or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Armada TSTw 2015

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

Hi!!! im buying my first pair of skis this year im going to work in vail as a ski instructor! my level of ski is advanced and hoping to become more expert this year! 

i want an all mountain ski so thats why i think the tstw are the best for me, the problem is i dont know the height. They come in 156cm or 165cm. Im a female my height is 165 cm and my weight around 55 kg! what do you think is best for me?? 

 

 

thanks!!!! 

post #2 of 12
Hi. I own this ski. My understanding is that the men's and women's models are identical except for the graphics. I have skied the 165 and the 174. Like virtually everyone else who has tried it, I feel it skis very short. My 174 TSTs ski shorter than my 167cm carvers, for example.

Assuming you've already settled on this make and model, 156 is way too short for you. 165 would be the minimum, and it would be worth demoing the 174 if possible. For reference I am 60kg, 170cm. 51 yo male, level 8 skier.

My two cents.
post #3 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulatorti View Post
 

Hi!!! im buying my first pair of skis this year im going to work in vail as a ski instructor! my level of ski is advanced and hoping to become more expert this year! 

i want an all mountain ski so thats why i think the tstw are the best for me, the problem is i dont know the height. They come in 156cm or 165cm. Im a female my height is 165 cm and my weight around 55 kg! what do you think is best for me?? 

 

 

thanks!!!! 

While the TSTW is a fine ski its not what I would consider teaching on.  If you are going to take an exam, I'm pretty sure that is REALLY not the ski you want to be on. 

 

Do you have a #2 pick for teaching and clinics? 

post #4 of 12

I have had this ski in a 183 and sold it to buy the 192 as it skis really short.  I agree with TC that it is not an everyday ski.  I use mine on low volume powder days (5' - 12").  In those conditions they are really fun, but on firm snow I can think of a dozen skis I would prefer.

post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
Hey guys! Thanks for your answers! Actually in buying them not to give class. For class im using the ones of the ski school im teaching kids from 3 to 6 years! Last year i tried them And really like it so what do
You think better de 165 cm??
post #6 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulatorti View Post

Hey guys! Thanks for your answers! Actually in buying them not to give class. For class im using the ones of the ski school im teaching kids from 3 to 6 years! Last year i tried them And really like it so what do
You think better de 165 cm??


174, as they ski really short.

post #7 of 12
Hate to make your decision more difficult but there's a really good ereview of thesebskis on blistergearreviewhttp://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2012-2013-armada-tstw and the reviewer had the exact opposite experience. Felt it skied long.
post #8 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremysbrown View Post

Hate to make your decision more difficult but there's a really good ereview of thesebskis on blistergearreviewhttp://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2012-2013-armada-tstw and the reviewer had the exact opposite experience. Felt it skied long.

 

Well, when you actually read the review you see that really the author's only reference point is the VJJ, which is a full-rocker S7-type ski. Sure, the TST will ski long compared with THAT. So will nearly every other ski made. Only one person in a hundred uses a ski like that as her reference point. Therefore I stand by what I and others have said: When you compare the ski with conventional full-camber ski, or one with modest early rise, the TST skis quite short, especially given how tight the turn radius is on a ski where the contact point on edge when not immersed is a foot back from the tip.

post #9 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremysbrown View Post

Hate to make your decision more difficult but there's a really good ereview of thesebskis on blistergearreviewhttp://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2012-2013-armada-tstw and the reviewer had the exact opposite experience. Felt it skied long.


How can that be a really good review if the authors reference point is way off base?  The TST skis ridiculously short on firm snow.  My 183's felt like 169's.

post #10 of 12

okee dokee, very well then. yes, the reviewer references the vjj. the op doesn't mention what she's skied before or where she's coming from to vail. point being - try before you buy. everyone will find things a little different. if you read the full review she says 

Quote:
 I probably should have opted for the 165cm model. (I commonly opt for skis that are about 168cm long.)

 

so yea, not sure how that's a bad review. she gives us her reference points. unlike simply saying "its skis really short". guaranteed you can demo these and about a million other skis in vail. do that. fwiw i bought these for my wife in the156. she demo'd them at fernie and it was a toss up for her between these and the ski logik goddess rl 158. for REFERENCE - she is an advancing intermediate coming from some true beginner (head lite thang) skis. hoping she will progress to a real charger on the tstw.

post #11 of 12

I am a few inches shorter than you and a bit heavier (damn baby weight) and ski the 165, so for the OP that is the absolute shortest I would go. I am also a pretty aggressive skiier, and everyone tells me that the TST skis short, but I like the length I have. Granted I did not try the 175 before buying. I previously skied a 168cm traditionally cambered, stiff ski and did not want that type of ski as I prefer to stick to tight trees and bumps. I am rarely cutting railroad tracks on a groomer and if I am, I can take a sacrifice in performance because I prefer to only have one pair of downhill skis instead of a quiver to choose from. I would definitely try both lengths though, to see which you prefer, as you could probably go either way but are more likely to enjoy the 175. As others said, the mens and womens are the same in this ski aside from topsheet, so find a demo shop and if they don't carry both length in the W you can demo the men's version. Also note that according to a recent review I read, the new version of this ski is slightly different than the previous years and so I can't vouch for how it skis (there is a review of it on Skidiva.com if you're interested) and it seems like the changes are all pretty positive in reference to performance. 

post #12 of 12
Hi! I'm 165cm tall and weigh 55kg. I demo'd 165 and loved them. Felt perfect to me I didn't feel the need to go longer and definitely not shorter. Purchased mine (165) today.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion