Poster: A snowHead
|
Last year skied 167cm skis, am 6ft and 14st. It was mostly boiler plate and struggled quite a bit. Fine when the conditions were good but the ice was a killer. Am not kidding myself about my technique which I know needs some work but are the length of skis going to make things harder or easier in icy conditions? Have been reading conflicting reports.
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Longer skis tend to grip better because there is more ski in contact with the snow/ice. 167 does sound a bit short at your height and weight, even assuming they were full pn piste skis (not much rocker at tip and tail). A lesson may help, though when anyone asks me how does one ski ice..my reply is "quickly"...
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
167cm perhaps a little bit short for height/weight bit I know lots of skiers with similar ratios have no problem. Having a stiff/soft ski flex will definitely have a bearing on ice, just have sharp edges and do the fall line if possible.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Doesn't matter how long they are, if they're blunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@danmar94, Length of skis less important than
a. technique - if you're not edging and applying force adequately, no amount of sharpness is going to help
b. edge sharpness and condition
c. "type" of ski - e.g. every male on the World cup circuit (and some of them are big lads) skis slalom on 165s. But these are stiff in all directions, espcially torsionally, so the ski is particularly "grippy" when worked correctly.
I'd disagree that longer skis grip better - as it's edge pressure that's more important I think and so a shorter edge will have more pressure. Long rigid skis will grip better than short soft skis and vice versa.
If they were hire skis, they were probably a little blunt and probably not in such good condition anyway. Rental skis tend towards the softer end of the spectrum so a blunt, soft ski is going to require more technique. Probably not more length...
Was it really "boilerplate" - most groomed pistes these days are rarely allowed to remain as very hard surfaces although a nice firm, smooth base is preferred by most people. You may have got unlucky with the conditions, sometimes options are limited.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
All things being equal grip also depends on edge angle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
it might also depend on the type of ski:
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the risk of getting a bit TGR, people on this board seem to prefer lengths about 15-20cm shorter than I'd put them on. Perhaps if you never stray from the piste and ski at a snails pace then shorter skis make sense but sheesh, 6 foot and 14 stone?... You should be on 185s. My 5 foot tall, 7 stone girlfriend tours on 175s!
That said, not sure that longer lengths help with edging - more lengths adds more stability through rougher terrain and at faster speeds.
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@BenA, At the risk of being over offensive to some of our audience (and while I see your point) my expectation of the general SHs audience, is that while the participants are keen and passionate, most people asking questions like this are still 100% on piste and learning at a place and pace where over long skis will bring absolutely no advantage.
No problem, we've all been there (or somewhere like it).
For instance... plugging 100% on piste and intermediate into Rossignol's own ski finder brings back one ski and it only goes up to 177cm and it's (apparently) rockered (to please the marketing dept). http://www.rossignol.com/GB/GB/pursuit-300-xelium--2015--RAEBW03--product--alpine-men-skis.html
So for the OP as we seem in agreement that additional length won't help on ice (if it was ice) then all additional length will do is make things more difficult. That said, that weight could easily be over powering a rental ski, so he may find a little longer ski gives a more stable platform to work on. (Or a more expensive "premium" rental").
(Oddly enough, my OH who is 5'5" and 55kgs wants to drop back from her 177s to maybe a 170 (unrockered equivalent) just to make life easier. And she's a very experienced and accomplished skier).
|
|
|
|
|
|
^^^ Sorry, that came across a little more aggressive than the intended tongue in cheek response.
I guess what I was trying to say in more straightforward terms was that if you are an intermediate skier who is building in confidence then you should not fear going a little longer. Short skis are great in the early days, but longer lengths will quickly become a benefit if you are skiing in chopped up conditions or starting to head off piste. As UANName says, if you at the rewarding end of the learning curve and keeping it to mellow terrain and speeds then longer lengths are not going to be an advantage.
Bottom line: Longer skis have a more rotational inertia and so will feel slower to turn and so are more 'intimidating', but the benefit is a more stable, less easily deflected ride as you ski faster.
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
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.
|
@danmar94, Those are "entry level" skis. They only go up to 174 (one size up from yours) and yes, you probably should have bought those if buying that ski at all...
One concern, on the couple of reviews I saw, the bindings only go up to 10. That's probably just about OK but you're arguably right on the margin (without me spending any time checking what you should be set on).
For once, you can probably accept a little equipment blame into the workman. (But never completely)...
|
|
|
|
|
|