elladms
Diva in Training
Hello! I am new here. I have been eyeing the Ramp Woodpecker/Chickadee for quite some time and they recently have a great sale on so am deciding to take the plunge. I am debating size and would love any input as I saw some conversations about these skis on this site when searching for advice.
I am an advanced skier- 5'4" & 125lbs. I currently ski in northern New England and I like to spend time off trail, in the trees, and on our limited above treeline areas but (the BIG BUT) I now have a 2 year old daughter and a snowboarding husband who will keep me more on easier, groomed trails. We are also teaching the 2 year old to ski and there is a lot of wrangling with her skiing physically on/with me interspersed with wild independence and me chasing after her. I look forward to my daughter being in ski school, next year, and finding time to ski myself but will still spend a lot of time with her.
I am curious given my desires (more challenging terrain) and my reality (wrangling a toddler-small skier for the next few years and all the footwork that goes with it) should I stick with the 159s? That is what I am leaning towards, right now. I think going up to 169 will be overkill with a lot of maneuvering with my kid. Quite frankly, skiing with her can be exhausting and I wonder if I will have the energy to want to really power 169s at speed when I get the chance. But then I worry that I will be disappointed I went shorter! I see a lot of length questions but since I saw some of you on here had the 159s in the Chickadee but contemplated moving up, I figured asking the specifics couldn't hurt. Did you end up moving up? Was this a good decision? Any input would be greatly appreciated.
I am an advanced skier- 5'4" & 125lbs. I currently ski in northern New England and I like to spend time off trail, in the trees, and on our limited above treeline areas but (the BIG BUT) I now have a 2 year old daughter and a snowboarding husband who will keep me more on easier, groomed trails. We are also teaching the 2 year old to ski and there is a lot of wrangling with her skiing physically on/with me interspersed with wild independence and me chasing after her. I look forward to my daughter being in ski school, next year, and finding time to ski myself but will still spend a lot of time with her.
I am curious given my desires (more challenging terrain) and my reality (wrangling a toddler-small skier for the next few years and all the footwork that goes with it) should I stick with the 159s? That is what I am leaning towards, right now. I think going up to 169 will be overkill with a lot of maneuvering with my kid. Quite frankly, skiing with her can be exhausting and I wonder if I will have the energy to want to really power 169s at speed when I get the chance. But then I worry that I will be disappointed I went shorter! I see a lot of length questions but since I saw some of you on here had the 159s in the Chickadee but contemplated moving up, I figured asking the specifics couldn't hurt. Did you end up moving up? Was this a good decision? Any input would be greatly appreciated.
