The finest wear rods and... we can prove it!


Unsurpassed Exaggeration


Simmons has done one heck of a snow job on the patent office and snowmobilers!!!

Simmons claim of "Revolutionizing Snowmobiling" with the Gen III ski is as bogus as their claim the Original Simmons ski Revolutionized Snowmobiling!!!

The reason the Gen II did not "Revolutionize Snowmobiling" is because they had the same bottom profile as the Original ski.

That means besides costing serious money they also :

Require more effort to turn the handlebars
Lower mpg
Push in corners
Dart when following other Simmons skis
Dart when following Ski-Doo's Precision skis

WHAT? Revolutionizing snowmobiling AGAIN?

Making a plastic version of a steel ski design does not equate to developing superior technoligies, neither does providing a different profile to the trails.

I expect the Gen III to have a different profile on the bottom of the ski so they should not dart until critical mass is reached on the trails. The question is , will it be different enough not to fall into Simmons grooves and/or the Precisions grooves? There was a 11/16" difference between these two skis!

The gap between the wear rods is 3 5/8" wide on the Gen 3 ski so they will definitely dart following Precision, Split Rail and other Gen 3 skis.

That means besides costing serious money they will still:

Require more effort to turn the handlebars
Lower mpg
Push in corners
Dart following other Gen III - Precision and Split-Rail skis.

Flotation is the only benefit Simmons skis provide over OEM stock skis!

Darting can be fixed for only $10.00 to $15.00 plus S&H.

Remember, legally the only accurate information advertisers have to provide is the pricing info.

I challenge you to read these links and agree with Simmons latest spin!!!

WHY a 3rd version? Because they want to maintain their cash flow. Also, the downsides of the Original Simmons ski profile have been exposed.

Home  | Site Map

Bergstrom Skegs

Contact Us

Copyright © 1999-2016 Bergstrom Skegs, Inc.
All rights reserved.