 Poster: A snowHead
|
Good day to you all,
Apologies for the fact that my first post is the old ski size chestnut!
I'm 6'2", weigh 88kg and am just parallel, skiing red runs. Looking for something all mountain, although I guess 80% of my skiing will be on post.
Am considering whether to buy 1.70s or 1.77s - what's the consensus? I'm progressing quickly so want something that takes that into account!
Any replies much appreciated!
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Andythejock, depends on the ski. A slalom or GS ski you'd go shorter. An all mountain probably longer. Best of all would be to try some out in different lengths and see how they feel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Andythejock, welcome to snowheads. Skis don't know how tall you are but they do know how much you weigh and how aggressively you ski. I'm 5'9", weigh 780kg, I ski 183cm. You should be looking around the 175 to 180 mark I htink
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
nbt, WTF???...you weigh "780KG?????"......does your cereal bowl have its own lifeguard?......
okbye
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
nbt, You fat bar steward 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| snowpatrol wrote: |
nbt, WTF???...you weigh "780KG?????"......does your cereal bowl have its own lifeguard?......
okbye |
I'm still crying as I type
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And to answer your question AndytheJock, I'd go with the 170cm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
183 for someone measuring 175 cms is very long, being longer in fact than you are tall.. I would reckon, Andythejock, at your 188 cms on a ski between 170 and 175 for all round stuff and given your stage of development would go with the suggestion of 170.
I am in fact your height and almost your weight and currently ski on 175 Salomon Crossmax. New skis scheduled for next season are likely to be Salomon X- Wing Tornado TI at 173cms. I've tried them on and off-piste. The ski suits me well as an advanced skier and the length was fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Andythejock wrote: |
Any 6 footers on here? What are you skiing?
|
189 Preachers, 189 Crusades, 190 Redeemers, 193 Pures ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
oh, BTW..... I'm 4'3"
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Mike Pow, Me too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
| And to answer your question AndytheJock, I'd go with the 170cm. |
Cheers Mike. Can you say why? Wouldn't know either way myself of course. I guess this is based on experience and on what others you know are skiing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Like most people who learned to ski before the advent of shaped technology, longer was the way to go.
At 188cm (6' 2") and around 100kg (220lbs) at the time I was given a pair of 195cm to learn on. At the end of the season I bought a pair of 210cm and thought I was the poo-poo. In reality, I was poo-poo. That was 1994.
Fast forward to 1997 and I got a pair of Dynastar Yeti's in 190cm as my first touring ski. The drop in length was working for me.
After a couple of full seasons I got a pair of Volkl G4s mounted with Dynafit bindngs in a 198cm as my do-it-all ski. In what would now be classed as a mid-fat the shape did more for my skiing than the length.
I started my CSIA instructor training in 2001 and over the course of two winters went from this 198cm ski to a Dynastar 74 in 184cm. The skiing improved as a consequence of training, reduced length and more shape.
In the 2005/06 season I had my biggest breakthrough when I listened to Annie Black, my PSIA trainer at Keystone, and dropped to a 170cm slalom ski - Salomon Equipe, 125-65-109
I moved to Hokkaido the folowing winter and rode these skis in all conditions for another season and a half until one snapped. Superb ski, but maybe too much for some.
I now ski on a 173cm Blizzard mid-fat but would have gone back to a 170cm slalom ski - Atomic - this past winter if I had returned to Hokkaido.
A ski in the 170-175cm range with a shovel in the 122 to 128mm range and a waist between 65 and 78mm allows me to pivot my skis easily when I need to and also to pure carve when conditions and terrain allow. I'm still 188cm, but with a backpack with photographic equipment and all the rest that goes in a backpack I must be tipping the scales at around 120kg (264lbs).
For someone of your ability, size and weight I would recommend the K2 Explorer in a 170cm or the two skis that have taken my interest for next winter:
Head iTitan
126-78-114, 13.5m radius @ 170cm
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=61979
Nordica Fire Arrow 74
126-74-109, 14.5m radius @ 172cm
Hope that helps.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Mon 22-03-10 11:47; 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:
|
|
I was skiing long ski's for my first 3 weeks of skiing. Last weekend a friend (who is 6ft 4in) suggested I move to a 170 ski (i'm 6ft 2in) The difference was actually really noticeable. Now, If I get my own skis (which I will this year) I will be going for a 170 (and probably the X wing's)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
Like most people who learned to ski before the advent of shaped technology, longer was the way to go.
At 188cm (6' 2") and around 100kg (220lbs) at the time I was given a pair of 195cm to learn on. At the end of the season I bought a pair of 210cm and thought I was the poo-poo. In reality, I was poo-poo. That was 1994.
Fast forward to 1997 and I got a pair of Dynastar Yeti's in 190cm as my first touring ski. The drop in length was working for me.
After a couple of full seasons I got a pair of Volkl G4s mounted with Dynafit bindngs in a 198cm as my do-it-all ski. In what would now be classed as a mid-fat the shape did more for my skiing than the length.
I started my CSIA instructor training in 2001 and over the course of two winters went from this 198cm ski to a Dynastar 74 in 184cm. The skiing improved as a consequence of training, reduced length and more shape.
In the 2005/06 season I had my biggest breakthrough when I listened to Annie Black, my PSIA trainer at Keystone, and dropped to a 170cm slalom ski - Salomon Equipe, 125-65-109
I moved to Hokkaido the folowing winter and rode these skis in all conditions for another season and a half until one snapped. Superb ski, but maybe too much for some.
I now ski on a 173cm Blizzard mid-fat but would have gone back to a 170cm slalom ski - Atomic - this past winter if I had returned to Hokkaido.
A ski in the 170-175cm range with a shovel in the 122 to 128mm range and a waist between 65 and 78mm allows me to pivot my skis easily when I need to and also to pure carve when conditions and terrain allow. I'm still 188cm, but with a backpack with photographic equipment and all the rest that goes in a backpack I must be tipping the scales at around 120kg (264lbs).
For someone of your ability, size and weight I would recommend the K2 Explorer in a 170cm or the two skis that have taken my interest for next winter:
Head iTitan
126-78-114, 13.5m radius @ 170cm
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=61979
Nordica Fire Arrow 74
126-74-109, 14.5m radius @ 172cm
Hope that helps. |
Good day to you Mike - yes, that certainly does help! Thanks v much for taking the time to explain all of this.
Will check on avilability and prices for the Skis you mention.
Was thinking of The k2 Apache Raiders as Nevisport in Aviemore recommended them (they were being pretty straight as they didn't actually have any in - I'd have to get them elsewhere. They also suggested the X wings as refrred to by Markon).
Anybody know what the difference is between the K2 Explorers and the Apache Raiders?
PS Mike - One of my pals has been skiing for over 25 yrs, is 5'6" and still prefers his non carver 190 Dynastars circa circa 1990 . He can outski an awful lot of people on those though - he was around when every season at Cairngorm was like this one, so he and his brother skied every week, every season through his teens (sounds great!)
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
More than welcome.
And after half a day on shaped skis in the 160-165cm range your pal would be in 7th heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Mike Pow wrote: |
More than welcome.
And after half a day on shaped skis in the 160-165cm range your pal would be in 7th heaven. |
He's tried them and went back to his old skis! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
im 6ft 2 and about 98kg and ski on around 175-180 skis in Head Supershape magnum or atomic nomad crimson. skied aout 16 weeks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Cheers.
Do heavier skiers benefit from longer skis (assuming the same height)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Production skis are designed to suit heavier skiers in the longer lengths. Often the difference in stiffness is more noticeable than the difference in length between 2 skis of the same model, but in different lengths. I generally prefer longer skis in the All-Mountain category, around 180-185 cm (I'm 6'1", 88 kg, so almost identical build to you). But I was used to 2m+ straight skis and find all modern skis easy to pivot. So for me the extra float and stability of a longer ski is worth any trade off in agility. But I'd go down to around 175 for a more dedicated piste ski eg. Head Magnum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One other thing - has anybody heard of Salomon PowerAxes? I'm skiing on them currently and bought them 2nd hand for £60. When I had them serviced I was told they were a good ski, although they'd gone a bit soft.
Have a feeling they may be about 15yrs old!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
