or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New Skis!! help with M:EX sizing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Skis!! help with M:EX sizing

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
It's Dumping up here in Alberta!!
I'm pumped to do some late season skiing and trying to pull the trigger on some new skis. I n an earlier post I sought guidance re metron sizing and have narrowed it down to metron M9 in a 171cm or a M:EX . I'm leaning toward the
M:EX but not as sure about the sizing with it. There are some good deals out there on these . I'm 44 , 5'-8" about 180lbs and athletically built for my height, Advanced , Few trips a year skier. Love RED mountain at Rossland B.C., Fernie B.C. etc. ,Glades, Backside , some double blacks on a good day when I'm fresh.,and some moguls. I enjoy some fast cruising but get tired of groomers quick.

The Atomic sizing chart puts me between the 164 and 171 for the M9 and I think the 171 is the way to go there. the chart would have me on a 165 M:EX but my instinct, and what I have been able to pull from this forum has me leaning to a 175. I skied some HEAD MONSTER iM 72 at Fernie a couple weeks ago in a 170 and they felt good but there had been no fresh for a week .I don't want to fight the ski if it gets steep and narrow. I wish they made it in a 171!! anyway I'm leaning towards the 175 . The deal $$ could sway me as well. (I think I can get 165 with neox 412 cheaper)
Does anyone have any expieriance withe the M:EX re: how it skis , that has any guidance it would be much appreciated
post #2 of 7
I'd go with the 175 M:ex. I ski that length in it and also ski the 171 in M:10. I'm 5'10" and 185. Despite being in the metron series it does not ski the same or need to be skied as short with the 19 or 20 m turning radius.
post #3 of 7
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the input!!

Nice to hear from someone who skis on them and is more or less my size.
post #4 of 7
I have a pair of the M -EX in a 175cm and they work fine on the hardpack as well as in the pow, they ski fast. I am 5'8" and weigh about 208lbs.If you want the ski for a variety of funky conditions go bigger but if your going to be on hardpack or packes powder the 165cm would be better as your lighter and the scale would put you closer to the 165cm. I have a friend who has the 165cm and he was really flying around on them and enjoying the ride. I hope the post helps . Though call !
Just remember to ask are you buying a 2004/2005 or the 2005/06 version there is some great pricing on the 2004/05 models and the only changes are the colors and the arms on the ski. You would not be able to tell the difference on them. Check out nathan at atomics skiers outlet.com if any are left they were selling the ski for $299.00.
post #5 of 7
I have the 165s and I weigh 150-155. If I weighed 180 I personally wouldn't go shorter than 175.

Go with your instinct.
post #6 of 7
Another vote for the 175 for your weight and ski habits. I love mine. I think the 165 might be a little less stable for you. The M:EX is not quite as beefy as the R:EX was, in my opinion.
post #7 of 7
Thread Starter 

Thanks Again for the input! What about M9?

Thanks for the insight !175 it is. What about the Metron M9 anyone ski on them , in what conditions, and how do you like them? (I can find M9's w/bindings about $150 cheaper than M:EX) What about weight of the skis and bindings ? I'm assuming the M9 will be lighter by a fair bit.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New Skis!! help with M:EX sizing