EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Length and Binding Choice for Watea 78
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Length and Binding Choice for Watea 78

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
Suggestions on ski length for Watea 78? 5'10", 165 lbs. advanced but not expert skier. Also, any binding recommendations for these from folks who have skied them?
post #2 of 11
One way to get a ball-park estimate of ski length is to look at a model of ski that works really well for you now. How many lengths is that ski from the shortest or longest available? If the shortest is 155 and you're on the next size, 165, then one size up from the shortest in your new ski might be your initial guideline. I generally size my skis one size down from the max available for my size and skiing style. The Watea 78 comes in 159cm, 167, 174, & 181. I'd think that the 174 would be a choice for a mid-energy skier of your size, and 181 for a strong, high energy skier.

I generally consider how much energy that model ski requires the skier to put into it to make it "come alive" and how much energy that skier puts into the ski. For example, I'm 6', 200# medium energy skier, A- skill level (I think). I use the same size ski as another skier I know who's 5-10, 150#, very high energy, A++ skill level.

Fischer offers re-labeled Head Tyrolia bindings, and those are an excellent choice.
post #3 of 11
We're similar in weight and described skiing ability. I ski in the east and got the Watea 78 in 167cm. I'd recommend you consider 167cm or the next size up (174cm?). I suspect many of the other folks on this forum will suggest the next size up.

I mounted Tyrolia bindings on mine. Check Level Nine Sports for good deals on the Head or Tyrolia LD12s. Look PX12s or the Rossi equivalent would also be a good choice. Should be able to find 'em at a reasonable price with the 80mm brakes.

STE
post #4 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the feedback. I am trying to figure out if the 167cm or 174cm length would be best for me. From most of what I have seen in these forums, folks generally seem to gravitate to a little longer ski. I think I may be on the other side of the spectrum and would probably prefer to err on the shorter side. I just want to make sure I don't miss the boat on the ski's best performance characteristics by going too short. My hardpack ski is 170cm which is fine, but if I had it to do over again, I would probably choose 165cm.
post #5 of 11
What do you want to do with this ski? Do you ski in the East or West? If you ski in the West and want this for soft snow, trees and bumps I would get the 174. For the East it would be a toss up but if you already have a groomer ski, what are you going to do with the Watea 78 that you can't do with your groomer ski?
post #6 of 11
Thread Starter 
My groomer ski is the RX Fire 8 at only 65mm waist and 14m turning radius. We haven't gotten out west for a few years, and I need to face the fact that western skiing is not highly likely. For the east, my idea of a "mid-fat" is in the 78-79mm range.
post #7 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post
My groomer ski is the RX Fire 8 at only 65mm waist and 14m turning radius. We haven't gotten out west for a few years, and I need to face the fact that western skiing is not highly likely. For the east, my idea of a "mid-fat" is in the 78-79mm range.
IMO the Watea is not the tool for what you appear to be looking for in the East, it's more of a Western midfat. If you want a wider, longer radius ski for the East would suggest you look at the Fischer Cool Heat, Volkl AC20 or 30, Head Monster 78 or other more groomer oriented midfats.
post #8 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ski the East View Post
We're similar in weight and described skiing ability. I ski in the east and got the Watea 78 in 167cm. I'd recommend you consider 167cm or the next size up (174cm?). I suspect many of the other folks on this forum will suggest the next size up.

I mounted Tyrolia bindings on mine. Check Level Nine Sports for good deals on the Head or Tyrolia LD12s. Look PX12s or the Rossi equivalent would also be a good choice. Should be able to find 'em at a reasonable price with the 80mm brakes.

STE
STE,

Sounds like your experience is closest to how I will be using these skis. Did you try others before choosing the Watea's? What made you select these in the end? Since I am also using them for eastern skiing (Killington, Smugglers, etc.) your insight is very helpful.
Thanks.
post #9 of 11
If you're interested in a 176cm Watea 78, I've got a pair for sale. Brand new. Also have new Rossignol Axial 120 bindings to go with.
post #10 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric S View Post
IMO the Watea is not the tool for what you appear to be looking for in the East, it's more of a Western midfat. If you want a wider, longer radius ski for the East would suggest you look at the Fischer Cool Heat, Volkl AC20 or 30, Head Monster 78 or other more groomer oriented midfats.
+1

I was looking at the Watea's also(midwest skier 90% of the time) and basically its a soft snow condition ski. Everyone I talked to in the end said it wasn't really designed for east/midwest skiing conditions. Few times I've skied the east coast I found the conditions similar to the Midwest.

I went with the Monster 78's and had them out last weekend on 100% man made snow and they worked flawless. Held a solid edge and never gave out under pressure no matter how fast I went. I could basically do any turn shape I wanted in any matter. I could go short, short, long, short, and the ski just performed perfectly each time. Went through part of the terrain park that was open and alot of corn snow in it(guess they figured the snowboarders would smash that up during the weekend) and skis just bulled through it with little to no chattering even at higher speeds. In the end the ski performed flawless on what I'd consider the worse conditions I'm going to encounter all seasion long.

If you do go with the Watea's I'd go 174. Remember they have a slight twin tip design to them so chances are the 174 skis more like a traditional 170ish.
post #11 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks to all for your comments and input. I think I will heed your advice. When I was in "stocking up" mode on last year's skis, I happened onto good deals on both the Monster 78 and Nomad Blackeye. I was thinking about the Watea 78 for less crossover with my RX Fire 8's, but the more I think about the conditions we get on a "good day" in the east, the more I realize the other 2 pairs might be a better bet. I think I will just try them both out, keep what works best and sell the other. Maybe this is one time my equipment addiction and stock-piling will be helpful!
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 › Length and Binding Choice for Watea 78