New ski advice

[mErica]

All-
I am looking to buy for a new set of skis. Trying to demo before the end of the season, but hoping you guys can give me ideas on what to demo! I am 5' 7", 120 lbs, 24 yoa. I ski CO most of the time, UT/ MT once a year. I am an advanced skier. I ski mostly blacks, love to carve up groomers, comfortable in minimal-moderate powder, but am looking to improve my mogul skills over the next year or so. I stay away from tree runs. Looking for a mostly front side all mtn ski. I have outgrown my current skis which are 2010 (?) K2 true luvs 156. Oh and I am also looking for rec on length for my height.
Thanks in advanced!

 

[marzNC]

I went from K2 OneLuvs to Rossi Attraxion 8. For current models, the Rossi Temptation line might be worth considering. The ski that caught me attention the most so far this season are from the Head Joy line. My all-mountain is the Blizzard Black Pearl. Been skiing them in a variety of conditions in CO and UT this season. Only bother to rent fatter skis when there is more than 6 inches of fresh powder. I'm an older advanced skier who has learned to enjoy bumps and trees in recent years.

 

[just jane]

I am hopelessly biased. I just got the Black Pearl and I am in love. I think the BP will be a great ski to improve on. I can't remember who here keeps touting the Outdoor Divas demo day at Loveland - there's one next Wednesday or Thursday, I think. If you can, you might want to check it out. $40 lift ticket if you arrange it in advance, and free demos.

 

[Little Lightning]

You need to call Outdoor Divas in advance so they know how many pass vouchers to get. If you already have a Loveland Pass the demos are free. Thursday is the last demo for the season. The Rossi Temptations have a deep sidecut and I love them on moguls. Along the same line is the K2 Potion and the Nordica Wild Belles. I thought the Wild Belles were very easy in the bumps.

 

[mustski]

Welcome. I would echo what others have said above about the BP and the Temptation 88's. I haven't demoed the Head Joy line but have been hearing a lot of love for that line of skis. I would add the Nordica Wild Belle (2015) or the now discontinued Hell's Belles. I skied the Hell's Belles this season and they are hands down the most versatile ski I have ever skied. The new Wild Belle is more similar to the Hell's Belles than to the older version of itself. A lot of us also love the Volkl Kenja though I am not sure how that would do in bumps - it is stiffer than the other skis listed.

As for length, hmmm? You are tall enough for the 170 range and light enough for the 160 range. I am 5'2", 140lbs, and I like a ski in a 162ish length. All the skis listed above have some level of rocker which shortens the edge that contacts the snow. This makes them ski "short," so you generally want to go longer. Since you find you K2's too short, and they are an older model, you might find the 160's too short in a rocketed ski. Your best bet is to demo a couple of skis in both the 160ish and 170ish length and see which you prefer.

 

[BethL]

I'm 5'8" 125 lbs and ski the Black Pearls in 166. I love them! I also have the Temptation 88s in 162/163. I do not like the Temptation 88s, but I think I'm in the minority. They're for sale.

 

[Bluestsky]

@mustski - this makes them ski "short,"...what do you experience then?

 

[Little Lightning]

@mustski - this makes them ski "short,"...what do you experience then?

It means that a ski that's measured tip to tail as 162 will feel shorter. My Rossi Temptations are 154 but feel more like 150's. It's also the reason small me can ski a 162 Rossi Saffron. I don't notice the extra length, the skis feel more like a 154-156 which would be my length on a straight ski. Many people don't realize this, my friends included, and demo/buy skis too short.

 

[Bluestsky]

@Little Lightning - that's right. What I was really asking is what a skier experiences when skiing on a too short ski, i.e. how the too short ski behaves.

 

[Little Lightning]

@Little Lightning - that's right. What I was really asking is what a skier experiences when skiing on a too short ski, i.e. how the too short ski behaves.

I don't know since many rockered skis don't come shorter than mine. However, I had a friend at Vail who the shop put on a 142 Volkl with a rockered tip. She's not a fast skier but could not keep up with us. In soft snow she fell 3 times on one run. She said she wasn't comfortable on the skis, they just seemed too squirrelly and not stable. Had she been on a longer length she probably would have been ok. However, the shop had a Samba in a 158. Her skiing changed entirely, her confidence soared, no more struggling to keep up, no more falling and she had a great week. I know she thought I was nuts telling her to go longer but she became a believer that week.

 

[mustski]

@mustski - this makes them ski "short,"...what do you experience then?

Much the same thing you experience with skis that are too short. You have less edge contact with the snow so there can be a variety of issues depending on the conditions. On ice, you will have less edge to use for controlling speed, on powder you may feel the skis don't float as well as they should, on groomers you may find they are less stable at speed. The biggest thing I usually notice is that the ski overall is more demanding to drive because the sweet spot is smaller. Basically a 163 with rocker will ski as if it is a 156 without rocker.

Now there can be advantages to choosing to ski short. A lot of instructors choose shorter skis for teaching with. Some who ski trees a lot, choose shorter skis for ease of maneuverability, and there are some who prefer a shorter ski in the bumps. All those people I listed have a quiver of skis so having a shorter ski for specialty purposes is no big deal. They can choose a different ski for the deep or the steep.

 

[Ringrat]

I had the opportunity to demo the Salomon Stella for a day and a half last weekend, and found it extremely fun. Once I got the feel of them (they are much heavier than anything I own) I loved them. Very playful and responsive, but definitely enough ski to power through loose crud at high speed. Short turns on groomers were a bit of work, they were more comfortable in big turns, and they liked big turns and being allowed to run on steep, uneven terrain as well.

I'm 5'2" and 135 lbs and demoed it in a 165.

 

[Bluestsky]

I had also owned K2 True Luvs. After living and skiing in CO for over two years I've upgraded to Volkl Kenjas. Love them (as, when you search the forum, many other Divas). Do demo them in more than one length. I regretfully bought them too short.

 

[CarolB]

Because I love trees I have pretty much the opposite opinion of everyone here. I like to play, I like moguls, I like trees. I ski plenty fast but skiing fast is definitely not my priorty. So, with my style in mind I still continue to be very happy with the advice my ex-ski shop Manager (and father of a world Cup Skier)- go as short as you can while still being stable. Of course, real length is different for every ski and every ski has a different stiffness/flex so there's also got to be that all important factor of how much edge are you really able to use on different skis? I personally see too many people sliding their longer skis around versus carving them because I think they just don't have the skill/weight/agression to get the edge down on that particular ski anyway. I love my ridiculously short reboundy skis simply because they are soft enough for me to use every little bit of edge when I need to and really quick to turn. Also, snow condition then comes into play- i don't need a stiff ski in the snow I ski. I could probably easily have gone one size up but then trees would be just that much more tricky.

In other words- I always think the answer to the length/which ski issue is "it depends". you can start with the "norm" but you might not end up there on a certain ski so try as many as you can in as many conditions as possible and in the situations that you most enjoy, no matter what type of skiing, run, colour that may be- it's your experience, not somebody elses, so build it for yourself but always be open to "the next adventure". For me the next adventure is to be gentler on my body so I've just bought a longer/fatter pair of skis to ski different conditions from my carvers. With the incredible choices and specialties of skis out there now I'm no longer a believer in a one quiver ski. Maybe that's a "skill cop out" though and I'll take all the help I can get

 

[maggie198]

Much the same thing you experience with skis that are too short. You have less edge contact with the snow so there can be a variety of issues depending on the conditions. On ice, you will have less edge to use for controlling speed, on powder you may feel the skis don't float as well as they should, on groomers you may find they are less stable at speed. The biggest thing I usually notice is that the ski overall is more demanding to drive because the sweet spot is smaller. Basically a 163 with rocker will ski as if it is a 156 without rocker.

I bought a pair of Hell's Belles in 162, after having demoed them on a packed groomer run. These skis have quite a bit of rocker but I thought the 162s would be okay. Alas, they were not. When I took mine out on their first day conditions were quite different than when I demoed. A good amount of fresh, kinda heavy snow had fallen, which quickly became cut up crud. In pressuring the tips of the skis there just wasn't enough tip length there, and I was constantly overbalancing. I'd have to sit back and use very little forward pressure to stay balanced. It was very disconcerting, that constant balance checking. I felt very unsafe too. When I went home I found the skis online in the next size up, a 170, and promptly ordered them. Though I had never skied anything that long before I basically loved the way the HBs skied and took a chance that the next size up would feel right. It did. They were excellent, and didn't feel long at all. And so, so stable, especially at speed. I trusted the ski completely and could let it run.

I've demoed other skis too short. If they're on the stiff side I think that probably has forced me to sit back a bit and use more heel pressure than I would like. Turning can seem okay, until you get on steeper terrain or in more challenging conditions. If the skis are soft, they just don't feel like enough ski.

Fwiw, I'm 5'6" and 170lbs.

 

[Bluestsky]

@maggie198 - I have the same experience as you on my 149 Kenjas. (I'm 5.0/115).

 

[mustski]

Rocker technology forced us all to rethink ski length. Just as we adjusted to the idea (shaped skis) that short is better, ski companies introduced rockered tips, tail, and of course camber remained. Personally, I am addicted to front rocker and LOVE it! However, it makes shorter more challenging to ski and not worth the effort beyond medium speeds ...IMHO. I think for anyone unfamiliar with this technology, it is useful to demo 2 lengths on the same day in the same conditions. It will help you to discern the difference.

 

[maggie198]

^^^ Agree!

 

[WaterGirl]

Because I love trees I have pretty much the opposite opinion of everyone here. I like to play, I like moguls, I like trees. I ski plenty fast but skiing fast is definitely not my priorty. Of course, real length is different for every ski and every ski has a different stiffness/flex so there's also got to be that all important factor of how much edge are you really able to use on different skis?

In other words- I always think the answer to the length/which ski issue is "it depends". you can start with the "norm" but you might not end up there on a certain ski so try as many as you can in as many conditions as possible and in the situations that you most enjoy, no matter what type of skiing, run, colour that may be- it's your experience, not somebody elses, so build it for yourself but always be open to "the next advenure"

Thank you @CarolB so true. I also love the trees, and the bumps and consdider the weight on my knees going up on lifts w/ out foot rests - If I can go lighter / shorter w/ out sacraficing speed stabilty I will. Last two weekends demoing a bunch for the fun of it. Everyting from 150 to 176. (mens and womens skis).
Some skis seemed they would never be long enough, others just right.

 

[mustski]

Thank you @CarolB so true. I also love the trees, and the bumps and consdider the weight on my knees going up on lifts w/ out foot rests - If I can go lighter / shorter w/ out sacraficing speed stabilty I will. Last two weekends demoing a bunch for the fun of it. Everyting from 150 to 176. (mens and womens skis).
Some skis seemed they would never be long enough, others just right.

Lighter and shorter create different dynamics. I understand what you are getting at, but there is very little weight difference within any model ski between a 156 and a 170. As for differences between brands, I totally agree. Demoing is eye opening if nothing else.