 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi all, i am a 6ft 14stone 9pounds adv/expert skier. 32 years of age
My question is:- i am in the market for buying my own ski's (always rented upto this point) i am looking at all mountain ski's i.e Salomon tornado TI's, Volkl AC30 etc. I have used the Tornados and found them a good ski. I used them in a length of 170, i was planning on buying a set at the max length of 177 as the 170's i found them to be a bit chattery underfoot at speed.
My question is will i find much difference between 170 & 177? the reason for asking is that i have found some 170's with big discounts as opposed to the 177 at full price.
cheers
DJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
At your size and ability, the shorter ones will probably be too soft. The longer ones should feel considerably less floppy as they will have been optimised for a heavier skier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I would be inclined to go even longer. 170cm is def too short though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I agree, i even thought of 180+, but most shops seem to only offer 177max (especialy internet deal) i was intersted to hear of other peoples experiance in will the extra length make much difference.
have also looked at Head Monster iM 82 SW in 177 for £383.00 inc bindings, but found 170 Volkl AC30's at a really good deal of £299 inc bindings hence the question
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I'd say it really depends on the exact make/model of ski and personal preferences. You almost need to try all the options you are looking at.
I'm 6' 4" and 15stone 5lbs and on our recent trip I tried the Atomic Nomads (rentals, no intention of buying myself) in 179cm and 168cm lengths. Personally I much prefered the 168cm's. But, then again, the 168cms were slightly wider under foot adding yet another variable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
depthjunkie, the Volkl deal is great but I agree with sps89. I'm a couple of inches shorter and nearly 2 stone lighter than you but usually ski on at least 175s (shorter in slalom skis, obviosuly). Recently mucked about on Elan Magfire12s in a 177, which are fairly all-mountain skis and they were good and steady on piste with enough float for the powder. I used some K2 Apache Recons last year also in a 177 and they were also a lot of fun. Think 177 min, and you'll do alright.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| depthjunkie wrote: |
have also looked at Head Monster iM 82 SW in 177 for £383.00 inc bindings, but found 170 Volkl AC30's at a really good deal of £299 inc bindings hence the question |
Well I'm a bit lighter than you and have a pair of Monster 82s in 183. I've tested AC30s in 170 (it was the only length demo available) and they were way too short for an all mountain ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i have AC30's in a 177 and they are a very stiff ski that needs working. I would go with a 177 as the 170 would be too stiff and short for you IMO. my mate was on tornados and they are very very lightweight compared to the AC30 and i dont think would ski anywhere remotely similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
You let me know how much you want to spend and where you ski and ill find you something.
Im guessing around £350?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
depthjunkie, welcome to snowHeads 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
depthjunkie, go with the long ones, and maybe look at slightly softening up or adding motion range to your boots so you get forward pressure more smoothly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Fine..take short skis into deep snow..they wont do you any favours there...
for the OP stats...185 min for a fattish ski...ie 88mm ..IMV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
comprex,
should read these things better...sorry, flying visit. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
JT, did he say he wanted this as a powder ski I assumed it was to be an AM lite fat?
|
Correct, AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
I assumed it was to be an AM lite fat? 
