or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › BIG GUY SKIS : Full-Length Models For Us Who Ski Well - Strong Advanced to Old Pros
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BIG GUY SKIS : Full-Length Models For Us Who Ski Well - Strong Advanced to Old Pros

post #1 of 58
Thread Starter 

If you ski full length mids to fatties, and know how to drive 'em, lets find out what your riding on. I'm thinking also, that if you aren't a big guy, say 195+ and over 6', but still go whole-hog jump on in.

 

I'm 6'2", 195 out of the shower, but always ski with a day pack, and have over 30 years under my belt. Have always rode on full-length stix since my first pair of Hexcel Bluelite 195s. Skied mostly 210 GS boards since my first pair of Harts, and carried that through to Volkls....though I did have a pair of Blizzard Firebird Pro 205s that almost killed me, I moved to a Rossi 4S 203s once upon a time.

 

When the fat revolution started I jumped from Salomon XScreams to first first mid-fats, a pair Ninthward First Bloods that I think were only 90mm under foot and 180s w/ RF HD14s, figuring the short length would be an issue in deep POW. A great idea, and a view of future binding application, and I was right. Cat skiing at Keystone had me scramble for a screwdriver to push them back 5cm, as I was over the handlebars twice. What a magical difference, as many of us are starting to find out when it comes to mount points. 

 

Today I'm on Head Mojo 94 187s, IMHO a perfect width for resort skiing, can pretty much do anything mounted on the factory line.

Also have my new favortie ski, obSETHed 189s at 105mm underfoot. This ski is why I started this thread., and I'll tell you why.

 

Last season one of my buds demoed the 179 length of the obSETHed, so I got to see him on them, he is just 10 lbs lighter and an inch or so shorter than me. He ripped up the powder in Champagne Glade for 5 days, but I could see the tips flapping on the runouts, as well as noodling. I thought to myself that he should have been on the 189s. I think the shorter snow contact of a rockered ski made the 179 just to damn short. On the other hand, my 189s that I picked up last March, showed none of those affects on the groomed runouts, no flapping, no noodling. While I haven't had them in deep POW yet, my first day on them had 8-12" of fresh to help me dial in my Schizos to +2.5. I go to +3 for long chutes. Also picked up some end of season Hellbents on sale, but they are waiting for this year.

 

Okay, it is your turn.

 

My Chronology....to the best of my recollection;

 

Hexcel Bluelite    195                                   Ninthward FirstBlood 180

Olin Mark V         203                                   Head Mojo 94           187

Hart GS              210                                   K2 obSETHed           189

Atomic GS          207                                   K2 Hellbents             189

Blizzard 'Bird Pro 205Active Quiver 110 (Medium).JPG

Rossi 4S             207

Volkl GS P?        210

Volkl SLC           205

V. Vario              207 

V.SnowRanger    200

Salo XScream     200

post #2 of 58

I'm 6'5" 205 lbs.

 

Salomon Force 9 3S size PR6

 

Hart F17T 201 cm

 

Rossignol Pow'Air 178

 

Rossignol Pow'Air 184

 

Kneissl Supafly 185

 

K2 Public Enemy First Gen 179

 

K2 Fujative 179

 

K2 Public Enemy Second Gen 179 (Current)

 

Hart BarHopper 188 (Current)

 

Hart Javelin GS 191 (New - Current)

 

Kneissl Fly Star 183 (New - Current)

 

 

 

post #3 of 58

Hells bells!  Those Mojos look tiny next to the K2s. 

 

Me, 6'4" and 210lbs.  Add on a backpack to that.

 

Volkl Supersport Allstars 175cm for zooming the hard groomers.

Head Monster 78 183cm for all mountain.

Head Mojo 94 187cm for soft snow and overseas trips.

 

snokat, you mention you were happy with the Mojos "on the factory line".  Did you ever play around with the fore/aft adjustment on the Mojo railflex binding?  With what success?

post #4 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDad View Post
 

The Dad's end-of-2010 quiver

 

176 Fischer AMC 79 / Fischer 12-DIN Railflex demo:  Primary purpose is early season muscle-memory activation, but later in the season, for mellow days (especially when I'm skiing a couple weeks straight or with the less-skilled).  Also (thanks to Railflex demos) my loaner skis.

186 Fischer Big Stix 84 / Tyrolia d10 FF17+:  Used to be my go-to unknown condition skis, until the Rubies came into my life.  This year, I don't think I took the storage wax off them until February or March, and that was just because I didn't have time to wax others.  Now they're my rock midfats.

188 PM Gear Bro Model (midstiff) / Marker Duke:  Touring, all-around for days when I didn't feel like something as wide as the Rubies, lending to friends who don't have powder skis but have big feet (320mm+ BSL).

190 Moment Ruby / Tyrolia d10 FF17+:  New for 2009-10, and that season's default skis, particularly when it had snowed in the last couple of days.  But I really never found a condition I didn't like them in.  Ridiculously good edge hold, especially when you take girth into account.  A little slow to turn in trees.  Basically a longer and fatter version of the Big Stix.

194 Stöckli Stormrider XL / Salomon 912ti PowerAxe:  Ice skates and groomer zoomers.  But we had a surprising number of days that called for them in 2009-10.

195 PM Gear SuperBro / Rossignol Axial 140ti Lifter:  Slaughtering livestock and self-humiliation.  Got them at the end of the season, which was good, because I needed several months to get ready for them.

195 Praxis Powder / Tyrolia Mojo 15:  For the good stuff.

Not yet pictured:  190 DPS Wailer 112RP / Tyrolia SP130 Aero Demos:  Hoping they'll react like the Praxis in the deep and the Rubies on the packed.  If they do, I might have to pare down the above.

 

6'1", 200 pounds.

 

And the stickers say "I'm compensating."

post #5 of 58

Maybe it is just me, but why are 170-something skis even being mentioned in a thread with this title?  I am not that heavy (175 at the end of the season), or particularly aggressive, and the only modern skis I have heard mentioned so far that I would consider 'Big Guy' skis are the 195 SuperBros.

post #6 of 58
Thread Starter 

SinBad7, I didn't slide em back, at least not yet. Had shin-deep POW for the 5 days I rode them last Jan. Champagne Glade @ Vail isn't that steep, just a fine glade and in places it gets tight.

It may have been a different story if I had been doing steep powder drop-ins.....maybe next time.

 

HiPlainDrifter,

Yeah, you are right, I was looking for the BIG board in the line, you know what I mean. Everything shorter than the longest, is just a knock-off, and doesn't do the same thing. The Ninthward I had only came in 180s, and a friends son skied for those guys and copped them for us, I actaully had two pair with consecutive season's graphix. They were my first twin-tips, but were really too short for me, but were easy to sell.

 

I got a call from a guy I go back with to when I was 5 y.o., and he was asking about the Atomic Bent Chetler....by the way his name is Chet, no shit! Asking me to research it for him, looks like a winner. Reason I bring this up is, he was the guy who demoed the obSETHed 179s last season and didn't like the noodling and flapping tips on runouts and such. Though he is only 175 lbs, and 6' he skis well enough to easily handle full-blown stix, so I am trying to convince him that the 192 would work fine for him as he is a Snowbirdite.

 

Moral of the story: Rockered Skis Ski Short.....if you are concerned get Schizos or RF bindings, they turn your gear into a REAL QUIVER!

 

Oh yeah, I mounted the HBs @ +5 w/ Mojo 15s, that's why the toe piece looks forward, but oddly the HBs are longer than the obSETHeds, but you would never know it when riding.

post #7 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiplainsdrifter View Post

Maybe it is just me, but why are 170-something skis even being mentioned in a thread with this title?


Because I didn't feel like recropping my quiver pic.

 

In any event, all but the Fischers, including the 190 112RPs, are the largest size offered in each model at the time (the 205 Praxis didn't come out for a couple years after I bought mine).

post #8 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiplainsdrifter View Post

Maybe it is just me, but why are 170-something skis even being mentioned in a thread with this title?  I am not that heavy (175 at the end of the season), or particularly aggressive, and the only modern skis I have heard mentioned so far that I would consider 'Big Guy' skis are the 195 SuperBros.


Because I'm 6'5" and a park rat.  Many park skis don't come in 180+ sizes.  K2 Public Enemy for example.  179 was tops.

post #9 of 58

6'3" & approx 215lbs.

 

I have been using Head monster im77's for everything last 5 years, even Japan.  After demoing some 184 Mantras at Niseko last year, I purchased a pair and will be mounting some Tyrolia RF HD14's on them. Most likely will place the +1.5 line on the skis 0 line which will allow me to slide them somewhere between 0 and -3.

 

I realise that even the Mantras are not that big and I really wanted to try out the 191 cm but the shops didn't stock them at that length. I have noticed,  some negative chit chat about the Mantras and it appears that in most cases "small" people are skiing them at 184 and then rating them poorly. For the Little Generals aout there, if you are going to demo and review a ski that is known to be powerful and stiff then try it in an apropriate length. 

Currently keeping an eye out online for something around the 115+ and approx. 190 in length but have probably missed the boat for this years trip to Hokkaido. a pair off Hellbents would round things out nicely for me.

 

Monsters for oz & NZ

 

Mantras for north America

 

Mantras/Hellbents or ???  for Japan

post #10 of 58

I've tried the Mantra in a 184 and 191.  Totally different ski.  191s were great.

post #11 of 58
6'0" 225-230 lbs. usually with a ~15lb. pack on my back west of the Mississippi.

All currently in use:
185 Blizzard Answer ('09) - plenty of ski in most conditions. Goes fast. Decent in moderate powder, crud, trees & groomers. Bit short for deep stuff.
187 Blizzard Cronus ('09) - A bit too soft. Good in bumps, and pp. Too narrow to float me in pow.
181 Blizzard Magnum ('09) - Almost no speed limit. Plenty of ski for groomed & crud. Damp and very smooth.
178 Salomon Equipe GC ('06) - good for relaxed skiing on pp, FRGR. Too soft for rec. GS racing but I've used it.
184 Dyanstar Course 66 ('05) - Rec. GS racing. Seems to be enough ski. I suck anyhow.
183 Head iM 78 ('08) - Great for eastern pp or small dumps & crud. Stable, quick, lively, yet damp and precise. Not wide enough for ripping bowls.
~159 Atomic SL11 WCup ('04) - Would prefer a 165, but still - WOW. One of my favorite skis ever. Unreal edge and quickness. Stable almost for GS. A blast for eastern groomers.
~161 Fischer World Cup SL ('06) - Nearly as good as above.

Currently seeking (any day now):
Big ski >115mm for trees, deep pow only days. Minimal to full rocker or hybrid 188-195 cm. Still whittling down my wish list.
post #12 of 58

6' 0" 220 lbs

 

Skiing a 2009 Fischer Cold Heat 176 - fantastic on the front side and crud. Could use a bit more float in powder.

 

As for progression - went from pure rental to owning boots (Nordica Sport Machine 10 - too big) to owning skis (the Fischers) to new boots (Tecnica Dragon 120 - huge improvement in fit and feel). Next step is new skis, perhaps a Sultan 85 or a Blizzard 8.7....

post #13 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by carvemeister View Post

6'0" 225-230 lbs. usually with a ~15lb. pack on my back west of the Mississippi.

All currently in use:
185 Blizzard Answer ('09) - plenty of ski in most conditions. Goes fast. Decent in moderate powder, crud, trees & groomers. Bit short for deep stuff.
187 Blizzard Cronus ('09) - A bit too soft. Good in bumps, and pp. Too narrow to float me in pow.
181 Blizzard Magnum ('09) - Almost no speed limit. Plenty of ski for groomed & crud. Damp and very smooth.
178 Salomon Equipe GC ('06) - good for relaxed skiing on pp, FRGR. Too soft for rec. GS racing but I've used it.
184 Dyanstar Course 66 ('05) - Rec. GS racing. Seems to be enough ski. I suck anyhow.
183 Head iM 78 ('08) - Great for eastern pp or small dumps & crud. Stable, quick, lively, yet damp and precise. Not wide enough for ripping bowls.
~159 Atomic SL11 WCup ('04) - Would prefer a 165, but still - WOW. One of my favorite skis ever. Unreal edge and quickness. Stable almost for GS. A blast for eastern groomers.
~161 Fischer World Cup SL ('06) - Nearly as good as above.

Currently seeking (any day now):
Big ski >115mm for trees, deep pow only days. Minimal to full rocker or hybrid 188-195 cm. Still whittling down my wish list.



 


 

Look!  A solution!

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/97795/2010-k2-hellbent-189-w-marker-griffon-schizo#post_1270992

post #14 of 58

Yes, thank you. I was eyeballing those just yesterday. That's a great deal. However, I'm still mulling it and leaning a bit toward a hybrid design at the moment. Not sure I'm ready to commit to full rocker yet. th_dunno-1[1].gif
post #15 of 58

6'4" 230 (250 with pack in the backcountry)

 

Used to be: 

 

K2 Comanche 179s

 

Now:

I use 4FRNT MSPs 181 with Deadbolt 12

post #16 of 58
Thread Starter 

Carvemeister, go for it. They are light weight and only 115 under foot, with  the 150 shovel it is floatatious, and the length can actually cruise you back to the lift.

More POW specific than the obSETHeds.

They will definitely float your boat.

post #17 of 58

6'2", 215ish - 186 Dynastar Big Troubles as my everyday ski.

 

My 16 y.o. boy is joining the "man" club at 6'3", 185ish and still growing - moving up to 187 High Society FR's as an everyday ski.  Only issue is we're still debating where to mount his bindings.  He wants 'em moved forward for better park/aerial performance,  dad thinks he should stick to more conventional mount point.  He skis mostly with me in the fun stuff (steeps, deeps, trees, bumps, etc.),  but often cuts away for an hour or two in the (stupid, dangerous, and ski-wrecking IMHO) parks.  I trust this bit of immaturity and youthful folly will eventually subside biggrin.gif

 

AM.

post #18 of 58

I'm 5'11" and 190lbs, so i'm not quite as tall as some of you. 

 

I currently have in my quiver:

192 Elan 777 w/STH16

195 SuperBROs w/916zzLAB

189 McConkey Pontoons w/916s

 

For Sale:

190 Ninthwad NGP w/a touch of custom early rise $cheap$

 

Ordered:

191 Faction 3.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

post #19 of 58

Yeah, I know some ski models (park and race) just aren't made that long, and for functional reasons.  I wasn't trying to dis your quiver, I was just saying that in my mind a big guy ski means long (190+) and stiff. 
 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FujativeOCR View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by hiplainsdrifter View Post

Maybe it is just me, but why are 170-something skis even being mentioned in a thread with this title?  I am not that heavy (175 at the end of the season), or particularly aggressive, and the only modern skis I have heard mentioned so far that I would consider 'Big Guy' skis are the 195 SuperBros.


Because I'm 6'5" and a park rat.  Many park skis don't come in 180+ sizes.  K2 Public Enemy for example.  179 was tops.

post #20 of 58

Hey

 

Would any of you would like to see a carving ski, not race stock, over 190cm, or over?

At 6'5" over 320lbs I miss long skis.

I ski a Fischer BIG HEAT 184cm ( there are too short ), still ski my K2 Seth 205.

 

If the # of ordered skis, was big enough, there could be a chance to have 190cm or + carving ski made. It is a # game, they only will make what will sell.

post #21 of 58
Thread Starter 

I haven't looked at present day GS boards, to the point that I have NO idea how long, long is anymore. Carving skis in my mind go 50 mph and put a smile on your face, GS boards?

I do have a bud who is prolly 5'7" and he loves slalom skis only, I think they are as long as my first rental skis back in '77. The boy rips moguls on those shorties, I have shoes that big. LOL

300lbs on skis, you are a BIG GUY. Maybe you should start a thread titled BIGGEST GUY SKIS!

I tried being 222 lbs a few years back after quitting butts, boy did my feet get slow.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by backroom View Post

Hey

 

Would any of you would like to see a carving ski, not race stock, over 190cm, or over?

At 6'5" over 320lbs I miss long skis.

I ski a Fischer BIG HEAT 184cm ( there are too short ), still ski my K2 Seth 205.

 

If the # of ordered skis, was big enough, there could be a chance to have 190cm or + carving ski made. It is a # game, they only will make what will sell.

post #22 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by backroom View Post

If the # of ordered skis, was big enough, there could be a chance to have 190cm or + carving ski made. It is a # game, they only will make what will sell.


Assuming that, by "carving ski," you mean something with ridiculous edge grip, try to track down the 194 Stockli Stormrider XLs or 195 PM Gear SuperBros.  

 

The Stocklis are a widened GS ski, with three layers of metal.  New old stock is often available cheap in the long length, because they didn't sell out.

 

The SuperBros are like nothing else (other than the AK SuperSalmon and the Hart Fuelie Boss, which if I understand correctly are the same ski).  Unbelievably stiff and solid.  Lay them on edge and make sure there's no one in your way.  PM Gear may still be running specials on the SuperBro; take a look on Gear Swap on tetongravity.com/forums/ for posts from splat.

post #23 of 58

I feel sorry for you heavyweights.  I'm 5'9" stretching my neck and 170 pounds.  all other things equal (price and availibility used) I buy the longest version I can get my hands on for what little I can spend on skis.  I did ski a borrowed pair of 210s one afternoon back in the day when I was only 5'3" and weighted 110 pounds.  I did a heli on them hahaha.  Back then I preferred a 195.  And, the lengths today are deceiving because 10 cm of the tail isn't even used.  Add to that that they just quit making longer skis claiming that increased torsional stiffness reduces the need for length.  I say horse hockey to that.  Length also provides a smoother ride.

Here's my list

 

Brand Model Length Type Waist Radius Bindings
K2 VO Slalom 204 Race SL Sub 70 Straight Look
K2 812 195 Race GS Sub 70 Straight Salomon
K2 Four 193 Race GS Sub 70 21 Marker
Elan M999 192 Powder 99 28 Rossi
Salomon Scream 10 Pilot 186 All Mountain 70 19 Salomon
Salamon Lab GS 185 Race GS Sub 70 21 Salomon
RD Coyote HeliDog 183 Powder 91 32 Marker
Nordica GSR  Doberman WC 181 Race GS Sub 70 21 Salomon
K2 Public Enemy 179 All Mountain/Twin 80 19.5 Salomon
K2 CaBrawler 179 Bump Ski Sub 70 21 Salomon
Nordica W80 178 MidFat 80 22 Marker
Hart F-17 177 Bump Ski Sub 70 Straight Look
Head iSuperShape WC 170 Race SL Sub 70 12 Head FF
hart Freespirit 150 Freestyle Sub 70 Straight Salomon

Edited by crgildart - 11/23/10 at 8:27am
post #24 of 58

double post

post #25 of 58

double post

post #26 of 58

double post

post #27 of 58

6'2" and 215lbs.

 

Since 1978 I have been skiing mostly off the rack and race stock skis. The list includes Yamaha Paramount SL 205, Head SL 205 (broke) and received Head LR90 GS 203, Blizzard Thermo SL205, Dynastar Course Gold SL 207 (broke) and received Course White SL207(sucked), Dynamic Geant GS 210, Head DH 225, Dynastar Course SL 203, Rossi 7SK GS 208, Rossi 9X GS 191(1st shaped), and Volkl P40 GS 193.

 

My first non-race skis In about 20 years were some Elan Magfire 12 176. These are by far the best all around skis I have ever had. I have had them for about 4 years. I ski mostly east coast in all conditions and terrain. I take the Elans in the bumps, trees, powder, ice, crud, whatever. These skis do it all. During a particularly icy day at Whiteface last March, I noticed they are finally starting to lose their ice hold. My solution was to buy some race stock 2008 Fischer RC4 World Cup GS 183 skis with  Fischer Z17 bindings. They are FIS legal with a 27M radius. They look like they were used about 4 times and come with a race tune. One of the owners of the store holding the swap grilled me to make sure I new what I was buying. He said that they were cruise missles with an unlimited top end.

 

I cannot wait to find out.

post #28 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by x10003q View Post

6'2" and 215lbs.

 

Since 1978 I have been skiing mostly off the rack and race stock skis. The list includes Yamaha Paramount SL 205, Head SL 205 (broke) and received Head LR90 GS 203, Blizzard Thermo SL205, Dynastar Course Gold SL 207 (broke) and received Course White SL207(sucked), Dynamic Geant GS 210, Head DH 225, Dynastar Course SL 203, Rossi 7SK GS 208, Rossi 9X GS 191(1st shaped), and Volkl P40 GS 193.

 

My first non-race skis In about 20 years were some Elan Magfire 12 176. These are by far the best all around skis I have ever had. I have had them for about 4 years. I ski mostly east coast in all conditions and terrain. I take the Elans in the bumps, trees, powder, ice, crud, whatever. These skis do it all. During a particularly icy day at Whiteface last March, I noticed they are finally starting to lose their ice hold. My solution was to buy some race stock 2008 Fischer RC4 World Cup GS 183 skis with  Fischer Z17 bindings. They are FIS legal with a 27M radius. They look like they were used about 4 times and come with a race tune. One of the owners of the store holding the swap grilled me to make sure I new what I was buying. He said that they were cruise missles with an unlimited top end.

 

I cannot wait to find out.


Cruise missiles?  That's too mild.  I'd guess more like Saturn V rockets.

post #29 of 58



I'm the same size,  though was 10-15 lbs lighter back in the day.  I bought that ski while in college and kept it for many years until my boys were old enough to ski regularly and I could justify upgrading to more modern equipment.  I loved that ski,  however,  and I regret that I got rid of it.  I would mount it on the wall of my office had I kept it.

 

AM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by x10003q View Post

6'2" and 215lbs.

 

... Dynastar Course SL 203,  

post #30 of 58



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rauch View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by x10003q View Post

6'2" and 215lbs.

 

Since 1978 I have been skiing mostly off the rack and race stock skis. The list includes Yamaha Paramount SL 205, Head SL 205 (broke) and received Head LR90 GS 203, Blizzard Thermo SL205, Dynastar Course Gold SL 207 (broke) and received Course White SL207(sucked), Dynamic Geant GS 210, Head DH 225, Dynastar Course SL 203, Rossi 7SK GS 208, Rossi 9X GS 191(1st shaped), and Volkl P40 GS 193.

 

My first non-race skis In about 20 years were some Elan Magfire 12 176. These are by far the best all around skis I have ever had. I have had them for about 4 years. I ski mostly east coast in all conditions and terrain. I take the Elans in the bumps, trees, powder, ice, crud, whatever. These skis do it all. During a particularly icy day at Whiteface last March, I noticed they are finally starting to lose their ice hold. My solution was to buy some race stock 2008 Fischer RC4 World Cup GS 183 skis with  Fischer Z17 bindings. They are FIS legal with a 27M radius. They look like they were used about 4 times and come with a race tune. One of the owners of the store holding the swap grilled me to make sure I new what I was buying. He said that they were cruise missles with an unlimited top end.

 

I cannot wait to find out.


Cruise missiles?  That's too mild.  I'd guess more like Saturn V rockets.

I actually laughed when I read this. Even though the racing days are mostly over, I still get excited to lap blues at high speed during mid week trips. I still have not lost the need for speed. Whiteface and Gore have some awesome trails where you can just let the skis run.

 

I also learned that all my bindings are now set too high. A week before I bought the Fischers I turned 50. I filled out the form for the binding adjustment and left the shop. A few days later they said I need to get some bindings on the ski with a lower DIN setting. The Z17 DIN range is 9-18. I figured they would be set on 9 where I have been set since I stopped racing. They told me since I turned 50 my DIN is a 7. I told them set it on 9 and  I would sign a waiver and they were ok with fitting my boots. They would not "test" the binding. How silly is this situation. If I said I was 49 this wouldn't have happened. I would hate to be flying down a trail at 50 mph, hit a bump or divot, and lose a ski because it was set at 7. Yikes.

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 › BIG GUY SKIS : Full-Length Models For Us Who Ski Well - Strong Advanced to Old Pros