New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

8800 for the wife

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
Hi everyone,

Just wanted an opinion on 8800 length for the wife. I can get a good deal on a pair of 158's but wasn't sure if that's too short. She's an upper intermediate, 5'7 and about 130lbs and currently skis on 160 Fischer Sceneo's. I finally got her to try some powder this year and she had a blast, so figure a slightly wider ski (73mm waist on the Sceneo to 89mm waist on the 8800) would do her good. I'm not sure if the 8800 measures short (like Pocket Rockets), so thought I'd get some opinions. Thanks in advance for any info.
post #2 of 17
I do question how good it will be in powder being that short (158) with a rider the size and weight of your wife.

I am 5' 10" and 140 # and no way would I go shorter than the 8800 178 I have for powder. All other conditions it would be fine except going mach 1.

I have never skied a 158 on powder but from the use of mine I wouldn't want any shorter. But thats just me.
post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the input. She's no expert aggressive skier, so the 178 would definitely be too long. I just want her to have a little more fun and want to ski powder more often. I figured she enjoyed the powder on her skinny 160's, so was thinking the 158 might be doable. A 165 Pocket Rocket was the other option, but heard they measure short, so the 158 8800 may be similar....Any other opinions?
post #4 of 17
I ski the 8800 in the 178 length. I'm 5'7" and weigh 165. The 8800 is a surprising forgiving ski and I have found it easy to ski. It has no speed limit and float is tremendous. It also has surprisingly good edge grip on corduroy crunch. It truly shines in soft snow at high speeds in long radius turns. It will make shorter radius turns rather easily but that is not its natural thing. It will transition from heavily tracked powder to untracked powder without missing a beat. I've tested it on steep tracked powder slopes by skiing down the fall line without turning. Like I said, it has no speed limit, even in difficult tracked snow, and I haven't found anything it won't blast through. Powder moguls are doable but lots of work. On very firm, hardpacked snow it sounds like a 1" x 12" being thrown on a concrete driveway, even though it has no speed limit on that type of snow either.

You said she is an intermediate skier. I would be hesitant to recommend this ski for her in any length other than 158. It is an easy ski to ski for me but it may not be the ski for her. She may find it very difficult to ski. I think it is a ski that intermediates can enjoy and benefit from but I'm not sure to what extent that would be true for her.

Good luck.
post #5 of 17
My GF is 5'7 130 and skis on skinny Rossi 160cm and it makes me so frustrated to watch her. Technically she is probably upper intermediate (not good form, skids turns) but she can make it down the hardest runs at Lake Louise (ER6, ER7, chutes above North Cornice). Watching her struggle in variable snow/crud on those tiny skis. I want to get her on at least 170's, thinking Pocket Rockets or something else soft, maybe 8800s, in the coming weeks to see if she likes it.

FWIW I am 5'10 200 and ride the 8800 in 188 and wouldn't go shorter except the 178 for very tight trees (not very common here). They mount pretty far forward so there is a bunch of tail, at 5'7 I think the 158 would tip dive in powder on a factory mount, but you'd have to demo to know. I'd say 168 for sure.
post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramboh
My GF is 5'7 130 and skis on skinny Rossi 160cm and it makes me so frustrated to watch her. Technically she is probably upper intermediate (not good form, skids turns) but she can make it down the hardest runs at Lake Louise (ER6, ER7, chutes above North Cornice). Watching her struggle in variable snow/crud on those tiny skis. I want to get her on at least 170's, thinking Pocket Rockets or something else soft, maybe 8800s, in the coming weeks to see if she likes it.

FWIW I am 5'10 200 and ride the 8800 in 188 and wouldn't go shorter except the 178 for very tight trees (not very common here). They mount pretty far forward so there is a bunch of tail, at 5'7 I think the 158 would tip dive in powder on a factory mount, but you'd have to demo to know. I'd say 168 for sure.
Thanks for the input. Perhaps the 165 Pocket Rocket may be more her speed. The 158 8800 is such a steal that I guess I was hoping for some positive feedback to sway me to get them....
post #7 of 17
If you're thinking about the Pocket Rocket, you should consider the 2006 Phat Luv (the pink ones) instead. I've skied both and vastly prefer the Phat Luv.

BTW, I'm 5'6" and 145 pounds.
post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudpeak
If you're thinking about the Pocket Rocket, you should consider the 2006 Phat Luv (the pink ones) instead. I've skied both and vastly prefer the Phat Luv.

BTW, I'm 5'6" and 145 pounds.
The Phat Luv would be in the running, but the price is still quite high on those....
post #9 of 17
Dynastar has a new fat ski for women called the Exclusive Legend Powder. It measures 121/85/104 and retails for $599. I haven't personally laid eyes on it. The narrower tail will make easier for her turn and skid. It may be one to consider.
post #10 of 17
My wife 5F 2I 125 lbs.
Demoed the 8800 @168 cmalong with the rosi snowird, when went 2 mt baker.
she loved the 8800, felt it gave back when pushed vs the rosi that skied easy but felt too damp.
(on the east coast she skis the Atomic SLII, no slackers ski)
hope this helped.
PaulElliott
post #11 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudpeak
If you're thinking about the Pocket Rocket, you should consider the 2006 Phat Luv (the pink ones) instead. I've skied both and vastly prefer the Phat Luv.

BTW, I'm 5'6" and 145 pounds.
What length do you ski the Phat Luv? My wife, who has skied for 40 years, is your height and a little lighter. She wouldn't give up her 153 Phat Luvs for anything.

I think you guys who want the women close to you to ski a certain way and on a certain ski are in big trouble. They need to decide what they want to ski and how they want to ski. It is great to make suggestions and do research but they need to make the decisions. Decisions shouldn't be based on price. A cheap price for a ski is not a good deal if she doesn't like it. I got my 8800s for a little over $400 at a brick and mortar shop. Great deal. But I like them, which makes it even a better deal.

The Phat Luv suggestion is a good one.
post #12 of 17
I ski the Phat Luv (the pink ones) in a 153.
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.T
My wife 5F 2I 125 lbs.
Demoed the 8800 @168 cmalong with the rosi snowird, when went 2 mt baker.
she loved the 8800, felt it gave back when pushed vs the rosi that skied easy but felt too damp.
(on the east coast she skis the Atomic SLII, no slackers ski)
hope this helped.
PaulElliott
Mr T,

Is your wife an upper intermediate? It seems like the 8800 would be too much for the subject skier.
post #14 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Joness
Mr T,

Is your wife an upper intermediate? It seems like the 8800 would be too much for the subject skier.
Ex-USSA Racer.
Her Favorite ski is the Atomic SL II.
post #15 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkman
Thanks for the input. Perhaps the 165 Pocket Rocket may be more her speed. The 158 8800 is such a steal that I guess I was hoping for some positive feedback to sway me to get them....
if she is a strong intermediate and the ski is a good deal it's a great ski to work up to. It may not be the best in powder but her skills everywhere else will greatly improve hence making her powder skiing eventually better as well.

good stable ski for sure but it takes input to make it dance.
post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJB
Dynastar has a new fat ski for women called the Exclusive Legend Powder. It measures 121/85/104 and retails for $599. I haven't personally laid eyes on it. The narrower tail will make easier for her turn and skid. It may be one to consider.

FWIW, Sister in law demoed several pairs at Snowbird. She is 5-7, 140, advanced skier and she preferred the Exclusive. She skied the Apache, Phat Luv, and Pocket.
post #17 of 17
Also, FWIW, I skied the Phat Luv and Sugar Daddy in UT recently. Far and away preferred the Sugar Daddy. Found the Phat Luv ponderous in comparison. (i am smaller than your wife, however) Just to illustrate that everyone likes things different, and as was said above, she should demo and decide herself.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion