or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

new lenght vs old

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
I'm finally making the switch from 195-205 high performance recreational ski's to the new style and I'm having a hard time dealing with being told to ski baby lenghts. I am sill a very agressive high speed skier and weigh 245lbs how mutch should that influence my choice?:
post #2 of 9
such as (in the stone age) a bump, slalom, GS and such were all different lengths, new designs will be different lengths. Today, you might be on a 162 Slalom and a 185 Powder ski. Chances are you will end up in a 170-180, but try some skis. Width and shape have as much to do with length.
post #3 of 9
fof, welcome to EpicSki!

Your weight, turn length, terrain, and snow conditions will all effect the length for a particular ski type. The ski type will determine the range that you should try. Unless you're racing DH on the world cup, you're not likely to be 190cm or above, though. Many of us here on the forum have gone through this transition.

Interestingly, skis are using characteristics other than length to provide structural strength and integrity. For example, the Atomic Metron:b5s that I ski use magnesium channels from the mid-ski to support the tip and tail. As a result, they can be skied much shorter (at 185lbs I ski them at 162cm. So far, I have not been able to find a speed limit, even when I push them about 45mph). Other designers use different means, and the different uses of the skis imply different lengths as a result.

In a slalom ski, you might ski one in the 160 range, as Phil mentions. In a GS ski, you might be a bit above 180. Typically, I agree with Phil: you're likely to be in the 170-180 range, especially given your weight and my assumption that you like to get up a head of steam. But, turn shape, typical terrain, and prevailing snow conditions will play into that selection, too.
post #4 of 9
Thread Starter 
Good info, thanks. I'm looking at volkl superspeeds in 175 or 182 and nordica speedmachine 14 xbs in 178 and the next shorter lenght. My current ancient favorites are k2 unlimited vo 195 for hard and k2 extreme 205 for soft. Anything more specific?
post #5 of 9
fof, I have a little rule: go as short as I can, but no shorter. I would suggest both of those in the shorter lengths of your range (175 for the Superspeed, and 170 for the Speedmachine, although you'll want to try the 178, too).

You may also want to try the Fischer RX8 or RX9 in 170-175, the Elan S12 in the same, and perhaps even the Atomic M:b5 in 162 and 172 (yes, you may enjoy the 162! Can you imagine?!?!?!).
post #6 of 9
Then------203 -- 207

Now -----167 -- 170

And the shorter stuff works far better too !
post #7 of 9
Originally Posted by Uncle Louie
Then------203 -- 207

Now -----167 -- 170

And the shorter stuff works far better too !
Amen. I am not sure I would want to ski if I had to ski on my old 212 Salomons.
post #8 of 9
I ski a 190 but I am hard pressed to find a non powder ski made in that kind of length any more. I'm thinking a 175 or 180 for my next ski.
post #9 of 9
Blizzboy283, how big are you, though? It's really a function of weight and the kind of pressure you can generate to the ski during turns. And some skis (like the M:b5) don't come any longer than a 170 or so for that reason. There is a lot of engineering and materials science in modern skis, and as a result, you really want to make sure that you approach them as instruments and apply them as designed to your skiing. If you pick length thinking that all skis are laminated or tortion box like in the old days, you're likely to find a ski that isn't made to do what you're trying to make it do.

Will you be able to ski on it? Probably. Will you get out of it what the designers put in? Probably not.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion