EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Looking for the narrowest all mountain ski
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Looking for the narrowest all mountain ski

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

I'm 200 lb, 5-11, skier of powder when I can find it, blue and black cruisers when I can't (occasional packed steep couloirs). I think skiis have gotten too wide (I currently have a pair of Rosignols in the old style) and want to get new skiis, ok with shorter, but I really dont want all that clunky width.


Anyway, what would be the narrowest expert all mountain ski out there?

post #2 of 12

By the "old style" do you mean straight?

post #3 of 12
rossi avenger comes in a 72mm width and no rocker. it will suit your needs.
post #4 of 12
Thread Starter 

They are Rossignol DVD6's in 200cm measuring, 84mm tip, 64mm waist, 74mm tail widths. They are Rossi Strato style skiis, all terrain GS skiis is what we called them back then. "Old style". This ski design was first made by Kneissl I believe and popularized when Jean Claude Killy won on them in 1968. Sales of Rossi Stratos made Rossignol rich and household name. The design stayed around till what? the mid 1990's? I know, they are old. Don't tell me they don't work, they do. I've made literally 1000's of runs on these and similar skiis. And skied everything they ski today (well almost). I am not an extreme skier. Maybe was a bit back then but not now. I ski bumps in GS style now (avoid them entirely if I can). If it's packed,  smooth slops are for me. Smooth and steep is ok. I'm probably a better soft snow and crud skier than the hard packed stuff. I ski bummed back in the 1970's and have always tried to ski at least one day a year lately thinking about skiing more and want to update my equipment. Just starting to look around.

Edited by coloradokid - 3/3/12 at 9:40am
post #5 of 12

In all honesty, something in the 78-82 mm waist range will ski as well as a 70-75 from several years ago. And have more float/all mountain potential for a guy your size. I'd get a MX78, which can handle everything from blue ice to light pow and feel elegant doing it. Second, less $$ choice would be a Blizzard 8.1 Magnum (this year's with early rise, normal tail), which will have great grip, very lively feel. Third choice would be Stockli Stormrider 78, slightly beefier and smoother version of the MX78, not any cheaper. Not sure there are any cheap MX78's or SR78's out there right now (SR78's may be a bit cheaper in a coupla months), believe Dawgcatching has some 8.1's at very good price. 

post #6 of 12
Thread Starter 

Who makes SR78's and MX78's?

post #7 of 12

I've just switch of 205cm Blizzard Thermo RS (GS Ski) from the early '90s to a 2010/11 176cm Dyanstar Speed Course WC ski.


Slightly wider, torsionally and length wise way more stiffer, this more than makes up for length of old.


Definitely more fun.  Yes you can ski this ski old school and it is blast, spend the time and effort and learn to ski new school (the rush is just amazing).


If you're anywhere near advanced on the old ski's, you'll definitely be advance/expert on the new.


Personelly, I have a preference to Race skis (they have no limits), but you have to work a little for it.  Look around, definitely go top end (race or whatever), there are great deals to be had.


Have fun.

post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 

Do racer skis make good all around skiis?

post #9 of 12
Originally Posted by coloradokid View Post

Do racer skis make good all around skiis?

No, not unless you ski only groomers. Race skis are the optimal tool for groomers and icy slopes, just as the new design powder skis are optimal for 2 feet of fresh snow. They are two pretty opposite ends of the ski spectrum and each best at what they do. An all around ski will be OK everywhere but not best anywhere.


post #10 of 12
Originally Posted by coloradokid View Post

Do racer skis make good all around skiis?

If all-around includes deep snow in tight trees, then no, not really.  Also, if all around includes slow skiing then no.  Race skis are too stiff to respond well to soft snow.  GS skis aren't too bad if you are carrying a lot of speed and the snow is heavy, but really there are much better skis for powder.


GS skis do well in crud and tracked out powder, provided you are making GS turns, and they are ok in moguls.


SL skis do well up to racing SL speeds, but are a real task to stay on top of in heavy crud; the short radius sidecut keeps wanting to dial up a tighter turn than they can hold and you end up with a bigger than intended steering angle and doing more sideways skiing than you might want to do.  Sideways skiing in crud can be challenging.  For the same reason, catching irregularities while skiing sideways, GS skis don't do too well anywhere that you have to ski slowly with a small radius turn, unless the surface is hard or at least packed down a bit.  Charging they are ok, but you can't always charge; you need to scout out a new run; there could be a slow moving crowd blocking all of your intended lines; you could be approaching a blind spot.


SG skis do well at SG speeds.





post #11 of 12

Originally Posted by Ghost View Post


Sideways skiing in crud can be challenging.  

Very nice use of understatement...


post #12 of 12

The Hart Pulse (77mm, now imported by our own iriponsnow under the Blossom name, supposedly very affordably).


I spent Monday and Tuesday this week in a clinic at Mt. Rose with Bud Heishman and Bob Barnes.  I brought the Pulse because I was anticipating hard snow and in any event I wanted something that gave quick feedback to learning new techniques.


Instead of hard snow, we got a couple of feet of pow over the two day clinic.  


If Bud, Bob, or Chris can imbed a vimeo of it, there is a video of me staggering down the hill and getting face shots in hidden soft bumps with these.  I admit, I was dubious and even a little bummed about having 170cm, 77mm waist skis for knee deep snow, but these sticks really surprised me.


Of course, there is also video of Bob ripping it on the same skis (177cm) much better than I can hope to, he definitely gets all mountain use out of them.


I would probably like the 177cm better, but what I had truly did perform 'all mountain' tasks in a skinny width (by today's standards).

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 › Looking for the narrowest all mountain ski