Jump to content

AM skis. An honest criticism.


Taelan28
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_UuUISRpDU

 

at :50 Adam (I believe his name is) said he and Andy "...wanted to take things to a whole other level and in order to do that the best way to go was with our own company"

 

What do you mean? You business partner is the best skier in history, has dominated the sport for 20 years and hold marketing power. Like working with Obrien didnt give you enough freedom or testing resources when designing skis? What about he other companies? Didnt you shop them around or didnt they contact you for a better deal?

 

Granted my eye isn't trained very well and I'm still pretty numb in feeling when riding a ski but looking at the bottom of a Sixam and a Elite there isn't much difference. What AM skis seems to offer is a RTM ski (like Reflex, Sans Rival, and Elite). What they offer thats different is molding a custom ski in 2 hours, and testing it 5 minutes away.

 

My point is them making starting their own company does not mean a big improvement in design as there are a half dozen other companies, with pros of their own, striving for the same thing, so by starting their own business is not to make a better ski, but to be more in control of the profits (which is totally fine) with a leaner company and it seems the only differentiating benefit is that they can mold a new ski in two hours for a customer on the site.

 

I wrote this quickly and Im sure it will receive criticism. Please correct me if Im missing anything or that does not line up with the reality of the situation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Id put money on me not knowing what im talking about. Im sure theyll make a quality ski. The comment in the video caught my attention immediatly the first time watching it. Immediately after that quote andy said that there was a financial element to working with other companies that he didnt like so i wonder how can storied ski companies not have the resources on hand to help the sports former top athlete to make a ski.

 

This isnt a question of AM skis being good or bad its a question of why they werent able to make the skis they wanted at another company.

 

From a business standpoint it seems really smart for the two to be teaming up and going independent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Go work for a large company (I do) and a small company (I have). while large companies in theory have large resources available, it doesn't always work out that way...time lines, departmental specific budgets, politics, quarterly reporting pressures, the relative sway that your department or product holds within the company; all of these things affect what you can and cannot do.

 

In a small company, communication is wide open and easily achieved, changes can be made on the fly, you are much closer to the end user of your product.

 

There are many more things and great things (and bad things) can come out of both arrangements, but don't ever assume that bigger is better. Particularly in a small run niche product like a high end slalom ski.

 

Look at the father of the industry Herb O'Brien, he has founded three major ski companies, and twice has sold them and moved on, only to open another small shop.

 

If you were looking for a fine meal, would it always be served by a chain? Or would you do better at a small bistro with a terrific chef?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Taelan, your skepticism of AM skis is reasonable. You are likely to get flamed because Andy IS one of the best slalom skiers and one of the best ski designers. But that is no guarantee that the ski will work for you.

 

From the looks of things, the ski is not manufactured by RTM. The manufacturing process with what looks like soft tooling makes changes and customization straightforward. The "locked in" designs of hard tooling needed for RTM and other manufacturing techniques make improvements difficult and expensive. For low volume specialty skis, AM may have a market advantage with the process they have selected.

 

Seattle was the heart of the waterski manufacturing industry because historically the advanced composites were developed for the aircraft industry - much of which was based in Seattle. The experienced engineers and technicians were in Seattle so the first spinoffs of this technology to waterskis were in Seattle. Composites are now a mature technology, Orlando has great waterskiing weather. You could take a ski vacation and dial in a ski to perfectly match your style. Basing a waterski company in Orlando could reasonably be another market advantage.

 

The Sixam is one of my favorite skis. Still! Andy's design skills are real. Having input from Chris Parrish can't hurt. The Mapple name is a market advantage.

 

On the other hand, there is a lot of competition in ski building. Many other companies share similar market advantages - proven designer names, great demo programs, top endorsements, etc.. Plus they have production and financing track records that may offer a huge market advantage over the AM company. There are a lot of proven winning skis out there.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, maybe the next great thing might emerge from a radical idea spawned in primer white out of a messy mold underneath an airplane wing!

 

Finally, it finally boils down to "it's the skier, not the ski".

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

With respect to O'Brien and Elite skis, I would like to add this info to the discussion - At the time that Adam was working there, he had access to a fantastic waterski test team (Andy, Glenn Campbell, and sometimes Drew Ross (health issues)) to get design feedback. He also had great support from his immediate superior, Pete Surrette. But.... Adam was responsible for preparing the brochure and marketing info for all of the O'Brien waterskis (Jordan Bollard was his one person art "department" that pulled everything together), designing and coordinating with China on the production of the waterski boots, gloves, and vests, designing the tooling for the RTM process and coordinating its development (from scratch), and if that wasn't enough, he personally ended up building most of the Elite skis for the first year and a half of production (for which he had no say over market pricing). Why was he spread so thin? Wakeboarding dollars vs. waterski dollars.

 

With AM Skis, he only has to focus on engineering/designing (and, at least at first, building) slalom skis.

 

With Andy as his business partner, you know that they won't be spending any time on wakeboards!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Criticizing a company that is on the verge of selling its first ski its idiotic. Like taking about a new car model before seeing it or badmouthing dinner before being it ges to the table.

 Goode ★ KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Horton is right. In this industry, if a ski works well, people will buy it. if not, they will not. Does not make any sense to criticize it. If you do not feel like buying it, do not buy it. More skis out there is better.

 

@Taelan28, what should they have stated in their ad? Something like "Although we had plenty of resources in our previous company, we did not get along with management, so we started this and hope to make a stick that will ski decently and will not break too much?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Geez guys, speculating about a ski company and its products is half the fun. Don't gang up on the guy because it's Andy he's asking about. His questions are totally legitimate. Having the rescources of Obrien should offer a designer a big advantage vs a messy mold under an airplane wing. Andy can probably make any ski process work though. And this discussion creates a buzz.

 

@Taelan, @Scarletarrow's idea to change the thread's title to "an honest question" is much more PC. But controversy can be entertaining. Grow a thick skin.

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Marketing 101. If it is about winning then watch Nate Smith and choose his brand...no one can argue it is the the best! I went to my first pro tournament last fall at Katy and the first thing I realized is that all the skiers had the same technique and it did not look like the Ski made much difference. Nate won that tournament and my bet is he could do it on any one of the top skis. So...my point is, it is all just marketing with ski manufactures. If CP beat Nate at Masters I may have bought into AM Skis. With that said, I guess I will just get back to working hard and hoping it pays off. No one will argue that CP can break his own world record, but in his position it is going to cost one of the ski manufactures a few bucks. If he doesn't break the record this year who will he sign with next?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@JC_McCavit For most of us mere mortals, I agree that nearly any ski will be a good choice these days, and that the top guys could ski well on any brand ... but could they really ski their very BEST on any ski?

 

Will Asher recently said that after experimenting with programs based on perfect diet and maximum body strength, the only thing that seems to make any difference to his results is how well he can dial in his ski. Recall the rack FULL of Radars behind Rossi in his setup videos. And is it a coincidence that now that Parish has had access to a series of AM skis fully customized to his technique that he has been able to equal his world record performance in early April? Nobody has ever skied that well that early in the season before. Matching the right ski to a top skier must make a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Some of the pros go through 10-20 skis of the same brand, size, etc.; identical skis for all intent and purpose, until they find the right one. Some even modify the ski such that the ski is not the same as when it came out of the mold (sanding, widening, etc.). The general ski population (us wallies) don't have that luxury. Maybe that is the concept that should be adopted for those who are willing to pay the price. Custom Engineered Skis for Everyone......
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

At an average price of $1300 per ski and up, is it only me who thinks the skis should be customized?

The ski companies always say their pro skiers are skiing on an out of the box or rock stock ski. I will buy a new ski exactly like a pro's and ask them to ride it at a tourny instead of their ski. They just won't do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jordan, eleeski and Scarlot Arrow know what Im saying. Sixam675 answered the question more accurately than I could have hoped, although I have no way of verifying the truth to his statements. Horton an Shane H dont know what Im saying. In fact the relentless "Im probably wrong" wording and per-apologetic statements was to appease you guys, yet you still rail. Hey Im just being skeptical.

 

@ral "Although we had plenty of resources in our previous company, we did not get along with management, so we started this and hope to make a stick that will ski decently and will not break too much?" Yes that will do just fine but I'd change it to this:

 

"Although we had plenty of resources in our previous company, we did not get along with management, so we went independent and hope to make a stick using some of the things we learned in the last few years in ski design, production, distribution and customer relations to bring you, the high end enthusiast skier, a ski that likely rides as good as any other high end model from the major producers, at a competitive price"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@Texas6 Our tournament turned out great. Lot of fun and kids were PB'ing like crazy. Charles ran into 41 off twice on Sundays and set a new lake record of 2@41 36mph. I set a new tournament pb of 5@35 off. Arora got into 391/2. And Brad Miller is looking strong like he's gonna clean 38 soon. You should have come out!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Taelan28 I have personally spent time in the factory, seen the design process. As well as spent time with Adam and Andy discussing the ski and the process they use. Andy had his booth across from mine at Masters. I am no engineer but I understand what they are doing and how having a lake a mile away and being able to turn out a ski in an hour is a great step forward for them. They can do in a day what some companies have to do in weeks due to factory time and shipping skis across the country to FL. I also have a late model prototype that I have been skiing on as well.

 

wanted to take things to a whole other level and in order to do that the best way to go was with our own company

Just because he is the best skier of all time he was also limited by his boss and the direction the company wanted to go with the skis. They do not have power, limited by the money they are given. Bob Archers companies are in a teired structure with O'Brien in the middle and HO at the top. There are not many other companies out there for Andy to work for or would work for. So creating his own company was a good move for him. There is not much shopping to do in this industry because it is so small with little money.

 

Granted my eye isn't trained very well and I'm still pretty numb in feeling when riding a ski but looking at the bottom of a Sixam and a Elite there isn't much difference. What AM skis seems to offer is a RTM ski (like Reflex, Sans Rival, and Elite). What they offer thats different is molding a custom ski in 2 hours, and testing it 5 minutes away.

You are correct your eye is not trained. Granted either is mine but to a degree I know what I am looking at. AM is not a RTM process I am able to tell you that. Their process has the ability to change the industry in a positive way.

My point is them making starting their own company does not mean a big improvement in design as there are a half dozen other companies, with pros of their own, striving for the same thing, so by starting their own business is not to make a better ski, but to be more in control of the profits (which is totally fine) with a leaner company and it seems the only differentiating benefit is that they can mold a new ski in two hours for a customer on the site.

 

Having pros on the really does not mean that much granted they give your skis legitimacy but @eleeski makes his own. And pros can ski on just about anything out there including a 2x4

 

I wrote this quickly and Im sure it will receive criticism. Please correct me if Im missing anything or that does not line up with the reality of the situation.
See above.

 

 

@JC McCavit

I went to my first pro tournament last fall at Katy and the first thing I realized is that all the skiers had the same technique and it did not look like the Ski made much difference. Nate won that tournament and my bet is he could do it on any one of the top skis. So...my point is, it is all just marketing with ski manufactures. If CP beat Nate at Masters I may have bought into AM Skis.

All skiers do not have the same technique I can tell you that. Have you ever watched them from the boat or studied video of them? There are some skiers that could fall into the same type of skiing but they all do it differently watch TGas and compare him to Nate then to Marcus they all have totally different types of skiing. CP was the only skier to run into 41 in the prelims with 3 buoys. Nate only got 3@39. So at the moment you are going out to buy a D3 X7 and not waiting for a AM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@skimech @skibug but whats the scientific method for customizing the right ski the first time and not doing trial and error on 50 different skis? The myth seems to be that skis get better every year, but they aren't microprocessors. Its all material made into a shape and the ski only improves when the material (or combination and order of materials) changes for the better or the shape clearly changes for the better and never goes back to what it was (ie, a flat bottomed ski). I saw a commercial for Brandon Parker's wakeboard. He said the rocker was less emphasized and flatter (I forget why) than last year's model, then I thought to myself "Sucka, I bet the board was flatter the year before that and they were talking up the more pronounced rocker." Its all seems to be a matter of personal preference.

 

I dont know exactly how skis are shaped, whether it be from a carved piece of wood or CAD (as mentioned in the video) and a 3D printer (those are cool), but the end result appears to me to be trial and error on the course. There's no equivalent to a wind tunnel or a mechanical swing hitting golf balls, so the idea of a custom ski seems to be only reserved for the sponsored pros until a controlled method is developed to give a custom ski on the first try. Until that happens the vast majority of us will just buy skis developed for the pros, which isnt a bad thing as @skijay similarly said that almost any ski out there is a good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@Taelan28 I can't say just yet I have been sworn to secrecy by the man him self. But keep an eye on the front page of BOS this week and I think there is an article coming that will shed some light on the process.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Talen28 The deal with Brandon Parkers wakeboard is. The more rocker you have the more of a 3-stage it will be. As in more late strait up boot off the wake and it will be slow in the water compared to a continuous rocker which is fast on the water and constant off the wake. With the wakeboard wakes getting bigger people are taking rocker out of the boards because there is no need for the big boot off the wake and the continues rocker gives a more constant pop off the wake.

 

Skies are drawn up in CAD then cut using water or CNC depending on how you are gong to develop the ski. There is a "wind tunnel" for skies , there is a water tunnel type device that acts the same way but is not used because of expense and unable to obtain the data needed because each person that rides it changes how the ski rides in the water.I'm sure that @Triplett can explain it better than i can. That is why there is more than one ski on the market if we all rode it the same then there would be no need for innovation.

 

You can have a custom ski made. Just call up AM and tell them the flex you are looking for and they can make it. It is as easy as that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Since @mattp_evil_twin did tag I feel I can help add to this. @mattp_ also states that there will be article soon that will shed light on this, which is also true.

 

Every ski on the market is obviously different, but every ski that is born from a previous model is improved from said model. The A2 is not a radically different ski than the A1, it improves upon the difficulty of the A1 and makes it an easier ski, it is softer and has some differences in the bottom. The S2 improved upon the S1 and so on, I hope you can get my point. You can argue the A1 was radically different, but Dave Wingerter scrapped the monza and started fresh, kind of like what Adam and Andy are doing. AM skis is able to do what no one else really has, they have a new shape and a new process. Like @mattp_ I am not allowed to say much about the process of how it is made but is for sure a departure from the norm.

 

Now as to offer a custom ski, it is exteremely difficult to do outside of flex. Right now the most custom you can get is getting a ski from Goode and getting the asymmetic series with the specific bevels with a specific flex. For nearly all skiers out there, this is way more than it needed. With AM I am sure you will be able to tell Adam or Andy how you ski and they will give you the appropriate flex pattern. Shape is far to hard to change, mainly because of the engineering time that goes into getting the shape right. Time = Money.

 

And to correct Evil, there is really no way to model the behavior of a ski within a computer program, the ski is far to dynamic and there are countless variables to account for, we just don't have the technology, time, and money for this. The only way to test is to try it.

 

And to finish, every ski complements a different style. Not everyone can ski on the A2, Strada, Nano, Carbon V or even the AM 33, so that is why you have so many different options.

 

If I am wrong somewhere please correct me, I have had a crash course on ski design over the weekend haha.

 

Why is it called the 33 anyway? @horton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...