 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hopefully you guys can point me in the right direction here.
I was browsing Ebay this morning and I accidentally purchased a pair of 172 Head IM82s. I am not particularly familiar with Ebay and I paid the price for presuming I could always undo any damage with the 'back' button. I dont mind the accidental purchase, even more so considering i got them for £200 however, I am concerned that the skis might be a bit too short for me. My stats are:
Sex. Male
Age. 27
Height. 180 cm (circa)
Weight. 16st
Level. 6/7
What do you guys think? Am I too big/ tall for this size IM82? Would I actually notice any difference if I purchased a longer model?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Don`t think you should worry... the advertising speel opens with the below...
"The new Monster 82 is about as straightforward as it gets- it’s a beefy all-mountain board that will make big skiers and speed-mongers very happy."......."On the snow the 82 is absolutely rock-solid at speed and on hardpack, and it definitely prefers speed and bigger turns. It is a demanding ski, and while predictable, it would be a handful for a tentative or small skier- this one will probably work better skied slightly shorter than normal for most skiers."
IMHO 82 underfoot is a good solid platform. Wide enough so you don`t sink into oblivion when playing in the pow pow but not so wide that it would take a monumental pivoting and edging effort to get the suckers turning.
I think you have made an inspired purchase. The length should be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 can think of worse accidents but an ebay lesson may save you some expensive mistakes 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Cheers, what about the length? Should i cancel and purchase a longer ski?
I didnt realise the skis will require drilling for the bindings to be mounted. Can any ski shop do this or is it highly speacialist. I am not sure if the Couple of Irish ski shops could do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Any competent ski shop shoud be able to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Longer would just make you a bit more stable at speed... but would have the downside of making turning more demanding. It`s your call but I think the length will be fine. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thedavman, on piste fine, off-piste I think you'll be struggling to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could an additional 5cms really make that much difference?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
When skis are drilled and bindings are mounted, can they be skied immediately or do they require time to set?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Music to my ears mrtoastie, cheers.
172cm will be well above lip height.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
thedavman, the whole point of an 82mm wide ski is to take it off-piste; if you're going to be entirely on piste you should have something narrower. At your weight I'd say 172cm is WAY too short for off-piste. If you have any opportunity to change then you should, and should go for at least 177, but I would actually recommend 183cm. I tried a 78mm in 177cm once in deep variable snow and it wasn't pretty, then bought the 182cm as a good all-rounder - that extra 5 cm made a huge difference. I'm 181cm, 14.5 stone and now ski a 95mm ski in 185cm, which makes the crappiest of snow really fun, but it takes a bit more effort to get anything useful on-piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mrtoastie, fine, but do you really think 82mm/172 is right for someone who's 16st? No way. If you want to keep that length, then it needs to be something like the Icelantic approach and go for 95mm+ (but I'm still not convinced by that argument). I'd expect those dimensions to be fine in perfect powder (maybe that's what you get most of the time in BC, but it's certainly not in the Alps), but the slightest bit of variability in the snow and he'll have a nightmare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
thedavman, go longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
172 is too short IMV.
At your weight you want 180 min. I don't know how the sizes fall on that model but you need to give it a chance off-piste.
My guess is you will be over the tips more than you'd like...so then you'll concentrate on keeping the tips up which isn't a good thing.
The ski should power up and lift in deeper snow and if your stats over-power it or you get out of position...splat...!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
No idea what 180cm height is  , or what level 6/7 skiier is.
But a 16 stone 27 year old looking to go off piste - go longer (and even fatter if you can). 185cmish 90mmish?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Wow, thaks for all the responses.
Will weigh myself tonight and see what i actually weigh. For the last few years i was 14.5 stone however i gave up the smokes 6 months ago and have put on about 1.5 stone on since then. Presuming I revert back to my normal weight in due course (once i get up off my ass) should i still look t a longer ski?
I will also measure my height properly. I advised on 180cms based on the heights of other people and how i comnpared to them. Havent actually measured my height for years.
Realistically though, the general consensus is that i should be looking at a significantly longer ski and i dont see a few lost pounds or cms altering that much . . . unfortunatley, they were a bargain!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
thedavman, I'm a bit taller than you and a lot heavier - my other skis and now my “piste skis” are 176cm with a 74mm waist. These work fine for me on groomed runs and in a little bit of crud/slush/fresh snow but after trying some longer and wider skis for a week I knew I needed something bigger for deeper snow/heavier slush/ more chopped up snow.
Just got some head im88’s 186cm with a (89mm waist ????) Not skied them yet but I think I have made the right choice.
What I’m trying to say is I’m sure the 172’s will be fine as long as you don’t then spend all your time skiing off piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
You'll have a damn better time on the skis you've just bought than you will discussing it here, so get out there in the snow and have fun !!!! Skis are skis, right ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
thedavman, I agree with the others that they're too short & narrow for someone of your stats. I'm 5'9" & 14st & I'm on 179's/92mm underfoot for all mountain & 187's/102mm underfoot for deep days.
What year are they? That ski had sidewall cracking problems on earlier models so they should be avoided but the 07/08's are fine.
If you bought from an online store can you get them to supply a different length? Or even an IM88 in the mid 180cm's.
With your stats you should also be looking for a good quality all metal binding & not low end plasticy models. If you want to stay with a Head/Tyrolia binding combo then Mojo15's at a minimum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
thedavman, on ebay sales are final once made. With a bit of luck the seller will have longer versions of the IM82 available and if he is willing you may request he ships you a longer one instead. Can't hurt to try, some ebay sellers are quite reasonable.
Good luck with your skis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Following on from this old thread, I absolutely loved the IM82s. Yes they were a little bit of hard work to try and keep the tips up when in deep pow but overall I found them very enjoyable to ski and really progressed with them.
Unfortunately, on my return home I noticed that one of the skis began to split (I think the term is delaminate) at the base. Head very kindly replaced them for me but as the IM82 was no longer in production, they gave me the new model, the Peak 82. Following the above comments, I went for the 183cm length and have to say that I wasnt as happy with the 183cm length as I was with the 172cm. I just didnt feel as in control. Admittedly, I have only skied on the 183cm Peak for a week and I didnt ski particularly well however I have a ski trip coming up shortly and I am in a bind as to what ski to bring with me.
Options available are:
Head Peak 82 @ 183cm (82mm waist)
K2 Comanche 5 Com @ 174cm (72mm waist)
The K2 is very easy to ski but pretty useless off piste, whereas the Head is great off piste but hard work on piste. 20m turning radius versus 14m turning radius. Incidentally, since the above post I have dropped 3 stone and I am now very fit training a huge amount so my legs and core are much stronger. I am concerned that the Head will be even more hard work this time given my reduced load but will my legs be enough to compensate.
My big worry is that I will bring the Head or K2 and from day 1 regret not bringing the other ski.
What do those in the know reckon? Am i fussing over nothing? Would love to bring both pairs but my ski bag just wont fit the 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thedavman, keep a close eye on what conditions are like in the resort you're going to, & make the decision the night before. For example, if you're going to France next week, the piste skis would be the better option...
Or you could just buy a bigger ski bag
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 got bored of reading lots of long responses but for what it's worth, I would say 172cm for someone your weight is too short. I'm about 6'2" but only weigh about 10.5 stone. I run 185cm. I might have gone a bit longer but that was the longest they do. No idea what level 6/7 means though so we might be doing different stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers for the replies.
Jo225, you make sense. Leave the decision until the last minute and then I should hopefully end up with the most suitable pair for the week I will be in resort.
Ha ha, bigger ski bag, you should see the size of my suitcase and bootbag already!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Just learn to tip them over further and keep your weight forward and you will have no problems turning those 183 82s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Thanks Ghost, thats it decision made. Peak 82s will be coming with me. Righty, now to get servicing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
) ... try skiing through deep pow in a narrow waisted slalom ski... tricky (but still fun 
)
