or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Elan M666 Questions

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
I searched but didn't see an exact answer ... So I have a deal on a pair of these in 168. I'm 6'1"+ 175 level 8 on a good day. Questions:
Is 168 going to be a good size for me on these boards?
These are flat, so can I assume a three year old pair of Marker M51s (almost brand new) will work on 'em?

post #2 of 9
Supposedly, the flat ski should be skied a little longer than the fusion, so that makes it a tougher call. My guess is that if you're not a speed demon, the 168 will work, but it's not a very educated guess.
post #3 of 9
Where are you skiing it? I am 5 foot 9, 150lbs, and prefer the 176cm. The 168 is a little short for crud, but fine on groomers. The 176 is the best length for what I use this ski for (4-8" of new snow). Any more than that and I go with a wider ski, any less and I am likely skiing a race ski or race carver. My brother is 5 foot 9 and 138lbs, and he skis the 168cm m666. That is his only ski though.
post #4 of 9
I own the 176's, skiied them for the first time on Tuesday. That's pretty much the right size for me, and I'm 6'0, 185lbs. That said, I've demo'd other skis (top fuel's in a 170), and they're a blast. I'd be tempted if the price were right.
post #5 of 9
I'm 170 lbs and have found the 176cm length to be a great ski; it's surprisingly versatile: stable, yet pretty quick turning with reasonable float

I didn't try the 168cm, but I'm betting you'll love the m666 in that length, too.

Your M51's should work just fine, assumming they're in good condition; I mounted mine with even older M1 SC Racing Turbos. Just get them function tested before you take them out.

Let us know how you like those satanic toys
post #6 of 9
I had a pair of M666 Fusion for 3 ski days, then sold 'em because I wanted a flat M666 to mount with a Look Pivot binder.

I'm 5'10" and 155 lbs, Level 8. I skied the M666 in 176 and found it perfect.

just ordered a pair of M662, the '03-04 version of the M666, in a flat version (w/o binders) for $400 from Al's Ski Barn. I bought the 176cm size.
post #7 of 9
Thread Starter 
I'm looking at picking up two new pairs of boards on a bit of budget. One more for front-face and bumps (cheaper as tend to get beaten up) and one high end mid-fat (or wider) for backside, bowls, and tree's. I thought the M666 in 168 might be the groomer/bump ski. It sounds like this may work, but a 175 would probably be a better idea. I live in Minnesota, but don't ever buy ski's for here instead I ski mostly Summit County CO (family lives there). Still not sure if I should do it, but thanks for the feedback!
post #8 of 9
I don't know about the 168, however the 176 rocks, and is stable but not gs-stable as it has a softer flex. Very damp and smooth. Gobs of edge grip on western snow and hardpack. Fun, helpful...
post #9 of 9
Originally Posted by ccaz
I searched but didn't see an exact answer ... So I have a deal on a pair of these in 168. I'm 6'1"+ 175 level 8 on a good day.
I'm almost exactly your size. Wanted the 174 M662 when they first came out but the local shop sold out of them before the mid-season sales started, so I bought the 168s.

I ski groomed, ungroomed, crud, woods and when I can find it powder in the East, most of my days are at MRG and Jay. I have loved the 168s for all conditions. Would the 174s have been better? Don't know but the 168s have been the best ski I have ever owned.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion