The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (57% of Full)
Home
>
General Discussion
>
Topic
Re: skis for son need your thoughts
All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner
of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion
and not fact until verified independently.
|
skis for son need your thoughts February 14, 2017 03:06PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Finally after years of skiing at Badger a few times a year, my son has stopped growing and for his birthday we are buying him his own ski gear. It has been decades since I skied so I can't really give him much insight on skis. He is 5'9" with clothes on about 120 pounds and is a intermediate but leaning more to advance skier. He likes to ski On Piste and not in powder so my suggesting he get an all mountain ski was not a hit. At Badger he usually rents a Rossignol Pursuit in a 157 or 163 length. He had thought about the following skis. Rossignol Hero Elite St, Rossignol Pursuit 600 basalt or Rossignol Hero Elite All Turn CA. On length he doesn't know to do a 163 or 170. I skied in the dark ages and at 5'2" skied 180 so what do I know now about how new skis perform.
|
Re: skis for son need your thoughts February 18, 2017 11:52AM | Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 33 |
There are lots of variations to consider... how many days per year expected to ski? Age? Experience? Preferred terrain (groomed, moguls)? Season preference (winter, spring, etc, budget? How fast like to ski?
What technique does he ski? For example a step-turner on an advanced slope is still an intermediate. A parallel skier who carves on intermediate slopes is probably advanced.
You also should consider that each resort's definition of advanced vs intermediate differ. For example, I have never skied Badger, but I have heard that it's advanced slopes may be considered intermediate at Squaw Valley.
Length of ski is not the only consideration, there are now three measurements, tail width, waist width, front tip width. There is also "rocker" and "camber", turn radius, along with different stiffnesses....
All these variations can be a bit overwhelming, but there is no substitute for trying different combinations to see what is most enjoyable. Note: don't purchase skis for "anticipated/expected" proficiency. An intermediate skier on "expert" skis may be miserable.
A lot of resorts/ski shops offer up demo rentals; on resort shops often allow you to try as many different demos as you want during the day. And they apply the demo fee to a purchase. Plus towards the end of the season they will sell off their demo skis for a really discounted price.
Brand names/models are sometimes hard to compare... it's good to get used to the tail/waist/tip/length rocker/no rocker measurements.
If you are still fixated on length, independent of the other measurements, then a 163 is much preferable to a 170. The skis he is considering have very narrow waists and are for advanced/expert, so shorter is much better unless he is really really strong, or is technically proficient.
Finally boots are really important too.. if he has truly stopped growing, i would suggest investing in good boots first. Without good fitting boots, it's almost impossible to really compare subtleties between skis.
Good luck and enjoy this winter!
What technique does he ski? For example a step-turner on an advanced slope is still an intermediate. A parallel skier who carves on intermediate slopes is probably advanced.
You also should consider that each resort's definition of advanced vs intermediate differ. For example, I have never skied Badger, but I have heard that it's advanced slopes may be considered intermediate at Squaw Valley.
Length of ski is not the only consideration, there are now three measurements, tail width, waist width, front tip width. There is also "rocker" and "camber", turn radius, along with different stiffnesses....
All these variations can be a bit overwhelming, but there is no substitute for trying different combinations to see what is most enjoyable. Note: don't purchase skis for "anticipated/expected" proficiency. An intermediate skier on "expert" skis may be miserable.
A lot of resorts/ski shops offer up demo rentals; on resort shops often allow you to try as many different demos as you want during the day. And they apply the demo fee to a purchase. Plus towards the end of the season they will sell off their demo skis for a really discounted price.
Brand names/models are sometimes hard to compare... it's good to get used to the tail/waist/tip/length rocker/no rocker measurements.
If you are still fixated on length, independent of the other measurements, then a 163 is much preferable to a 170. The skis he is considering have very narrow waists and are for advanced/expert, so shorter is much better unless he is really really strong, or is technically proficient.
Finally boots are really important too.. if he has truly stopped growing, i would suggest investing in good boots first. Without good fitting boots, it's almost impossible to really compare subtleties between skis.
Good luck and enjoy this winter!
|
Re: skis for son need your thoughts February 18, 2017 09:53PM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
Thank for answering back. My son is going to be 21 and has been skiing since he was 7. He has done all of his skiing at Badger and goes during his winter and spring breaks and on some of the holiday weekends. He has been taking lessons each time we go there and is considered an advanced skier by the instructors. I know he is not close to a expert level because I was an expert skier when I was able to ski. He prefers on piste skiing and has tried both on piste and all mountain skis and prefers on piste skies. Any way, long story short after trying on multiple boots he ended up with Nordica boots and after much deliberation and contact with a Rossignol Rep he decided on the Rossignol Hero Elite All Turn 163. He has been researching skis for two years now and this is what he finally decided on. Nice thing is that the place we bought them from has a exchange policy. One thing I can say is that ski equipment has really changes since I skied. I used to ski 180's and I am only 5'2" but that was back in the "old days" of the 70's and 80's.Quote
OL
There are lots of variations to consider... how many days per year expected to ski? Age? Experience? Preferred terrain (groomed, moguls)? Season preference (winter, spring, etc, budget? How fast like to ski?
What technique does he ski? For example a step-turner on an advanced slope is still an intermediate. A parallel skier who carves on intermediate slopes is probably advanced.
You also should consider that each resort's definition of advanced vs intermediate differ. For example, I have never skied Badger, but I have heard that it's advanced slopes may be considered intermediate at Squaw Valley.
Length of ski is not the only consideration, there are now three measurements, tail width, waist width, front tip width. There is also "rocker" and "camber", turn radius, along with different stiffnesses....
All these variations can be a bit overwhelming, but there is no substitute for trying different combinations to see what is most enjoyable. Note: don't purchase skis for "anticipated/expected" proficiency. An intermediate skier on "expert" skis may be miserable.
A lot of resorts/ski shops offer up demo rentals; on resort shops often allow you to try as many different demos as you want during the day. And they apply the demo fee to a purchase. Plus towards the end of the season they will sell off their demo skis for a really discounted price.
Brand names/models are sometimes hard to compare... it's good to get used to the tail/waist/tip/length rocker/no rocker measurements.
If you are still fixated on length, independent of the other measurements, then a 163 is much preferable to a 170. The skis he is considering have very narrow waists and are for advanced/expert, so shorter is much better unless he is really really strong, or is technically proficient.
Finally boots are really important too.. if he has truly stopped growing, i would suggest investing in good boots first. Without good fitting boots, it's almost impossible to really compare subtleties between skis.
Good luck and enjoy this winter!
|
Re: skis for son need your thoughts February 19, 2017 05:55PM | Registered: 10 years ago Posts: 33 |
Definitely sounds like your son has done his homework on skis... with that added info, I think a 163 would be a much better length than 170 especially because of his weight. As a reference, I am older and heavier, and have a 175cm pair with similar dimensions and characteristics. But those longer skis only behave on groomers at high speeds. They are a modern day equivalent to 200cm straight skis from the 1980s
|
Re: skis for son need your thoughts February 20, 2017 10:40AM | Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,976 |
I am glad that he decided on the 163 since he usually skies shorter than that. Depending on his improvement, he could always go longer later. With his own boots and skis, it will be interesting to see how fast he will improve.Quote
OL
Definitely sounds like your son has done his homework on skis... with that added info, I think a 163 would be a much better length than 170 especially because of his weight. As a reference, I am older and heavier, and have a 175cm pair with similar dimensions and characteristics. But those longer skis only behave on groomers at high speeds. They are a modern day equivalent to 200cm straight skis from the 1980s
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
