EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › help! ski length/type question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

help! ski length/type question

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

ok... i admit it, the marketing worked... i am only going to buy VOLKL, please dont judge me, im admitting im obsessed with their 'brand' and design, im into design, sue me.  so...

 

im 5'9" 165lbs, average skier, can go fast on blues and like to control speed (turn alot) on blacks but am not scared etc, and will do double blacks if its not icy out.  mostly ski east coast vt etc.

 

i had my father in laws 4 year old salomon xwing tornados 162 for the last few seasons but i want my own skis and am buying my own skis for the first time ever at 40yo, so its a big deal to me.

 

1) rocker/width queston:  

     I am torn between the RTM 75 iS (which i am leaning towards) and the RTM 77.  the 75 has tip rocker, the 77 has full rocker.  so i kind of want the 77 because it could be better when theres some fresh snow on the ground but i find it hard to believe an extra 2mm will do much.  the 77 also has full rocker which my research leads me to believe will be harder for me to ski based on my skill level etc.  i have found when i get going too fast on blacks etc that i have a little trouble turning safely/effectively on my current loaners, so im thinking i should buy the 75 iS with only tip rocker and teeny bit more sidecut.  75 iS with tip rocker or 77 with full rocker..?

 

2) length

     as mentioned above, i feel a little locked in when i get going fast and im only on a 162 now (which hits about the bridge of my nose), since im leaning towards the 75 iS, I think i have to get them in 159 which comes just under my nose tip because the next size up is 166 which hits my forehead almost.  so for either ski I choose, length is a question.   if this difference is neglible and im an idiot gaper fine, otherwise your opinions please.

 

Thoughts....?   please go easy on me if all this is stupid as the differences are kind of minor etc. but thanks for any opinions.

 

Dave

 

post #2 of 12

I haven't skiied either ski, so I can't really comment, but if you go for the 75is, I'd give serious consideration to the 166 rather than the 159.  Tip rocker will make it ski a bit shorter than it's length might suggest, so the 166 would likely feel like your current 162s.  Obviously it would be ideal to get a chance to demo to see how you feel about the lengths/models, but if I were you and going to go out on a limb, I'd go for a 166 in a slightly rockered ski.

post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 

thanks marcus, i was thinking this too.  but i have been leaning to the 159 for two reasons, 1) because volkl site says to just use nose height as guide for intermediates and 159s hit just at my nose and maybe more importantly to me...  2) i was just hoping that if i dont improve my skills anytime soon (as i dont expect alot more days on the mountain anytime soon), then the slightly shorter ones could make me feel some 'improvement' in turning ability as my form is not great and may not improve anytime soon.

agggh.

but for the other issue, do you think im better off with the 75s and just tip rocker than 77s and full..?  

thank you!

post #4 of 12

If you want your form to improve, get the 75 is (in 166 cm).

post #5 of 12

If you are willing to demo, Volkl shouldn't be too hard to find and this is the exact type of question that demoing would answer (the size thing at least).  If you get the 159, you might be a bit quicker, but the trade off is that it will likely feel less stable.  The rockered tip should already make it feel like you can turn more easily.  It shortens the amount of edge on the ski that's in contact with the snow though, so you're effectively skiing on shorter skis when the full edge isn't engaged and at your stage of development, that's likely a lot of the time.  If you aren't going particularly fast though and the surface is likely to be smooth, that might be a tradeoff that you're willing to make.
 

As for tip vs. full rocker on a frontside ski, I really don't know.  The only ski I have with tail rocker (it doesn't have full rocker) is dedicated soft snow ski.  It works to get me back to the lift with no problems, but I wouldn't choose to ski it on groomers for a variety of reasons.  The possible appeal of having tail rocker would be that it would allow you to slide your tails out easily letting you avoid that "locked in" feeling.  The downside is that it means you'll slide your tails out easily avoiding that locked in feeling. wink.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidFox View Post

thanks marcus, i was thinking this too.  but i have been leaning to the 159 for two reasons, 1) because volkl site says to just use nose height as guide for intermediates and 159s hit just at my nose and maybe more importantly to me...  2) i was just hoping that if i dont improve my skills anytime soon (as i dont expect alot more days on the mountain anytime soon), then the slightly shorter ones could make me feel some 'improvement' in turning ability as my form is not great and may not improve anytime soon.

agggh.

but for the other issue, do you think im better off with the 75s and just tip rocker than 77s and full..?  

thank you!



 

post #6 of 12
Thread Starter 

thanks Ghost.

are you saying the 166 will naturally help me improve by pushing me to ski more correctly or that I will have to learn to ski better to utililize the additional length making it a better buy..?

post #7 of 12

The question is you currently are on 162s,  do you ever feel they are too short and you had some "more ski" to give you more stability/speed/edge.   Do you feel they are too long and unwieldly here and there you need "less ski"?  You've been on them for a little while, so you should have some feel for how they are.

 

 

If you take off 2-3cm for the "rocker" the 166 is close to the 162s you're currently using or at most a tiny bit longer.  The 159s are shorter then what you are currently using..

 

The ski isn't going to make you ski better, but as you put in more days, you yourself will improve in ability, want to go faster, take a more athletic turn, and maybe even physically improve strength through the exercise and repetition, and then will want "more ski"

Or you may stay at exactly the same skill level if you do the exact same skiing and don't challenge yourself a little once in awhile.

post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 

thanks raysteng and i really appreciate you all helping me, means alot to me.

 

i do feel that when i get going a little to fast i feel a little stuck and that is when i end up crashing when i try to get a turn instigated and catch an edge and fall. i thought the shorter skis would help in those situations

post #9 of 12

As Marcus mentioned, I agree the newer designs with tip rocker and probably more aggressive sidecut, you will find the new skis will be easier and you won't get yourself into that situation as much.  So even if the ski was the same length, like marcus mentioned, it will be more manageble as if it were shorter.   

 

If you're getting completely crossed up with the salomon 162, then maybe the 159 is better for you; but if you are OK most of the time, I think you will do good with the 166 length.

post #10 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidFox View Post

thanks Ghost.

are you saying the 166 will naturally help me improve by pushing me to ski more correctly or that I will have to learn to ski better to utililize the additional length making it a better buy..?


Both, but not so much a push as a reward.  The 75 is in 166 will reward proper movements, and will help you learn how to tip both skis to their proper edges to initiate and follow through with a nice parallel turn.  Although there is nothing stopping you from making a proper parallel turn with the shorter rockered ski, the shorter full rockerd ski will make it easier for you to ski in a mini wedge with opposing edges semi-engaged pivoting to a steering angle and although you might have an easier time over-ruling the ski, catching an inside edge when things get dicey, will still be a habit to unlearn.

 

post #11 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusBrody View Post

I haven't skiied either ski, so I can't really comment, but if you go for the 75is, I'd give serious consideration to the 166 rather than the 159.  Tip rocker will make it ski a bit shorter than it's length might suggest, so the 166 would likely feel like your current 162s.  Obviously it would be ideal to get a chance to demo to see how you feel about the lengths/models, but if I were you and going to go out on a limb, I'd go for a 166 in a slightly rockered ski.



Similar story.... haven't skied the 75is, but have skied/demoed the RTM 80 in a 176 for a total of two full days. Have to say that with the rocker, they ski MUCH shorter. I think you'll find that they ski closer to what you have been used to, but much more of a 'fun' and great turning ski. For what its worth...

post #12 of 12
Thread Starter 

thank you 

and thank all of you for sharing, its really nice to hear opinions from people who know the topic so well.

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 › help! ski length/type question