EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Is weight or height more important for ski length? - It seems like weight.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is weight or height more important for ski length? - It seems like weight.

post #1 of 3
Thread Starter 

I would like any opinions or charts or formulas I can get.

If you are an expert  skier and skied 168 skis, but then gained 100 lbs in the last 2 years when tore both ACL's and various other reasons --and now I'm getting slowly back into skiing again and losing weight. But--of course my skis ski quite different from the last time I wore them. For new skiis in the meantime....How much length do you go up because of the weight? but of course I'm still the same height- but off the chart for my height vs. weight. The old saying"at head height for an expert" has always been too short for me. Skied 168   at 5'4" and 150 lbs. Head height would be 163.

             And if I buy a Kastle RX12 and you are supposed to take off 3-4 cm from your regular.  Do I really ski 160!?  This seems really short to me.  Or is this actually correct?

Thanks

post #2 of 3

One general piece of advice I've heard is that ski length should vary with your height, but ski stiffness should vary with your weight.  If you weigh more, you can more easily bend a stiff ski at lower speeds, and you may overpower a soft ski on hard snow.

 

Of course, it's not always that simple, because stiffness also tends to vary with the length of the ski, and there's no simple uniform measure for 'stiffness'.  (A lot depends on whether the ski stiffens gradually or suddenly as it bends, and the balance between longitudinal and torsional stiffness is also critical to the 'feel'.)  You can also get into distinctions between the 'length' of a ski (tip to tail) and the actual running length of the ski's edge.  If two skis are the same 'length', the one with the shorter radius/skinnier waist actually has longer edges.  Rockered designs also effectively ski 'shorter', since more of the forebody of the ski is off the snow at the start of a turn.

 

IMO the advice of not going much beyond head height makes sense, at least for frontside-oriented skis.  Because of the physics of applying leverage to the skis, it can be quite difficult to pressure the front of a ski that is significantly longer than you are tall.  But some of it depends on biomechanics -- things like how long your legs are relative to your height, for instance.

 

FWIW, I'm about 6'6" (78" ~= 198cm) and I don't have a problem on 170-175cm carvers -- if they're stout!  I actually went with a 175cm Fischer Progressor 9+ rather than a 180 because I felt it was plenty stable at 175 and I wanted better maneuverability in the bumps.

 

Ski what you like.  If you like the feel of a 168cm ski rather than 160 or 163, go with that.

post #3 of 3

I would say even if you gain 50lbs, at most you'd only be going up 1 size.

 

If you seriously gained 100 lbs, i think you'd not be able to athletically ski, so the right ski doesn't matter.  You'll be fighting more against your own weight rather than issues with the ski.  Plus after a few runs you'll be huffing and puffing, so it'll be time to hit the lodge.

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 › Is weight or height more important for ski length? - It seems like weight.