 Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm looking at getting a pair of Rossi B2s, and am trying to work out what length to buy. According to several sources, I should be getting a length equivalent to my height (174). But this seems quite long (I ski 170cm now and they feel long).
What are the advantages of going long (174) v short (166)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Stability at speed
Long skis truck
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
It's easy.
203 for slalom
207 for GS
210 for super G
218 for downhill.
Why would you want to change? 
Modern skis generally don't benefit from length the way old ones did. Even the racers are now limited to minimum lengths. I would have thought that 166cms are probably enough. My understanding is that piste skis should be around eye height.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Elizabeth B, I'd say that a better length would be "nose height", so I'd go for the 166 if I were you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Elizabeth B, The longer length recommended for the B2 is because its meant to spend a lot of its life off piste. The extra length gives more area and more float. Ski it short and it'll be easier to handle on piste but harder work off. What sort of skiing do you do? If you're thinking B2 then it implies you're planning heading into the deep stuff, if so go long, if you're not going off piste then why buy a B2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Elizabeth B, The longer length recommended for the B2 is because its meant to spend a lot of its life off piste. The extra length gives more area and more float. Ski it short and it'll be easier to handle on piste but harder work off. What sort of skiing do you do? If you're thinking B2 then it implies you're planning heading into the deep stuff, if so go long, if you're not going off piste then why buy a B2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rich has got it...
Long skis = good. Shorts skis = bad.
On a more serious note, are you getting the 'ladies' version or the gents version? If you're getting the ladies then you *must* gor for the long uns, otherwise you might as well save your money and get some nasty hire skis. If you're getting the chaps model then consider the 166.
Personally if you want to go off piste then stop messing around and get the ladies B3 and in 174cm. Once you've had fat you'll never go back.
In conclusion, if buying 'ladies' specific skies then get the 174 B2W or if you're scared by the length then put it round the middle and go for 166 B2W... you'll NEVER regret it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry +ves & -ves?
Short skis - going over the top of them, not getting enough edge, over flexing, no challenge, promote poor technique AND lack of float
Long skis - fast, stable, lots of float AND ski like you're on rails...
Also I wrote:
| Quote: |
| In conclusion, if buying 'ladies' specific skies then get the 174 B2W or if you're scared by the length then put it round the middle and go for 166 B2W... you'll NEVER regret it... |
It should have read:
...go for the 168 B3W... you'll NEVER regret it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| parlor wrote: |
Long skis - fast, stable, lots of float AND ski like you're on rails...
|
What happens if you like doing short radius turns?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Short skis - going over the top of them, not getting enough edge, over flexing, no challenge, promote poor technique AND lack of float
|
Surely going a bit shorter can improve technique in the pow by increasing the challenge?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
parlor, I'm most certainly NOT getting the W version of any ski.
Most of my skiing is piste, so I want something that handles nicely on fast carves...hence not wanting the B3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
rob@rar.org.uk, you work harder...
conor, certainly you'd need to be more exact, which is why people say fat skis are a cheat in powder, but at what cost? Going too short for a ski that has to be used across the mountain that *can* promote poor techniques as its easier to force the ski to make it do what you want.
Elizabeth B, why not? Unless you are the have the same build and strength to weight ratio as a man, which you may have and I'm not implying this is good or bad, why not have a ski that is designed for women? You'll get much more pleasure out of it...
Also for fast carving you want less side cut and more length, so you've answered you own question... however if you're set on the mens version then perhaps going for the shorter ski is a good idea, unless you're an altogether more wholesome lady (see above).
I'd also say at least try something with a little more girth underfoot as when you are carving hard on piste they're incredible fun as it takes longer to get from edge to edge so you literally throw yourself into each turn...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| parlor wrote: |
rob@rar.org.uk, you work harder...
|
I see. My masochistic tendancies left me several years ago...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
parlor, I tried the W version last year and it was c**p. I've demo'd various other W skis and they're just no good for me. I'm above average weight and strength....so fit better into the "unisex" ski category.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Elizabeth B, B2 in 166, happy with that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
parlor, that's sounding like the best plan....thanks for the suggestions 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Want to help me decide? I'm having issues for this winter...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Elizabeth B,
Friend of mine (good intermediate) just bought the B2 in 174 - but he is 6'3! I would go for the 166. The B2 is designed to be versatile on and off piste - I would guess from what you say the sort of off piste you're doing will be just popping off the side of the piste on powder days, so don't worry about going for a longer length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Okay....deed done. I'm now the proud owner of a pair of B2's (166). Slight hiccup with the binding fitting - I forgot to take my boots with me, and they didn't have any others the same shell length as mine.....but they're now home and I'm happy
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Elizabeth B, Congratulations. Which did you finally settle on, the mens' or womens' B2 versions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowbunny:
| Elizabeth B wrote: |
| parlor, I'm most certainly NOT getting the W version of any ski. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
im thinkin gof getting the other half some skis for xmas...
she's about 158cm's tall .... and usually has 140 ish at xscape, she should be able to manage 150 or 160 ish ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Simple rule.
If in doubt, having chosen the right ski type etc. Buy the longer length, if it turns out wrong you chose the wrong ski or your ability has gone a little backwards. If your buying and not hiring, surely you love skiing and are getting better and wan't to continue to improve and ski more. If not keep hiring, your skiing less frequently than the technology is improving. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
cheers easiski, just looking for an easy xmas present i guess !
PS anyone tried fisher RX2's ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, I disagree with yuor simple rule. From my experience I used to follow that, but my last couple of purchases have been the other way, and those who have skiied with me have noticed that by choosing shorter, I've had more control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yo! Short is fun, ever try a 155/157cm slalom ski? or a short Atomic M2?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I'm with biggy Smalls on this. My enthusiasm for skiing is immense and sometimes I forget that not everybody has aspirations to charge big lines and ski all over the mountain so they don't actually need big, burly skis. But then I think that if we did a poll in here 90% of the skiers would love to be able to ski more off piste (not just powder), so why not buy a fatter, longer pair of skis (but I ski 80% on piste...)? Fat's the future, you don't have to believe me now, you'll see.
Wear The Fox Hat, of course you've got more control, but does that make you a better skier? How much of that short ski is now manipulated by your strength and how much of it is actually skied? And then I remember what I've written above again. biggy & myself are lucky as we live in resorts, this makes it different as we can learn about our long (and fat) skis. I know you're not a one weeker Foxy what I don't know is what you want from your skiing holidays. One day I know I'm going to be back doing holidays, well probably not actually, but I do know that each winter my knees are getting worse and at some point I'm going to want to ease off the gas pedal 'a little bit'.
In the meantime each one of you that ask for ski advice on here are going to get the same answer from me: get longer and fatter than you think you'll need. You can, should and do ignore me. Everyone else does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
parlor, I know what you're saying, but if the options are controlling the skis, or having them control you, I know which I'd choose. My piste skis are 170s, my off piste are 179. My old piste skis about 3 years ago were 181. By dropping down shorter, I've been less tired, had fewer problems from old injuries, and my skiing has improved (according to instructors who have known me over the years)
I'm interested in being fast, but I don't need to be the fastest, but I'm more interested in having fun, and if I have to work too hard on the skis, then it's not much fun for me.
One of my ski instructor friends is over 6ft tall, and spends most of his days on 155s - as all mountain skis.
I guess my question would be "why go longer if you don't need to?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
parlor, why just have one pair? I think that's the way forward - have one pair for piste, and one for pow!
(and a pair of skiboards, just because you know how to use them)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I have 3 pairs... I'll show you a picture later...
1 pair for park, 1 pair for everything else and a pair of new skis... (you'll see)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
parlor,
I'm 5'8" and 73 kg.
I picked up a pair of 186cm Head Madtrix Mojos from ebay. Wanted to see if the longer length when compared to my 166cm Mojo's would be an improvement in the powder (really wanted 176cm but the 186's were a great price). Wider skis did prove to be better (from 68 to 89 mm waist) so I though I'd increase the length.
After half a day on the 186's I was totally knackered. Sold them onto a taller/heavier and better Norwegian skier 2 days later.
Now if I lived in a resort and was able to get used to the skis and build my strength / fitness & technique up then it might of been a different matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
DB, I was trying to be nice when I described certain people as "mellower" skiers for these exact reasons... Don't hate me for being so wrapped up in skiing (to me skiing is about big back country lines) that I'm almost blinkered at times... I repeat:
| Quote: |
parlor
In the meantime each one of you that ask for ski advice on here are going to get the same answer from me: get longer and fatter than you think you'll need. You can, should and do ignore me. Everyone else does. |
Please you've got some mid fat love going on though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I'd go for the shorter skis of the 2 lengths and if you're worried about sinking in the powder, just don't stop and try going a little bit faster!
Shorter skis are more forgiving and unless you ski for more than a few weeks per year (which most people don't) you'll be finding them a struggle rather than a pleasure for your precious few days of skiing.
That's my opinion anyway.
from a lightweight female skier who likes the concept of women's skis and effortless skiing (cliffs are scary enough WITHOUT the worry that you can't pivot on a sixpence on your new skis). 
PS If you like piste-skiing lots, longer skis would be just fine!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi! I am skiing in Val Thorens next month and hiring Rossignol B2W. I've currently booked 166, but having read all the postings above, I wonder if I should change to 158 (the only other option through this hire company).
I am 5'6'' and mainly ski on-piste on reds, some blacks. My motivation for choosing the B2W was that I used the Rossi Saphir last April in Tignes and it was great when the pistes were well groomed, or it was icy, but I found it didn't (or I didn't!) perform so well when it was slushy near resort; or on the last couple of days in blizzard conditions when 'on piste' became practically'off piste' in knee-deep snow, which then got quite cruddy. This will be my 3rd week skiing this year, and 5th week in total.
I suppose my motivation for booking Rossi B2W is that I hope they will perform well in good on-piste conditions, but will also float better and be more manageable if there are slushy conditions or crud.
I would be really grateful for any advice on this, as 158 and 166 both sound pretty short in the discussions above, but I would just like to find the best one for me. With thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SkiBod, welcome to snowheads, quite honestly I don't think you would notice an 8cms difference in skis. Or if you could you'd be such a good skier that it wouldn't make any difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
David, Thanks for that ~ sounds like I'm not going to notice much difference then! It's probably my technique rather than my ski length that needs the work. I am pinning my hopes on the B2W being the magical floating ski I am looking for, or that there just won't be any crud!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SkiBod,
welcome, just registered and straight in with no lurking..good girl...!!
Use the one that is nearest to your nose which I would guess is the 166...!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
