 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Out of curiosity what are the disadvantages of skiing on a ski that is shorter than the reccomended for your height/weight/level etc?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
The "Uncool Factor" of skiing on a ski thats too short.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Reduced edge grip and oscillation at speed with the ski flat are the biggest problems I've found. Also lack of steeze.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
No stability and a complete fallacy that it will be easier to turn?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Depends on what you mean by short. I regularly ski on slalom skis at 167cm. No flapping, no stability issues, completely rock solid, awesome fun on piste in most conditions. I do think for me these style of skis do engage the rider, they can kick you out of the turns if you aren’t ready for it. Keep ‘em on edge most the time but even running flat isn’t an issue. Occasionally when I’ve a real buzz for speed I wish I was on longer skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
a complete fallacy that it will be easier to turn
|
parlor, I'm curious, do you find that to be the case? if you look at most skis the longest one in the models range of lengths will be stiffer and have a much bigger sidecut radius compared to the shortest version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| Quote: |
a complete fallacy that it will be easier to turn
|
if you look at most skis the longest one in the models range of lengths will be stiffer and have a much bigger sidecut radius compared to the shortest version. |
Don't forget the question:
| Quote: |
| is shorter than the reccomended for your height/weight/level etc? |
For all the "shorter is easier" buyer knows, that recommendation exists because the models below a given length are not stiff enough and bow out into a U near the binding while the tips and tails are barely pressured.
Welcome to instant skidville as you try to make a turn longer than the published radius of a hockey skate.
Oh, and if the snow happens to be wet or soft at all, you've just robbed yourself of the speed necessary to make the turn and the ski stalls, even if you are Wayne Gretzky.
Oh, and if the snow happens to be hardpack at all, you've just thown away the longitudinal stiffness needed to pressure the tips, so the bits next to the bindings get overloaded in torsion. Fan tan stick.
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Wed 24-09-08 16:24; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comprex, fair enough but what is the "recommended" length for any ski, I dont think there is one and it depends who you talk too....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
This is quite interesting, especially for me at the moment. When i got my new skis, i got them slightly shorter than my old ones as i felt that i could do with a wee bit of help when skiing really steep stuff.
Next to each other though, i find that there's actually not that much perceived difference. Most of the difference in length seems to be taken out of the back of the skis.
Will i really notice a 4cm difference when skiing them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| shoogly wrote: |
Will i really notice a 4cm difference when skiing them? |
Will you notice a difference? I hope so, or its money ill spent.
Will the difference be good or bad? You get to tell us.
Will the difference be only due to the length difference? No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try a differnet one on each foot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
beequin, I like the way you think.
| shoogly wrote: |
I'm amazed at how passionate people are over the length of skis. As long as you're having fun on them, they're long enough  |
True. Unfortunately I've met a few too many who were absolutely miserable.
"My friend skis 170s and I'm the same size as him, why won't these 150 cm skis turn on ice?"
Ans: coz they're meant for 14 year old girls and you're 220lbs.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Wed 24-09-08 16:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
skimottaret, search on this forum for 'Metron' and 'sizing guide'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Mmm..I'm 5'5" and 9st. I ski 154cm Volkl Arenas - 100-69-115 an on-piste adv. ski. I was given these in Lech as being the right size for me. I skied last season with them and they are brilliant. They are fabulous at all turn shapes and have excellent edge hold and very good over moguls. Off piste - I think they would have been better if longer, and on straight runs they were a tad unstable. I wish I'd just tried the next size up.
Should I keep these and buy an off-piste ski as well, or should I trade them in for a longer, marginally fatter model? Mostly I stay on piste but am getting better off piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
erica2004, keep those and get something a little longer, wider and straighter (ie less sidecut) for off piste. Make sure they match your hot new outfit. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| beequin wrote: |
| Try a differnet one on each foot. |
I did that on an instructor course. Did a few runs with a blade on one foot & a 5star on the other, then swapped around. Felt a bit weird for the first few turns & then after that no difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The_Hirsty, My hubby swopped his “recommended” length skis (hired from various rental outlets over the years) due to a knee injury, he wanted something shorter, as suggested by a Physio, so he bought a ski/blade hybrid - Atomic 120’s and never looked back - yes they are easy turn less pressure on the knees, so he has less knee pain. The skis never wobble, chatter, slip or skid, and they have been used in most conditions now (other than off piste, so can’t comment on that) but they have extended his skiing years, and last year, 2 other men in our party bought the same ones, as they had hired them and loved them so much. But we are a bunch of rather sedate, mature skiers, just looking to enjoy the runs, not get down them as fast as possible, or clock up the miles! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short skis SUCK, end off, unless you are a beginner and have poor fitting boots and refuse to pay for someone to help you learn to ski on proper skis. Unless i've mis-read the marketing and development briefs of the manufacturers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
sharon1953, glad you're having fun. That's what the sport is all about.
Comparing apples and oranges, however. You see, the Atomic 120 is a design that is optimised for hubby at 120cm. That IS his recommended ski length in that model.
If he'd wanted an 80cm version the ski would have to be of a design different than the Atomic 120, he couldn't just buy the same design ski in 80cm and expect it to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The shorter the ski, the greater the control.
It's why most skis have gotten shorter over the past decade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Whitegold, hmmmm... deep snow, fast line, short ski, no chance
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
JT, For massmarket skiers (i.e. most) who rarely go fast or deep, short skis offer superior control to long ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
define your terms: superior what control?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Do I detect a trend towards longer skis again??? Are we heading for more 203-215cm willy-waving?
Emperor's new clothes?
Surely the skills of the bloke on the planks is more important?
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Thu 25-09-08 20:02; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Whitegold, You know Shite. Let's just wax our boot soles and go for 'Whitegold' i say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I suck on 170+, I suck marginally less on 180+, I'd almost certainly rule on 190+ (though about 6 years back at the height of the short ski thing I did try a set of Rossi bandit something or others in about a 194 which all went brilliantly until I tried to land a teeny air asswards - flat tails, boo)
At the end of he day though, it's all about enjoying the mountain. If you want to enjoy the mountain on the alpine equivalent of a smart car, that's no skin off my nose
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Cunners, You are too polite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Whitegold, But I am giving you an instance where I don't believe short is best...certainly not helpful. I am not talking about straight-lining 35 degrees....just that you have discovered a nice little stash..you are bored with s's and you want to go fast because you think you can handle that pitch
Now, you only ski what you can ski....but the tendency to go faster, straighter, if you so desire, needs a more stable platform... it's all comes down to inches.
Now, if you are so determined to ski short, then ok, have fun, but then don't complain when the ski doesn't help.
I've been over the tips of a few skis that were too short....and I agree you can be between lenghts... ie, too long, too much of a handful, but I'd also argue the other way..too short and you don't give the ski a chance.
General benchmark... IMV, 6ft, skied a bit, you need 180 plus...unless you are on a Race SL..in which case you better be able to handle one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| JT wrote: |
| ...unless you are on a Race SL..in which case you better be able to handle one. |
Big grin factor if you can. Nothing wrong with a pair of short skis in the right conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Great picture... I can imagine long, happy evenings at shoogly hall.... waxing, polishing, adjust those DIN settings, sharpening, stroking, maybe even a little talking - am i right? Have you named all 4 yet?
I can add nothing to the Size debate, but am I the only one who is very jealous that you have 4 skis, even if they are on the stubby side?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I got hold of (download from somwhere) the salomon 06/07 workshop manual a while back, and I recently rediscovered it on one of my computers.
It has recommended length tables for each ski graded by user data.
Personally, I like anything over 175 - which is my height (OK, I am a bit stubby) and prefer longer. Last march, because of my recent knee op, I bimbled about on some 140s on piste - no problem with stability but i wasnt going terriably fast due to having a 1 weeker in my wake They certainly carved very tight loops across the narrow paths - about 180degree and edge to edge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
c0wdoo.
Shorter does not mean easier to "turn" or "control". Just easier to change direction. Woo-hooo. Take up snowboarding if that floats your boat. The poster was asking about turning. Short skis don't make it easier to turn, just easier to change direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe that bu11sh!t becomes c0wdoo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I've skied on Metron B5's in 152, no stability problems even at mega speed, equally, skied Crimson's in 169, great ski again bullet proof performance, ski what you're comfortable on, ignore the manufacturers latest trends, it's just to get us to fork out more cash!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
parlor, It may seem that way to you, not to me, so you own your stuff and let others own theirs! If you turn to change direction, and don't jump in the air from one edge to the other, then it stands to reason that if changing direction is achieved through turning (carving) and that feels easier - "turning is easier", changing the words doesn't change the outcome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
