're those wire binding things, put
them in the fireplace and get short skis with real bindings.
You'll destroy a knee or break one or several bones on
those wire things. It happens all the time, and apparently
it will continue to, hopefully though, not to you.

Foot, I am getting very bored with your antagonism about snowblades, I have
examined the evidence you gave last year, 1 inconclusive study and have kept
quiet until now. The reason most 'blades do not have release bindings, as
stated by salomon when they first introduced them was that because standard
bindings would be useless on a ski this short. As salomon are not renowned
for cheap products and had a monopoly on snowblades for several years, I am
sure that as one of the biggest binding manufacturers in the world they
would have specified release bindings if they could have justified them.

in a similar vein, I asked last year whether the "indemnification list" was
a purely North American phenominum, as the shops I use over here have never
heard of it.


--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk

"MoonMan" wrote in message


Foot, I am getting very bored with your antagonism about snowblades, I
have
examined the evidence you gave last year, 1 inconclusive study and have
kept
quiet until now. The reason most 'blades do not have release bindings, as
stated by salomon when they first introduced them was that because
standard
bindings would be useless on a ski this short.


A ski that short is also useless. You need at least a 120.
There were statistics cited last yeat that showed "blades"
had a somewhat slightly higher rate of injury above
snowboards, then skis, skis being the lowest. The outstanding
difference was, a huge percentage of blade injuries were
catastrophic, whereas many of the board and ski injuries were
trivial. Destroyed knees, broken bones, etc, from snowblade
use. Lots of them. The things *are* much more dangerous
than short skis with real bindings.


As salomon are not renowned
for cheap products and had a monopoly on snowblades for several years, I
am
sure that as one of the biggest binding manufacturers in the world they
would have specified release bindings if they could have justified them.

Please. You're living in a dream world. The stats are out there.
I personally have met people who have broken legs and torn
up kness on snowblades. Especially the 100 cm blades.




in a similar vein, I asked last year whether the "indemnification list"
was
a purely North American phenominum, as the shops I use over here have
never
heard of it.

Don't know about that.

foot2foot wrote:
"MoonMan" wrote in message

snip (my own stuff)

A ski that short is also useless. You need at least a 120.

Why? my blades are 89cm I have even raced slalom on them (before the minimum
ski length rules where introduced) They slowed me down less than 1%


There were statistics cited last yeat that showed "blades"
had a somewhat slightly higher rate of injury above
snowboards, then skis, skis being the lowest. The outstanding
difference was, a huge percentage of blade injuries were
catastrophic, whereas many of the board and ski injuries were
trivial. Destroyed knees, broken bones, etc, from snowblade
use. Lots of them. The things *are* much more dangerous
than short skis with real bindings.

as I said before, One inconclusive study! I do not know if blades are as
popular in the states as they are in europe, but here they seem to be taking
over from snowboards as the cool snowsport.
and apart from on RSA no one has ever suggested to me that they where more
dangerous than skis



As salomon are not renowned
for cheap products and had a monopoly on snowblades for several
years, I am sure that as one of the biggest binding manufacturers in
the world they would have specified release bindings if they could
have justified them.

Please. You're living in a dream world. The stats are out there.
I personally have met people who have broken legs and torn
up kness on snowblades. Especially the 100 cm blades.

as I stated last year I only know personnaly of two injuries on blades.
1) myself, I twisted my knee, stopped me sking for three days, luckily on
the last day of my holiday, so I missed one Training session when I got home


2) a Loony Friend of mine, broke both legs, but The fact he was on blades
was irrelavent, he would have probably done the same damage on ski's. mind
you he ski's with more care now


--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk

foot2foot wrote:
"MoonMan" wrote in message

in a similar vein, I asked last year whether the "indemnification list"
was a purely North American phenominum, as the shops I use over here have
never heard of it.

Don't know about that.

It's a US phenomena. Not sure about Canada (I'll ask next time I'm
there). And I doubt it matters in Mexico and the rest of North America.

Indemnification merely means that the binding manufacturer will pay the
legal costs for a shop if the shop gets sued. It doesn't mean that the
binding is "safe" or guaranteed to work.

Anyway, the important thing is to have them tested, not whether they're
on some list. But since you can't get them tested in the US unless
they're on the list, we're stuck using the ones on the list.


--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Volkl Conspiracy

Walt wrote:
foot2foot wrote:
"MoonMan" wrote in message

in a similar vein, I asked last year whether the "indemnification
list" was a purely North American phenominum, as the shops I use
over here have never heard of it.

Don't know about that.

It's a US phenomena. Not sure about Canada (I'll ask next time I'm
there). And I doubt it matters in Mexico and the rest of North
America.

Indemnification merely means that the binding manufacturer will pay
the legal costs for a shop if the shop gets sued. It doesn't mean
that the binding is "safe" or guaranteed to work.


Anyway, the important thing is to have them tested, not whether
they're on some list. But since you can't get them tested in the US
unless they're on the list, we're stuck using the ones on the list.

Thanks Walt I suspected that was the case, mind you In my experience testing
equipment is not that common here iether.


--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk