PDA

View Full Version : Ski size for a big guy?


Trip
08-11-2006, 10:26 PM
Hi Guys,

Fantastic forum you have here...one of the only good waterski forums on the net it appears... :)

Anyways, I'll cut right to the chase. I'm a pretty big and athletic guy: 6'2" 210-215lbs. I've been steadily improving (but freeskiing only so far) on my dad's 1970s vintage O'Brien Competitor in a 67.5" length. He was my height and a bit heavier (like 220-225) when the ski was recommended to him back then. It appears that going shorter was an old-school notion, as most today would recommend something longer to me, and from what I can tell, I should be in the 69-70" range. Yet, his ski does feel pretty good, although I'm sure I might feel more comfortable on a ski with a couple more inches on it.

I'm skiing a full-lenth line at 32 mph right now, but steadily improving and learning to push the ski pretty hard. I think I'd like to stay with a ski that is fully concave and probably the classic shape. I've been thinking of an O'Brien Mission but I am not sure of whether to go 68" or 70" or maybe a 69" Connelly F1X, but I am not sure if I will like the slightly shaped ends (I've heard they make the ski ride higher in the water; does that have any merit or relevance?). I was also thinking of an O'Brien Allegiance in a 69" as something that I could push hard and really grow into as I develop. Do the skis I'm looking at seem like a logical fit? Where do you guys think I should be? (I know I need to ski as many skis as I can get my hands on, but in my area wakeboarding has taken over and GOOD skis are very tough, if not impossible, to come by, so it looks as though I'll be ordering something soon.

Thanks for any help you can give me,
Trip

Hoosier Bob
08-11-2006, 10:31 PM
As you increase speed the 68 F1X should roll with you. I have heard some very great things about this ski from 30-36 mph. Ski it first and decide. I would not call it a shaped or widebody ski. The F1X is a touch wider but not so much as to totally impede it's high speed control. TWO CENTS and welcome to a very cool place!
PS Many of us on here began with another manufacturer. Cool ride and hopefully we can get you to consummate the MC relationship soon! If not welcome and don't forget to post often and have fun!

PendO
08-11-2006, 10:45 PM
69" HO or > would be my rec >:) .......................................


> (greater)

Recently dropped 12# so I am back to 224, tomorrow will be the first rides sans the weight, should be better on my HO Sys 8 69.5

Hoosier Bob
08-11-2006, 10:52 PM
236!!!!!!! W T F! Pendo you better start running or I am calling you the BUS! Get off your arse and spend some time skiing! You can't be lawyering all the time. I am down from 198 to 180 but ain't muscle! Beer and cigarettes should help you get the weight off! Off track but just bought the newer Johnny Cash CD's, both of them, and man it is like dad singing to you. Very cool and very nice music. Just thought I would introduce Trip to his first ThreadJACK!

PendO
08-11-2006, 10:55 PM
I'm going for the less fast food, less late night eating, less coke and pepsi, and more sex! Way better than the Atkins diet:)

Hoosier Bob
08-11-2006, 10:56 PM
I can help you with everything but the sex!:D
PS if you need a stand in I am available!

PendO
08-11-2006, 10:59 PM
Well the new bike should pay some dividends, I didn't dump 4K on a bike I can't ride for nuthin' ... but as of yet it is just the fast food, late night food, and no regular pop.


(I am impressed with the level of threadjackness we have taken this too)

Hoosier Bob
08-11-2006, 11:02 PM
Get ridin' so she will quit calling me! Man I have been fighting all year! Every time I run my left achilles begins to tear. Last run right in front of my house as I was about to finish. We shall see tomorrow but hopefully I will ski like a machine. As of late it has been more like a Wally!

PendO
08-11-2006, 11:06 PM
Get ridin' so she will quit calling me! Man I have been fighting all year! Every time I run my left achilles begins to tear. Last run right in front of my house as I was about to finish. We shall see tomorrow but hopefully I will ski like a machine. As of late it has been more like a Wally!

yeah, running and I DO NOT get along ... it bugs my back all the jarring, we have an eliptical machine that I actually use and I like the low impact. Tomorrow is Heathers first race with her new bike so that will be fun to watch, I thought about training for it but remembered I would have to swim for a mile and run 6 miles ... the bike part is fine, but the swim and run are not my friends.

Trip
08-12-2006, 03:25 AM
(I am impressed with the level of threadjackness we have taken this too)So am I! :eek: (But thanks for the help initially, hehe) :)

So you guys think at least for a conventionally-shaped ski (and probably the F1X then, too) that 68"-69" would be the way to go for a guy who's 210-215lbs and wants to be in the 30+mph range? Thanks!

Trip

Leroy
08-12-2006, 05:18 AM
Ski shop here in Indy recommended a double boot Nitro for me. I am somewhat similar to you, except for the athletic ;)

Notch down would be a Triumph.

Another performance level down would be compFreeride series

PendO
08-12-2006, 07:07 AM
So am I! :eek: (But thanks for the help initially, hehe) :)

So you guys think at least for a conventionally-shaped ski (and probably the F1X then, too) that 68"-69" would be the way to go for a guy who's 210-215lbs and wants to be in the 30+mph range? Thanks!

Trip

Well, I'm sure you have been to their website but if not here is the link (http://www.connellyskis.com/2006/index.php?mod=skis&id_prd=2&id_gal=39&display=gallery) I'd go with the 69" in that model (since the 70 is not available) ... as a general rule I think that when we are over 6' and over 200# then the largest size is the best ... I just got out of a 70" HO CDX and replaced it with a 69.5" System 8 ... the nice thing about the ski you are looking at is with the slightly wider tip and tail deep water starts should be easier ... Casey

Hoosier Bob
08-12-2006, 10:52 AM
F1X is a bad arse ski that (I have heard) works for a wide range of levels and speeds. It looks cool as well! Now back to the jack!

Trip
08-12-2006, 12:41 PM
LOL. "Back to the jack." Haha, alright guys thanks a lot for the recommendation. I'm leaning towards the F1X and I'll come back with a full report for you. Cheers!

bkhallpass
08-12-2006, 02:44 PM
Trip,

I'm 6'2" and 220 lbs. Certainly not a pro skier, and I don't get near a slalom course anymore, but I have been skiing for over 35 years. IMO, a 68-69" ski is too small for you at the speeds you are running. At 34, or 36mph, the 68-69 works fine for me. Any slower, and the ski really bogs down. A lot of unnecessary strain and effort. The modern skis, are light, flexible, and designed to be skied at longer lengths. In the old days we wanted short skis because we turned hard on the tails with little ski in the water. With the modern style of skiing, you want to keep as much of the ski in the water as possible to "carve" the turn much the same as snow skis. I discussed skis with Mike Suyderhoud last year (if you're too young to remember Mike, he was world champion several times, you can find his bio on the web page for the Water Ski Hall of Fame). Mike recommended at least a 70 inch ski. At the time he was pushing a KD, but I think he had some financial incentive related to that brand. I think the KD model was a 71". One of my ski partner actually bought the ski. I've ridden it, and it was grreat. BKH

Trip
08-12-2006, 09:58 PM
Hi BKH,

First, I really want to thank you for that advice. I haven't been able to get to talk with any guys who ski that are my size. And it seems everyone I know who used to ski either wakeboards now or just doesn't ride at all. And I'm only 23. :rolleyes:

As for your insight, up until now, all I've had to go on was the advice of my dad, who still owns the 67.5" O'Brien Competitor he got in the late 70s, which is the ski I've learned on. So needless to say, he means well by his advice, but probably doesn't know any better when talking about the size of today's equipment. My experience on the 67.5 is that it feels skiable (heck, I even skied on my friend's 66" Connelly RS2), but yes, I know I probably could use a couple more inches under me and it would make a conceivable difference when laying down more of the ski in the water.

About speed: I am really just starting to come into my own, and I forsee myself increasing to the 32-36 range in the very near future. Given the slight extra width (surface area) of the Connelly F1X compared to a conventional shapel, at 69" an F1X I've been told would ski slightly higher in the water, thus allowing slower skiing without that much extra sink. What do you think?

Thanks for your practical advice, I appreciate it more than you know,
Trip

Hoosier Bob
08-12-2006, 10:18 PM
You are right on Trip. I understand the new technology, I guess. The old ski's did not generate as much speed so styles were different. It was pull your arse off, stop, hook and pop! I am still trying to break my old habits. I have a 67 that with numerous settings does not turn like "I" would like. Yes it is fast and an 04. My KD is a 66". The new technology (IMO) allows for a touch shorter ski due to the fact they are a ton faster (if you ski oldstyle). I know this goes against the grain but the F1X is reviewed to be skiable at 30 through 36 mph which is rare. I am still learning not to work so hard in my turns and rely on getting there early but I still like the old feel better. 41 and this old dog just don't get it!:o

PendO
08-13-2006, 12:29 AM
There are a ton of good SKI (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/features/2006_swimsuit/) reviews on this site.

bkhallpass
08-13-2006, 02:31 AM
Hi BKH,

Given the slight extra width (surface area) of the Connelly F1X compared to a conventional shapel, at 69" an F1X I've been told would ski slightly higher in the water, thus allowing slower skiing without that much extra sink. What do you think?
Trip

Again, trip, I'm no expert, but I have ridden some of the wider skis, and they do ride higher at slower speeds. Further, you're young, probably strong, and have already been on a smaller ski. Anything longer is going to feel easier to you.

My advice would be that if you have any reputable ski shops in your area, go in and talk to the guys and see what they would put you on. If you don't have shops in your area, call Wiley's and talk to them. These guys earn their living putting you on a ski which meets your needs. Most shops will let you exchange if the ski is not working out.

My second piece of advice, with all due respect to your father, is get a lesson with a reputable instuctor. The modern style of skiing capitalizes on the technology of the skis. Do yourself a favor, get a lesson and start out right. While I'm sure your Dad is a good skier, we old guys learned to ski a different style, and as Hoosier Bob said, old habits are hard to break.

Good luck and enjoy it out there. BKH

Chef23
08-21-2006, 01:21 PM
So am I! :eek: (But thanks for the help initially, hehe) :)

So you guys think at least for a conventionally-shaped ski (and probably the F1X then, too) that 68"-69" would be the way to go for a guy who's 210-215lbs and wants to be in the 30+mph range? Thanks!

Trip

I weight 235 and skied the HO Charger last year into 28 off at 34 mph. It performed very well for me there. I think the HO is a great transitional ski into the course and can perform at shorter line lengths.

Since then I have switched to a D3X5 at 68.5" and it is working great for me. I wouldn't recommend the X5 for a guy my size at anything slower than 32mph. It did start to bog down at 32mph and 15 off.

88 PS190
08-21-2006, 01:30 PM
I don't konw which ski you should go for, but using the charts try not to go too big as a safety margin if you plan on improving, because long skis can be harder to turn, particularly if you are just learning to turn them, though w/ lower boat speeds some length helps float it.

Connelly makes some very good products, perhaps a bit less high tech or exotic in construction but they're very durable, and can be used hard, where as some of the more expensive skis ie. goode can be damaged fairly easily if you don't pay attention to how you keep them. And a ski failure can cost you quite a bit of cash.