 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi All,
What is the significance of different dimensions in different parts of a ski?
I'm about to invest in my first pair of skis, and I've noticed I've enough experience to notice differences in how different makes of ski ... errr ... ski. But I don't know if that was down simply to the different makes, or I should try the same makes of skis with, say, different widths at the tip and/or under the binding?
Currently, I ski mainly on-piste but, as I'm hoping to have much more time than one or two weeks a year, I'd hope not to rule out trying off-piste on the same skis. I'm also considering twin-tips in the wish list.
If it's significant, I'm considering a length of 150 cm.
Regards,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
The waist width and side cut pretty much determine the dimensions at the tip, tail and waist. More specialist skis get a lot more complicated. Ultimately you need to be a total geek about it to really care as the length, waist width and side cut tell you a lot more useful information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Probably not twin tips at this stage...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Random tombola post?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@StuartMac, Try some skis; see what you like; buy the ones you like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most skis are great these days. It's more about their suitability for your needs. It sounds like you haven't skied a lot from your post so don't overbuy and end up with a ski that's too advanced for your ability. Go to your local ski shop and tell them what you want which sounds like an all mountain ski but be very honest about your skiing ability ( most skiers aren't) They should be able to direct you to a ski that is appropriate for you. Don't be too worried about dimensions etc. at this stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although, with planning on skiing more than two weeks a year you don't want a too soft beginners ski as you will soon be wishing for something a little more suitable as you progress. As said, go for mid everything regarding dimensions, I learnt on the old Rossi B2's, the champion punters ski, though once I got into off piste I went up in width, but for the first 4 years they were fantastic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Hi All,
Thanks for all your replies.
| Perty wrote: |
| unless you are about 5ft tall, 150com is way too short! |
Hmmm ... might be I have the wrong information ...  I'm 5' 7", so 170 cm., 150 cm to my chin, 157 cm. to the the tip of my nose, which are the two rules-of-thumb ski hire places have used on me. Was going for the shorter length because my (limited) understanding says they're easier to turn?
Also, last year we scored a true bargain, a pair of 150 cm. Head Impulse 5.70's for £2  at a local charity shop sale. The local ski shop said they'd suit either MissusMac or me, she got the nod 'cos the bindings' length could just be adjusted to suit her.
| red 27 wrote: |
| Probably not twin tips at this stage... |
Aw, gwan ... the only thing I can do better than my son (and daughter) - at least for the time being - is ski backwards (intentionally  ).
| ansta1 wrote: |
| Random tombola post? |
| scooby_simon wrote: |
| Try some skis; see what you like; buy the ones you like. |
It's looking like that, Ellis Brigham have offered to let me try out skis at Braehead ...  now I just have to look forward to the three-hour drive in each direction ... 
| Ade57 wrote: |
| It sounds like you haven't skied a lot from your post |
Ten years of anything between one and four weeks a year, with some snowboarding thrown in; can do Finnish blacks, some French reds still freak me out ...
| Scarpa wrote: |
| Although, with planning on skiing more than two weeks a year you don't want a too soft beginners ski as you will soon be wishing for something a little more suitable as you progress. |
Pretty much my thinking - I'd rather my investment wasn't someone else's Ebay bargain in just a couple of years' time.
At the moment, I'm just after understanding so that, having dragged down to Braehead, the nice Ellis Brigham person asks me why I like a particular ski over another, my reply might be a bit more edifying than, "Just because ...". 
Regards,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you are fairly confident then any mid range ski about 80mm to 88mm should suit, I would go more for eye level if you intend to get some speed up as shorter skis are not generally as stable as longer ones... although just watch a WV racer on 165 slalom skis LOL. I always prefer twin tips unless it's a dedicated piste ski, much more fun in parks, lets you ski backwards out of bushes etc without getting the tails embedded, and can also let you spray your kids with snow as you ski past them
If you are venturing off piste having a decent shovel on the front of the ski with some all mountain slight rocker (the curve up at the tip) may help, but the ski probably won't carve as well on piste and will feel a little shorter as the tip will mostly be out of contact with the pisted surface.
If you like to get your edges dug in hard and put loads of power down though the ski so that you feel it flex and pop out of a turn go for a stiffer ski. If you have a more delicate feel you may prefer a softer model and find that a stiff ski is difficult to get to do what you want.
The turn radius makes a fair difference too, a slalom ski that turns on a radius of 11.5m will be exciting on piste, a bit hooky off piste and probably be quite demanding on your legs to ski all day. An all mountain at 16m to 20m would allow a variety of turn shapes, but will not be too good at carving on a sixpence short turns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
StuartMac, a few more things that might help. Rossignol say: Optimal ski length is typically determined by the following order: weight, ability, height, and aggressiveness.
My 163 cm piste skis (nose height on me) with tip-waist-tail widths of 115-68-99 mm are very difficult to use off piste unless the snow is light and powdery and not too deep, and I am a light weight - 65 kg (10 st 3 lb). For me, a waist width greater than 80 mm makes a massive difference in flotation for deeper snow.
I've just noticed the Snow + Rock size chart is spot on for my weight and ability, so it might help you too. There really is no substitute for ski testing to find out what works for you and what doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| scooby_simon wrote: |
| @StuartMac, Try some skis; see what you like; buy the ones you like. |
That's what I did - hired until I found a pair I loved, made a note of what they were and then bought a pair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@StuartMac, 150cm is too short for your size, although fun to ski that size for your height. You probably want to be looking at 160-165cm, you might find them a bit long to start with if you have been skiing 150's (I was doing the same), but will be worth it as you get better to have the longer ski.
Not that it matters, as the best way to find the right ski is to try them out, mine are 163cm with 80mm width and I'm 5ft 6". You will be surprised how different the ski's feel from different brands too and at different lengths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
It's also worth bearing in mind that rental skis usually differ from their retail counterparts - rental skis often have thicker bases and edges, so they can be serviced more often. This means they can feel different to the retail versions. When I tested the rental version of the skis I eventually bought, they were really solid and stiff. The flex of the retail version was a little softer (better for me) and after about three weeks skiing on them they seemed to soften a little more and so became more forgiving over bumps.
There is another guide to ski selection here: www.edgeandwax.co.uk/content/ski-buyers-guide.aspx
Happy hunting and when you do buy some skis please come back and let us know what you think of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| red 27 wrote: |
| Aw, gwan ... the only thing I can do better than my son (and daughter) - at least for the time being - is ski backwards (intentionally ). |
Um, well it's entirely possible with standard skis, in fact it's hardly a trick if you do it on skis designed to help you do it. A bit like riding switch on a twin-tip snowboard, it kind of takes the challenge out of it. Just saying.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Wed 10-12-14 18:09; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
Um, well it's entirely possible with standard skis, in fact it's hardly a trick if you do it on skis designed to help you do it
|
On fairly smooth piste it is not really any more difficult with conventional skis.
I'm sure lots of twin tips are more about the rooster tail 
My fatter skis are twin tips. I find them a bit of a pain TBH - mainly getting them in gondola ski carriers (split, twist, etc) but they are also a bit more cumbersome to skate on. Next time I buy I'll probably avoid (big) twin tips
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I hate straight tails on off piste skis. I've often gingerly picked my way to the edge of a little drop, thought better off it, and then reversing out jammed the tails into the snow. Same when making your way down through dense vegetation. @jedster, I know what you mean about skating though, a big pair of fatter skis are way more cumbersome than a little pair of SLs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@Walter-Spitty, back in the day, rental skis were often pale shadows of the retails skis they resembled, simply to make them very, very much cheaper. I can quite imagine that you would notice a difference.
A case in point being the ~1987 Rossignol 4S which in its rental form bore no structural resemblance to the retail version - not that the retail version was worth skiing on anyway, IMHO. (The mists of time, Kronenbourg and Lagavulin may have clouded my memory a little should anyone disagree with me).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hi All,
| Quote: |
| http://www.snowandrock.com/ski-technology/content/fcp-content |
Absolutely perfect, I'm now a ski geek.
Thanks to everyone who replied, much appreciated.
Regards,
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@StuartMac, Welcome to a lifetime of obsessing about skis and other gear
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am sorry I put you in this dreadful spiral of always wanting to know more and to have the newest gear available.
Don't bill me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
