It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
So basically I skied on candide 2.0s for the 2017 and 2018 season, and those had a width of 102. I loved them for hitting groomers and park and were even pretty good in the deep stuff. But by the end of the season I came to realize that I like to bomb things (I wanted stiffer skies than the 2.0s which tend to be unstable in choppy high speeds) and have crazy float in powder. So this year I bought a pair of CT 5.0s, which are 122 waist, and am literally being harassed by all my friends for them being too fat for the west coast. Honestly what do y'all think is too fat?
I have some BD Helio 105's that rip hard pack and thigh deep. I have some JJ Zeros that are fun in slush and deep, but are leg burners to rip regularly. For a park ski, I don't really like anything over mid 90 range cause ice coast and I like going f a s t
in a 2' utarded cold smoke blower dump 138 or 142 aint to fat for me
and no body harrasses me when I bomb the pow pows on em
ifin I was skidding around on hardpack or dust on crust unable to carve or finish a turn I would hope my friends would tell me
I have a bunch of other skis in my quiver that ski those conditions better
IMO waist width isn't really the issue, the sidecut and camber as a much bigger effect. Of course a 110 will handle better on piste than a 122+, but its all down to what you like. Ski what's most fun for you, tell your friends to chill
You may be a bit light for the waist width, but with that said what’s the worst that’ll happen, you float more? You’ll gain weight over time making them float less and also get stronger due to skiing bigger skis. Have fun on them and don’t expect them to punch through snow like your 2.0’s but they should make for a great time.
**This post was edited on Nov 7th 2019 at 5:25:36pm