 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
I'm about 79kg and 1.78m, intermediate skier but haven't strayed off piste yet, what length and width would you suggest as a first go anywhere ski? Piste performance not critical, have some very nice speedwaves 169cms for days all on the groomed runs but would like them to be OK for mixed days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Around 180 to 175 - that's what I'd go for at 74kg and 5 foot 9 anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Cool, so a bit taller than me then? What sort of under foot width would you suggest? I have seen everything from around 70mm up described as all mountain!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
An 80 mm underfoot, sub 20m turn radius ski, 5 cm shorter than my height has been more than adequate for mixing ungroomed runs, near piste & long (La Grave) itineraire type snow with general packed piste skiing. I now have some 90 mm underfoot and close to 30m turn radius skis for touring and although undoubtedly more floaty and less inclined to break a crust, they are definitely less confidence inspiring on cold and icy or hardpack days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Thanks, moffatross, not to worried about icy hardpacked performance, guess at the stage I am those days will be piste days and the speedwaves excel at those sort of conditions! Love the hiss from the edges as they bite on that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| davkt wrote: |
| "but would like them to be OK for mixed days" AND "not to worried about icy hardpacked performance" |
Just my opinion but I'd consider both together, not exclusive to each other. On a mixed snow day, a long off-piste traverse with exposure below can be really unpleasant if the sun's been on it and the snow underfoot has become hard crusted and packed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moffatross, Yep, need to sort the basics before trying exposed stuff on tricky days
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anything from 80mm to 90mm in width would be a good All Mountain Ski. 175cm-181cm in length. There are quite a few skis in this width range that also carve quite well on piste. Of course if you have the chance to demo, that is always the best method to determine which works best for you.
Just a few that come to mind are:
Dynastar Sultan 80 and 85
Fischer Watea 84
K2 Rictor (80mm)
K2 Aftershock (86mm)
Rossi Freeride S80 and S86
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Add to that list some Scott Missions. I'm a bit on the better built side at 6ft and 105 KGs but having bought a pair last season to replace some Volkl 724s I can confirm they go anyware. A true all mountain skias they rip on piste and provide loads more float for off piste forays than the Volkls having gone up to 89mm under foot from the Volkls 74mm. I ski them in a 178 and Scott have somehow put a sidecut in their skis that lets them turn like slalom skis on piste but crank out GS turns off piste. As you can probably tell I'm sold on them.
Can also recommend the Fischer Watea as a mate got some last season as well as my better half getting the ladies version and they both think they are spot on for all mountain riding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say about 90mm underfoot. I actually prefer my 90mm Dynastar Big Troubles on piste to my old Sultan 85's (although the Sultans are still great skis, they were a bit too short for me too which didn't really help. Perfect bump ski though) - the larger turn radius is better for my skiing style. I use them as my everyday ski, and it's only on the most bulletproof ice that I'd rather be on something slimmer, big GS carves are great on them. If you do go for a wider ski like that, it's best to go a bit stiffer (especially tortionally) as that's what really helps the edges grip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| davkt wrote: |
| moffatross, Yep, need to sort the basics before trying exposed stuff on tricky days |
I know what you mean but sometimes my enthusiasm gets me into places I worry that I haven't got the skills for either and other times I'm skiing with heavier, stronger and much more capable skiers too. Right or wrong, once you mosey away from the groomed, you tend to mosey further & further away each time and there'll inevitably come times when you don't want your edge hold to be compromised. Holding a wide ski on edge on hard, icy snow requires more effort too and gets more difficult as your strength saps, and that'll happens quicker on tough, mixed, off-piste snow conditions rather than on the nice groomed where all you have to worry about is being clouted from behind by out of control GPS watching speedsters.
Either way though, as you challenge yourself more, unless you're an exceptionally good skier, I think it's better & safer to sacrifice powder float for edge hold and control. It'll be a few more years (if ever) before I'd even consider skiing the 100 to 120 mm width planks that some of the best skiers I know will happily throw around in Scotland's mixed conditions. At 79 kg and 1.78 m, you're not far away from my build so if you get sold on the idea of going wider than say 85 mm, I'd just think about when and where you'll be making compromises. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
moffatross, I reckon 90--100mm is the best all round for the mixed conditions we have in Europe. Skiing crud and variables (even frozen solid) is much easier and more fun on circa 90mm, and IME 92mm doesn't sacrifice any edge grip even on steep exposed icy stuff. I can't think of anything better than my BT's that I'd want to be on skiing a steep couloir with dodgy snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
clarky999, definitely 10mm off that for me is the best compromise but maybe I'm 'old school' as well as old (although I can' t be that 'old school' as I only took up skiing 10 years ago). I'm about 73kg and 1.75 m though so guess you've maybe got some more height/weight than me to help lever that extra width ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Thanks for all the help, have just had an offer to good to turn down on a pair of Storm Aurora skis, smaller end of the suggestions at 173cm 121/82/110mm and 18m radius, only a cm or so under moffatross's, suggestion and given the fact they have only skied 2 runs (and looking at them its hard to tell that they have had that much use!). will have some bindings on them by the middle of the week so will be playing with them soon!
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Sun 30-12-12 0:03; 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:
|
|
moffatross, 74kg and however many cms are in 5 foot 9. Horses for courses I guess. Possibly the stack height of my barons might help with leveredge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
