Red Bull Unrailistic | LIVE Broadcast

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!

What type of ski should I get?

profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
I am a 5'6" Male and am having a hard time finding good skis.

I basically do it all. I do a lot of trees and moguls, and always mix in a few powder days.
I like to ski fast, but not super fast.
I like to do smaller jumps and drops (nothing over 10-15 feet)

I have been looking at a lot of different All mountain skis, but don't know if 175 is too large for my height.

Any recommendations for a ski that can work through all this stuff and still have some float for the powder days?

Any advice would help a lot!



Apr 29 2013 6:15PM
20 4
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
Check out:
K2 Kung Fujas- 102 underfoot
ON3P Jeronimo - 98
Moment PB&J - 101
Atomic Ritual- 103 underfoot

Line Prohet 98
Armada TST- 101

Bottom two are directional
Apr 29 2013 6:36PM
1 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
96 or 98 is the width on the old jmo. The new ones are 101 under foot.
Apr 29 2013 6:54PM
1 0
profile picture
VD.
Posts: 4054 - Karma: 4,564

Most companies now make at least one ski that fits your needs. If you're looking for more park oriented performance, without sacrificing the ability to ski all mountain, I'd look at stuff around 100 underfoot. However if you're more interested in all mountain skiing, but still want to be able to ski the park on the same ski, some around 107 underfoot might suit better. Its all personal preference, I prefer a slightly wider ski for everything, but then again for what you want to do, some people would want something on the skinnier side, ie. ~100 underfoot. Regardless, I've listed skis from both categories so you can choose. See below ...

Skis around 100 Underfoot

Rossignol Scimitar Open

Rossignol Scimitar

Line Blend

ON3P Jeronimo

Moment PB&J

K2 Kung Fujas

K2 Shredittor 102 (come out for the 2013/2014 season and replaces the Kung Fujas)

Volkl Bridge

Dynastar 6th Sense Silencer

Line Chronic

Surface One Time

RMU Diam


Skis around 107 Underfoot

Line Sir Francis Bacon

Atomic Blog

Salomon Rocker2 108

Rossignol Sickle Open

Moment Deathwish

ON3P Jefferey

K2 Shredittor 112 (comes out for the 2013/2014 season)

Icelantic Nomad

RMU Apostle


Apr 30 2013 5:39AM
1 0
profile picture
50Kal
Posts: 2826 - Karma: 5,367
Anything posted so far will work. One ski maybe not mentioned Armada AVR in 175.
Apr 30 2013 12:03PM
1 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Thanks, but one concern.

Right now I am on skis that have a 66 mm waist. They are GS Skis.

Would it be hard to make the transition from such a skinny ski to one that is around 100 mm underfoot?

I do mainly all mountain, but some park also.
Apr 30 2013 5:52PM
1 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Thanks for all the info!

I'm just wondering how hard it would be to transition from a used pair of demo race skis with 66 underfoot to something around 100 underfoot.
Apr 30 2013 5:54PM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
I went from some "traditional" skis which were the k2 apache recons which were 78 underfoot to some atomic rituals that were 103 and it felt very natural, even in steep technical coulours
Apr 30 2013 6:08PM
1 1
profile picture
thesoloist
Posts: 71 - Karma: 145
This I can relate. I moved from 66mm rental to 73mm carver and I demo'd 2014 line chronic(92mm) and volkl kendo(89mm) and can barely notice any diff. I'm intermediate/adv. intermediate. To me ~90 is good enough on east coast/my ability.
Apr 30 2013 6:31PM
1 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Did you ski the coulours before? Just wondering haha
Apr 30 2013 6:31PM
1 0
profile picture
keatdogg
Posts: 95 - Karma: 110
If you were surviving on a 66mm underfoot ski, I am assuming your all-mountain skiing doesn't include a lot of deep or variable snow. If that is the case, you probably don't need to go to a 100mm ski. But if you are looking to take advantage of more pow/crud/everything variable, then the above posters are right, 100mm is a good ballpark to be in.
Apr 30 2013 7:02PM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
Yeah. Most of these skis still do pretty good on the hardpack, but what you have to look out for is more of their camber profile than width. The same day i tried the 103 atomics, I also used some 108 Salomon rocker2 108s and I had no confidence on the ice. But thats because they were a much softer ski with a very rockered tip and tail, so my effective edge length was much shorter
Apr 30 2013 7:03PM
1 1
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
That was definitely an issue. On powder days over 10" I was left behind by my friend who is skiing on 92 underfoot. I didn't look at changing to wider skis because I didn't have the money at the time.
Apr 30 2013 8:49PM
1 0
profile picture
50Kal
Posts: 2826 - Karma: 5,367
It might feel different for the first couple runs but if your decent skier, you will like a wider waist right away.  To support my claim here is an article from Blister gear review on why Fat skis are better and easier.

http://blistergearreview.com/articles/skiing-101-safer-skiing-the-case-for-fatter-rockered-skis
Apr 30 2013 10:05PM
1 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Thanks for all the input guys!

One more question though...

What size skis do you think is in the right range? I am still growing so I want to get the skis a little bigger, but I don't want them to be so big that I can't do moguls and tree skiing.
May 1 2013 4:49PM
1 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
If you want to ski park with it, mid 170s, if you want to only use it for cruising/skiing all mountain, closer to 180
May 1 2013 8:14PM
2 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
I am almost 5'6" and do 95% all mountain. I find that interesting because 170 is about an inch over my head or a little more
Would that make it a lot more difficult to go through moguls being on such long skis?


May 1 2013 9:48PM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
180 would be way too long for you if 170 is an inch over your head. Im 6'2" and an ideal length for me is about 184ish.
It depends on what type of ski you're getting. If it has no rocker, it can be shorter, but if it has rocker in the tip and tail the effective edge length would be a lot shorter so youd want to go longer. Thats why people ski powder skis longer than their all mountain ones
May 1 2013 10:01PM
1 2
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
I guess I must just like my skis long then, because I ski 191 caylors all the time unless I'm skiing park, and I'm about 5'10" or 5'11" and 145 lbs
May 2 2013 1:24AM
0 0
profile picture
geist
Posts: 493 - Karma: 984
100+ width, 170-176cm
you'll love it
May 2 2013 8:32AM
0 0
profile picture
Nate.Dog
Posts: 1672 - Karma: 2,098
I find i like pow skis to be a lot longer than my park skis, like a good 10 cm longer.
May 2 2013 10:23AM
0 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Thanks guys. I've been looking at 168 to 175 just because I am going to keep growing, but I dot want them to be long enough that I can't do large moguls. Many of the runs I do have moguls on them that you need to get through to get to the good stuff.

I have never heard of 191's before. That is huge haha.

If the skis I am getting would have any rocker, it would probably just be a little in the tip if it was early rise.
Thanks for all the info! I am learning a lot about peoples ski preferences.
May 2 2013 6:00PM
0 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
So 168 would be pretty much exactly your height, which would be good if you're skiing on a mostly camber ski. How much do you plan on growing though? Becuase if you want the skis to last and you're gonna grow another 2 or 3 inches at least, go with 175.
May 2 2013 6:25PM
0 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
i am probably going to grow another 2 or 3 inches within the next few years. right now 175 is about 2 to 3 inches over my head which i don't think is all that bad.
May 4 2013 6:45PM
0 0
profile picture
jmasterp
Posts: 1976 - Karma: 233
Surface one time
May 4 2013 6:56PM
0 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
So, a 166 would be right at the top of my head I have found out, and I am probably going to grow 2 to 3 more inches in the next few years.
May 4 2013 7:05PM
0 0
profile picture
p-fo
Posts: 9372 - Karma: 6,155
You can't really get good pow and mogul performance in one ski, unless by "skiing moguls" you simply mean jumping over them and/or mashing through them. You can get skis that are a pretty decent compromise between park and pow, or park and bumps, but not really pow and bumps.
But even more importantly, what I've gotten from this thread is that you're in the process of transitioning away from being a gaper. You're a decent skier, but you're young and growing, and still developing the pow riding and park skills, as well as your riding style and preferences. And you seem to ski the east and this will be your first pair of twintips. So you shouldn't stress a ton about what you get, nor should you spend a lot. You should wait until summer, then hop on some older discounted park skis from Evo or another online shop that are 90-95 underfoot, in the low 170s and only minimally rockered.
Just transitioning to that from skinny ass slalom skis will be a vast improvement in both park and pow. Yeah, you'll lose some mogul performance, but that's just the way it is. Then in a couple years, reevaluate how you ski, and apply what you've learned and experienced to your next ski purchase.
May 4 2013 8:50PM
1 0
profile picture
rBMX88
Posts: 20 - Karma: 36
Basically. Except the west coast and the park bit. I don't really do park at all. I definitely am a gaper right now with my womens gs skis and hiking poles. Also, I am from the west coast. You have a good idea since I know I am going to grow. Anything wider than a 66 waist will help with pow, and I have been able to ski it with my current skis already (barely). i can probably compromise some mogul compatibility for overall performance. I've only been skiing about 4 years, but I can do everything that my home mountain has to offer. thanks for all the advice.
May 5 2013 4:32PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)