Posts
Some background? There are several places in the Chamonix valley that off piste skiers hang out at the end of the day. In town it is the Elevation with an outside ski rack. Just outside the ice cream parlor below the train station with a railing fence that has skis stacked on it daily. And forced into a crowded train ride back from the tours that drop down to the train coming back from Vallorcine at the upper end of the valley. If you are a gear geek any given winter season you can generally notice one brand of ski showing up a lot. Over the 30 years I have been skiing in the Valley the brand and skis change almost seasonally.
Almost.
The last 10 years I've been seeing Black Crowns gather more and more customers. To the point the "green" ski is very common being used by men. The "red" ski, more common being used by women, and more recently the "pink" ski being used by either if you can make out a gender as they scream by at Mach1!
Before anyone gets all hot about me labeling the red ski a "girl's" ski it is just my observation from what I saw while in Chamonix last winter. If you know the colors Black Crow uses on their skis they are all very distinctive. Nothing more. Nothing less. When I started wondering what the bright red ski was, I almost 100% of the time saw the ski was in a woman's hand or just as likely on a woman's ski pack. At that point knowing almost nothing of Back Crow skis I began to assume the "red ski" was a woman's specific ski.
No matter the optics in the Valley or the advertising blitz, boy did I have that wrong!
I've generally been a huge fan of 100 +/- ski under foot for almost all of my skiing the last decade. Last 3 or 4 years I have bumped that up some, to 105 +/- and been happy enough. That said with skis up to 138 under foot in my quiver for the blower days that seem to become less and less common even if you are willing to chase storms across several states.
The is more to the story on widths. But it isn't the story today. Yesterday I unpacked a new pair of 183cm Camox. Then took the time to clean them and add DPS' excellent Phantom base prep. It is a long-lasting, high-performance base "wax". But not a wax at all. I've found more than worth the effort, cost and time.
This morning, in a hurry, I mounted a set of Dynafit race toes and Plum heels. And off I went for some expected sloppy spring skiing at Bogus. It was 47F at 8am on the hill! Ice (which surprised me) in the shade on the first few runs. Fair size water puddles just getting off the lifts. It was slush two hrs later. And I had skied just under 11K feet of vert in 10 miles according to my Slopes phone app. Not much. But enough to get a good feel for the skis in Spring conditions. Skis could have been a little better on the blue water ice. But what ski at 95mm couldn't be? By the time the slush was starting to get heavy and moved around the skis were showing me just how stable they were cruising the groomers at 30mph. Mind you this is supposed to me a 95mm back country ski, not a yoyo ski. And I was skiing as hard as do any ski. I wasn't even remotely disappointed at the Camox's performance. In the 183.8cm size I was skiing they come in at 1570g/1575g per ski. My long time, go to Dynafit Denalis (which are pretty dang light) are 99cm under foot and 1325/1332g per ski. The Corvus are more stable, easier to ski, every bit a quick under foot, have a good bit more tail support and are simply more fun in every way except maybe while being carried on your back.
I've always loved super light skis. Dynafit has made some. I have a full quiver of Movement skis that still are. But for the little added weight, the entire line of back country skis from Black Crow has really upped my skiing fun from the super light skis. But that is another story that needs to be told. The Camox? It aint just a "girl's ski" ;-) I might even snag an extra pair of 171cm just to carry around!
Charlie touring in the Argentière basin and definitely not on what most would consider a "touring" ski!
No comments:
Post a Comment