or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Dimension recs

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
I know this gets done to death, but I can't help it...

I'd like to get skis for my 2 sons. Rather than ask for specific brand recomendations, I thought I'd concentrate on getting the right dimensions first, then maybe see what I could find on ebay, etc and ask about specific brands/models later.

They will be fitted for boots in Mammoth later this week. I expect they will wear Langes (both have very narrow, low volume feet).

Son #1: 5'10" 125 lbs., 21 yo, athletic but cautious. A little bit awkward. Starting school in Tahoe in April. Hasn't skied much in the past, but I'm sure he will. Will probably take sking classes in school.

Son #2: 5'11 125 lbs. 18 yo so probably not done growing (vertically). Ex-skateboarder. Snowboards 5 or 6 times a year. Fearless, but still has some common sense. Will be skiing at Mammoth about that often (unless he moves in with his brother at Tahoe). Says slalom appeals to him. Wants to go "downhill. Really fast." Wonder if my heart can take it...:

So can you guys recommend length, waist and sidecut for me to look for? Once i know that, I'll look at what's available and get back with questions about specific skis.

Thank you,
post #2 of 12
First go make both your kids a sandwich.

125 lbs??
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 

Really, small boned. Their dad wore a size 28 when I married him ('tho, alas, not any more). I'm still a size 4. Tried to get them to consider modeling, but neither has any interest.

post #4 of 12
Somehing soft, they don't have the weight to flex anything beefy.

Tip: 120-125
Waist: 75ish
Tail: 110ish

A ski like a Metron 9 comes to mind.
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 

Should they ski women's skis?
post #6 of 12
Originally Posted by Phoebe3 View Post

Should they ski women's skis?
165-170 and not unless you want them to get beat up a lot.
post #7 of 12
My God woman, are you out to destroy these boys?

160's, no longer than that. They will be spending lots of time on the groomed blue runs on soft stuff. Go a tad up on the type of ski .... intermediate versus beginner ... but stay short.
post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 
That is sooo unfair! May I remind you of what you said in this thread:

I believe it was something like..."if you like a woman's ski, then good for you!"

Or are you saying my little darlings aren't MANLY enough for women's skis???

post #9 of 12
Thread Starter 

Salomon Equipe 10SC

The Metrons might be a bit pricey for me. What do you think of the Salomon Equipe 10SC in either 160cm, 165cm or 170cm? They can be had for $300 to $400 including bindings.

post #10 of 12
Check out www.sportsoutletusa.com. They have some Atomic Izor 7.5's in 168cm for $249 with bindings. Good all around ski, especially good for speed on groomers. They also have tons of used ski packages which may a good option.
post #11 of 12
If your Boys are going to be skiing In the Sierra You might want to go with something wider then what some are suggesting. They might be staying on groomed runs for now. But if The bug bites then they will be going off piste and most likely looking hard at the Terrain park So a twin tip ski would also be a consideration. Dynastar Salomon and Rossie all make light easy flexing forgiving twin tip skis.
By the way what is your budget for skis and bindings?
post #12 of 12
I have narrow feet, have skied in both Lange and Nordica boots, and I do better in the Nordica models made with their narrow mold--Nordica HotRod Nitrous might be one to try.

I prefer a narrow waisted ski with wide tips & tails, even in fresh snow. I ski Pacific coastal snow every week, and my Head Supershapes, 65 mm under foot, are the sweetest ski I've been on even in fresh snow over a foot deep. The wide waisted skis are a fad and a crutch to skiers that bomb through the unpacked snow, but a detriment to the best skiing on packed snow. Yes, I've got wide PocketRockets for really deep days. If the boys get into trauma park skiing, used twin-tips are easily available.

For the best ski recommendations, buy a $20 subscription to Peter Keelty's http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/. I like his ski reviews the best, and he'll give personal answers to your questions on the subscription site. The $20 will be money very well spent. My first suggestions would be a Head i.XRC 800 or Fischer RX6 or RX8, probably 150 to 155 cm. (I was recently skiing my wife's i.XRC800s, 156 cm, I'm 6', 205#, and those skis were stable and great carvers for me--but I don't think I'll be able to get them away from her.) A ski with an 11 meter or 12 meter turning-radius side cut is FUN, and stable at speed with modern ski construction. The ski school director at Crystal Mountain, Sean Bold, told me that last year he tested the full Head XRC line. He liked them all very much, but the lower end models reached the end of their performance when he pressed them...as expected. His personal skis are Head i.SL rec slalom skis.
http://www.head.com/ski/products.php...ssive &id=614

Regarding ski length, keep in mind
(a) Modern ski construction gives a very stable, high performing ski in much shorter lengths than ever.
(b) Within the same model line, shorter skis are more flexible than longer skis, thus perform better for the lighter weight skier and/or the lower energy skier.
(c) Across model lines, a higher performance shorter ski will be somewhat the equal of a lower performance longer ski (but it is very hard to make an exact comparison).

About boot flex...a lighter, lower energy skier needs a more flexible boot, a taller skier needs a stiffer boot (more leverage), most boot brands have a flex scale, and the flex scale is NOT comparable across different boot brands. The flex scale applies to that boot brand only.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion