or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Thoughts on measuring skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Thoughts on measuring skis

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Twin tip skis are here to stay. Seems everyone is making a twin tip plus converting many popular model skis into some sort of semi twin tip. So when we read that a Salomon Pocket Rocket is 185 cm long does that really matter? Should we be rethinking how we maesure Skis? In Sail Boats they will measure Overall Length and Length at Waterline. So a 34 foot sailboat could be 34"lol and 30" LWL Maybe we need to do the same for skis. sure as a K2 AK Enamy would be 188cm LOL (Length Over All)and then 180cm for SCL (Snow Contact Length). IMHO The contact with the snow,how much of that ski is working for you is more important then how long it really is. So a 175cm Solamon PR at 175cm may really mean that the snow contact is only 167 or 168cm. Theres so many other factors that go into ski proformance stiffness, camber, ect. length is just one factor I do think have two sets of length would give skiers a better clearer picture of how that ski would really proform on the snow.

[ August 31, 2002, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: Utah49 ]
post #2 of 13
I wonder about the length Salomon indicates because my 179 cm X-Scream Series are the same size as my 177 cm Teneighty Cusson when you stand them up base-to-base.

It seems they're quoting the usable edge size, but I don't really know.
post #3 of 13
I think the lengths of any manufacturer's ski are really only important as a reference with in that line/model. I don't think that just because you skied a 185cm from company A that a 188cm from B will be to big.
Decide the ski, then pick the length. This one's to small, this one's to big, the one in the middle is perfect by default. Then just go ski and don't sweat it.

It really doen't have to be that complicated and doesn't make any difference. Companies have always measured things differently and made different size breaks with in the line.

waiting for snow!
post #4 of 13
I agree with Utah 49. Once you find the ski you like try it in at least two different lengths. I think people will be amazed at the difference between different lengths of the same brand vs. same lengths of different brands.
post #5 of 13
I think Knuck has the right idea. Perhaps a better way to think of length, is what the potential maximum length of ski edge is available to make the turn. Of course with weight on the ski it is flexed and the edge length increases, so prehaps it has to be a measurement without any weight on the ski.
post #6 of 13
I don't think you should make judgments about ski length unless you know all the other dimensions. A ski with a real short sidecut radius(less than 15m)needs to be short because the width of the tip and tail would get way too wide in longer lengths. Powder skis need to be longer to have enough surface area to float, without being so wide that they are too hard to edge. The lengths of those two kinds of skis are not really comparable. The most versatile skis end up somewhere between those two extremes in a most dimensions, not just length.

[ October 30, 2002, 07:00 AM: Message edited by: John Dowling ]
post #7 of 13
One more thought. Based on current World Cup skis, I don't think many recreational skiers need a ski much longer than 150 cm for stability at high speeds, although you probably want a longer ski for other reasons, especially in softer snow.

John
post #8 of 13
I've been wondering about the actual length of my Big Stix 84's. They are listed as 186 which is a long ski these days but they seem to ski like a shoter ski. They have a turned up tail and a big honking prow, a much larger shovel than the 74. I have been meaning to measure th drop from the tip of the shovel to the floor compared to the edge that would be in contact with the snow.
post #9 of 13
Ski length can be critical.

In the Salomon Crossmax 10 Pilot, I loved those skis in 170, and I hated them in 160.

In the Rossignol Bandit XX, I hated it in 177 but I loved it and bought in in 170.

In the Rossignol Bandit X [single X], I found the 170 too squirrelly, but the 177 worked fine.

The same ski is not the same ski when the length is changed. Some are more "length sensative" than others, but length is almost always critical. That just may be the reason why DangerousBrian finds the Rossignol Bandit XX good for long turns but not short, while I find it great for long turns, great for quick short turns, and quick edge-to-edge.

I also want to add that I own and enjoy the Rossi T-Power in 160, in which length that particular model works for me. I have owned and skied the former K2 Mod 7/8 [now the Axis no X] in 174 and 167 and enjoyed them both - in fact, that particular model was probably the least "lenght sensative" of any I've skied.
post #10 of 13
J.D. Of course length is just one factor. But with twin tip skis, where do you measure the length of the ski ? I believe that was Utah 49's original question in his post. Is a 175 twin tip ski a true 175 or is it fact shorter, a 167-168 length ski ?
post #11 of 13
Quote:
Originally posted by wink:
Of course length is just one factor. But with twin tip skis, where do you measure the length of the ski ? I believe that was Utah 49's original question in his post. Is a 175 twin tip ski a true 175 or is it fact shorter, a 167-168 length ski ?
Why don't you just hold both skis up together to see which one is longer? In any event, I don't think all manufacturers use the same method to measure length, and knowing the length alone won't tall you how the ski will ski. My rule (for me only) is that I always get the second longest size that's available in any model I'm interested in.

John
post #12 of 13
Thread Starter 
wink got the point here. I have heard that the K2 AK Enemy @188 is really a 180 ski. The exstened twin tip design measures longer, then how much ski is really making contact with the snow. So is a 184 Atomic REX going to feel like a shorter ski due to the tail design? Is it really say a 180? is a 183 K2 enemy really a 178?
I'm not sure if this is really anything to worry about I have been looking at twin tips and reading up on them and other have said The 188 feels more like a 180 ect...
post #13 of 13
The simple answer would be use the manafacturer's measured length as a rough guide and demo demo demo. Regardless of the stated length, the only way to know what we like for sure is to test them out on the hill.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Thoughts on measuring skis