Hello NS, I have been in a dilemma about buying some all-rounder mid-fat skis. I was hoping you can contribute with some knowledge.
Considering a height of 5.6 feet and weight of around 138~139lbs, which type of ski would you choose for better overall flotation in snow? and, if possible, why?
a) a 175 ~178cm length, 100~104mm waist ski
or
b) a 170~173 cm length, 105~110mm waist ski
Appreciate your input!!
Online
- Newschoolers
- rudager
- cory.iyoob
- ThaLetterM.
- VinnieF
- Rparr
- YoungChristmas
- .zoidberg
- BlackSam
- CashKleest
- Chawn2112
- CJKski
- D.B.
- gaddafski
- hennytano
- iced
- JohnnyDope
- Loodwik
- Manskimac
- marcoreo
- mikey375
- Moonraccoon7
- nmwninjart
- NPF
- pyrothesaucer
- rjnaha
- Rundkino
- sendinswede
- SendyMcSendyface
- shredasaurus
- SMS_Freeskiing
- Stuuuuuuuuuu
- TheMailMan
- The_half_Faroese
- VerneriMaekelae
- Wonderwop
- YoungJens
- 37 members 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!
Mechanics of flotation?
Are you going to tell me they have the same surface area roughly? I'm too lazy to calculate right now.
I'd say if that's the case I'd think the shorter/wider ski would float better due to the surface area beneath your feet in a stiffer area of the ski.
I'm the same size as you and though I gravitate towards shorter skis generally in this case I'd probably pick the lighter of the two options in their given lengths.
I'd say if that's the case I'd think the shorter/wider ski would float better due to the surface area beneath your feet in a stiffer area of the ski.
I'm the same size as you and though I gravitate towards shorter skis generally in this case I'd probably pick the lighter of the two options in their given lengths.
A 175-178cm length, 105-110mm waist ski.
So considering a similar surface area it is true it makes more sense to have a wider surface under the foot area for flotation. Much clearer now, thanks!
mystery3Are you going to tell me they have the same surface area roughly? I'm too lazy to calculate right now.
I'd say if that's the case I'd think the shorter/wider ski would float better due to the surface area beneath your feet in a stiffer area of the ski.
I'm the same size as you and though I gravitate towards shorter skis generally in this case I'd probably pick the lighter of the two options in their given lengths.
Go 175+ and 105-110 it will float even better
Saho3914Go 175+ and 105-110 it will float even better
Why not just get 215's with like 140 waist? How big are your pow skis?
I'd rather have a bit more length than a bit more girth given your size.
Honestly, there are very few pow days where I'd ever really need anything over 110-115mm wide. If I can ride a fat ski that's versatile then I'm all for it, but I love shredding most pow days on smaller widths.. until it gets real deep when you need something fat to keep your speed up. Depends on the snow too though..
Honestly, there are very few pow days where I'd ever really need anything over 110-115mm wide. If I can ride a fat ski that's versatile then I'm all for it, but I love shredding most pow days on smaller widths.. until it gets real deep when you need something fat to keep your speed up. Depends on the snow too though..
mystery3Why not just get 215's with like 140 waist? How big are your pow skis?
184cm and 116mm underfoot and then another pair thats 186cm and 124mm
Saho3914184cm and 116mm underfoot and then another pair thats 186cm and 124mm
Those are some pretty big skis! I'm not lucky enough to need separate skis for different conditions. Hopefully I'll see some pow this year and tackle it with 96mm underfoot.
mystery3Those are some pretty big skis! I'm not lucky enough to need separate skis for different conditions. Hopefully I'll see some pow this year and tackle it with 96mm underfoot.
You'll be fine on those, rocker profile seems to have a much bigger impact on float than people expect
Longer ski + bigger waist for pow. For you, 175-180 should be a good start and a 110+ waist would be a nice option for all around pow/groomer performance. Moment death wish has pretty good all around performance so it may be worth taking a peek. And as said above, rocker is a must. The more splay your tips have (height of tip, doesn’t neccisarily have to be length of rocker) the easier time you’ll have in pow. For example, my JJs will do better in deep pow compared to my Icelantic Gypsys because they have a bigger splay despite having less rocker overall.
ZypherLonger ski + bigger waist for pow. For you, 175-180 should be a good start and a 110+ waist would be a nice option for all around pow/groomer performance. Moment death wish has pretty good all around performance so it may be worth taking a peek. And as said above, rocker is a must. The more splay your tips have (height of tip, doesn’t neccisarily have to be length of rocker) the easier time you’ll have in pow. For example, my JJs will do better in deep pow compared to my Icelantic Gypsys because they have a bigger splay despite having less rocker overall.
How do your JJs hold up on groomers? Im a Midwest skiier who rarely faces any pow, and i ski on landfills. Finally moving out west and looking to get some sort of sidecountry touring/all mountain hybrid setup. The 19' bent 120s caught my eye but from what I've read that seems to be an unnecessary waist width
**This post was edited on Mar 22nd 2018 at 4:31:08pm
DunnersHow do your JJs hold up on groomers? Im a Midwest skiier who rarely faces any pow, and i ski on landfills. Finally moving out west and looking to get some sort of sidecountry touring/all mountain hybrid setup. The 19' bent 120s caught my eye but from what I've read that seems to be an unnecessary waist width
**This post was edited on Mar 22nd 2018 at 4:31:08pm
Personally I didn’t love the JJs on groomers. Sure they rip but I didn’t like the tight radius they had. 17-18m is too small for my style, mid 20s is better for me. If you’re looking for a resort/touring setup look at the Moment Bibby and the Bibby Tour (named the wildcat for next years line). They rip on groomers and are light enough for touring. Plus they’re a fun as hell big mtn/powder ski. If you don’t plan on skiing switch, the billy goats and steeples from ON3P are another great option. The JJs were amazing for the ski they were but didn’t hold up to my standards in a ski. If they were less tapered and a tad stiffer they’d be the next pair in my lineup.
dude just get the fattest skis you can find
JJ's are only good in untracked pow or trees. They are some of the best skis ever for untracked. They suck everywhere else.
JiseiHello NS, I have been in a dilemma about buying some all-rounder mid-fat skis. I was hoping you can contribute with some knowledge.
Considering a height of 5.6 feet and weight of around 138~139lbs, which type of ski would you choose for better overall flotation in snow? and, if possible, why?
a) a 175 ~178cm length, 100~104mm waist ski
or
b) a 170~173 cm length, 105~110mm waist ski
Appreciate your input!!
Guys he only weighs 139 lbs and is 5' 6". It also depends where you ski and what you're going to do with the ski. If you're wanting a powder ski then buy a powder ski at 116 underft. If you want a all mountain ski that floats then buy a ski around 108 underfoot and buy it according to your height. You shouldn't need to buy a super wide ski since you don't weigh that much. If you were 180 pounds then you should probably get a taller ski so you have more surface area giving you more float. Also you're only 5'6" and you don't want to have to throw some ski that's made for someone who is 5' 10".
All times are Eastern (-4)
