Help badly needed on ski length!

[snowgem]

First - thanks to y'all - my so sprang for new boots - mostly 'cuz I conveyed to him info from posts about the necessity of good boots!

I am seriously considering the Lotta Luv's - am stuck on length. I have 153's in the BL's and luv 'em.

But, would be using the Luv's for lighter snow, deeper conditions off and on the groomers.
Am 5'7", 130 - 135 pounds, a level 6-7 skier (?), and, over 65 (that, again!), not super strong. On the charts I am right between 153' and 160's. Choice could be 153's or 160's, with piston binding, or 160's flat with other binding (the more $ choice).

I tend to want to go shorter, but am not sure with the choices I mentioned!

 

[SnowHot]

OMG, you are gonna be sick!
Lotta luvs were on Steep and Cheap this morning at around 5 AM for 260.00 ish with bindings!!!
Then again a little while ago.
Please tell me you got a pair !!!


And, I'd go with the 160, definitely!

 

[num]

I'd vote 153s but it's a personal preference thing. Any chance of demoing?

 

[Robyn]

For powder I vote 160s.

 

[Robyn]

Lottas are up again!

 

[snowgem]

AAArgh! I haven't had experience with Steep and Cheep, and was too slow!!! Maybe they'll come up again. The deals are disappearing right under my eyes, so I have to decide soon!

Am still stuck between the 160's, with markers, or flat which would be lighter, and 153's, with markers.

 

[lynseyf]

on again now!

 

[snowgem]

Am tending toward the 160 flat - which will be lighter - the most expensive option - still not totally sure tho!

Thanks for the quick comments. This site is just amazing.

 

[climber.girl1]

I don't think you can buy the Lotta Luv's flat. It's an integrated Marker binding system, where the binding mounts on rails along the top center of the ski. It is a heavy ski, and it's fairly stiff (I got it last week in a 167 just for giggles, will probably pass it on to someone else), but it does seem to do really well in the chop and on soft groomers (I couldn't really open 'em up because I was with my daughter).

I'm 5'8, 130-140 lbs (I try not to weigh myself), and a level 8 or 8- skier (I think?!?!), and I wish I had the 160s, so if I were you, I might go with the 153s unless you're anticipating being able to get them into a lot of powder often!

Let us know how it goes!

 

[snowgem]

Still a toss-up between the 153's and 160's. still Today is decision day. Demoing not an option at this point!

SnoHot and Robyn and anyone else who wants to comment - could you give reasons for saying 160's?

climber.girl1 gave some good support for 153's.
num and any others - reasons for 153's?

 

[Robyn]

Well, you said you wanted this for lighter powder which is what I was focusing on. For powder you want more surface area to help hold you up on top of the snow rather than letting you sink so the 160s give you that. I'm 2 inches shorter than you although heavier for sure and I wouldn't dream of a powder ski less than 166. I ski 163s for my all-mountain ski.

 

[snowgem]

Thanks, Robyn. Learning a lot.

 

[volklgirl]

FWIW,

After demoing the Lotta, I'd say go with the longer length. I found the 160 to feel way short and soft for me, but I outweigh you by a bunch and like to ski really, really fast. I think you'll get better stability in the rough stuff and better float in the pow at 160.

 

[snowgem]

I did it! the '07 Lottas 160's flat with a Solomon binding, from Al's Ski Barn (www.untracked.com) Pricier than SAC, but still discounted. (1-day shipping, free - they are great to deal with)
This one was really a struggle! Will report back after using them. Thanks for all the input.

 

[climber.girl1]

Congratulations on your new skis! Can't wait to see how you like them.

I didn't know you could buy the Lotta Luv flat... Thank goodness you didn't listen to me, and a good thing to know! Hopefully you can find a nice light binding to pair with them, as my 167s with Markers are like lead weights!

 

[Shellski]

I've said it before.. I have Burnin's in a 160, which I adore, and bought a pair of Lottas undemoed in a 160, I hate them, they ruined my Chamonix ski trip. I'd gladly give them away if I could be bothered carting them to America. Maybe I could do that and then just lose them... (insurance claim.. ).

Integrated bindings, and they are really, really heavy.

 

[num]

Oops, missed this earlier.

Congratulations on the new skis! Following your instincts usually leads to good things One day shipping, sweet!

 

[snowgem]

I got the flat so they'd be lighter - was advised to do that with my BL's and didn't and kind of wish I had, but I still luv 'em. Shellski, I had bot them before reading your review, so am really curious now! I was somewhat stuck bc haven't found the Lotta's even to pay to demo and am short on time.

Al's Ski Barn is located in ME - online only - only place I found with flat skis. Another site with deals was Sun and Ski.

Will report back with my review of the skis!

Loved all the input.

 

[snowgem]

My Lotta's arrived. They look nice! I swear, tho they are longer than my BL's (160 vs. 153), since I bought them flat and had a binding put on them (didn't buy the integrated binding) they really feel lighter. Hmm. Maybe I just have a good imagination!
And, am sort of regretting not following the advice at Al's Ski Barn to get the BL's flat, too. But still luvin them!

 

[snowgem]

Tried out the Lotta's at Mount Snow. There was a couple inches light powder over hardpask, icy spots, and clumps and occasional really mogul - all of which the skis handled great. Ow fo rthe Utah scene!