or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skis for newbies

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
My wife and I have just started skiing and would like to buy skis at the end of the season sales. We've been skiing 6 times over the past 7 weeks mostly at Canada Olympic Park (where we took 4 lessons) but we also went to Sunshine last weekend and have a lesson there this weekend. We plan on skiing at least 10-15 times per season. We thought it would be a good idea to buy skis at the end of season sales and need advice on what skis to try before we buy. Most of our skiing will be at places like sunshine, lake louise, nakiska and probably a weekend a year at castle.

My wife is 5' 110lbs. I'm 6'2" 225lbs. Both of us are 33. We bought boots at a Banff bootfitter last weekend (I couldn't stand the Sunshine rental boots). We would like skis that we can grow into and will last a few years.

For myself, one store recommended the Dynastar Legend 4800 in 175cm or a Ski Cross 9. Another store recommended the Elan m12 fusion. A friend of mine thought that the Dynastar skis wouldn't be stiff enough for my size as I progressed.

The Nordica suv8 and the dynastar exclusive 8 or 9 have been recommended to my wife.

After reading a review both of us were wondering about the rossignol bandit 1.

How do these suggestions sound? Any other suggestions? Any suggestions on poles or bindings.

Thanks
post #2 of 13
Personally, I think the 4800 in the 178cm would be great for you and the Exclusive 8 would be good for your wife. These are both skis that are fairly forgiving as you improve, yet will give you the performance you need to improve. You won't out grow those skis anytime soon.

Your friend may be right about the SC9 as it's pretty soft. The 4800 will be plenty stiff enough for you though. I ski the 8000 which is real similar to the 4800, except for width, with no issues and I'm 6'4" 250.

BTW, welcome to EpicSki!!
post #3 of 13
Thread Starter 
Thanks very much for the help and the welcome. We will be sure to try those out. Any other suggestions?
post #4 of 13
Thread Starter 
What about the Atomic R11? Would that ski be too advanced for me?
post #5 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.b
What about the Atomic R11? Would that ski be too advanced for me?
I think it would be at your level of experience.
post #6 of 13
Thread Starter 
One more question. My wife is 5' and has been skiing mostly on 130s. She tried 140s last week without problems. It seems that minimum length of many skis is 150. Would that be too long for her?

Thanks
post #7 of 13
How about the atomic C9 -- we're looking at that and the Metron M9 to upgrade our skis after two years of skiing. A lot of people on the mountain here have C9's. I'd demo a bunch of skis and then buy one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by d.b
What about the Atomic R11? Would that ski be too advanced for me?
post #8 of 13

Ski size for the bride

Quote:
Originally Posted by d.b
One more question. My wife is 5' and has been skiing mostly on 130s. She tried 140s last week without problems. It seems that minimum length of many skis is 150. Would that be too long for her?

Thanks
140s are too small for her. 150 - 155 would work much better for her weight.

Check out ski chart link:

http://www.scsports.com/articles.cfm?go=14
post #9 of 13
Thread Starter 
The C9 isn't an all mountain ski is it? We'll take a look at the metron.

Thanks for the sizing chart.
post #10 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.b
The C9 isn't an all mountain ski is it? We'll take a look at the metron.

Thanks for the sizing chart.
What's great about C9's: they are the ultimate New England and midwestern on-piste ski and can be bought cheaply. What stinks about C9's: they are the ultimate New England and midwestern on-piste ski.
post #11 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbroun
What's great about C9's: they are the ultimate New England and midwestern on-piste ski and can be bought cheaply. What stinks about C9's: they are the ultimate New England and midwestern on-piste ski.
This is the end of the era for the 9.18/C9 which has been an extremely succesful ski for Atomic for the past 5+ years.

The carve line is being replaced next year by the new Izor line. This will be the first skis to employ nano-technology.

There was review here recently of the 9.7. The review was generally favorable, although the weight of the ski was mentioned.

If you can pick up a good deal on the C9, you can't go wrong. I've been skiing it for 5 years! Great NE ski.
post #12 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ski-Dad
140s are too small for her. 150 - 155 would work much better for her weight.

Check out ski chart link:

http://www.scsports.com/articles.cfm?go=14
I have to take issue with this. The chart above strikes me as just a bit behind the times with respect to modern skis (last couple years designs). At 110 pounds, a decent ski at 140 or 145 is probably just great for your spouse. Such skis can be had today without resorting to kid skis. Given your stated situation and needs, think hard before going to 150 or longer. This has been discussed before, but sticking with the "conventional wisdom" usually puts a small woman on a whole lot "more ski" than a typical guy. Both in terms of surface area and running length.

Also, at 225 pounds or so, I'm not so sure an R11 is too much ski as long as you stay "short". Something like a 170 might ski OK for you. Probably like an R10 for someone who weighs 160 or 170 pounds (a ski suggestion that has frequently popped up). Just a thought given the mention of the ski above...
post #13 of 13
Thread Starter 
My demo plans were partly thwarted by a non-ski injury and lack of planning (who thought you'd need to reserve a ski on the busiest weekend of the year). I ended up testing the 4800 in 178 and an atomic R9 in 180. Both were much better than the cheap rentals I was using before (salomon verse 170/180, rossignol edge 170, head ? 170/177) My impression of the two was that the 4800 seemed more stable than the R9. When going over small piles of snow, the 4800 seemed to want to go over or through while the r9 wanted to turn. I had to work harder to keep the skis pointing straight ahead. With the r9, I had a tougher time with steeper parts of blue trails. I had really wanted to try the B2 but the rental shop was out.

My wife tried out the dynaster exclusive 8 in 142 and 9 in 150. She couldn't tell much difference between the two but I think she fatigued more with the exclusive 9.

A local store had their 50% off sale this weekend so we ended up buying without testing more skis. The person at the store thought that the B2 and 4800 were very similar skis so I went with the 4800 since I had tried it out before. My wife went for the B1W in 152 based on reviews she had read.

Thanks everyone for your help.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion