or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Your height vs. your ski pole length
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Your height vs. your ski pole length - Page 3

post #61 of 85
Good call, that is the pole indeed. The grips look dumb but haven't annoyed me in use...and I'm a no strap kinda guy.
post #62 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Good call, that is the pole indeed. The grips look dumb but haven't annoyed me in use...and I'm a no strap kinda guy.
When you get 'em LMK if the baskets fold for packing/tilt for terrain like the Leki Deep Pows?
post #63 of 85
Why do you need so much basket? Skinning?
post #64 of 85
In ascending priority order:

air brakes

tree wells

Utah.
post #65 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by telerod15 View Post
Why do you need so much basket? Skinning?
Need is such a strong word...
post #66 of 85

correction

I cut my poles from 46 to 43 -3"
post #67 of 85
My poles range from 50"-54", 2 pair in 50", one in 52", and one in 54". 54"s are DH poles, and the length helps alot. The shorter are obviously SL/GS, and the 52" are for freeskiing, and do good for most of the random terrain I trek into in these areas.
post #68 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by aschick View Post
Let me know if you see a pair with the older trigger grip for cheap.
Blech.... I don't like the triggers much.
post #69 of 85
There's a growing school of thought that says you can compute appropriate pole length for most skiing by using the following formula:

suggestedLength = skierHeight * 0.0

Several of the better skiers I know are now using this simple calculation. Not all by any means, but... Just sayin'
post #70 of 85

Tale of the tape

While we are on the subject, I just broke my old 52” Scotts and spent some time shopping for a new pair, and what I found out is that the manufacturer/seller’s claimed length of the pole cannot be trusted. This was true for several different brands I checked. I had two different model Scotts at the same store, marked the same length on what looked like the factory labels that were 1” different in length. Also, some companies make and market poles using 5 cm increments, which dealers will round up or down to get an inch “measurement.” Bottom line, if you’ve got some poles you like and are getting new ones, measure yours and take a tape to the store because you can’t trust the labels.
post #71 of 85
I had this experience too. The Head 120 cm is much longer than the Scott. I ended up taking a 115 cm from Head instead, as it was much closer to the Scott 120.

I can't believe we're having this discussion.
post #72 of 85
Old school of thought is that standing on your boots and skis your forearm should be parallel to the ground when you plant a ski pole. With that in mind in the ski shop you can turn a pole over and grip it on top of the basked to get an idea of what size would work-compensate an inch and a half-two for boots and skis under you.
post #73 of 85

Actually, gripping an upside down pole under the basket indoors was to compensate for the part that penetrates into the snow. Although I've stayed with 52in, my poles have become effectively shorter when accounting for thicker bindings and riser plates.

 

Comprex, If you need bigger baskets in Utah, it might be because you've developed the habit of planting too hard in Pennsylvania. I know I have. When I found myself in deep snow, I was pushing half of my pole into the snow, at which point I first thought "get bigger baskets". My second thought was "just stop doing that." Being light with the pole touch helps me ski better on hard pack too, but the blocking pole plant is a hard habit for me to break.


Edited by telerod15 - Sun, 01 Feb 09 00:14:24 GMT
post #74 of 85

That's a fair comment.

 

I still plant -HARD- on jump turns but other than that I mostly don't plant at all, merely light touch.   Still, I will keep your words in mind, particularly since harder planting is probably correlated to going too slow for proper transitions.    Going too slow for proper transitions tends to get me in trouble anyway, as that tree well episode showed.

 

The baskets are nice for getting out of trouble when it all goes pear shaped, though.   And they fold nicely into the luggage.  :)


Edited by comprex - Sun, 01 Feb 09 00:26:58 GMT
post #75 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex View Post

That's a fair comment.

 

I still plant -HARD- on jump turns but other than that I mostly don't plant at all, merely light touch.   Still, I will keep your words in mind, particularly since harder planting is probably correlated to going too slow for proper transitions.    Going too slow for proper transitions tends to get me in trouble anyway, as that tree well episode showed.

 

The baskets are nice for getting out of trouble when it all goes pear shaped, though.   And they fold nicely into the luggage.  :)


Edited by comprex - Sun, 01 Feb 09 00:26:58 GMT

 

 

your right tele is very wrong.

 

also trying to push with your poles in deep snow when the baskets are tiny sucks. Remember telerod is a guy who insist on doing everything the hardest way possiable.

post #76 of 85

Pretty sure I outmasochisted telerod on a couple of occasions.

 

Nothing recent though.

post #77 of 85

Haha, a comment I made at telemarktips, "Telemark is for those who wish to ski in the worst possible way."  Someone used that quote as his signature line over there. 

 

Now, I don't prefer small baskets at all, but since I don't actually ski, the size of my baskets doesn't really matter. I haven't been near deep snow in over a decade, so I forgot about using the poles to push one's self on traverses, etc. 

post #78 of 85

I purchased my new high end Scott poles two weeks ago.  They all seem to come with the dinky small baskets, and since I ski off the groomed whenever possible I had them put on some bigger Scott powder baskets, which both broke the first day of skiing. Thinking maybe the shop guy screwed them up when he switched them I got another pair and put them on myself, but they both broke after 3 days of skiing, so I'm now back to the small racing baskets, which are completely useless if you have conditions where they actually come in contact with the snow.  Are they making them in China now?  My hope is that they will make me a better skier by forcing me not to rely on pole plants, but then what's the point of using poles?  It looks like I'm headed for duct taping my old K2 baskets on in order to get something that works in deep snow.

post #79 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post

I purchased my new high end Scott poles two weeks ago.  They all seem to come with the dinky small baskets, and since I ski off the groomed whenever possible I had them put on some bigger Scott powder baskets, which both broke the first day of skiing. Thinking maybe the shop guy screwed them up when he switched them I got another pair and put them on myself, but they both broke after 3 days of skiing, so I'm now back to the small racing baskets, which are completely useless if you have conditions where they actually come in contact with the snow.  Are they making them in China now?  My hope is that they will make me a better skier by forcing me not to rely on pole plants, but then what's the point of using poles?  It looks like I'm headed for duct taping my old K2 baskets on in order to get something that works in deep snow.

 

EMS Deep Powder baskets is what I would try next (I am assuming these are Al poles?).

post #80 of 85

Thanks, I'll check those out!  Although I like to ski deep snow and need something for climbing, traversing and skiing it, I end up doing lots of packed, bumps and the usual area skiing. In the past I've had good luck with Scott powder baskets holding up to non-powder abuse, but the new ones seem exceptionally lame based on the four that broke on me in the last 2 weeks.


Edited by mudfoot - Mon, 02 Feb 09 18:54:22 GMT
post #81 of 85
 I was always told that you put your ski boots on, and grab the pole upside down below the basket and the with the handle on the floor, your forearm should be parallel to the floor.  I had a pair of 50" Scott Comps from 1976 to 2004, when one broke just above the basket.  I payed $50 in 1976 and would pay $300 today for a brand new pair of them.  I really like the molded handle without any straps.  They hung nicely on the chair bar.  I have a pair of something or other now, but still miss my Scott Comps.
Edited by JKKristinsson - 8/19/2009 at 04:24 am GMT
Edited by JKKristinsson - 8/19/2009 at 04:24 am GMT
post #82 of 85
 I used to go 45* from the top on the lower arm, now I go 45* from bottom of the lower arm. For me at 5'10" is a 47" pole. One of the things Squatty mentioned at Big Sky is most skiers are skiing with poles that are too long. 
post #83 of 85
Interesting stuff.  I have always liked a bit longer reach in the steeps and for GS starts too.  Or so I thought.  Most of my skis now have pretty high risers and I haven't changed my pole size in years.  I need to see how I grip them with my skis on.  I also never considered how they might affect my posture.
I'm 5'9" and my main poles are 49" (Total length).  I can't find any markings without removing the SL guards.  I have new 52" SG poles I got really cheap at a swap and I plan to cut them.
Food for thought here
post #84 of 85
I feel like I could go a little longer than 54" but 56" just a tad too much. Does anybody make nice (non adjustable) 55" poles.
post #85 of 85
 JKK, remove the grips from your old poles and put them on a new pair.

PhilT, remove the grips from a pair of 56s and cut an inch off.
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 › Your height vs. your ski pole length