If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Miller Soft report
As some of you may recall, I scored a pair of original Miller Soft skis
early in the season at a consignment shop, in good shape with good bases. These skis were probably made in the early 1970s IIRC; at least that's about the era when I first noticed them. They were specifically designed by Earl Miller http://www.lib.utah.edu/spc/mss/accn1570/accn1570.html for Utah powder aqnd had limited distribution - you pretty much had to go to Utah to buy them. Thus began a covetious relationship with what I thought was unobtainable - owning and skiing Miller Softs. I was surprised and gratified to discover this pair for sale (at $50.) I had my shop mount them with demo bindings - I imagined others might like to test drive such a (now) rare ski. OK, enough background. I tried them last Thursday at Alpine Meadows, in deep California Cement, and hated them. Minimum sidecut, narrow, and no stiffness meant they couldn't crank a GS turn in the deep. Two footed technique would send each in a different direction, and outside weighting would leave the outside ski buried tracking unforgiving snow leading to arkward lurching to get the ski free for the next turn. And when making the last run into the lift on the packed they didn't behave themselves (that minimal sidecut thing again.) Very difficult skiing - I gave them three deep snow runs and went into the locker for my regular California Cement deep snow skis (K2 Piste Stinx) which have more sidecut and are stiffer, while still relatively narrow. They would crank GS turns in the heavy. Oh well - maybe it was another experiment with limited reward. But last night we had another 18inches of reasonably light snow (at least by California standards. And the Millers became stars today. The narrowness meant I had none of that surface gliding - they would alway porpoise deep into the soft and the soft shovel would bring them right back up for the next turn. They really shined on steep where one could launch a freefall drop into the soft and let the compression launch the next turn, and the next, and the next. As long as the surface remained soft they even managed crud and tracked up with aplomb, and handled the lift return runout easily. They were Beautiful. They were a Revelation. And they also put wide plank "powder" skis to shame. Earl Miller got it right 35 years ago. IMO it's a crying shame what people today are subjected to - skis that won't allow the skier to enter the three dimensional world of deep snow skiing, that force the skier to remain on top of the snow. It's time for a ski counter-revolution. It's time for manufacturers to offer capable skiers the choice of skiing in the snow rather than on the snow. Leave the training skis for those who ski 8 or 10 days a year, and build some new real powder skis for the rest of us. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
lal_truckee writes: Leave the training skis for those who ski 8 or 10 days a year, and build some new real powder skis for the rest of us. So I'm curious: The Miller Soft are (were) by definition specialized powder skis. What makes them any less of a cheating ski than say a current mid fat ? bruno. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Miko the pooch wrote:
In article , lal_truckee writes: Leave the training skis for those who ski 8 or 10 days a year, and build some new real powder skis for the rest of us. So I'm curious: The Miller Soft are (were) by definition specialized powder skis. What makes them any less of a cheating ski than say a current mid fat ? Narrow. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I'm interested in what a 3-D powder experience would feel like, ski
like. I think I understand the idea, but top to bottom there aren't many places where a guy could actually experience it. But, maybe I have the wrong idea about what you are saying. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
chennai wrote:
I'm interested in what a 3-D powder experience would feel like, ski like. I think I understand the idea, but top to bottom there aren't many places where a guy could actually experience it. But, maybe I have the wrong idea about what you are saying. Short, edifying video http://jacksonhole.com/movies/012702.mov First half - boarder doing it in two dimensions Second half - skier doing it in three dimensions |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
lal_truckee wrote:
chennai wrote: I'm interested in what a 3-D powder experience would feel like, ski like. I think I understand the idea, but top to bottom there aren't many places where a guy could actually experience it. But, maybe I have the wrong idea about what you are saying. Short, edifying video http://jacksonhole.com/movies/012702.mov First half - boarder doing it in two dimensions Second half - skier doing it in three dimensions Ah, yes. I remember that video. Currently, my skis - dynastar intuitiv 71s - are only moderately wide, and - unlike the boarder - I definitely am not on the top surface of the snow. Yet, I don't think I have any top to bottom control. Maybe I've just never learned to do it right. Do the wider skis really stay on top like the snowboard in the video? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Miller Soft report | lal_truckee | Alpine Skiing | 5 | April 1st 05 08:31 PM |
Galena Lodge/Sun Valley trip report | gr | Nordic Skiing | 2 | April 5th 04 01:57 PM |
Miller 4th, Rahlves 5th in overall WC. | Inger Skramstad Jørstad | Alpine Skiing | 4 | March 15th 04 06:34 AM |
Trip Report - Mt. Baker / Mt. Bachelor | toddjb | Snowboarding | 10 | January 5th 04 11:34 PM |
Custom Liners / Soft Boots | Chris Devidal | Alpine Skiing (moderated) | 3 | October 4th 03 03:11 AM |