 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi,
Looking at a pair of skis I've hired twice in the last 2 years in a 170cm length and liked a lot but have seen a good offer on a 176cm length.
I'm 183cm tall, 75kg and intermediate/advanced level. I ski 95% on piste and the 5% is only between pistes. Like to do short turns as well as long carving turns at speed.
My initial thoughts are I should stick with the 170cm length but due to price I'm tempted.
Any thoughts welcome....Festive Greetings
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
If it was I wouldn't be bothered by an extra 6cm. With your stats 176 should be fine. Also do they have a traditional tail because many modern have a slight if not full tip at the back making them ski shorter than their quaoted length?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
rambotion, It's a Rossignol Zenith Z9.5...skied on the previous Z9 model twice before. They have a flat tail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Doubt it will make a huge difference. 170cm sounds about right for your weight on an on piste carving/slalom ski. So if you go up to 176 cm it will probably mean you have to be a little bit more precise on your short turns, but I'd have thought you will find them better for the high speed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
pokemon, I'm 2cm taller than you and 40kg bigger and at a similar level. My piste skis are 176 and fatter skis are 186. I can tell the diference between the 2 but it's not as big a diference as you may think....
I should add that the "piste ski" I have is also a Zenith Z5 (from 2005) which was 2nd top of the range back then..... Think they have changed the numbers since
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
II, cheers....am I correct in inferring from your response that you think a 170 would be best for me but 176 would suffice ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pokemon, yes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II,  cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 would even say that the bigger ones are better for you. As you get more experienced, chances are you'll enjoy the improved stability and slightly higher off-piste potential.
(I'm 2 cm taller and same weight, and I ski everything between 165 and 185, my 'all round' ski being 176)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At 75kg you will be fine on the 176.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
No problem - in fact if you concentrate on short-radius turns you'll put on a couple of pounds of muscle in your thighs - thereby making the turns easier anyway due to the extra weight/muscle! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Quick update, the the 176 skis actually measure 174cm. Will the flex be the same in both the 170 and 176 ski though ? I realise I need to make edge contact along the whole length to get the best out of them.
Appreciate if anyone can comment ASAP as I want to buy today. 
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 176 will be a stiffer ski. That's how it generally works. Longer lengths are made stiffer to suit heavier skiers. The difference is often significant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
I bought the 170cm length in the end after speaking to a knowledgeable guy in a shop who had both lengths for sale. He advised me that my weight was more important than my height due to the ability to flex the ski.
The main reason was that I was really happy on the 170cm length when I've hired the ski twice before and it always felt stable at speed. I thought better the devil you know. Another thing occurred to me as well.....As they only do this ski in 4 lengths, with the 170 length being the second longest, then logically I wouldn't place myself on the longest length anyway, if you were segmenting the target audience for this ski into four groups based on height and weight. I'm tall but not excessively tall and I'm probably fairly light, in terms of weight.
And as I also said to my friend. "The 170 length is like my wife and the 176 length could be like Claudia Schiffer but if I never try the 176, I'll never miss what I haven't experienced". At this point my wife gave me an evil stare. btw, my wife is great in case anyone thinks I'm making some sort of sexist joke
Thanks for all the advice and I realise that I've perhaps wimped out slightly but as I generally only go once a year, it didn't seem worth the worry that the longer length may be too stiff for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Thanks for reporting back pokemon, glad you got sorted out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
