New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are my skis too short?

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 

I was looking at the REI site at skis and clicked on sizing chart.  I have always been told that with the shaped skis, the ski should be between your chin and your nose.  The REI site's size charts that breaks out sizes by ski are much longer than this.  Two charts have been shown below.

 

k2 Skis.jpgVolkl Skis.jpg

I am 5'11" and 195 (on a good day) and currently ski 167 cm skis.  The charts put me at as high as 184 CM.  I called REI and spoke to the guy that handles the ski department and was told that these size charts are all from the ski manufacturers.  And so, are my skis too short?

 

post #2 of 22

What ski and what length and how much do you weigh and how tall are you and how fast do you ski?


 

post #3 of 22

It depends on what kind of ski it is, how you want to ski and your skill level. I am about the same size as you and have 12 pairs of skis from 151cm-188cm with waist width from 65mm to 121mm. Thing is from what my ski buds say I look/ski the same no matter which boards I'm on. Go figure. But for an all round ski for your size I would go up to 175-180cm.

post #4 of 22

My skis range in size from 165 to 208.  They are all the right length for their given application.


 

post #5 of 22
Thread Starter 

I am 195, 5'11", lower level advanced, I ski K2 Raiders whch I have advanced beyond at this point.  They are 167 CM.  Clearly, the rule of thumb of "between the chin and nose" doesn't hold water. 

post #6 of 22

Well given your size I'd say those are a little short for you.  I own a 170cm K2 Raider, and they are probably the right length or a little short for me, and I'm 4-5 inches (12 cm) shorter than you.

 

BUT

 

If you ski a few times a year, a shorter ski will be better for you to handle when your body/muscles aren't used to turning a longer one.

 

How much do you ski?  How fast do you ski?

 

When cruising, do you have that sensation that the skis are vibrating/rattling around too much?  If so, go longer.

 

Also, as Bootfitter Lou Rosenfeld's youtube video says, its much better to buy "expert" equipment and work the skills to use them than it is to buy intermediate equipment and be out the money when you out-perform it.

 

 

On that list, the last three skis are pretty good, the first one not so much (though those are this year's equivalent of the Raider of the past... so if you want "more" ski get the Rictor or AC30...).  But you know your ability and how much money you are willing/able to spend on skis right now.


Edited by Vitamin Ski - 4/8/11 at 9:19pm
post #7 of 22

Quote:

Originally Posted by handhdad View Post

I am 195, 5'11", lower level advanced, I ski K2 Raiders whch I have advanced beyond at this point.  They are 167 CM.  Clearly, the rule of thumb of "between the chin and nose" doesn't hold water. 

skis vary, how they're used vary

but if one is looking for versatility then its best to start with the manufacturer's sizing recs and modify from there, if you know what you want gained and are willing to sacrifice other characteristics. I would always use 'weight' and ski style/intent, over height. A ski only 'knows' the energy you put into it, hence your mass and your energy.

Where and how you ski is important also.

167 Raider too short? given the intent of that ski, your 195 lbs, you're trading away a lot of what that ski could do.

Try some other skis with similar intent, in other sizes, and decide for yourself if what you have is limiting your ski experience or suits you.

 

 

post #8 of 22

Given your stats, I would say those skis are too short for you.

 

Also just going longer won't help much in terms of stability at speed with a ski designed for low speeds; you will just have more ski flopping around uncontrolled.  If you want to stay in the K2 family and ski harder faster, then you could move up to a Recon at 177, unless you ski really fast or really slow, or have some other thing that puts far from the norm.

 

post #9 of 22

Depends on type of skiing i.e., for carving on a small hill I have used a 135cm (slower speeds more G force can be created with a smaller R) A longer ski would be a little more forgiving landing air from transition i.e., shifting weight from for /aft during turn to allow skis to travel faster then body so the ski can take the longer path then the body caution must be taken not to wash out the short tail

For corn I like long 215cm DH & somewhat narrow. ( dont sink as much more responsive)

Powder I like as long as I can get. ( like a long ski for landing porpuse)

I seldom do long turns ( love the feel of transition & slower speed safer) & almost always ski short turns straight down fall line.

 

 

 

post #10 of 22
Thread Starter 

I ski 20-30 days a year, most in the Poconos in PA, with a trip out west each year.  I ski pretty fast, moguls, Nastar.

post #11 of 22
Given all that skiing the ac30 might be best for you...
post #12 of 22
Thread Starter 

If I follow the chart for the AC 30, I need 184 cm skis.  That's almost 7 inches longer than my current skis.  Wow, I never would have thought that was the right legnth.  Gentlemen , thanks for your time.

post #13 of 22

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by handhdad View Post

If I follow the chart for the AC 30, I need 184 cm skis.  That's almost 7 inches longer than my current skis.  Wow, I never would have thought that was the right legnth.  Gentlemen , thanks for your time.


First of all, the chart also says you'd be fine on the 177, which I think would be true based on your stats and ability.  And for smaller mountains in the poconos, the smaller ski would be a better choice, IMO.  Second of all, don't follow a chart.  The chart is next to useless.  There is no rule that will apply to everyone based on just your height and weight.  Ability, skiing style, preferred terrain, etc. will all come into play also.

 

post #14 of 22

I'd second the 177 suggestion.  You'll have an easier time with that overall, especially in NASTAR.

post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaobrien6 View Post


First of all, the chart also says you'd be fine on the 177, which I think would be true based on your stats and ability.  And for smaller mountains in the poconos, the smaller ski would be a better choice, IMO.  Second of all, don't follow a chart.  The chart is next to useless.  There is no rule that will apply to everyone based on just your height and weight.  Ability, skiing style, preferred terrain, etc. will all come into play also.

 

^^^ What he said. Also, longer skis run faster, are more stabile. If you ski Nastar on your single quiver, you'll enjoy the outcomes more when your tip reaches your eyebrows to middle forehead. Which is the middle 170's at 5'11".
 

 

post #16 of 22
Thread Starter 

I have had my eyes on a set of K2 Recons for a year or so.  I just purchased a set of new 177's on Ebay for $385 all-in.  I am hoping for happy trails next year.

 

Thanks again

post #17 of 22

Thats not a bad deal at all! I know people that ski on a wide range of skis. a friend is 5'4" and skis on a pair of 185 head intel chips. the kid is crazy!

post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW View Post

 

 

Also, as Bootfitter Lou Rosenfeld's youtube video says, its much better to buy "expert" equipment and work the skills to use them than it is to buy intermediate equipment and be out the money when you out-perform it.

 

 

 


Link please? cant find it.

 

post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by WC68 View Post




Link please? cant find it.

 


Go to "Ask the Bootfitters" forum, then click on one of the links at the top, I forget which one.  Either "who's who" or "faq" and you'll find it.  He has a Master's of Science degree and probably knows what he's talking about with that statement.

 

post #20 of 22

The 179 should work just fine to start. You might find yourself wanting something bigger in a few years as you get better, though.

post #21 of 22

I work part time at an on mountain ski shop and we rent demo and performance skis. Most of our customers select "type two skier" for an easier binding release and ski intermediate runs or runs that are not more difficult than groomed black diamond. These skiers usually don't know what length to ski and they get the chin to nose length. Better skiers get forehead length or slightly taller than the skier.

 

Me, I'm a retired guy 5'8" 215lbs, advanced skier averaging 80 days per year. Used to ski 207cm straight skis in the old days, now on 177cm.

post #22 of 22

for anyone else interested...

http://www.lous.ca/techarticles.html
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WC68 View Post




Link please? cant find it.

 



 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion