PDA

View Full Version : In Between Ski Sizes...


jhladousa
09-11-2006, 05:02 PM
Hi Everyone -

First post here - great forum. I'm in the market for a new ski (first one in a LONG time). I currently ski an old HO Mach TRX and it's a 65". I've got it narrowed down to an HO Nitro with Double Animal high wraps but I can't decide on the size.

I'm 5'7" and weigh 155 lbs so I fall right between either the 65" or the 67". My local dealer told me if I walked in off the street, they would most likely push me towards a 67" however it's really personal preference.

Anyone want to chime in on suggestions either way?

Thanks!!!

beef
09-11-2006, 05:07 PM
What speed are you skiing? Also, do you ski in the course or free ski?

I think if you're free skiing, or if you are skiing < 34, then go with the larger ski.

jhladousa
09-11-2006, 05:11 PM
Ah, sorry should have mentioned that. I ski at 34 mph and generally free ski. Thanks

88 PS190
09-11-2006, 05:32 PM
If you are in cold water alot you might fight the shorter size advantageous as colder water is dense.

jhladousa
09-11-2006, 06:09 PM
I ski in Northern WI from ice drop to ice freeze every year. So it will be in a wide range of temperatures. The warmest the lake gets is usually 78 degrees mid summer.

88 PS190
09-11-2006, 06:16 PM
A 67" could feel slow in the turns or hard to turn for a light person on cold water. But you could probably get the turns to happen by adjusting the fin and binding posistion (mainly dft i believe) through the summer.

jhladousa
09-11-2006, 06:24 PM
Interesting, I skiied on an older 67" this weekend and that's exactly how I would describe it - harder to turn and a bit slower. I figured it was just me being used to by 65" for so long.

88 PS190
09-11-2006, 06:29 PM
Technically if you have enough weight a longer ski is faster, since you get more surface area in the water.

But if you can't turn the ski and set it on edge its hard to accelerate and less speed.

One nice thing about longer skis, if you learn to turn the ski and hold your angle the ski gets through the trough better than the shorter ski.

BrianM
09-11-2006, 06:53 PM
I would say go with the longer ski. Much good advise above.

beef
09-11-2006, 07:09 PM
I'd say go with the longer one, too. It will be less tiring to ride and can still be adjusted for higher performance if you want.

jhladousa
09-11-2006, 07:26 PM
Excellent - thanks for the input!

Jorski
09-12-2006, 10:33 AM
I think the answer depends upon, your ability, your water, your set-up and the model of ski.

My advice would be to demo both lengths. One will just feel right.

jhladousa
09-12-2006, 10:40 AM
Point taken however, there in lies the problem. End of the season, local dealer that I can demo skis with only has the 67" in stock.

88 PS190
09-12-2006, 12:02 PM
demo the 67''

get the fin adjusted,

If she just won't ski you'll need to wait on a 65" to try it out.

End of the season is the perfect time to try it, cooler water, you're in shape/form.

Awesome.

BuoyChaser
09-12-2006, 01:56 PM
you can always move your bindings one hole pattern forward as well, to make the ski fell shorter than it really is...i did that with my 67.5" D3 X5...my weight varies in spring to 190 then middle of summer 175 and now back to 185 so went with the longer ski based on Paul's recommendations at D3...

my buddies with same weight are on a 66.5" and doing great as well, so it was a tough call...

jhladousa
09-12-2006, 02:12 PM
It is a tough call - who would think that 2" could make such a difference?!?!

I'm going to see about doing a demo of the 67".

EricB
09-12-2006, 02:21 PM
Going from the old ski you have, the new one (at 67") will seem quite abit faster. The materials and construction have improved dramatically in the past several years. The new skis are faster at the longer lengths and easier to turn that the old designs. My recommendation would be to demo the 67" like you are.

shepherd
09-12-2006, 02:48 PM
Go with the 67". Even if it's too long, you're bound to gain weight as you get older so you'll grow into it. ;)

jhladousa
09-12-2006, 02:52 PM
Excellent point! ;-)

Chef23
09-12-2006, 09:40 PM
I would say if you are used to skiing on a 65" ski unless you are on a wider shape ski I would go the same way on the Nitro. I am in a similar situation but bigger and thought I might need a larger ski but when I got to ski on a 70" Connely F1 I hated it and felt like I was skiing on a barge.

Hoosier Bob
09-12-2006, 09:51 PM
65 but even better maybe a 66". The 67" is in no way slower! Longer will achieve much more speed but will take a much wider turn. Simple physics. I would ski them both but I being 185lbs and 5'11 skiing 66-67" skis at 34-36 I cannot comprehend how anyone would recommend a 67" for a 155 lbs person skiing at 34+. 65" should be plenty if you ski at 34. The 67 will feel like a pig in the turns. I would ski them both, spend time with them and enjoy. Mapple's are cheap right now and may be a huge upgrade for little dough.:twocents:
PS I love Shep but don't buy a ski with the expectations that you will get fatter! I am bigger but still very much the same as I was when I was 20! I have skied 66" for 30+ years and yes early in the season I do go 67" but not for long! You are 5'7" and 155lbs right where you should be! I hope you don't plan on being 200 lbs any time soon!
PSS It is also funny that ski shops have no problem with two inches of ski but will also tell you to only move your fin 1000th of an inch at a time!

jhladousa
09-13-2006, 09:10 AM
When I first started looking, I was convinced that a 65” was the way to go. However, my current ski is 12 or 13 years old and I know technology has changed. I’m just wondering how much – is a 67” ski of today equivalent to a 65” ski of a decade ago because of new materials, bevel, etc? Or it is just the opposite?

I look at the progression of snow skis over the past decade and people that were skiing monster length skis in the mid-90’s are now skiing much shorter shape skis because of the technology changes.

It seems that since I am not going to get any taller, and yes – I do plan on staying relatively the same weight – that I should be in the market for a 65” or 66” ski. Perhaps I will broaden my search outside of the Nitro……now, where is that thread on deciding what new ski to buy??!?! Ha!

88 PS190
09-13-2006, 12:11 PM
Size is a different issue than materials.

Demo Demo Demo.

High end skis on the cheap, connelly F1, demo stock D3's. If you weren't up in northern WI I have a connelly F3 you could try... 66" but its a back up.

Almost forgot for the mapple you probably would need the longer ski, mapples have narrow tails, and while i ride the 66 connelly or d3 or the 65.5 goode on a mapple i cannot ride the 66 w/o sinking the tail.