EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Dynastar Legend 8000 length question...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dynastar Legend 8000 length question...

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
Since I know this ski gets a lot of discussion here I thought I would solicit some feedback.

I am 25, 5'9" and a healthy 160lbs. I would say I am an expert skier. I prefer the bumps and trees, ski mostly New England with a trip out west once a season.

I've been skiing on some real junk old K2's at 164cm, and its time to hang them up.

I am torn between the Dynastar Legend 8000 165 and 172 length. I am not a heavy guy, but I think with my skill level the 172 would be easily managed, but I like to ski with short, quick turns in the bumps and trees, so shorter might be better.

The question I really have is would the 165 absolutely be too short given my size or vice versa with the 172? Thanks.
post #2 of 10
I've just bought the 172s, having skied a pair last winter. I'm 5'10", 176 (and a lot older!). My guess is that, between the two, the 172s will be the right ones for you -- they seemed a pretty light ski to me.
post #3 of 10
I'm a clone on hitherandthither but on 178's (previous to last years) and the only time I wish they were shorter is in firm bumps. I'd think the 165's would be too short overall.

Love the skis, though.
post #4 of 10
I agree - I have the 178s from two years ago and very infrequently want a shorter ski in the bumps. If you are an expert skier, then the 172 will be very easy to throw around. I love the ski.
post #5 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
Since I know this ski gets a lot of discussion here I thought I would solicit some feedback.

I am 25, 5'9" and a healthy 160lbs. I would say I am an expert skier. I prefer the bumps and trees, ski mostly New England with a trip out west once a season.

I've been skiing on some real junk old K2's at 164cm, and its time to hang them up.

I am torn between the Dynastar Legend 8000 165 and 172 length. I am not a heavy guy, but I think with my skill level the 172 would be easily managed, but I like to ski with short, quick turns in the bumps and trees, so shorter might be better.

The question I really have is would the 165 absolutely be too short given my size or vice versa with the 172? Thanks.
160lbs and "expert"? I'd look a lil north of 172
post #6 of 10
Your height is irrelevant.

I weigh around 170 and ski the Legend 8K in 178, primarily at Taos. Of the two lengths you mention, 172 without question.
post #7 of 10
Thread Starter 
Bought the 172's. Thanks people.

now just have to find some bindings...
post #8 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
Bought the 172's. Thanks people.

now just have to find some bindings...
Great! Enjoy!
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
Bought the 172's. Thanks people.

now just have to find some bindings...
I have some Look P14's (the older model) in good shape which was usually what's mounted on the 8k's. PM me if you're interested
post #10 of 10
Another length question for those , who know . I am 54 , a massive 10 st. advanced skier (sarcasm) , in Australia . I am going to buy the Legend 8000 , but could only demo in 178 .However , the length question has me stumped . My preference is for a short turn , rather than a longer radius . I am torn between the 165 & the 172 .
Now obviously I would opt for the 165 NORMALLY . What has me stumped is this :- IF I went for the 165 over the 172 would it tend to be stiffer (being shorter) ?
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 › Dynastar Legend 8000 length question...