or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What is the common length used for GS today?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What is the common length used for GS today?

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Hi folks,
What ski length would be the most prefferable for Nastar GS racing? What ski lengths are people using? (some ex.)Are people in genneral using shorter skies then the lengths used in the WC (188-198 cm)? and how is the nastar courses compared to FIS-WC standards?
My point is can a expert skiier use a 180 cm GS ski and still be fast enough?
post #2 of 12
I've noticed over the past couple of years recreational racers and Nastar-ers have swithed to more of a slalom sidecut ski. The better racers are now on Atomic 9.16's or Salomon Equipe 3V's. Both slalom skis. 170cm for the Atomic and 176 for the Salomon. I guess the reason being it's easier to hold a clean carve on a slalom vs a GS ski. Also Nastar courses aren't even close to WC standards.
180 cm is now about the maximum length for Nastar. If you are an expert skier and can crank fast CARVED turns on a 180 GS ski, you will be fine.
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 
Hi Arby,
Thanks for your reply, It is nice to hear some realistic meanings about the ski length used for amature GS racing, because every time I ask people about advice for a GS ski they recommed skies around 195 cm. I am 181 cm and 97 kg advanced/expert skiier, and is in god shape, (ex. pro windsurfer i Europe) All though a guy of my size could easily use a 193 cm atomic 10.22 for GS, I think/know I would loose the nice clean carved turns in critical situations, which means loosing time in the end. I have not been skiing on that many GS skis, only the new 2002 Dynastar Course 64 (178) with the extreme soft tail and the new Ross 9X (174 cm), which had a very very nice egde grip. Ross is also only launching a 188 cm ski as the longet GS ski.

Hang loose
post #4 of 12
Really its exactly as easy to carve a clean turn on any ski - each ski simply has a different potential carve radius. Mechanically it was the same to carve a turn on my old 223 DH boards even - with nearly no sidecut. If you tipped and stood on them, they carved a perfectly clean turn . . . a LOOOONG turn! (And of course you were soon doing 50 if you linked many of them!).
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
Gravity: Yes that make perfect sence, but suddently you can not keep your line in the course,(because of the turn radius of your 223 cm railway sleeper on clean egde ) and you get later and later in the line, finally you rotate your upper-body and you now the rest...but it all depents on the type of course you are racing, right?
post #6 of 12
Yep - you definately must match skis to the racecourse or terrain and desires. Those 223's were really wonderful at what they were built for, you would be blasting along but not feeling like you were even going all that fast - because they were as stable as battleships. Great flotation in the powder too! In the bumps they were certainly a lot of work, however it was like warming up holding three bats - when you would go back to 'normal' skis it was crazy how light they would feel. Also they were great for teaching folks not to always be picking a ski up - since they were so damn heavy it was too much work! Incidentally - now that I'm in nostalgia for skis mode . . . I found some of my SuperG skis today, they are Atomic 215's. They are very stiff, weigh a ton and are literally bullet-proof! Living on a ranch in CO we'd go stir crazy when the pass was closed because of slides - so one time it was just a friend and I, too much beer, those skis and a rifle (dumb combination clearly!). And one of us said "I wonder . . . ?" And sure enough, .22 solid tip took about an inch of paint off - and put a huge dent in the first layer of metal, but did not penetrate. Ahhh - to be young and dumb again (perhaps *dumber* that is!).
post #7 of 12
For recreational and Nastar type courses, a 178-183 would probably be the better lengths, but for the real FIS courses a 198ish for men. All male Atomic skiers are using a 198 with about a 28m turn radius. A normal FIS GS course is faster and straighter than most recreational Super Gs. The added stabilty from a longer and straighter ski benefit the athlete better than rack shape 22m. Plus, if one is racing at FIS level, strength and technique makes it easier to ski a longer straighter ski.
post #8 of 12
omg! an international GS is that loose? wow! i've never heard that before. how does a world-cup slalom stack up to USSA?
post #9 of 12
Volkl Reps at Park City said that their World Cup men were using 193cms for GS, though it would make more sense for most of us to consider what the women are using for length. Which was low 180's high 170's.
post #10 of 12
Thread Starter 
JJ: That sounds resonable because I know that Aamodt is on 188 cm for GS. And another World cupper Marco Büchel, which I breifly have been in contact with, he is one of the taller gus on the tour and he is on 192 cm Stockli´s for GS.
post #11 of 12
I don't think it is worth getting a new pair of skis for nastar. Nastar courses are straight, easy, and not even close to a real GS race course. If you really want a challenge , enter a real race!
post #12 of 12

What type of citizen racing is available in Austria?

I think each course has to have a ski selected for pitch and snow conditions.

This season our course was very flat at the top and required a lot of skating for the first three gates. A lighter ski as opposed to the heavier GS would have helped me here since at 53, my power, kicking out of the start would help.

Take a look at what the other participants are using. Our course pace setters were on Rossi 9X and Mt. Vipers in the 190's.

<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by yuki (edited April 08, 2001).]</FONT>
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 › What is the common length used for GS today?