snowblades?

So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype seems to
suggest they are, but is it true? I'm thinking I might like to give them a
try on an upcoming ski trip, but I'm not sure. As a relative newcomer to
skiing (total experience four weeks in four years) I still manage to fall
over occasionally by getting my skis crossed in front of me. Although most
of the time I manage to make it down red runs and the occasional (slightly)
black reasonably smoothly and without too much embarassement, snowblades
have a certain attraction... but, I wonder, does the fact that they are so
short mean it is harder to stop with them? Or even easier to fall over? Or
more risk of injury with the non-release bindings? What do people think?

Rich

"Richard Goodman" wrote in message
...
So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype seems
to
suggest they are, but is it true?

It's probably easier for a guy to get laid out of a gay bar too. But would
ya? If so, give the blades a try.

in article , pigo at
wrote on 2/1/04 12:47 PM:


"Richard Goodman" wrote in message
...
So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype seems
to
suggest they are, but is it true?

It's probably easier for a guy to get laid out of a gay bar too. But would
ya? If so, give the blades a try.


Bob Thompson would know.

"Richard Goodman" wrote in
:

So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype
seems to suggest they are, but is it true? I'm thinking I might like
to give them a try on an upcoming ski trip, but I'm not sure. As a
relative newcomer to skiing (total experience four weeks in four
years) I still manage to fall over occasionally by getting my skis
crossed in front of me. Although most of the time I manage to make it
down red runs and the occasional (slightly) black reasonably smoothly
and without too much embarassement, snowblades have a certain
attraction... but, I wonder, does the fact that they are so short
mean it is harder to stop with them? Or even easier to fall over? Or
more risk of injury with the non-release bindings? What do people
think?

Rich
Snowblades (or the slightly long version skiboards) is perceived to be
easier to ski on because of reasons that they are lighter and such as the
ones you mentioned. On the same token, it allows skiers to be sloppy. These
little skis are meant to be skied by going from edge to edge, hence they
are great for carving drills. They are not meant for straight runs/bombs.
They are also great if you were to ski along side with someone much slower
than you (like a young kid). They give you the sensation of going fast (by
carving left and right) without really going too fast. They can be a lot of
fun if you use them right. Now as for the hazard regarding the bindings, as
long as you stay on the packed trails and away from the ungroom stuff
(unless you really know how to exaggerate your carving), it really isn't
that big of a concern. These short things don't create much torque but they
do tend to be grabbed by the "snow snakes" if you are not careful. Boy,
does that hurt!

If you mind is set on getting a pair of these, go long. They are far more
stable than the stubby ones. And, they flow much better on unpacked snow.



--------------------------------------------

W R Chan from Upstate NY
(to respond, remove ### from email address)

* I have no stinking sig *

"Richard Goodman" wrote in message ...
So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype seems to
suggest they are, but is it true? I'm thinking I might like to give them a
try on an upcoming ski trip, but I'm not sure. As a relative newcomer to
skiing (total experience four weeks in four years) I still manage to fall
over occasionally by getting my skis crossed in front of me. Although most
of the time I manage to make it down red runs and the occasional (slightly)
black reasonably smoothly and without too much embarassement, snowblades
have a certain attraction... but, I wonder, does the fact that they are so
short mean it is harder to stop with them? Or even easier to fall over? Or
more risk of injury with the non-release bindings? What do people think?

Rich

Used properly, Blades CAN be useful for developing some edging skills.
They also can lead to some really bad habits if overused. Give 'em a
rental try or join a ski school group for blading. Most ski schools
will put on a blade group program if asked.

Don't use them, don't look at them, don't even *think*
about them.

More people have gotten spiral fractures, knees injuries,
and a host of assorted injuries using these things than
the public has any idea of.

There have been lawsuits against areas for renting
them when the user has been injured.

I know of one "ripper" of a skier who broke both legs
on a pair.

If you really want to own something in the nature of
these, get the Atomic 120cm race training ski, or the
Rossi or Dynastar development ski in that length.

These are *real* skis with *real* bindings. 100cm is
*plenty* long enough to get hurt on, yet too short to
be useful. 90cm is *entirely* too short to be useful.

*DO NOT* (no shout intended) use these cheap,
very dangerous and useless pieces of garbage.

I don't think. I know.

For instance, search the Ski Area Management site
(google it). You'll find an attorney asking about how to
defend a suit brought by just such a "snowblade" user
against an area that rented him a pair.

The thing is, shorter skis steer more easily, but you
get the crap beat out of you in crud. By the end of
any given day, groomed or not, many runs
*are* crud.

Longer skis help you by absorbing a lot of the
roughness, as well as "bridging?" over a lot of little
gullies and such.

When you first use short skis, (like 120's) you find that
they wobble all over the place, that you can't hold them
straight and steady at speed. Then, in time, you learn to
hold them straight. As such, they can improve your
steering, as well as your fore and aft balance, because
you end up face or butt first in the snow if you're not
centered over the skis. No back seat allowed on these
things. Another thing they can help you with is to really
learn to ski with your feet, as opposed to just depending
on the boots. Also, they can help you learn to carve.

I'm talking about *real* short skis, not "snowblades"
with those junk wire bindings.

As far as length, as a general rule. if you have two pairs
of skis of the same model, one shorter than the other,
the shorter pair will become unstable at a slower speed
than the longer pair. Hence, going fast on short skis is
an issue.

What you might try doing is just experimenting with
different lengths of skis from your resort's rental shop.
They *must* have something in the 120 to 140 range.

In the end, you'll have to learn how to deal with skis
of around 160 to 180cm anyway, so in the long run
experience with longer skis is what's needed.

You sometimes fall because of tips getting crossed?
I would say the likeliest thing is that you're getting
too much weight on the inside ski.

What type of turn are you trying to make? Are you
wedging?

"Richard Goodman" wrote in message
...
So are snowblades easier to ski on than regular skis? Vendor hype seems
to
suggest they are, but is it true? I'm thinking I might like to give them
a
try on an upcoming ski trip, but I'm not sure. As a relative newcomer to
skiing (total experience four weeks in four years) I still manage to fall
over occasionally by getting my skis crossed in front of me. Although
most
of the time I manage to make it down red runs and the occasional
(slightly)
black reasonably smoothly and without too much embarassement, snowblades
have a certain attraction... but, I wonder, does the fact that they are
so
short mean it is harder to stop with them? Or even easier to fall over?
Or
more risk of injury with the non-release bindings? What do people think?

Rich

"foot2foot" writes:

Don't use them, don't look at them, don't even *think*
about them.

More people have gotten spiral fractures, knees injuries,
and a host of assorted injuries using these things than
the public has any idea of.

Really??? Wow. I sure didn't know. I'll freely admit that they
don't look that way to me based on a casual glance. What's the
issue -- do the bindings not release like a ski binding?

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
...
"foot2foot" writes:

Don't use them, don't look at them, don't even *think*
about them.

More people have gotten spiral fractures, knees injuries,
and a host of assorted injuries using these things than
the public has any idea of.

Really??? Wow. I sure didn't know. I'll freely admit that they
don't look that way to me based on a casual glance. What's the
issue -- do the bindings not release like a ski binding?

Most snowblades have non release bindings, but I think the injury rate is
being hyped up, I've never seen a casualty on Blades though they are
becoming very common in Europe (mind you an acquaintance broke his leg on a
pair, but if you saw the way he skied on ordinary skis....... )


--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk

Mary and Moon, the thing is, there it absolutely no need to
use these cheap pieces of junk, because there exist real skis
with real bindings that are more useful, and as safe as any
ski made. These "blades" are an unusual example of the
companies that make them showing absolute disregard for
the safety of their customers for the goal of cheap, quick
profit. Instead of making this crap, these companies could
make *real* short skis, as other companies are doing.

I have personal experience with them. I *know* how easy
it is to get hurt on a wire binding "snowblade". I didn't,
much, but given the available alternative of real short skis,
onc could only be a fool to pick the wire binding, too short
to be useful alternative, the "snowblade".

Don't even *think* about using them.

Get a real short ski.

"MoonMan" wrote in message
...

"Mary Malmros" wrote in message
...
"foot2foot" writes:

Don't use them, don't look at them, don't even *think*
about them.

More people have gotten spiral fractures, knees injuries,
and a host of assorted injuries using these things than
the public has any idea of.

Really??? Wow. I sure didn't know. I'll freely admit that they
don't look that way to me based on a casual glance. What's the
issue -- do the bindings not release like a ski binding?

Most snowblades have non release bindings, but I think the injury rate is
being hyped up, I've never seen a casualty on Blades though they are
becoming very common in Europe (mind you an acquaintance broke his leg on
a
pair, but if you saw the way he skied on ordinary skis....... )


--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk

"foot2foot" wrote in message
...
Mary and Moon, the thing is, there it absolutely no need to
use these cheap pieces of junk, because there exist real skis
with real bindings that are more useful, and as safe as any
ski made. These "blades" are an unusual example of the
companies that make them showing absolute disregard for
the safety of their customers for the goal of cheap, quick
profit. Instead of making this crap, these companies could
make *real* short skis, as other companies are doing.


I have a pair of blades, Had them for years, they are great fun and also
very useful. for example they are very good for teaching someone where they
should be over the ski. I also use mine for course inspection at races. In
fact I raced on mine once, the last race before the 155 minimum length was
introduced.

mine are 0.89m and I dont think a proper binding would release anyway

I have personal experience with them. I *know* how easy
it is to get hurt on a wire binding "snowblade". I didn't,
much, but given the available alternative of real short skis,
onc could only be a fool to pick the wire binding, too short
to be useful alternative, the "snowblade".


I have only hurt myself on them once, and that wasn't bad (I could still
ski) and that was due to using them in the wrong conditions (fresh snow on
top of a Piste that hadn't frozen the night before) so my own stupid fault.



--
Chris *:-)

Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk