or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just my imagination?

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
Is it just my imagination or are ski lengths moving up again?
From scanning the ski magazines it appears that many are moving towards the 180-190 cm range common four to five years ago.
post #2 of 7
Hmmm... can you give any examples of types of skis?
Race GS? Midfats? Big powder sticks?
Boy, I would have thought it the other way.
Especially when you have adults talking about
skiing on 150s.
post #3 of 7
I think there are just more lengths now. Once where i ski came in 3 lengths each being 8 - 10 cm apart, youre now finding lengths being closer together but spanning a larger spectrum of sizes. It does seem that longer lengths are available now, but at the other end of the spectrum - short lengths are almost always available in that particular ski.
post #4 of 7
I've noticed two trends at the upper end of lengths. First, more of the wider skis are now available in lengths in the 190s. Second, many limited edition fat skis are only available in longer lengths. The Salomon AK Rocket, Atomic Big Daddy, Volant Spatula & Dynastar Super Nobis are only available in 190s lengths. The Stockli Schmidt Pro and Head Monster IM 103 are only available in 180s and 190s lengths.
post #5 of 7
Thread Starter 
Helluva skier, you are probably right. A few short seasons ago, the all-mountain slalom with 68-70ish waist was heralded as the new practically “do it all” skis for both on and off the groomed.

The argument ran that new improved materials made torsionally stiff skis possible in shorter lengths and longish skis were largely a thing of the past except for SG/downhill, and Extreme Big Mountain Skiing.

Today the manufacturers have in addition to their short slaloms, GS race skis and Carvers self-described “bigmountain/powder”, “all-mountain”,“skier-cross”, “cross-carve”, “freeride”, “all-mountain-freeride”,”all-mountain performer,”carve/skier-x”, “powder”, “all-mountain-carve”, “ all-mountain cruise,” “high performance versatile carving” “recreatrional performance all mountain”, “all mountain cruiser” “mid-fat”, “freeride/all mountain” , “freeride-race”and this list is not at all exhaustive. : Nor am I kidding about any of the categories. :

When you look at all of these various categories it seems like things are moving away somewhat from the 160-175 short slalom all mountain or whatever we decide to call them.
post #6 of 7
Call me a skeptic, but can it just be a case of something like "planned obsolescence." They have to get us interested in some new category to keep people buying skis rather than holding on to their shorty slaloms, their 70mm wide mid fats, or whatever.
post #7 of 7
FAT AND LONG RULES! (just ask any chick)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion