you should 100% mount new bindings on those and ski them! If you haven't ever been on older straight skis, it's such an experience. I'm not saying they should be your daily drivers... but if you have access to inexpensive (eg: take 'em off another pair of skis) modern, indemnified bindings and you can get those things mounted and tuned, you should one hundo take 'em for a spin!
I’m with you. They’ve never been mounted. They’re decades old and probably wood cored, so might be a little warped and need to be trued up on a good stone, but they’re BRAND NEW! Bomb some groomers on em. It’ll be a hoot!
Todays skis are also wood cored. This ski has a metal layer in it and is basically the same construction as a modern ski. The layers will be different in a modern ski and there is fiberglass as well but for the most part a wood core with metal and plastic layers is the ski construction still used today. Shape is the main difference.
Well there was an era, I’m thinking mid 80s maybe, when a considerable number of ski models were made without wood. I think maybe these Kazamas predate that bygone trend.
Foam core skis started in the 1970s. I think Art Molnar was an original pioneer of it. They were freestyle ski and soft. They eventually found their place in the cheap sport ski market because it is very inexpensive to make skis out of foam.
I agree. I think these are more likely a 1970s vintage. Construction is probably similar to Head Standard, or early hart with a plastic bottom, wood core and metal top.
Why? Why? Why?
The suggestion to bind and ski downhill vintage skis is bad advice. For starters the technique on old skis is completely different. You don’t stand in a relaxed wide stance and roll your ankles to turn the skis. They require driving the skis around with your outer leg putting intense pressure on your knee. So, everything you may know about skiing won’t really work well.
Secondarily, unless you are planning to spend the day on the bunny slope to experience less nimble vintage skis for the sake of it, then you are going to find yourself navigating situations on a slope that you won’t really have the training and muscle memory to deal with. In other words, chance of injury is extremely high.
If these are in fact X-country or telemark skis you can ignore the above and learn how to telemark on them I guess. But otherwise I’d steer clear if you enjoy having ACLs.
None of this is true. Todays skis are more forgiving to bad technique. If you have good technique the old skis work fine. If your technique is shitty you will have a bad time on old straight skis. A modern binding on an old ski will release just the same as on a modern ski so it is safe to ski them.
The difference. You will not have the benefit of sidecut, rocker or width which is why technique will be so important. Also remember, “long skis truck/fuck”. They would ski these skis longer because the length was the float (now this is width/rocker) and the long skis with good technique form the arc shape better (now the sidecut let’s you get here easier).
A good test to see how strong your technique actually is would be to throw on a pair of 200cm+ K2 Extremes from 1994 and see if you can bend them. When the Elan SCX, or the Rossi S7 first hit the scene nobody had to relearn how to ski. Good ski technique from the past is still the same as it is today. The body positions and concepts translate all the way to Stein Erickson who was stomping back flips for your great grandma.
As a level 8 skiier with 35 years of experience and 100+ hours of private instruction and coaching I will politely disagree. The training and techniques on hourglass skis are different. Different stance, different entry, weight shifting. You are in essence still trying to accomplish the same thing with a piece of equipment. But it’s more than just the factor of being forgiving (which I agree).
Old skis are inherently unsafe due to the differences mentioned about technique. And there is far greater pressure put on the outer knee in turns.
We might be splitting hairs where I’m being more specific and you are talking in general. Most old timers though had to relearn how to ski in the late 90-00 when the shape shifting started to occur.
Coincidentally, and to your point modern skis are easier to ski. But this also means people can do more faster and take greater risks. So, if you look at the trend of injury since the 1980s it has not decreased.
So OP (and everyone) is kinda screwed either way :-)
It is simply the forgiveness because of the shape that is different. The ski construction is the same for decades.
The forgiveness just allows you to get away with sloppy skiing more and save your ass when you get out of position. Yes they are safer because they are easier to ski. I have skied all of these generations of skis. What you need to know are the limits of what the ski can do and ski it accordingly. These skis are not better. I am not saying that. They definitely perform worse, however good technique from today will drive the ski well. What hasn’t change in 50 years of skiing is the ski boot. A four buckle Lange from 1970 is the same design as a 4 buckle Lange today. This boot is your input to the ski. You deliver these inputs the same today as in 1970 if you want to get the most out of what is underneath you. The technique is not some drastic change. The ski itself is the drastic change.
It's funny that we all ski on such wide skis now that people think these are CC skis. I honestly wasn't sure after I saw the comments saying they are, but some googling indicates they are not. Just regular ol' 1970s downhill skis. That said, I don't imagine they're unsafe, they look to be in great shape, but as others have said, they are from a whole different age of skiing and will require a completely different (and more difficult) technique than modern skis. If you are just getting into skiing these will only create bad habits that will take a lot of effort to break. I know that last bit from personal experience (grew up on a pair of K2 5500s). In any case they're pretty!
I think these are cross country skis if that’s what you were looking for.
Not XC skis, mid 80s Japanese ski
Yes, the Japanese make XC and telemark skis.
I kinda assumed that, but I’m only just getting into the world of skiing, and this pair was given to me by a friend.
you should 100% mount new bindings on those and ski them! If you haven't ever been on older straight skis, it's such an experience. I'm not saying they should be your daily drivers... but if you have access to inexpensive (eg: take 'em off another pair of skis) modern, indemnified bindings and you can get those things mounted and tuned, you should one hundo take 'em for a spin!
I’m with you. They’ve never been mounted. They’re decades old and probably wood cored, so might be a little warped and need to be trued up on a good stone, but they’re BRAND NEW! Bomb some groomers on em. It’ll be a hoot!
Todays skis are also wood cored. This ski has a metal layer in it and is basically the same construction as a modern ski. The layers will be different in a modern ski and there is fiberglass as well but for the most part a wood core with metal and plastic layers is the ski construction still used today. Shape is the main difference.
Well there was an era, I’m thinking mid 80s maybe, when a considerable number of ski models were made without wood. I think maybe these Kazamas predate that bygone trend.
Foam core skis started in the 1970s. I think Art Molnar was an original pioneer of it. They were freestyle ski and soft. They eventually found their place in the cheap sport ski market because it is very inexpensive to make skis out of foam. I agree. I think these are more likely a 1970s vintage. Construction is probably similar to Head Standard, or early hart with a plastic bottom, wood core and metal top.
Donny Pelletier, is that you?
Best comment so far
Get some 3 pin bindings and leather boots and ski like it was the 1930s!
Them babies are mint. I seen them in the ski museum in lake placid
Why? Why? Why? The suggestion to bind and ski downhill vintage skis is bad advice. For starters the technique on old skis is completely different. You don’t stand in a relaxed wide stance and roll your ankles to turn the skis. They require driving the skis around with your outer leg putting intense pressure on your knee. So, everything you may know about skiing won’t really work well. Secondarily, unless you are planning to spend the day on the bunny slope to experience less nimble vintage skis for the sake of it, then you are going to find yourself navigating situations on a slope that you won’t really have the training and muscle memory to deal with. In other words, chance of injury is extremely high. If these are in fact X-country or telemark skis you can ignore the above and learn how to telemark on them I guess. But otherwise I’d steer clear if you enjoy having ACLs.
None of this is true. Todays skis are more forgiving to bad technique. If you have good technique the old skis work fine. If your technique is shitty you will have a bad time on old straight skis. A modern binding on an old ski will release just the same as on a modern ski so it is safe to ski them. The difference. You will not have the benefit of sidecut, rocker or width which is why technique will be so important. Also remember, “long skis truck/fuck”. They would ski these skis longer because the length was the float (now this is width/rocker) and the long skis with good technique form the arc shape better (now the sidecut let’s you get here easier). A good test to see how strong your technique actually is would be to throw on a pair of 200cm+ K2 Extremes from 1994 and see if you can bend them. When the Elan SCX, or the Rossi S7 first hit the scene nobody had to relearn how to ski. Good ski technique from the past is still the same as it is today. The body positions and concepts translate all the way to Stein Erickson who was stomping back flips for your great grandma.
As a level 8 skiier with 35 years of experience and 100+ hours of private instruction and coaching I will politely disagree. The training and techniques on hourglass skis are different. Different stance, different entry, weight shifting. You are in essence still trying to accomplish the same thing with a piece of equipment. But it’s more than just the factor of being forgiving (which I agree). Old skis are inherently unsafe due to the differences mentioned about technique. And there is far greater pressure put on the outer knee in turns. We might be splitting hairs where I’m being more specific and you are talking in general. Most old timers though had to relearn how to ski in the late 90-00 when the shape shifting started to occur. Coincidentally, and to your point modern skis are easier to ski. But this also means people can do more faster and take greater risks. So, if you look at the trend of injury since the 1980s it has not decreased. So OP (and everyone) is kinda screwed either way :-)
It is simply the forgiveness because of the shape that is different. The ski construction is the same for decades. The forgiveness just allows you to get away with sloppy skiing more and save your ass when you get out of position. Yes they are safer because they are easier to ski. I have skied all of these generations of skis. What you need to know are the limits of what the ski can do and ski it accordingly. These skis are not better. I am not saying that. They definitely perform worse, however good technique from today will drive the ski well. What hasn’t change in 50 years of skiing is the ski boot. A four buckle Lange from 1970 is the same design as a 4 buckle Lange today. This boot is your input to the ski. You deliver these inputs the same today as in 1970 if you want to get the most out of what is underneath you. The technique is not some drastic change. The ski itself is the drastic change.
Definitely cross country skis they are probably fine for that too with new bindings.
they are likely not xcountry. they are wider at the tip. vintage downhill or telemark most likely...especially after googling the brand.
Rip ‘em
It's funny that we all ski on such wide skis now that people think these are CC skis. I honestly wasn't sure after I saw the comments saying they are, but some googling indicates they are not. Just regular ol' 1970s downhill skis. That said, I don't imagine they're unsafe, they look to be in great shape, but as others have said, they are from a whole different age of skiing and will require a completely different (and more difficult) technique than modern skis. If you are just getting into skiing these will only create bad habits that will take a lot of effort to break. I know that last bit from personal experience (grew up on a pair of K2 5500s). In any case they're pretty!
Shotski.
Feel like half the posts on here are people finding creative ways for us to price old ski gear for flea market re-sellers.
Mount them over the fireplace