or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Are my 168cm's too long... got suckered at the resort!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are my 168cm's too long... got suckered at the resort!

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 

female

5'4' 140lbs

Bought Rossi S3- everyone said was a great ski.

 

Am a beginnger again after skiing as a child. 

size is 168cm. backcountry.com said these are WAY too longer for me. 168 at 5'4" is good for aggressive skiier.  Used them to skin up today and they were hard to turn, but not too bad. it was a short run. Did I get suckered by the ski resort telling me this length is fine for me? I am pissed! paid for bindings, ski cut, mount, wax!

 

thanks

nicole

post #2 of 25

Not necessarily way too long.  How well did you ski when you stopped?  Have you had any lessons on shaped skis?  I'm 5'0", 115 pounds, older female.  My Rossi Attraxion 8's are 159.  I've skied on demo skis from several brands at 160-163.

 

Where do you plan to ski?

post #3 of 25

As a beginner, yeah it's too long for you. But keep them around, once you start getting more aggressive and wanting to start skiing in powder they should work well for you.

post #4 of 25
Thread Starter 

well, i live in Montana so power most days at the resort, grommers of course. They are the Rossi s3s. rockered of course. first pair of rockered skiis. I was thinking about taking some lessons when the season started on these and going from there... 

post #5 of 25

Did you get the S3W womens' or mens?  Not sure if there is a difference other than graphics, maybe someone else will know.  The dimensions are different so I think they are different.

 

I think the length will be fine once you skill up if this was women's ski, 

but if this was the men's ski, maybe you could have been OK with the 158 unless you were already advanced skier.

 

 

If it feels too long and you can't get it after a day or so, then it's impairing your fun.

It might be worthwhile to go to the rental shop and rent out a pair of shorter intermediate skis (say mid-high 150s length) for a day or two (shouldn't be too expensive), until you can get the technique and swap back into the e3s once you progressed.  If you want to go lesson, that's a good idea too if the costs aren't prohibitive.

 

If the rentalshop has been keeping up to date and refreshed it's learning equipment within the past year or so, the intermediate skis should have a small bit of rocker and big sidecut, and ezmode to quickly to pickup the new tipping-method of skiing too.  

If the skis they have don't have rocker maybe go a bit shorter to about low 150s to learn on.


Edited by raytseng - 5/12/12 at 4:33pm
post #6 of 25

Can't imagine they are too long for you, daughter skis on Auras, 167 or 168 - something like that.  Hers are NOT rockered and they always tell you to go longer on rockered skis.  She is 5'3", weighs 1118.  I just bought rockered 169's for myself (and I am much larger) and am regretting it.  I thought I wanted skis that skied shorter, but not THIS much shorter.  I will make myself get used to them, but rocker really shortens the ski quite a bit, maybe like 10 - 15 cm I'm thinking.

post #7 of 25

According to the reviews I read from our experts the s3 has quite a bit of rocker that reduces contact point and is twintip so you take away a bit there.   So granted for this ski, 168cm might feel like 158 or so. 

 

But still for a beginner skier, if you are 5'4" (which is 163cm) you'd want something around chin length to start, which maybe is more around the 150cm range.

 

Especially if the last time you skied was long time ago before shaped skis, and your brain is still trained for old skool pivot turns where you are trying to manhandle the whole ski around. 

post #8 of 25
Thread Starter 
well, I started skiing around early to mid nineties. I rent skis a few times last season as well, but did not demo any rocker twin tip skis since it was end of season as and I just switched from snowboarding. I will most likely setup a private lesson next season and I RI g the skis and see how it goes. I have an always rent cheaply as a passholder.

thanls for a of the advice. I can always pick up shorter skis end of next season and sell these at our big slightly swap sale
post #9 of 25

Did you notice that the EpicSki Gathering next March is at Big Sky and Bridger?  For private lessons, Bridger is a great place with very good prices.

 

Sounds to me like you'll get the hang of skiing on your S3s pretty quickly.  A good instructor would be able to give you solid advice whether they are too long for getting started.

post #10 of 25

you live in Montana and you're a passholder? You won't stay a beginner for long. Don't make any fast moves (changing skis I mean). Right now you're probably a little afraid of speed and not confident you can slow down , turn, and stop if you need to, so you're trying to keep the speed down by making a lot of sharp turns. Get used to the speed on beginner runs if necessary-runs where you feel comfortable making long gentle turns and work your way up. Modern Western skiing-and gear-- seem to be oriented more towards speed and long turns than they were when you skied last.

(Around here there are a fair number of folks who don't bother turning at all, in which case how well a ski turns becomes  irrelevant.) 

post #11 of 25

Here's the link from Rossignol for recommended ski lengths:

 

http://www.rossignol.com/tzr/scripts/downloader2.php?filename=LABELS/PICTO/f5/30/US.4jwtr9igynv9&mime=application/pdf&originalname=Ski_sizer_NORAM.pdf

 

At 140lbs, you're close to the middle of 168 recommendation for unisex s3s (although unisex means mens if you want to factor that in).  

So the shop did not sucker you in, but you may need to advance your skills to get them to work for you.  

 

So agree with the oldgoat and maybe keep them to grow into them.  

 

But I still do think, if you're really not getting it, then swap to an easier ski that you can use for a short bit, then switch again after you've leveled up.  


Something 98 underfoot is going to be slower and harder to get onto edge compared to the mid 70s widths of intermediate skis.  Especially if you're not sure of yourself as a beginner and are wavering switching edge to edge, or snowplowing.


Edited by raytseng - 5/12/12 at 10:14pm
post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by raytseng View Post

According to the reviews I read from our experts the s3 has quite a bit of rocker that reduces contact point and is twintip so you take away a bit there.   So granted for this ski, 168cm might feel like 158 or so. 

 

But still for a beginner skier, if you are 5'4" (which is 163cm) you'd want something around chin length to start, which maybe is more around the 150cm range.

 

Especially if the last time you skied was long time ago before shaped skis, and your brain is still trained for old skool pivot turns where you are trying to manhandle the whole ski around. 


it's a couple of inches, should not be that noticeable. Everyone tries to undersize, and all that leaves people with in the end is a ski that they quickly outgrow.

post #13 of 25

I am 5'5'' and 115#s. Most of my skis are 170s and none have any rocker. The skis may be a little long the first year you are back skiing. However, skis that were good for the first year would be too short once you developed some skills. They should be fine in the long run. I don't know rockered skis well enough to know how they are for learning, my guess is they may make learning some critical skills (e.g., carving) somewhat harder.

post #14 of 25

Seems like a reasonable size for you in that ski. Just play with it a bunch.

 

While not a "carving ski" per se, carving them should be no issue.

post #15 of 25

It seems a little too long, but not by much.  Normally I would say, just ski faster, but if you want to ski faster, you will need a different ski imho.

 

If you know what you are doing, or once you learn what to do, it shouldn't be a problem.  Pushing them around until you learn good technique, you might be better off with something else.  On the other hand these might force you to learn quicker.

post #16 of 25

Where specifically in Montana do you ski?

post #17 of 25

Based on your vitals, your S3 is perfect. It has quite a lot of rocker, and is fairly soft. Just ski a lot; you'll come to appreciate it pretty quickly. 

post #18 of 25

I am surprised that they did not recommend any of the women's skis (unless they don't stock them).

 

Length, remember that we used to ski significantly longer skis without much difficulty. wink.gif

 

First couple of days back, is going to be uncomfortable, but if you had any reasonable skill, it will comeback as the muscles remember what they are to do.  Just let it happen. The good thing is that they don't have to unlearn anything from old skis, they just have remember what they have to do with the new skis (a whole lot easier).

 

Do some side slips exercises to get the feel of neutral on the skis (on a nice groomed hard pack for the first run or 2) and the transition and memories will comeback. 

 

I think long term you'll be pleased. (BTW I would suspect that you may be better than you let on, based on your opening comment. Trust yourself). icon14.gif

post #19 of 25

i think part of the problem is also the width+rocker more so than the length.  These are 98width skis (for a lighter person), and "powder turn" rocker so all that powder design isn't going to add anything for carving on the groomers.

post #20 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by raytseng View Post

i think part of the problem is also the width+rocker more so than the length.  These are 98width skis (for a lighter person), and "powder turn" rocker so all that powder design isn't going to add anything for carving on the groomers.

 

It may not "add" anything on groomers. But those are perfectly fine all-around skis. If anything, a bit narrow for soft snow country. They will offer plenty of flexibility across a range of snow conditions and terrain. More so than any of the more "conventional" narrower skis out there.

post #21 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

It may not "add" anything on groomers. But those are perfectly fine all-around skis. If anything, a bit narrow for soft snow country. They will offer plenty of flexibility across a range of snow conditions and terrain. More so than any of the more "conventional" narrower skis out there.

 

No one said they weren't-for a more advanced skier.  

 

I still think the narrower ski is easier to learn on; and the width of ski here is contributing to the problems OP was complaining about, not just length.

post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by raytseng View Post

 

No one said they weren't-for a more advanced skier.  

 

I still think the narrower ski is easier to learn on; and the width of ski here is contributing to the problems OP was complaining about, not just length.

 

We fundamentally disagree. Most of the narrower skis are better at "technical carving", but are far less "friendly" across varied conditions. I know I'm in the minority here, but in light of the availability of skis like S3s (or better yet S7s), I think it is borderline irresponsible torture to put newbs and intermediates on old school carver derived designs. IMO that is a big contributor to the dropout rate from the sport. I cringe when I see ski school students needlessly catching edges, crossing tips and generally falling on their asses for no reason other than "inertia" in the instructional world. 

 

I think the OP chose reasonably well and is on a reasonable length for that design. Way better off on that than any seventy or eighty something carver. Unless they really want a hard snow specialty ski - in which case what I said would not particularly apply... 

post #23 of 25

The OP was evidently looking for a sidecountry rig.        I can't  blame the shop for upselling on length - no true beginner is going to ask for a touring rig.   In fact they sold her pretty durn decent value.

 

With time on snow, the OP can re-develop muscle memory, using the same skills as on a mid-90s 170cm DV6 (for example).   The S3 will certainly do all that.  

 

The fact that the S3 will do /more/ than the OP learned in the 90s does not make the OP a true 'beginner'.       

 

The only way the OP is a beginner is in learning Park'n'Ride carving - and she has never said she wanted to learn that.

post #24 of 25

Hi NK. I'm about your weight, a few inches taller. I've tried the S3. They "ski short," which means you want a longer length than you would on some other models. For example, I generally ski on a 165 - 170cm ski, but on this model the 178 felt fine because of the rocker and the easy flex. Granted I'm a more experience skier than you are, but the point is that for you a 168 does not sound too long. Rest easy and learn to enjoy. :)
 

post #25 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

The OP was evidently looking for a sidecountry rig.        I can't  blame the shop for upselling on length - no true beginner is going to ask for a touring rig.   In fact they sold her pretty durn decent value.

 

With time on snow, the OP can re-develop muscle memory, using the same skills as on a mid-90s 170cm DV6 (for example).   The S3 will certainly do all that.  

 

The fact that the S3 will do /more/ than the OP learned in the 90s does not make the OP a true 'beginner'.       

 

The only way the OP is a beginner is in learning Park'n'Ride carving - and she has never said she wanted to learn that.

 

That's kind of how I see it too?  

 

NK:  What bindings did they mount for you?  What were the conditions?  When you snowboarded, did you spend much time in the BC?  Do you have some good mentors?

I'd give the 168's some more time on the hill, either early next season or you could even head up to Beartooth pass now?

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 › Are my 168cm's too long... got suckered at the resort!