So my question is this: Am I better off on the 159 cm length or the 167 cm length in the 2017 model Stockli Laser AX? This will be my every-day ski, for pleasure and teaching.
I skied the 2015 Stockli Laser AX in early season Vermont hard snow conditions in December of 2015. They were 167 cm length. I was amazed at how well they performed and how comfortable and confidence inducing they felt in a scraped off icy stretch. They were not quick turners like the Head Rallys in 163 cm that I eventually bought, but they were solid as a rock. On the advice of my PSIA clinician, I'm now moving to a flat ski [sold the Head Rally skis/bindings] so can have a binding with less delta. If the Stocklis were made in 163 cm length or thereabouts, I'd really be happy - but they're not. I read an article on the website of an Aspen outfit called Bumps for Boomers. They are saying that people in my age cohort should be on skis of 160 cm - AND SHORTER. In my experiments over the years with ski length, I've found shorter skis, in general, to be easier to maneuver but more squirrelly, and longer skis to be more work to maneuver but more stable.
I'll be skiing on the Socklis [which I have yet to acquire] when I'm seventy-five years old, after open heart surgery in August 2014 [mitral valve repair] and recent ablation for A-fib from which I'm still recovering [recent!]. I think that on a great day, with hero conditions and on top of my game, I might be able to fake Level 8. Truth be told, I've been a higher Level 7 and have lost a few steps that I'll regain. I'll be having AAAAAAttack 13 bindings put on them. I've shrunk two inches to a height of 5'8" and weigh 155 lbs. Sometimes five pounds less.
I also have Kastle FX94 in 166 cm length, [which I enjoyed very much on groomed and skied-on snow at Alta and Solitude in March 2016] and Volkl 100EIGHT in 173 cm [full rocker, and I haven't skied them yet].
Thank you in advance for your thoughts.