Is the new Solly Sandstorm (95 waist) a renamed model from last year? My buddy wants to buy them new, but $600 isn't exactly in his price range.
Printable View
Is the new Solly Sandstorm (95 waist) a renamed model from last year? My buddy wants to buy them new, but $600 isn't exactly in his price range.
it's a non-twin, slightly stiffer, 1080 gun lab.
ie, a real new model.
^^^ but the Gun Lab would be the closest in comparison, correct?
Salomon is slowly going in the right direction but for christ's sake, when are they going to ditch the foam core bullshit???? I got a pair 3 years ago as a gift and they were toast after about 30 days of hard skiing. They flap around like a limp dick now, pitiful for some of the most expensive mass produced skis out there.
That's what their mensuration and construction suggest. And the supposedly in-the-know posters on SkiPass (french forum).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd Christmas
Yeah, I don't know why my buddy wants them, he'll destroy them in a matter of a season... but hey, he's not listening to me, so fuck'em. For the price of those Solly's, he could get some short Bros.
So true. It is amazing how many people either still don't know or just don't care because they are label whores about how piss poor Salomon's construction is. I had 3 straight pairs of Salomons when I was a dumb little shit and each one either de-lamed, cracked or turned to a noodle after a good season of use and I kept going back....when I grew up and start buying my own gear, I learned fast that durability can be an expensive gamble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd Christmas
Plus the sandstorms have to have the ugliest graphics posible, htose things are hideous.
:rolleyes2 :rolleyes2 :rolleyes2Quote:
Originally Posted by Boomer28
and k2 are bomber, atomic edges don't crack and the topsheet doesn't delam, volkl's don't bend easily or delam, fishers don't soften incredibally quickly or fall apart fast, head's sidewalls don't crack or blow out, rossi's don't snap or delam, dynastars cores don't break and sidewalls don't blow out, goodes don't snap in half etc etc etc etc...
:nonono2: :nonono2: :nonono2:
fuck dude, anything with a cap will delam, anything with a metal topsheet/sandwhich will bend, anything with a wood core can get broken, anything with a sidewall can blow the sidewall, etc...
squads are foam core, atomics are foam core, etc. they all have the same issues.
edit to add: fisher and atomic have made the most delam prone skis EVER (powder cruise, heli-star, 106) and the most fragile edges ever (big daddy, sugar daddy, r:ex, 106).
what marshal is trying to say is that skis are consumable items. A good rule of thumb:
expect 15 days
be satisfied with 30
be happy with 50
be amazed at 75+
or buy igneous and get 200
I sure as hell don't expect 15 days out of my skis. If they aren't lasting 50 I'm pretty pissed. 15 days?Quote:
Originally Posted by lemon boy
50ish days till I tore the edge out of my pinners...particle skied a pair for like 10 days when he broke one of em.... (not that I'm not fully on the iggy>anything else train)Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
Daywalker, I am a very lightfooted skier and I personally get a helluva lot more days out of skis than most people but I have low expectations for durability. At 15 days you're still <1yr and getting styled on the warranty front.
Marshal: I wasn't painting Solly into a corner all by it's self, of course others have some serious problems, but in my experience the worst of all worlds have been present. Individual skis by K2, Atomic, Rossi, etc. have had some fatal flaws, no question, but on the whole I would expect more than a season out of all of those brands.
I consider myself "normal" when it comes to use (20+ EC days, another 10+ west coast on average) but I am 6' and 215lbs and ski relatively hard. That being said I'm not hucking 30' clifs, or getting airbore much at all for that matter and can't comment on what that use would result in.
So for someone like myself I feel I can be picky about a ski that craps out after a season, and especially if I find that one manufacturer is more prone than others. If I lived out west and got 40+ days a year, I'm sure I would bitch about more than Salomon.
Have a look at the stats for these skis, the sandstorm and the gun. Check specifically the 173/4 and the 187/8 cm skis. The stats are identical. The only ski that was the same last year was the salomon Gun Lab. Identical in every way to this years gun apart from topsheet design and base materials.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd Christmas
If he's going to get a pair, the longer ones have a better spec being 101 at the waist.
Gun
http://www.salomonski.com/uk/product...product=786032
Sandstorm
http://www.salomonski.com/uk/product...product=786861
20 to 30 days a pair if I'm not careful.....:nonono2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daywalker
ShenanigansQuote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
There's a difference between breaking and wearing out. Any ski can break and that can happen on the 1st day or the 100th. But a ski should not just WEAR out in 15 days. It should break in over maybe 3 days, and provide pretty consistent performance for another 30 at minimum, barring anything catastrophic.
That being said,
- slapping your park landings will delam most sandwich skis pretty quickly, especially if they have long tips
- Atomic edges are very brittle
- Fischer plasma edges are SUPER brittle
- A ski that achieved a given stiffness by using a thick sheet of titanal will be more likely to bend and kink than one of the same stiffness with thin titanal or none at all.
Skis are evil. Punish them until they are dead. The base material on my new Heads is made of room temperature butter. And die-cut base graphics? Stop that shit!!!