|Originally posted by Doid23:
Thanks for the input, I've read a few of your previous posts about the M12, one of the reasons I looked into them. I know the Elan site recommends a 184, but I prefer shorter skis in general and am more interested in the 176's (quicker, willing to trade off some stability and float). Do you think this would be a mistake? Thanks
It really depends on how you want to ski it. You are a big guy, so the 184 would be the most likely choice. The M12 is a pretty heavy ski, so it still won't be "quick" but it will be more versatile in a shorter length. Another guy I know who is 6 foot 195lbs is very happy on his M12 Fusions in 176cm. The 184 will really excel as a high speed, smooth cruiser over choppy (Western) snow, but not have as much energy as the 176. The 176 will be just fine if you are skiing typically smoother/lighter/harder snow. Elan recommends that you go 0 to 10 centimeters shorter than your head height for the M12, so that would point to the 184. Then again, that is just a basic recommendation. If you like shorter skis, the 176 won't be too short to enjoy (I like the 168 personally). It is still very stable in any length. For me, it would come down to where the ski would be used. Out here in the PNW, a longer ski is usually a good choice, due to the choppy state the groomers are usually in (lots of heavy, wet snow that never seems to1 become hardpack). A shorter ski doesn't allow me to relax in those conditions-I get tossed around too much. On rare days when it hasn't snowed in more than 3 days and the snow is semi-firm, or if we have light snow (a real rarity), I love my shorter skis-there would be no reason to go longer. If it were me, the type of snow I was usually skiing would be the determining factor.
Regarding the 176cm-we sold out of that length awhile back. We do still have our demos in that length (retail ski with Fusion system/binding). They are for sale for $415 if you are interested. I hope this helps!