 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi guys, I realise this gets asked a lot but after trawling through old old threads I couldn't find an answer that was applicable to me.
I'm looking to buy my first pair of skis (mainly because the resort I'm going to, Gressoney, doesn't seem to stock any hire skis wider than 90mm) which I'm looking to buy second hand off the Internet (can't afford to buy new).
I'm 180cm / 5'11 & 72kg / ~11 stone and would class myself as solid intermediate (have spent a week skiing off piste and comfortable on all but the most extreme blacks). I'm looking to buy an all mountain ski with a focus on off piste skiing and am thinking I want something between 90-99mm.
However I'm really not sure how long a ski I will want. I've seen a pair of Scott dozers that are 185 which sounds pretty long but honestly have no idea if it is or not. Can anyone give me an idea of the sort of length range I should be looking at given what I've said above?
Annoyingly, I can't remember the length of the all mountain skis I've used previously (elan ripstick 96), but I think they may have been 174.
Any other advice would be appreciated, thanks in advance!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I'm about the same height but a little heavier and I use Volk Kendo 184's, and I'm looking to buy a little shorter. Great ski and stable as you like but I wouldn't mind trying something a bit more nimble.
LIke others will say, it will also depend on the ski, does it have rocker etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Gressoney shops have skis wider than 90. It's a report that sells itself on the available off piste. Many  have hired wider/OP skis there on the Gnabug bash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I did see that guide and noted that for 'freeride' even a beginner would want a minimum of body length. I thought the type of skis I was looking at were classed as freeride, could someone clarify for me please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| adithorp wrote: |
| Gressoney shops have skis wider than 90. It's a report that sells itself on the available off piste. Many have hired wider/OP skis there on the Gnabug bash. |
I thought it was weird given the profile of the resort but read on another thread on this forum that wider skis can be hard to rent in Italian resorts. I also can't find any mention of wider skis on any of the hire websites, do you have any advice for reserving specific width skis out there? (Skiset haven't responded to my email and aren't picking up the phone).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you're a good powder skier, and you're lucky enough to arrive in report after a dump, you don't need anything over 90 underfoot. Piste performance fall away dramatically over 90 and for off piste, you're not a big unit so you don't need very wide to get decent float.
Regarding ski length; 178, max 180.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I'm looking to buy my first pair of skis (mainly because the resort I'm going to, Gressoney, doesn't seem to stock any hire skis wider than 90mm)
|
Odd that. It was a few years ago but I just walked into the first hire shop I came across in Gressoney and there were lots of wide skis and staff on hand to advise on length and the merits of each ski.
As to ski length. This is a tricky one. To some extent it depends on the rocker of the ski. Apart from a crude relationship between height and weight I think that your weight is more important than your height; afterall isn't the weight that bends the skis and makes them sink into the snow? I'm a little shorter and lighter than you. My general purpose skis which have a slight rocker and a twin tip (which unless you enjoy covering your friends in snow I suggest you avoid. I wish I did) are 178cm long.
I wonder why we use cm to state a skis length and not SI units?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
".....(mainly because the resort I'm going to, Gressoney, doesn't seem to stock any hire skis wider than 90mm)…."
Maybe contact a shop directly ?
Looking at this one, they seem to have off-piste skis
https://www.cisco-ski.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think harder about width than length for a 1 ski quiver. You are likely to spend the majority of time on-piste than in powder. It’s seems the rental option is available for powder days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Mi|es wrote: |
I did see that guide and noted that for 'freeride' even a beginner would want a minimum of body length. I thought the type of skis I was looking at were classed as freeride, could someone clarify for me please? |
Definitions of "all mountain" and "freeride" are fuzzy. I tend to think all mountain is slanted to a one quiver, all day on and off piste resort ski whereas freeride is more full on piste/deep powder ski.
Then you have the twin top and rocker factors added in the equation - twin tips help when riding switch (which could be in park or powder) and rocker helping with floatation
So your Scott Dozer skis are rockered all mountain skis with twin tips.
The biggest size they do is 185. I am 196cm tall, experienced and nearly 100kgs so a pretty tall, weighty and advanced skier - and 185 is all they give me, so that tells you something.
I ski 184 Dynastar Cham 97's which are similar (have a cambered middle) to your Dozer's.
So yeah in the Dozer's I would say you would look at the next size down - which would be 175cm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
And just to say personally I would always err slightly on the shorter side than the longer because IMO that versatility in tight situations is more useful than the speed and shallow turns on open terrain the longer ski would give you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think 170 - 175 is about right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
why we use cm to state a skis length and not SI units?
|
Possibly because the habits of measuring skis pre-date the SI standards? Also, cms seem a more natural gauge - 173cms feels simpler than 1.73m. That may just be habit.
@Mi|es, I wouldn't buy if renting would also suit and suitable skis are available. Never rented in G so no idea, but I'd be quite amazed if nothing > 90 mm. But which G you going to? i.e. I'd expect Stafal to not have a huge amount of choice.
And 2nding, unless you arrive a few days after a powder fall, you won't need anything much >90mm.
Length? I'd guess about 180ish, I weigh ~6'kgs and ski off 173. I could have gone 180 but while quite nice they just made things a bit more effort. NB the skis do not know how tall you are...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
[quote="under a new name"]
| Quote: |
@Mi|es, I wouldn't buy if renting would also suit and suitable skis are available. Never rented in G so no idea, but I'd be quite amazed if nothing > 90 mm. But which G you going to? i.e. I'd expect Stafal to not have a huge amount of choice.
And 2nding, unless you arrive a few days after a powder fall, you won't need anything much >90mm.
Length? I'd guess about 180ish, I weigh ~6'kgs and ski off 173. I could have gone 180 but while quite nice they just made things a bit more effort. NB the skis do not know how tall you are... |
I am staying in Staffal, there only seems to be one shop. I will get in touch directly and see what I can learn.
Re skis >90mm, I can only think of one trip I've been on when it hasn't snowed at least one day (generally it snows multiple days but maybe that's just luck/small sample size). I'm really not that interested in on piste skiing other than when it's too dangerous to go off the sides, on that basis doesn't 90-99m sound about right?
I've done a bit of stuff at the side of the piste on something closer to 80s and seemed to sink in a lot. Perhaps it's the weight of all the crap I tend to carry around in my bag rather than my bodyweight that's the key factor!
Thanks for all the responses so far, guys, they've been very informative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
This is the shop next to the hotel used for the gnabug bash...
http://www.davidsport.it/
They were very good, friendly and not expensive from what I remember (it was 3 seasons ago). I hadn't pre-booked; just walked in and got Cham97s. They charged me on return rather than collection which seemed odd and then gave a decent discount for cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Mi|es, small sample size.
By snowing, what do you mean? UK-deep snow? - otherwise known as "dust on crust" and to be avoided generally, ... or a proper dumping of 30-50cms overnight which then makes avalanche safety a priority (and often leads to lifts opening late (well it often does in Chamonix)).
Your shop seems to be https://www.monterosaskirental.it/en/ermannosport/all-mountain-skis/ who appear to offer Volkl Inuks which are 83mm waist and I think last marketed in 2016?
@adithorp, which is in G La Trinite, a good 45 minute walk away so maybe not so useful without a car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Mi|es wrote: |
| I'm really not that interested in on piste skiing other than when it's too dangerous to go off the sides, on that basis doesn't 90-99m sound about right? |
Yes, that's about right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@adithorp, which is in G La Trinite, a good 45 minute walk away so maybe not so useful without a car. |
Ñ
Yes but he hadn't posted that before I started typing.
It's an option and only 10min on the bus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@adithorp, ah. It does look like a better option, but there's that bus hassle ... especially if you want to mix and match as it were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@Mi|es, small sample size.
By snowing, what do you mean? UK-deep snow? - otherwise known as "dust on crust" and to be avoided generally, ... or a proper dumping of 30-50cms overnight which then makes avalanche safety a priority (and often leads to lifts opening late (well it often does in Chamonix)).
Your shop seems to be https://www.monterosaskirental.it/en/ermannosport/all-mountain-skis/ who appear to offer Volkl Inuks which are 83mm waist and I think last marketed in 2016?
@adithorp, which is in G La Trinite, a good 45 minute walk away so maybe not so useful without a car. |
6-36 inches. On a few days I didn't have to go off piste at all to find the deep stuff, just had to brave the blizzard.
I'll look into these two shops but I do think the inuks are likely to be too narrow given I plan to spend most of my time off piste. I'll look into how much of a pain it'd be to bus it down to la trinite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Mi|es, Then you have been somewhat lucky. Small sample. (Always impressed with anyone who'll admit to that!)
I think you are missing my critical point that Monterosa is not (necessarily) a powder paradise (mainly due frequent high winds) to the extent that in teh day when we spent quite a bit of time there I added slalom skis to my quiver ...
So ideally, you want the ability to switch skis depending on the likely conditions.
Agreed, Inuks a bit on the narrow side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To negate the loss of drinking time on the bus, the shop is also a bar. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Wow, you've been extremely lucky. I'm jealous!
I have several trips a year and have done for many years and don't think I've ever seen 36". Many weeks we haven't even had 6" of fresh in the whole week. 50cm would be exceptional and get me out of bed very early, which takes some doing!
I'm 6', 79kg and ski fast on a 97mm waist ski with tip and tail rocker and have gone 186, just over head height, good for speed and float but sometimes wish I'd gone shorter. My last skis were 90mm 179s and bloody amazing all rounders. I'd be aiming more 175 area as an intermediate. If you go 90/175 then you can learn off piste, hone your turns on and aim to add a wider floatier ski to the quiver once you progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| gravity-slave wrote: |
Wow, you've been extremely lucky. I'm jealous!
I have several trips a year and have done for many years and don't think I've ever seen 36". Many weeks we haven't even had 6" of fresh in the whole week. 50cm would be exceptional and get me out of bed very early, which takes some doing!
I'm 6', 79kg and ski fast on a 97mm waist ski with tip and tail rocker and have gone 186, just over head height, good for speed and float but sometimes wish I'd gone shorter. My last skis were 90mm 179s and bloody amazing all rounders. I'd be aiming more 175 area as an intermediate. If you go 90/175 then you can learn off piste, hone your turns on and aim to add a wider floatier ski to the quiver once you progress. |
The problem with 50cm days is that you get out of bed early but then they spend half the morning blasting before they'll open the lifts. Thanks for your insight, it looks like 170-175 is probably about right for me. I've seen a pair of 170cm Smash 7's that look like they might fit the bill.
@under a new name thanks for the reminder about the wind at Gressoney. I noted it when we first researched the venue but had since forgotten!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@Mi|es, It's often not a problem, there are certain windblown snow types that are really rather lovely to ski on.
It just gets on my goat that Alagna advertises itself as a "free ride paradise" with pics of Canada type powder when that really isn't usually the reality. Whereas the reality is often very fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
You don't need fresh powder to ski powder. Under the right conditions it can stay powdery for days.
On top of which off piste we not just talking about powder in the pure sense of the word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Layne, without wanting to put words in your mouth, what I think you mean is that actually snow can transform into something resembling fresh powder days after a fall.
My intuition is that many people here and elsewhere mean powder when they mention off piste, driven by resort marketing, when the reality is very different...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@Mi|es, I'm fractionally smaller than you, although I often have a fairly heavy pack so may weigh more in total, and have a pair of 182cm skis although they do have a slight and think that they feel great in fresh snow and at speed on piste. Going slowly on piste and they feel a bit cumbersome. I also have a pair of mid 80s underfoot 172cm semi twin tips and while they feel great popping from turn to turn on fairly gentle pistes as soon as it starts to get a bit steeper I feel that I would either benefit from a longer or a stiffer ski to keep them carving with higher forces. Off-piste the difference between them is huge, I wouldn't feel confident to join a guided group on the 172s, I just make too many unforced errors on them in deep snow, but on the 182s I will rarely crash unless I hit a rock or the snow suddenly changes a lot and catches me out. Therefore, if I were you I would be looking between the 178 and 185 mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Mi|es go with the same length as you or 5cm bigger. I am 176 cm and ski atomic BC 100 in 180
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Mi|es wrote: |
| I'm really not that interested in on piste skiing other than when it's too dangerous to go off the sides, on that basis doesn't 90-99m sound about right? |
Yes. Something like the Salomon QST99 or Equivalent Rossignol (Sky7?) in the high 170s would work well for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I’d also go around skier's height.
TLDR:
I’m a little shorter/lighter than you at 175cm / 65kg and at I guess similar ability and interest.
Have some old Salomon Lord (87mm) in 177 and more recently added some K2 Shreditor 102 in 184.
Personally I found that the extra width and rocker of the K2 gave me confidence to progress in 3d / ungroomed snow.
They’re also more fun in slushy end of season conditions.
I agree with some previous comments about agility in very tight conditions, but then again for me that’s not the norm (although on kick-turns a shorter ski would help me) and I don’t look for those scenarios (at least for now).
When conditions are particularly dry I rent piste skis for 1/2 day - I can always find those at any rental shop...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
Yes. Something like the Salomon QST99 or Equivalent Rossignol (Sky7?) in the high 170s would work well for you.
|
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
BTW I'm a bit surprised you can't hire wider skis in Gressoney. Even 10 years ago I hired proper powder skis in Alagna when I was a bit undergunned on 75mm waist in deep and rather heavy snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@jedster, not Gressoney ... OP is in Stafal which despite being on route across valleys is a bit of a satellite
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
ah, yes - pretty small as I remember
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The approach I take is to consider where you fit in the range of people based primarily on the force you'd put through the ski, which in turn is based on weight, ability and aggressiveness. If you translate that to a scale of small, medium, large and extra-large, then you'd come in as a medium. If a ski is unisex (i.e. there's no equivalent female-oriented model) and comes in 4 sizes, these can also be considered S, M, L and XL. Matching up you'd take the 2nd smallest size. One model might have sizes 195, 185, 175, 165, and another might be 178, 170, 162, 154, and if they're aimed at similar skier profiles, then you'd end up with a 175 in the first ski, and a 162 in the second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
^ that makes sense actually
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| jedster wrote: |
| ^ that makes sense actually |
It does and it doesn't to be honest.
The size differential would only be that extreme on ski's that are completely different genres i.e., a slalom ski v a freeride ski. Ski's of the same type wouldn't vary very much.
But yeah if you ski the second longest in one ski you'd probably ski the second longest in any ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jedster wrote: |
| Quote: |
Yes. Something like the Salomon QST99 or Equivalent Rossignol (Sky7?) in the high 170s would work well for you.
|
+1 |
The Sky 7s in particular ski pretty short. I'm 193cm on 188s and pretty happy on them whatever the conditions (now on west coast USA). They don't feel 11cm longer than the 177cm Head Titans I had before. The next 2 sizes down are 180 and 172 and I'd say go the 180s
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
