EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Line Prophet 98 length suggestions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Line Prophet 98 length suggestions

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 

Hi,

 

Thinking of getting a pair of Line Prophet 98s to ski the crud between the trees here in the Pacific Northwest.  Based on my hight (5' 9") 172 cm are recomended but I am stout weighing in at 210 and an aggressive skiier which would put me in a 178 cm ski.  Any thoughts about going long or short for this ski?  I do like skiing fast and in control when skiing the groomers so I am thinking on going with the 178 cm.  skiis.  I currently ski K2 Shucksans @ 185 cm but these are 114 78 105. 

 

Thanks,

 

Thomas

post #2 of 16

Ability? What area's your home base?

post #3 of 16
Thread Starter 

Ability is expert but currently not in top skiing shape so I will handicap and say Advanced Intermediate.  Seattle is home base and I ski Crystal, White Pass, Alpental, Whistler, Baker ect.

 

Thomas

post #4 of 16

Get the 186. You'll be happier in the long run.

post #5 of 16

I couldn't imagine a decent skier weighing in at 210 lbs on a 172cm slightly rockered twintip.  I'd agree with the 186.

post #6 of 16

Skiing the Prophet 100's myself, I will second the suggestions above.  Go 186 - period.  Even the 179 would be a bit short for you, given your height, weight and ability.  I'm 5'6" or so, and about 165-170#, and solid intermediate with glimmers of advanced showing up from time to time.  I got the 172s (as they were what was in stock at the time, and the price was amazing), though I wish I'd had the option of at least the 179s.  Regardless of your final length choice, I have a feeling you'll really like the skis.  Have you had a chance to demo them previously at all?

 

Cheers

 

Brian~

post #7 of 16

186 no question.  They ski short anyway and are TT's. I have the 100's - they are fun and easy to ski.

post #8 of 16

i'm 6 3 185 and the 186s are easy to turn, very forgiving

post #9 of 16
Thread Starter 

Hey,

 

I decided to go for the 179 cm. I realy appreciate the feedback.  I took a look at the 186 cm and did some calculations and visulaizations on the surface area of the ski in this size and decided to forgo.  Will provide an update when I given them a whirl.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas

post #10 of 16

Funny how many people asks for opinions, and do not listen.  Why solicit for recommendations in the first place?

post #11 of 16

Eh, whatever. What do I know. I'm almost the exact size, skiing in the same area.

post #12 of 16


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norwest View Post

Hey,

 

I decided to go for the 179 cm. I realy appreciate the feedback.  I took a look at the 186 cm and did some calculations and visulaizations on the surface area of the ski in this size and decided to forgo.  Will provide an update when I given them a whirl.

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas



 

Betting the update will be - " wow, these are really short"

post #13 of 16
Thread Starter 

Ouch.  To the contrary I did consider the feedback I received from you all carefuly and appreciate all the input. I did also go to 3 local shops and discussed this ski and sizing with the staff including 2 folks who have demoed the ski. I was recomended the 172 as the standard based on hight but was told I would also be good with the 179s.  When I asked about going longer to 186 the response was negative. I do realize that shop staff may have a different perspective in that they want clients to be happy with their skiis and perhaps in general shorter may mean happier for the larger percentage of clients.  I currently have 185 K2s and in comparison the Line 98 are "Planks"and felt that the 186 would be unmanageble. Idealy I should have domoed the ski in different sizes and also compared to some other skis but time did not permit that. My K2 Shucksans are still in great shape so I now have a 2 distinct ski styles and sizes to apply to different conditions and moods. If the 178 prove to be too small then lesson learned and I will upsize for my next pair of fat skiis.  No regrets.

 

Thanks again for everones feedback!

 

Thomas

post #14 of 16

5' 9",  210#, aggressive skiier...and they told you you should start out on a 172???  I'm 5'6", 165-170# and markedly not an aggressive/largely athletic skier.  I demoed all last season, and tried the Prophet 100s several times on several different mountains.  Granted, it's a "different" ski than the 98, but I think the skiability is going to be close enough to make a fair comparison between the two lengthwise.  I should be riding the 179's, even at my height/weight/ability, but I ended up with the 172s as that was all that was left in stock when I purchased.  There is no reason whatsoever I can imagine that anyone in their right mind would steer you away from the 186 - unless you're actually shorter/lighter/less aggressive than your original post indicated.

 

Now, with all that said, I think you'll definitely like the Prophets.  They're a darn good ski by just about all accounts, and they should serve you well in a wide variety of conditions.  Hopefully you won't get a lot of chatter on the corduroy or tossed around too much in the crud.  They may also be a little bit slower without the extra length, but perhaps not with a proper tune and maintenance.  Enjoy!

 

B~

post #15 of 16

Worth pointing out, this is from this thread: http://www.epicski.com/t/102157/2012-blizzard-bonafide

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

While the flex is relatively similar, the P-98 is better than the P-100 in almost every way. The P-100 was built along Lines' "new schoolers" thinking which was an all mountain ski built by a park ski company. For all that, the P-100 was a very good ski and I owned one for a year in 186. The P-100 was very nimble and had plenty of grip but it was just too turny in crud for my tastes. (hence the 186 which is longer than I normally need for this category of ski). The difference is that the 98 has a more conventional tail for a longer aft running surface and (I think) a slightly more rearward waist and mount location. The result is that the P-98 is much more useful (for my tastes anyway) as an all around tool.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

I would choose the P-98 in the 179......no question.

 

 

Jim is 200# (or so I found in one of his reviews from last season).  He skied the 100 in a 186, and would choose the 179 for himself.  I'll defer to his much greater experience and expertise, and say that my 186 recommendation may have been off base.  You'll probably be really happy on the 179's.

post #16 of 16

Norwest, you can demo the Prophet 98 at Crystal.  I did last week (12/10/2011).  Out of seven skis I tried it was easily the best for me and I am buying it.  I am 5'10, 170lb, 58 yrs old, in reasonable good shape and like quick turns.  I skied the 172 and 179 (on ice/hardpack/crud) to check out the differences and there was not a significant difference.  Both held the edge equally well and there was only a small difference in how fast I could turn.  I'm still debating, but I'm leaning towards the 172 because I don't expect to be in deep powder much, otherwise I would get the 179.

 

For you, I think you got the right length unless you plan to ski a lot of powder.  I thought the 172 would be too short for me, but it is remarkable how well it holds an edge and how forgiving it is.  Maybe a different ski you would need to go longer, but my opinion is both the 179 and 186 would probably work for you.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Line Prophet 98 length suggestions