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!

90-100 park ski. What to get?

profile picture
Christy_H
Posts: 17 - Karma: 21
I have the ARV96 but I'm trying to keep them off rails and boxes to keep them nice and fresh so I'm looking for a new ski to use purely for park, probably 90% of that indoors.

I'm 184cm and around 90kg. Ideally I want something around 92ish under foot, and nothing too pricey as these skis will rarely see the mountains. I am tempted by the Line Wallisch, but the largest is a 178, which i fear is a bit small for me.

Any suggestions on another ski?

Any advice is appreciated!
Dec 26 2016 8:52AM
0 0
profile picture
twatt_chaurus
Posts: 469 - Karma: 1,679
I wouldn't worry too much about the skis being little bit shorter, when you ski 90% indoors. You probably aren't going to miss the added stability that comes with length, and shorter skis are more playful in my opinion.
Dec 26 2016 12:30PM
0 0
profile picture
skippy_
Posts: 66 - Karma: 124
If you're a fan of Line then the chronic is 92 underfoot and comes in a 185 length. I've found them to measure a little short so they're probs more like a 183-4. Could be what you're after as they're a pretty standard, popular park stick.
Dec 27 2016 5:15AM
0 0
profile picture
Lewisbaboois
Posts: 22 - Karma: 63
Blendssssssss for sure
Dec 27 2016 2:04PM
0 0
profile picture
skippy_
Posts: 66 - Karma: 124
Have done a singular lap on a friend'z blendz. Can confirm it was a fun lap.
Dec 29 2016 7:26AM
0 0
profile picture
Christy_H
Posts: 17 - Karma: 21
I got a sick deal on the line wallisch so bought them. Now I'm worried if I've gone to short with a 178, someone give me confidence!
Dec 29 2016 1:31PM
0 0
profile picture
skippy_
Posts: 66 - Karma: 124
Cheap deals are always good and if you're riding mostly indoor then the shorter length probably isn't bad.
Dec 29 2016 3:55PM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
Just ski your skis.

Why do you need something 90-100 underfoot in the park? I mean, i prefer a park ski with the same underfoot, but I like to take my park skis all over here and there.

I don't know how I feel about indoor skiing in general, but I feel like just getting the cheapest price point skis you can would be the best option and just plan on going through a few pairs. When you get to having 2 pairs, even if one ski is broken you will have a spare just in case.
Jan 5 2017 12:32AM
0 0
profile picture
Christy_H
Posts: 17 - Karma: 21
SHastatahoeJust ski your skis.

Why do you need something 90-100 underfoot in the park? I mean, i prefer a park ski with the same underfoot, but I like to take my park skis all over here and there.

I don't know how I feel about indoor skiing in general, but I feel like just getting the cheapest price point skis you can would be the best option and just plan on going through a few pairs. When you get to having 2 pairs, even if one ski is broken you will have a spare just in case.


When living in England the only regular skiing I can get is indoors. It's 90% rails and jibs so the edges get a battering, hence I'm keeping my Armadas for when I can make trips out to the mountains.

I got an unreal deal on the Twalls so very happy with my set up.
Jan 5 2017 5:47AM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
Ah, I understand. Doing rails here and there won't mess up your skis. I used to do occasional rails on my race skis and my dad (my ski tech!) could tell, and would yell at me, but it was never anything a file couldnt take care of.
Jan 5 2017 10:36AM
0 0
profile picture
Outoftowner
Posts: 114 - Karma: 160
90-100 underfoot, to ski park, inside.

Why are you limiting yourself to just something that wide?
Jan 5 2017 10:13PM
0 0
profile picture
klibs
Posts: 260 - Karma: 182
Outoftowner90-100 underfoot, to ski park, inside.

Why are you limiting yourself to just something that wide?


+1 why do you need that much width? Something in the 80s would surely be fine, if not better on hard packed conditions. IMO if you are not hitting any fresh snow there is no need for a ski wider than 90 underfoot.

Wider skis are best for all-mountain performance because of the increased float on fresh snow but you will almost certainly give up carving ability on groomers. Besides, rail tricks are slightly easier on narrower skis.

I'm assuming you wouldn't be charging hard indoors while you hit rails so something softer and more forgiving would probably be nice? I would personally look for < 90 underfoot if I were you. Having said that, the blends would probably be a good choice if you really wanted a fatter ski.
Jan 6 2017 11:01AM
0 0
profile picture
klibs
Posts: 260 - Karma: 182
Nevermind, saw that you ended up with the TWalls. You are the same height as me and I ride longer skis (185) for the stability when charging hard off jumps and groomers. A bit shorter to cruise around indoors on rails will probably be more fun to screw around on so I think you'll be happy with your choice.
Jan 6 2017 11:04AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)