tomPietrowskiYeah I would have to disagree. Certainly in te past that was true but now brands have the technology to make a lighter ski whic still rips. Lighter equipment helps so much especially in the park. Try some lightweight skis an boots and see what you think.
I'd have to disagree again. Pretty much any lightweight-tech ski still blows up in the park long before the regular tech equivalent ski does. That's not to say they don't rip, they just don't last as long. Examples off the top of my head include the original Candide 1.0 (withdrawn after a year, snaps), Amplid Syntax (don't last nearly as long as the Antidogma, which is the same ski just heavier/chunkier), Line Chronic (12-14 Macroblocklite 'snapcore'), Blend (same years, same core), Atomic Infamous (not specifically lightweight but they are... at least these are cheap). I honestly can't think of any ski that is light for its category but known as durable (with the possible exception of really high end $900+ skis). If I were dropping full retail on a ski to ride in the park, I'd 100% go for something chunky, no matter if a light ski is easier to ride.
LonelySince its on topic I'm litterally like a day from deciding whether to get the blends or sfbs. I like buttery skis but I heard the sfb got stiffer and smaller sidewalls so it won't be as durable. I'm about 75 park 25 all mtn and I'm either skiing on a hill with 600 ft of drop, or Alta. Thoughts?
In order (for your usage), I'd probably go 2012-15 SFB, Blend, New SFB (I've owned all 3). The new SFB is the lightest, but it's also the stiffest and has pretty narrow edges/thinner bases so if you ride rails/wreck skis, I wouldn't expect them to last all that long. It really is meant to be a mountain/pow ski now, they kill it for that but they wouldn't last me in the park.
The Blend is super soft in the tip and tail, but relatively solid underfoot. I'd consider myself a fan of soft skis but these were too soft tip/tail and then the flex is too uneven. I've snapped a pair buttering, right at the hinge point (both skis), though they may have changed the core since then (Snake/tiger graphic). They actually ski pretty well in soft light snow but when the going gets heavy, they flap like mad and just aren't much fun. Most of the Line team rides them for what that's worth, but they get free skis.
The older SFB is softer than the new one, but stiffer than the Blend, with a more even flex profile. It's also way more durable than either in my experience, I've owned two pairs and skied them for whole winters without killing them. They aren't the lightest but imo they are the best of the 3. They still aren't good in crap snow, but better than the Blend. I think i've got more full reviews of all 3 in my profile.
*OP may be trolling judging by his post asking for a ski he can break, but the other stuff is interesting*
**This post was edited on Aug 8th 2015 at 3:41:57pm
there's a certain point where it neither looks good nor functions properly...that's when you know you look steezy - no_steeze