Live in PNW and thinking about purchasing Czar for wife as a ski for new snow days. I like this ski because it has tip rocker, some camber, and there are some very good closeout deals going on right now. The question is size. My wife is tall, about 5'10 and weighs probably 160 pounds. This leads me to believe 174 is right for her, if not larger. But at the same time, she's only an advanced intermediate and somewhat passive, leading me to believe that the 166 might work. But I don't want to get her a 166cm unless I know she would not suffer any tip dive (even with rocker) if I went that small. Any advice? Thanks
Czar length for Wife
The Czar is designed as an expert powder ski. It has among the least sidecut of any ski made, with a 44 meter turn radius. are you sure it's a good choice. If you do it, I disagree with the assessments above on length, but since I haven't skied it I'll not suggest any thing except that you talk with someone who really knows that particular ski. It is unique.
I'm not an expert regarding the radius issue, but I've read many experts' comments and it makes sense to me: The sidecut radius really only matters on the groomers. If she's only going to use these skis in powder then the flex and rocker/camber will affect their performance for her more than the sidecut. From reading much advice on this topic, it seems that less sidecut is preferred in 3D snow to prevent hookiness, but they may be harder to carve with on firm groomers getting back to the lift. Everybody used to ski on skis with far less sidecut than the Czars (including all the beginners), so how bad can a 44m sidecut be?
- 4 Posts. Joined 1/2007
- Select All Posts By This User
174 cm for the Czar sounds fine. I have used these in Tahoe for a couple of years and really like them. They are easy to ski, work great in fresh snow and are OK on soft groomers. I have never used them on a hardpack day and don't think they would be a good everyday ski at all. The effect of straight sidecut is minimized somewhat by the fact that front half of the ski does not even touch snow that has been packed down
Very fun skis. I think your wife will like them. I have attached a link to a review that I posted earlier.
Davluri, why all the aggressive and negative comments if, as you say, you've never skied the ski? The "blind leading the blind" -- give me a break. Do you really think you need to "own your own helicopter" to ski powder in the PNW? I'm sorry you have such a negative outlook. I'm sure something about 105 underneath with tip rocker will excel in new snow compared to the head wild thangs that my wife currently skis -- a great ski, but like other similar head skis -- a stiff ski that dives in new snow. Thanks to those with substantive comments.
- 5,882 Posts. Joined 3/2002
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Select All Posts By This User
The first ski that comes to my mind for a skier who is an "advanced intermediate and somewhat passive" for PNW new snow days is a 169 Pontoon. It'll never ever tip dive. Easy as could be to ski. Great in powder, slush, soft windbuff, etc. Not a groomer ski, but once you get used to it, it really is not that hard to ride back to the lift (again, we are talking soft days...). Heck, on spring slush days, it is a great "groomer" ski. The overall design makes it way more maneuverable, even on edge, than you'd think. A great ski for a la nina year in the Cascades. After a few days of just chilling & using them in soft snow, it'll be a whole new world.
The other skis that jump to my mind are the Rossi S7 or maybe S110, and the '11 Line SFB. Both should be very "friendly" for the skier you describe, while being more middle of the road in terms of design. (have yet to ski any of these, but have heard lots of comments on them).
The people I know who have really liked the Czar have been rather strong "traditional" style skiers.
I understand the urge to shop sales. But the right ski can really make a difference in fun factor. Anyway, red/white Pontoons should be easy to find on sale. S7s, maybe in smaller sizes... This year's 'toons & SFBs, not so much.