or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski size on a pair of Line Sick Day 95's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski size on a pair of Line Sick Day 95's

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

I'm 5'4" 165lbs (not fat just stocky build) currently skiing on a pair of Blizzard Magnum 8.0 CA's in a 165.  I'm primarily a front-side groomer skier but am trying to venture off the front side and broaden my skiing abilities.

 

I love the Blizzards for what they are and have no problem with the size.  My previous skis were in 157 and I was worried about the 165's but didn't have a problem with the added length.

 

On of the ski's I'm thinking about is the Line Sick Day 95's but the shortest length in a 172 and now I'm worried that they may be too long for me. 

 

Anyone else with a similar height out there skiing the sick days and if so what length?  I was also looking at the K2 Sheditor 92's, which I can get in a 163 or 170.

 

Thanks for any help.

post #2 of 10

AFAIK, Line sizes correspond to base length, not tip-to-tail length. For example, SD 110 in 186 is in reality 182 cm long as measured by Blistergear. 184 Bacons come in at 180 cm, etc.

 

Do you have a chance to tape measure the Sick Days? My hunch is that they are near or a bit under 170 cm.

post #3 of 10

My buddy is 5'9", 170 and he's on the 179 SD 95s.  Says they're perfect size-wise.  They seem more like 175s to me, but I've never measured them.  I think the 172s are probably more like 169-170, and they have some rocker.  You're probably fine with the 172s.  Really nice skis.  My buddy loves his and skis well on them.

post #4 of 10

Line skis measure a little shorter than the stated length so the 172 is probably really a 169 (ish). It has a little rocker in it so I would think if you are a decent skier you should definitely be good to go, lots of people love that ski!

post #5 of 10

I'm 5'5 and heavier than you, and I have the Sick Day 110s in 172. My tastes run toward steeps, natural snow, and trees. I find my SD 110s easy to turn, and surprisingly good on groomers; I'm sure you'll find the Sick Day 95 even better at that. I think the 172 will be fine for you. That being said, you might look at the Soulmate 98 - I had the Celebrity 100 from a few years ago, and the Soulmate 98 is the successor to the Celebrity 100. Those skis were confidence inspiring for me on basically every type of terrain, and really helped me get comfortable all over the mountain.

post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bounceswoosh View Post
 

I'm 5'5 and heavier than you, and I have the Sick Day 110s in 172. My tastes run toward steeps, natural snow, and trees. I find my SD 110s easy to turn, and surprisingly good on groomers; I'm sure you'll find the Sick Day 95 even better at that. I think the 172 will be fine for you. That being said, you might look at the Soulmate 98 - I had the Celebrity 100 from a few years ago, and the Soulmate 98 is the successor to the Celebrity 100. Those skis were confidence inspiring for me on basically every type of terrain, and really helped me get comfortable all over the mountain.

(I suggested that because the Soulmate 98 is available in shorter lengths)

post #7 of 10
Does anyone know the actual on 179s? Sick Day and Supernaturals?
post #8 of 10
I'm 5'8" and 150 upper intermediate. I too have the blizzard magnum CA in 172. I did a quick demo of the LSD 95 in 172. They do seem like 170 and I'm tempted to try or buy the 179. I'm sure I could ski them but maybe too much work for me...
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenmonkey View Post

Does anyone know the actual on 179s? Sick Day and Supernaturals?

The SD skis shorter than the Supernatural. Supernatural has a longer effective edge and less rocker.

 

I have the SD 179 and the SN 172. Demo them both before making a decision, 2 completely different skis.

 

Supernatural is exactly as described, this ski rips, sucks you to the snow, is NOT poppy ski, firm for slamming tips into bumps but this ski rips on the groomers and cut up crud, no vibration, minimal chatter when edging hard on firm snow in shorter turns. IMHO strictly a ski for groomers, crud, harder snow. 

 

Sick Day is a much more fun and playful ski for all around skiing, has adequate "float" in new snow, move up to the 110 or Bacon for deeper snow for more float.

post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 

So I picked up the sick day's yesterday and placed them next to my blizzard's that are a 165cm. Not sure what I was expecting, but I guess I thought they would be much bigger than the 165s.   i read somewhere that Line measures differently. I didn't measure them but they don't appear to be much longer than the 165's. I included a picture for reference in case it helps anyone else.

 

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 › Ski size on a pair of Line Sick Day 95's