Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Thoughts about ski length

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
I've been thinking - I'm about 183 cm, 80kg, 30 year old. I've got a weird body in the sense that I've got heavy upper body and slim but well trained legs (I go on 20-30km runs). I'm very inflexible. I tend to stay away from high speeds mostly because I do not want to go down the mountain like a boulder when there are other people, especially kids around. I also tend to ski with people who are (1) a lot lighter (45-60kg), (2) not very experienced. What long skis do for me is they (1) make me go down fast (2) make short turn maneuvering harder. I was thinking of getting something about 160cm.

And here is the actual question (sorry for the boring body above): should I go with shorter skis and progressively increase the length every season (I'm renting so it doesn't matter) or should I just get a longer ski (say around 175-180cm) and each season try to control it better? I'm of the opinion that the tool needs to fit the task and I believe shorter skis fit my skiing style better. Considering I ski 80% on piste, I was thinking of purchasing 160cm piste skis and 180-195cm off piste skis.

I recently went back into the sport after a 15 year break (I'm 30). I found a black mogul run a bit challenging - I didn't fall but the ride was anything but fluid. I had 169cm skis. I would have thought a 160 ski or 165 ski would have been a lot easier to navigate although there is an element of my body still re-learning the movements needed to navigate the moguls.
snow report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
You're a similar 'shape' to me but I'm 100+ Kg - I usually get given 170ish slalom skis and get on fine with them. I'd just practice a bit and if you can make it down a black mogul field after a 15yr break I really wouldn't worry !!!
snow report
 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?
1. What level are you?

2. The very shortest skis, if you are a cautious Intermediate, would be about 170.....but probably better to go around 175

3. I would look at a piste ski with a sidecut of 14 - 16m (closer to 14m, if want a tighter turn).

4. Get some lessons.

It's hard to give advice without seeing you ski.....but i suspect you would be better with a 14m ski, which is a versatile radius.
ski holidays
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Thanks, these days I do prefer more uneven terrain - moguls, bumps and jumps. A friend of mine has a pair of dynastar legend big dump. They are 192cm (one size). It's a bit confusing that they are offering a 192cm ski for all skiers.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
I’d have thought 160 would be too short, personally I don’t like skiing anything shorter than 165.

Consider some lessons and specifically talk to the instructor about controlling speed and short turns with a longer ski.
snow report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
SnoodlesMcFlude wrote:
I’d have thought 160 would be too short, personally I don’t like skiing anything shorter than 165.

Consider some lessons and specifically talk to the instructor about controlling speed and short turns with a longer ski.


What do you not like about shorter than 165?
ski holidays
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
s5s wrote:
SnoodlesMcFlude wrote:
I’d have thought 160 would be too short, personally I don’t like skiing anything shorter than 165.

Consider some lessons and specifically talk to the instructor about controlling speed and short turns with a longer ski.


What do you not like about shorter than 165?

S. McF will answer for himself, but I will put my view, which is similar.

The length of ski you should go for, is usually based on :
- Weight
- Height
- Ability
- Preferred terrain
- Speed you ski at
- Ski construction (Playful/Damp/Rocker)
- Personal preference, taking the above into consideration.

At your weight, the only ski type that would be sensible as a 160, is a proper slalom ski....which really requires decent skills to use.

Looking at a normal Piste Ski, you are looking at 170 as a minimum IME.....but is dependent on your skill level
snow report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
I might have asked a bit to much of my skis last time I went skiing. I rented 169cm movement skis from the freeski company. I found them adequate on groomed runs but off piste would sink in the snow. Moguls - they were quite stiff I thought (stiffness was 110) and bumps were quite shaky.
snow conditions
 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.
@s5s, it's not just about the length, it's also about the turn radius of the ski and the stiffness of the ski. You need to tell the hire shop what you want - in your case, something maneuverable, with a radius to facilitate short turns/bumps. And if they don't feel right take them back and try something else.
ski holidays
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Layne wrote:
@s5s, it's not just about the length, it's also about the turn radius of the ski and the stiffness of the ski. You need to tell the hire shop what you want - in your case, something maneuverable, with a radius to facilitate short turns/bumps. And if they don't feel right take them back and try something else.

I started with skis that were less stiff (I think about 90) and couldn't carve and skis would shake and lose grip in higher speed turns. I'm wondering if I'm just asking too much of a single pair of skis.
snow report
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
s5s wrote:
I might have asked a bit to much of my skis last time I went skiing. I rented 169cm movement skis from the freeski company. I found them adequate on groomed runs but off piste would sink in the snow. Moguls - they were quite stiff I thought (stiffness was 110) and bumps were quite shaky.

If you are mostly on Piste, then skis specific for the job really are the way to go (IMO).

If you want a Freeride type ski, you will probably looking at about 180
snow report
 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.
s5s wrote:
Layne wrote:
@s5s, it's not just about the length, it's also about the turn radius of the ski and the stiffness of the ski. You need to tell the hire shop what you want - in your case, something maneuverable, with a radius to facilitate short turns/bumps. And if they don't feel right take them back and try something else.

I started with skis that were less stiff (I think about 90) and couldn't carve and skis would shake and lose grip in higher speed turns. I'm wondering if I'm just asking too much of a single pair of skis.

I think you are muddling Ski Boot stiffness rating, with Ski stiffness (where there is no rating).
latest report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@s5s, not really stable enough at speed and a bit skittish otherwise as I’m effectively overpowering it.
snow report
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
You are really looking at two different aspects of skiing... for your weight and ability I'd say an off piste ski should be about 180 - 190cm and at least 100mm underfoot. On piste a cheater ski ( sort of a cross between a SL ski and a standard piste ski) should be fine. Too short and you lose a lot of stability at speed, the shortest I ski is a 165cm SL ski and I am shorter and lighter than you.
snow report
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
I wouldn't worry about specific lengths in cm as it varies by design of ski. I would think of it more like for a ski that is manufactured in 5 lengths, if you have roughly average weight and ability, and a preference for a shorter ski, you should probably be on the middle one for now. If you get more confident you can move up to the second longest one. Don't let anyone tell you that you should be on the longest ski someone makes.
ski holidays
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
I am about the same weight / height / standard as you are .

I currently own a pair of Nordica Navigator 85 (piste skewed all mountain ski with tip and tail rocker) in 179 cm length and find them completely manoeuvrable all around the mountain. I had rented a pair before buying so I knew they were the one.

Went with the all mountain just so I have one ski to cover mostly everything (they were great recently on hard pistes in Selva but have also performed well in deep powder)

However a couple of years ago I rented a pair of Rossignol P700 (advanced front side carving piste ski) and loved them at 170cm - very easy to manoeuvre but just a tad skittish at high speed.

So I went up a size to 177cm...hated them...found them much more difficult to manoeuvre - never wanted to go fast enough on them to find out if more stable...

I guess the answer is to try as many as you can...no one knows the right length but you.
snow report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
I was in austria about 10 years ago and asked for my "normal" ski length and think it was about 188. The lad in the shop just laughed, gave me 170 and said go have some fun. Never looked back and my skiing improved immensly.
ski holidays
 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?
This skis really confuse me - https://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/dynastar-legend-big-dump

They are 192cm and they only come in one size. I'm really keen to try them out (50% off-piste 50% on piste) but the 192cm scares me.
ski holidays
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Sorry there seems to be a lot of waffle being talked. The OP wants something maneuverable and easy. 160cm fits the bill, 170cm max.

I am a bit smaller 175cm 77kg and I will happily ski all day on 155 - 165 carving skis and never really want for anything longer, unless I want to go seriously off piste or very fast (fast enough to make most SH wet themselves)
snow conditions
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@s5s, they're an 8 year old ski! Can't see reference to 50/50 either, do me they look like an out and out powder ski. I also doubt that they were only available in one size, just that's the size shown out the website and used for the turning radius stats.

Edit: Actually on closer look they aren't as wide as I thought, so maybe not just powder. However the picture is of a 186 length so obviously they were available shorter.


Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Mon 21-01-19 13:49; edited 1 time in total
latest report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
I would try 175cms all terrain skis for a 6 foot man for the time being and when comfortable with those or if the conditions are really really difficult consider going back to the ski shop for a ski best suited to the specific conditions. I am 5 foot 5 inch woman and I ski 160 - 165 and in general terms I would say this is far too short for a larger person and particularly a man with greater strength.
snow report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I would try 175cms all terrain skis for a 6 foot man for the time being and when comfortable with those or if the conditions are really really difficult consider going back to the ski shop for a ski best suited to the specific conditions. I am 5 foot 5 inch woman and I ski 160 - 165 and in general terms I would say this is far too short for a larger person and particularly a man with greater strength.
snow report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
@s5s, not being funny mate but you seem a bit clueless.

First off you talk about a stiffness rating, which there isn't for skis and then you put out a link for a high end 2010 full on powder ski which even it was still on sale wouldn't in any way fit your requirements.

You say you haven't skied for 15 years and so you were just a boy when you previously skied. I think you need to take some lessons, hire kit and do a bit of reading/research.
ski holidays
 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.
169 for a an athletic grown adult male aspiring to ski black mogul runs. Hang your head in shame or find another sport. Here's the clue your problem is not that 169 was too long for you, you're just too short in skills at the moment.
latest report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:

169 for a an athletic grown adult male aspiring to ski black mogul runs. Hang your head in shame or find another sport.



ah ballcocks.
As @Idris, says if you don't want to ski off piste, like making short turns and don't want to ski really fast then a pair of cheater slalom skis of 165 are perfectly fine.
ski holidays
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@jedster, They need to be very cheater because SL skis are pretty bad in moguls being too stiff. While not totally in the short skis suck, long skis truck mindset I think one of the problems of modern ski lengths is that too many people think the choice is entirely up to them and that shorter skis are perfectly fine if they find the longer length too hard. Reality is that for any given person and model of ski there are possibly 2 lengths which are appropriate to the skier ( and maybe only one for pixies or lardarses). Of course an SL ski in 165 is fine but it doesn't mean that if you are getting something less focused (& functionally more compromised) that you might not be better stepping up to 175 for a general piste ski etc. It can be great fun to get on a undersized ski but it's not necessarily good for long term skill development.
ski holidays
 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.
jedster wrote:
Quote:

169 for a an athletic grown adult male aspiring to ski black mogul runs. Hang your head in shame or find another sport.



ah ballcocks.
As @Idris, says if you don't want to ski off piste, like making short turns and don't want to ski really fast then a pair of cheater slalom skis of 165 are perfectly fine.

I tend to agree, but I don't think that was the point Dave of the Marmottes was making
snow report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
169 for a an athletic grown adult male aspiring to ski black mogul runs. Hang your head in shame or find another sport. Here's the clue your problem is not that 169 was too long for you, you're just too short in skills at the moment.

I'd say the length was not that much of a problem as was the stiffness of these skis. I did say that I'm coming back to the sport after a long break and while the mogul run was fine, shorter/more flexible skis would have allowed me to be more fluid I feel.
ski holidays
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@s5s, So it's not plausible that after not having skied for 15 years the problem with a black mogul field was you and not the skis? It's usually the problem for me and I'll have skied only 7 or 8 months ago.
snow report
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Just had a quick look at the dynastar legends big dumps.... 192cm, 120mm waist & with a 38m radius......
snow conditions
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Yes, Big Dumps came in 1 size but were not aimed at “all skiers”. They were aimed at strong skiers who want to ski really fast off piste
ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
WASHOUT wrote:
Just had a quick look at the dynastar legends big dumps.... 192cm, 120mm waist & with a 38m radius......


Hmm, could have sworn when I looked at the picture earlier that the skis said 82 or 88mm waist. Must have been looking at the wrong thing (unless the picture was something different).

As Dave mentions, solely looking at a ski in terms of length is a bit misleading. My 181cm Armadas bend like a bit of grass if you push them, so I’d far rather send them through a mogul field than a set of FIS slalom skis.
ski holidays
 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?
s5s wrote:
I've been thinking - I'm about 183 cm, 80kg, 30 year old. I've got a weird body in the sense that I've got heavy upper body and slim but well trained legs (I go on 20-30km runs).

Does heavy = overweight and/our out of condition? Struggling to picture your physique and whether it has any significance.

s5s wrote:
I'm very inflexible.

Through choice or do you have a medical condition?

s5s wrote:
I tend to stay away from high speeds mostly because I do not want to go down the mountain like a boulder when there are other people, especially kids around.

This is a rather curious line of thinking. You should ski at speeds that map to your ability, the prevailing conditions and of course taking into consideration other slope users. That said being comfortable skiing at speed is part of the learning process and skiing at speed is part of the enjoyment of the sport. Skiing at a pace that doesn't endanger yourself and others is commendable but it almost sounds like are uncomfortable in your ability.

s5s wrote:
I also tend to ski with people who are (1) a lot lighter (45-60kg), (2) not very experienced.

Not sure of the relevance here to your skiing/ski choice other than perhaps you are saying you are ending up skiing easy runs/slowly because of your companions. Whilst it's nice to ski with your friends it can be very limiting and you may have to consider separating for periods of time.

s5s wrote:
What long skis do for me is they (1) make me go down fast (2) make short turn maneuvering harder.

You are missing other factors. That is not to say the length of the ski may not be a factor but it's unlikely to be the whole answer. It may be that the ski has a long radius or is too stiff or that the ski is beyond your current capabilities or that you are skiing too conservatively for that particular ski.

s5s wrote:
I was thinking of getting something about 160cm.

There are more important factors. Whether the ski is 160 or 170 or even 175 is unlikely to make much odds. Some skis ski shorter than their length anyhow. What you need is to talk to the shop about your ability and what you want the skis to be able to do. Find the right ski and as long as the length is in the right ball park it shouldn't be an issue. As an aside it does sound like you could do with some coaching/instruction.

s5s wrote:
And here is the actual question (sorry for the boring body above): should I go with shorter skis and progressively increase the length every season (I'm renting so it doesn't matter) or should I just get a longer ski (say around 175-180cm) and each season try to control it better?

Nope. Just explain to the shop your ability (be honest!) and what you want to ski (piste, moguls, park, off piste, etc.) and they will give you what they believe is an appropriate ski. If you don't like them ask for something else explaining what you don't like. Make a note of the skis and length you use and read up on them, so that your knowledge builds up. Different skis perform differently regardless of the length.

s5s wrote:
I'm of the opinion that the tool needs to fit the task and I believe shorter skis fit my skiing style better.

You got the first bit right, the second is dubious logic. People don't really have a style of skiing - they have different abilities due to how long they've skied, what instruction they've had, their fitness, what terrain they've skied, etc. I ski 184 skis (I'm 196 tall) but I'm sure I would be happy on anything 175 to 190+. It would be the design and properties of the ski that would be make or break the relationship.

s5s wrote:
Considering I ski 80% on piste, I was thinking of purchasing 160cm piste skis and 180-195cm off piste skis.

#1 It's pointless skiing 20% off piste IMO. You will never be any good or enjoy it. So you need to make your mind up. #2 it's rare in Europe, certainly for holiday punters like me and you, to get a lot of time in deep powder where we can justify having a full on pow ski. Fortunately modern technology has created wider skis that will still perform well on piste... often termed all mountain skis. They are often a good bet for anyone who grabs what off piste they can but inevitably spends a far amount of time on the groomed runs too. Either way the length wouldn't be massively different. As mentioned here if you ski purely on piste and what a short turning ski that is a different breed and that is what you should get. These might be a bit shorter but we are not talking 160 v 185. Either way the shop will give you the right length in the right ski... you just have to talk to them.

s5s wrote:
I recently went back into the sport after a 15 year break (I'm 30). I found a black mogul run a bit challenging - I didn't fall but the ride was anything but fluid.

Unless you were some kind of teenage superstar this is no surprise.

s5s wrote:
I had 169cm skis. I would have thought a 160 ski or 165 ski would have been a lot easier to navigate

Nope. A different ski might have. If you had some lessons it might have. But it's unlikely 5-10cm reduction in ski length would make much odds.
snow report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Just echoing Layne’s comments, I currently have (current) skis in the garage ranging from 165cms to 203cms. My daily drivers are 173cms. (FWIW 167cms and 60kgs, me). I have skied quite a lot though ...
snow conditions
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
I suspect lessons will make a bigger difference than 10 or 15cms.


(Embarassed )
snow conditions
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Layne wrote:
s5s wrote:
I'm of the opinion that the tool needs to fit the task and I believe shorter skis fit my skiing style better.

You got the first bit right, the second is dubious logic. People don't really have a style of skiing - they have different abilities due to how long they've skied, what instruction they've had, their fitness, what terrain they've skied, etc. I ski 184 skis (I'm 196 tall) but I'm sure I would be happy on anything 175 to 190+. It would be the design and properties of the ski that would be make or break the relationship.


Not in the way that s5s seems to use it, and not that it has a huge effect on ability, but different skiers definitely have different styles. At the top level look at Hirscher v Kristofferson v Schwarz v Zenhausern, all of them very accomplished World Cup slalom skiers (albeit one a bit better) but all have a different 'style' to how they skier. Hirscher is aggressive off the back of the skis, Henrik further forward, Schwarz is crazy aggressive and Zenhausern a lot more fluid
ski holidays



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy