 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
1556garyt, you should listen to the wise woman who is your wife. I'm the same height as you, weigh a lot less, ski 167 to 172ish but don't have a problem with skis at 176. Load of cobblers, all this quibbling over a few centimetres. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
1556garyt, your wife must be happy with the snow blade you've got!!!
Does eb at Hemel not have a pair or one with similar width for you to try??
If not I'm sure an hour on them won't skuff them too much ??
And don't forget ;
it's not the length of your sticks that makes the difference,
it's the magic in your wand!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Booooooolocks.
You can ski amost anything you like. If you're 172 and skiing a 176 that's fine. Trend seems to be towards longer skis anyhow right now.
At 78kg you're fairly large for your height, so a longer ski will be useful.
The bloke can make all the suggestions he likes in the shop, but he doesn't know how you ski, how strong your legs are, what you're technique's like, what kind of ski you're used to?
I used to use Snowblades a lot when I was young, and it means I prefer a shorter ski. I could easily ski a set of kids/womens skis at 150cm and I'm just shy of 6'.
I'd ignore the suggestion. As intermediate/advanced you'll likely find yourself needing the slightly longer ski anyhow some time or another, and as long as you can work with them they'll be fine.
Ski them, if you sell them now they'll be worth just the same as if you've done a couple of days on them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Ski them and have fun, dont ebay them, ski more aggressive stuff than you normally would to get the extra 10cm's worth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
1556garyt, Other's replying might find it useful to know what length have you skied before?
I am no expert, but from what I understand if what you've got is within 10cm of what you've skied before I think you should soon adapt. I am an inexperienced 1-2 week a year holiday skier, and own a pair of 160's (I am about 177cm/5'9", but I've skied 170's (that 10cm I'm on about) on ski tests and managed them with the feeling that within a couple of hours I would adapt. I don't think I'd be too concerned and would be tempted to try skiing them in your situation. From what I read round here ski length seems the easier thing to adapt to providing you can still flex them OK. What I find is its the wider skis I have more problems adapting to.
I'm sure some experts will be around soon to advise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swap them for shorter planks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176 scott neos? big mountain skis?
lulz
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
1556garyt, As Arno, they are fine in length, Big Mountain though they certainly aren't. Gotta love the sales patter in Blighty!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Are you a big mountain skier?" Did you move away quickly enough to avoid catching his stupid?
No, you have most likely not screwed up. Ski them and have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I bet I know who it was you spoke to at Hemel as well. We've taken to just ignoring a couple of the guys altogether, there's a couple of guys in there that know their stuff and are really helpful, and a couple that don't know the difference between working in Sales and talking at people.
It bothers me when salespeople make generalisations, because it's something I batter into our salespeople when they arrive on day one - the moment you make an assumption you stop asking questions, understanding your customer, and you start to try and get the customer to fit the solution, not the solution to fit the customer. And I don't have anything do with the ski industry - but the same principle applies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think they'll be fine to ski at that length, but think you'll probably be missing out on a lot of fun the 166 would offer you. The shorter ski will obviously have the shorter radius, it's a pretty wide ski underfoot so should be stable enough for you off piste too even at 166.
Probably worth noting that this is a big mountain ski and prob best suited for jumping out of helicopters or at least climbing up and around the back of ski lifts.
I think for the money you paid I'd put them straight on eBay get as much of your money back as possible and enjoy a ski that will reward you far more.
Sorry to sound like the prophet of doom but several years ago I invested in a pair (I think) of Head Monster iM 95's in something like a 196, they looked beautiful and for the one deep powder day L2A saw in '04 they were awesome, anything else they were just a nightmare, used them maybe 6 times, struggled to sell them ended up leaving them there in a ski shop 'Haricana' marked 'For Sale' suspect they are still there, ask Easiski !!!
Anyway, a bitter pill but every time you hear them click on you'll be wondering 'what if'.
Good luck anyway.
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
What rubbish they are only 83mm underfoot which is far from wide now and they are designed to be 50/50 on/off piste. I skied a pair of 166's for 5 days in Tignes last December, I'm about the same size as the OP, and found them a little short for mainly piste skiing that week. 176's will be ideal!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
1556garyt, if you really are an advanced intermediate skier, you shouldn't have a problem with them, in fact why are you asking? If you bought them because this model suits your skiing style, preferences and goals, you will be fine. Get out there and do it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Don't worry about it, people quibble to much about a few cm on here sometimes.
If they feel good, ski them, if they don't feel good, flog them.
My K2's are apparently to short for me. WRONG I like the way they feel, I really have no interest in what I'm supposed to ski, I like them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Far too short, swop them for the next size up!
They sound spot on to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Colin B, sorry to bring this back to you, but I'm not so keen on your 'What rubbish' remark you posted. I feel I might have the right to an opinion, given that I've spent several years working in a specialist ski & boot shop (www.freeride.fr) and tested a fair ammount of skis in my time.
The original posting was by a 'holiday' skier who is a self confesse good to advanced and weighs 78kg.
How often in his trips is he realistically likely to find good powder? Surely a ski that he can bend when he carves would be more appropriate? 83mm underfoot you say is not that wide, but I have to tell you that it's more than ample.
All this talk about float and other 'hip jargon' is pointless, the guy might spend 2-3 weeks skiing max per annum, surely the advice should be geared to him maximising each and every day. A good short ski that's more piste orientated than off has to be a more realistic ski for that task. On the 1 or 2 days when he's lucky enough to go and falk over in the knee deep (again let's face it he's not going anywhere too gnarly!!) he can learn how to use his skis or rent a pair of wide jobs.
Don't forget that it's the skier ultimately that has the abillity, not the ski. Buy a sensible ski for the terrain you are actually going to ski, not what you dream of. We'd ski most days on the older 3V's if we saw some unexpected spring snow or good patch we wouldn't say 'Oh bug we've the wrong skis!!'
Sorry to rant on, I stand by my initial posting which starts off 'I think that they'll be a fine to ski at that length, but you'll be missing out on a lot of fun the 166 would offer you.'
Colin I really don't mind if you disagree with me, in fact I enjoy learning so if you could've explained to me why I was wrong I'd have been far more appreciative, as it was I found your posting a little uneducated. Especially given that you skied them for a week at that length!! Why didn't you switch to the longer ones???
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Mezza9Matt, maybe I am wrong but it was probably this:
| Quote: |
| Probably worth noting that this is a big mountain ski and prob best suited for jumping out of helicopters or at least climbing up and around the back of ski lifts. |
That Colin B was calling rubbish. I don't know what your definition of 'big mountain' is but it definitely isn't aligned with mine, maybe that is where the confusion lies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mezza9Matt, Opinions are fine but you stated they are big mountain skis more suited to heliskiing, they clearly are not! They are a 50/50 all mountain skis. Big mountain skis are commonly now about 190cm and 130mm underfoot. The vast majority of opinion above seems to favour them being suitable. I didn't change them last December as they didn't have the longer ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apologies, but upon reading;
"The Scott Neo is a super charged free ride ski for accessing big mountain terrain. The Scott Neo is a ski that will charge down hardpack, bounce and float in the powder bowls and provide you with a fun all mountain experience. The Neo is ideal for intermediate to advanced skiers wanting to ski difficult backcountry and resort terrain. " This is the general online shop spiel, I suspect distributed by Scott.
Coupled with the fact that this chap has skis 4cm taller than himself then I hope you can see how I might in fact think that these are wholly inappropriate as a holiday makers only skis!!
However, if I'm wrong, (which I may well be), and Colin's right (an Arsenal fan!!) then why would a 50/50 ski 4cm taller than a 78kg chap who is intermediate/advanced skiing maybe 20 days a year (if he's a very lucky guy!!) be right????
Hope his 140cm custom poles were a wise investment 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.
|
|
Mezza9Matt, I don't necessarily disagree with you but Scott calling them a big mountain ski is also off the mark, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mezza9Matt, No problem. No one is right or wrong in these things  They were very easy to ski at 166cm, even for my limited ability, and I don't think 176's would be much of a problem. Don't forget too that they are twin tips which means that they are probably equivalent to something about 170cm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I suspect you're right, having just checked out the Scott site, they look a bit half hearted don't they?
Lol 50/50 they are then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Mezza9Matt, They are actually very nice skis. I'm a bit disappointed that the skiandboard camp which I'm going on again in about 3 weeks at Tignes doesn't have Neo's this year (either 166 or 176 ) I'm skiing with Charlotte as usual next Easter I'll keep a look out for your Monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol If you can find them you're more than welcome to claim them, they're pretty eye catching at 194/7cm a large streak of bright yellow petex on one and I embossed them with a 40cm girl on each tip as per the WW2 US bombers!
Very nice skis, oh how I miss looking at them, not so much the using them though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
You`ll grow into them matey definatly not a waste of money. These skis are meant to be pretty easy going on the all round ability kind of group and going by their specs I would say its a decent all mountain ski with occasional offpiste. The guy was probably just being radical man you know because he was teh gnarliest, like cliff hucking giant. know what I mean
Enjoy yerself man and stop worrying you`ll have a blast, just remember lean forward and stare the slope down you own the skis they dont own you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Sorry to jump in on this. I spoke to my member of staff who dealt with the gentleman who started this post. His name is Martin and is vastly experienced skier and runs my ski equipment department.
Relative to the gentlemans size after a discussion, listening to what the customer wanted out of the ski he decided that the ski would arguably be too long.
Martin is also very aware that although the Neo would give you "big mountain" access it is not scott's pure big mountain ski. The appropriately named Scott Pure is!!!
If anybody has any issues with the service or advice any of my staff have given that you think is inappropriate, please do not hesitate to PM me or alternatively email me directly as follows: manager.hemel@snowandrock.com
Any feedback, positive or negative, is appreciated and will be dealt with.
Regards
Rob Link
Store Manager
Snow and rock sports ltd.
Hemel Snow centre
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Thanks Rob, have to say I think it's really impressive that not only do you read these forums but also comment on them.
Hats off to you and S&R (coming from someone who's not necessarily a big fan).
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
OK time for the ignorance post...
What's a big mountain? How does it differ from all mountain? Is it like latte and cappuccino - both coffee, just down to individual taste?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
JimW, Courtesy of http://www.lanches.fr/
| Quote: |
All Mountain Skis are the compromise between all types of Alpine Skis.They are fat / wide enough to stay up in deep snow, soft enough to do big jumps. But All Terrain / All Mountain Skis are mainly designed with the piste in mind.Narrower under foot, shorter and with more side cut for manoeuvrability. They are soft enough to be able to maintain snow contact and spring you out of terrain features. All-Mountain Skis will float in powder, though not as well as fat skis, and they will carve on groomers, though not as well as race skis. The advantage, though, is that they ski all types of terrain decently and perform in crud, powder, ice, groomed and not groomed snow quite well. What is more, some of manufacturers are making Twin-Tip All Mountain Skis, with aim to aloud you to enjoy all elements of free style anywhere on slopes
|
| Quote: |
This is what the big boys use. Free Ride / Big Mountain / Off-Piste skis are the ones, which are designed to be used out of track, to flow on top of deep powder, when you have already mastered everything that the Ski area had to offer. They are excellent in tough conditions.
This type of Skis is suited for advanced, expert skiers. Regularly Free Ride Skis are much wider (over 10 cm) especially in front end and longer than regular Alpine Skis, although they are more stiffer in flex. These Skis allow the best performance for rider in any off-piste conditions you can find.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Good old wikipedia, latte vs cappucino
Freeskiing is most commonly used to describe skiing for fun, as opposed to training or racing.
In the mid 1990s, the term was adopted by "Big Mountain" skiers and extreme skiing professionals and refers to skiing down an ungroomed, often extremely steep mountain that is often only accessible by hiking or helicopter. Recently the term "Freeskiing" has been somewhat distorted to encompass not only the "Big Mountain" and backcountry aspect of skiing, but also skiing in specially constructed snow or terrain parks, which include a variety of jumps as well as boxes and rails for the skiers to slide on. The film the "Blizzard Of AAHHH's" helped jumpstart "freeskiing" in the US,[1] by causing extreme terrain to become available to the public.
Does that shed any light? I guess technically 'All mountain' covers 'Big Mountain' as well as pisted runs???
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Mezza9Matt wrote: |
| Thanks Rob, have to say I think it's really impressive that not only do you read these forums but also comment on them. Hats off to you and S&R |
Seconded 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
JimW, Big mountain are completely off piste skis. Usually fat and long and give you the float in powder. You would need a ski that is at least top of head height and min 100mm under foot with a large turn radius (20m and above). They go much bigger and you would have to ski a lot of powder to justify owning a pair.
An All Mountain ski is one that can get you about on and off piste, therefore 'all' over the mountain. These are slightly shorter(below top of head height) and about 80-90mm under foot with a mid teen turn radius.
Saying this, you ski what you like. I have various skis in my 'quiver' and my all mountain are my old Rossi Bandits (78 under foot with a 15m radius). I now have a pair of Prior skis that are just over my head height and about 100mm under foot with an 18m radius). Not quite big mountain but big enough for my style of skiing and weight. I no longer need my Bandits but i have had a lot of good memories using them on and off piste.
Hope that is clear. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
1556garyt, what date you doing warrensmith course? I'm doing one starting Dec 5th. I'll be in Verbier through out Dec if the Neos are too long you can beat me with them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bit late coming to this, but I largely agree with Haggis_Trap - with a proviso or two. 1556garyt, you'll have discussed your requirements more with Martin than us here, so he's probably got more background that us for his recommendation - but I do disagree with it, strongly.
The proviso is dependent on where you want your skiing to go. If you are looking to head up out and mix it up off-piste, then I think you have the perfect size planks. I ski skis 4cm longer than my height, and a few mm wider than my weight (in kg), i.e. just like yours, and they took me well on from a good but unreliable off-piste skier to someone that can handle pretty much everything. I have on occasion skied something shorter and it's really not worth it. Going for something shorter than you are means you have to spend too much time worrying about how solid the lump of snow in front of you is and whether it'll collapse or cause you to lurch forwards and bury your tips in the snow. The longer skis give you so much more fore-aft stability in variable snow it's unreal. You'll still be able to make short "euro-mince" powder turns (which I love doing when the mood takes me), although they'll take a little more work, but you'll be able to lay out big sweeping lines as well (which I also like doing when that mood takes me). Fine, you'll not make the shortest carves on the piste, but those skis wouldn't do so even in 166cm either - and I've still had plenty of fun on piste in my 185cm skis. If you're solely a piste skier though, and looking to get the most performance you can on-piste, then your skis are probably 10cm too long - but they are also the wrong type of ski altogether, and you should be looking for something no wider than 70-72mm underfoot. (Unfortunately a snowdome won't show you what the advantages of that ski are, only the disadvantages - although by eveningtime Hemel has been so lumpy of late, that may be an incorrect statement .)
The other proviso is if your "intermediate/advanced" has been subject to ski-school/hire-shop grade inflation and it really means you have about 3 weeks under your belt and can sort of cope with a red, and just about struggling down a black is the highlight of the day. I don't for one minute think that's the case though.
I agree with the others that you have about the perfect ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
, 
)
) I'm going to stick with the Neos I've got. I'm on the Warren Smith Course in December so hopefully my skills will improve so I can get the most of the skis; the earlier comment that its how you use the wand that counts is undoubtadly true.
