Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Anyone with Mik D's?

profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
Yo, if anyone here has the Mik D, can you lay the flat on the ground and measure them from the tail to the tip?
If you can give up the lengths in metres and cm's that would be great, but feet and inches works too.
Thanks
Aug 26 2006 1:40PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
C'mon bytchez
Aug 26 2006 3:07PM
0 0
profile picture
LDuggan420
Posts: 1611 - Karma: 13
why dont you just look at the specs of them?
Aug 26 2006 3:12PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
I know the are "176" but, I've heard they had a kinda weird measuring. And my 180 MSP's are 177,5 cm tip to tail, so I was just wondering, cuz I can get a killah deal on these bytchez...

Please, somebody must have them
Aug 26 2006 3:20PM
0 0
profile picture
Tha_Grouch
Posts: 2216 - Karma: 14
He's right... ski companies measure differently. Like a LINE 178 is the same as an armada 176. B/C line measures tip to tail.. and armada measures surface area..

I was thinking about this same thing... Like which one 9thward measures.. but I don't know.. and probably won't till they're in the shop.

I can try to investigate for ya though.
Aug 26 2006 3:33PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
shyts getn bumped untill I get a answer
Aug 26 2006 4:01PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
B U M PEE
Aug 26 2006 5:15PM
0 0
profile picture
titsLOL
Posts: 7485 - Karma: 396
umm it's not like theres a noticable difference when you're skiing if its off by like a cm, would you not buy them if they are 174 instead of 175?
Aug 26 2006 6:09PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
I'm just curious, cuz 180 4FRNT are 177,5 cm tip to tail, and I want to know how long Mik D's are tip to tail.

Aug 27 2006 7:39AM
0 0
profile picture
bp.lando
Posts: 9297 - Karma: 1,495
anyone with ninthwards can help this kid.

just measure your ski all the way from tip to tail!
Aug 27 2006 10:36AM
0 0
profile picture
Tha_Grouch
Posts: 2216 - Karma: 14
That doesn't make any sense.
Aug 27 2006 12:23PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
How?
Aug 27 2006 2:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Tha_Grouch
Posts: 2216 - Karma: 14
If a ski is supposed to be a 180 and its 177.5 tip to tail.. thats different than anything I've ever seen. Like armadas.. they say they are 176.. but if measured tip to tail.. they'd be longer, b/c armada measures surface area. Line on the other hand... a 178 is the tip to tail measurement. the surface area measurement is less.. like a 176.

It makes no sense that a 180 would have a shorter tip to tail measurement... I would understand if the SA measurement was 177.5.. maybe you measured wrong?
Aug 27 2006 3:16PM
0 0
profile picture
ineedarealname
Posts: 2658 - Karma: 20
seems like a hella big deal over just wondering about a 1 cm difference on a ski...
Aug 27 2006 3:28PM
0 0
profile picture
lyndon
Posts: 7266 - Karma: 127
my t-halls are 176 cm tip to tail.........
Aug 27 2006 7:25PM
0 0
profile picture
lyndon
Posts: 7266 - Karma: 127
that doesent make sence...my 176 t-halls are 176 cm tip to tail.....
Aug 27 2006 7:26PM
0 0
profile picture
iskindiana
Posts: 1149 - Karma: 19
u really shouldnt be that worried about length... u ski on them once... you will figure it out.
my dude has a pair and he loves them.
but i dont like the Mik Ds. save bamboo for the pandas
Aug 27 2006 7:59PM
0 0
profile picture
salomon-skier
Posts: 201 - Karma: 13
the kid is just asking a damn question, answer it haha
Aug 27 2006 8:31PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
What I think, is that the ski is shorter tip-tail and gets a few cm longer measuring the entire surface area, that makes more sence to me.

But, THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME G'S WITH NINTWARDS THAT CAN MEASURE TIP TO TAIL LENGTS ON THEIR SKI GODDAMN!!
Aug 28 2006 8:47AM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
This is how I measured the 180 MSP's.
Ski
\/
|\__________/|
|------------|
178cm

That's how I want somebody to mearure there Ninths.
PLEASE!
Aug 28 2006 10:36AM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
This better work:
______Ski
_______\/
|\__________/|
|-------------------|
178cm
Aug 28 2006 10:38AM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
This better work:
______Ski
_______\/
|\__________/|
|-----------------|
_______178cm

There, now it looks right
Aug 28 2006 10:39AM
0 0
profile picture
EClay46
Posts: 2499 - Karma: 69
tip to tail is shorter than measuring the surface of the ski because when u measure the surface u get extra distance from followoing the curve of the ski. a straight line is shorter than a curved one that starts and ends at the same points.
Aug 28 2006 10:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Tha_Grouch
Posts: 2216 - Karma: 14
^I don't think so. When SA is measured they measure from the contact points where the ski touches the snow.. not the extra base length on the tips and tails.

And if I'm wrong... then DAMN IT! But, I am pretty sure I am right on this one.

Even so.. whats the difference btw a couple cm. If you like them.. get them.
Aug 28 2006 1:06PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
This iz done niggaz, I'm rollin Mik D's for next season bytchez, haha.
Aug 28 2006 3:13PM
0 0
profile picture
steezy-joe
Posts: 452 - Karma: 10
just get them its not gonna be that different from a 176im sure its ball park.
Aug 28 2006 3:15PM
0 0
profile picture
XXL_Steeze
Posts: 1746 - Karma: 15
Did you read my last post? Or did you ignore it just so that you can seem less a nOOb by posting alot?
Aug 28 2006 3:18PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)