Ski Length and Women

[jthree]

I'm reading this article and comments on this thread with interest. I'm also a petite skier (5'0" and that's possibly rounding up). I have skied on exactly 2 pairs of skis in my adult life: the first was the straight skis that were my Xmas present in the early 90's when I was in college. I always thought they too long--I remember asking for a smaller size but they didn't come any smaller, so felt at the time I was just getting, "we don't make advanced skis for someone as short as you."

I finally upgraded 4 or 5 years ago and I went ahead and bought what the shop recommended. At the time I just didn't want to deal with demoing, etc, I just wanted skis to throw in my car and go skiing. Plus the shop offered a deal. They have served me well, but it's been suggested that they are too short: 144 cm Rossi Temptaion 80's. Next season I'm hoping to demo and see how I feel on different lengths, waists, etc. I actually need some convincing that my current skis are "too short"-- I've been really happy with them, but my only comparison is my old, straight, too-long skis.

 

[marzNC]

I finally upgraded 4 or 5 years ago and I went ahead and bought what the shop recommended. At the time I just didn't want to deal with demoing, etc, I just wanted skis to throw in my car and go skiing. Plus the shop offered a deal. They have served me well, but it's been suggested that they are too short: 144 cm Rossi Temptaion 80's. Next season I'm hoping to demo and see how I feel on different lengths, waists, etc. I actually need some convincing that my current skis are "too short"-- I've been really happy with them, but my only comparison is my old, straight, too-long skis.

Sounds like the 1990s straight skis were the correct length. But making those skis turns was a lot harder than with current design and materials used for skis.

Your weight is in some ways more significant than your height. Temptation 80 @144 could be an appropriate length. I'm 5'0", 110 lbs, over 60. The first good skis I bought 15 years ago after getting my daughter going on skis were K2 skis, 74 underfoot, and more or less mid-140s (K2 measured length differently than other brands at the time). I was an adventurous intermediate skiing groomed trails 10-15 days in the southeast. The Head AJs I got for the southeast and Mid-Atlantic about 5 years ago are 78 underfoot and 149cm. By then I'd become an advanced skier with the help of regular lessons and a lot more days on snow every season (20+ in the east, 25+ out west).

It's really useful to demo the same model in different lengths in order to learn the difference. Either longer or shorter than what's supposed to be optimal.

 

[altagirl]

^^ demoing different lengths of the same ski really is the best way to figure it out. If you go on a demo day or demo from a slopeside shop so you can swap out between run it's actually not that inconvenient and will tell you more about what works for you than any other method.

 

[scandium]

I definitely agree that women are undersold a heck of a lot of the time on length, but where is the note about weight-for-height also influencing our length and flex preference? I am 157cm tall/115-120lb, and my skis and demo preferences are all in the realm of my height (154cm Volkl Yumis, 155cm Volkl SC Flair) as an intermediate-progressing skiier.

 

[BReeves215]

I “luv” my K2 LottaLuvs, 156. I am 5’3, 125 lbs, and ski 12-14 days a year if I’m lucky. I’m an intermediate skier with aspirations to improve; no real mind-blocks, mostly I just need more time on the hill. I’m thinking I might demo longer skis at Alta next week just for reference.

 

[marzNC]

I “luv” my K2 LottaLuvs, 156. I am 5’3, 125 lbs, and ski 12-14 days a year if I’m lucky. I’m an intermediate skier with aspirations to improve; no real mind-blocks, mostly I just need more time on the hill. I’m thinking I might demo longer skis at Alta next week just for reference.

Not sure you need longer skis, but there have been a lot of design changes since the LottaLuvs came on the scene. I bought the OneLuv as my first good skis after starting to ski more regularly after 2007. Certainly worth some demo time while you're at Alta. There are several different ski shops, so many brands are covered.

 

[Amie H]

I'm reading this article and comments on this thread with interest. I'm also a petite skier (5'0" and that's possibly rounding up). I have skied on exactly 2 pairs of skis in my adult life: the first was the straight skis that were my Xmas present in the early 90's when I was in college. I always thought they too long--I remember asking for a smaller size but they didn't come any smaller, so felt at the time I was just getting, "we don't make advanced skis for someone as short as you."

I finally upgraded 4 or 5 years ago and I went ahead and bought what the shop recommended. At the time I just didn't want to deal with demoing, etc, I just wanted skis to throw in my car and go skiing. Plus the shop offered a deal. They have served me well, but it's been suggested that they are too short: 144 cm Rossi Temptaion 80's. Next season I'm hoping to demo and see how I feel on different lengths, waists, etc. I actually need some convincing that my current skis are "too short"-- I've been really happy with them, but my only comparison is my old, straight, too-long skis.

 

[Amie H]

My Wifi bombed out before I could post reply to the quote. Anyway....

I know how you feel. 5'2" here, happy on my 153s. Was "meh" with the 1st pair of shaped skis I bought in 2018 (my 90s sticks still skied great, IMO!) Mine were also Rossi Temptation but 84 width. Demoed a bunch, (wiped out on some during demoing - another story for another time), and what I was able to learn from demoing was not a specific make/model but features to look for that suited me/my style.

More research led me to my currently-used pair so keep an eye out but if you like what ya got, then enjoy!

 

[marzNC]

I know how you feel. 5'2" here, happy on my 153s. Was "meh" with the 1st pair of shaped skis I bought in 2018 (my 90s sticks still skied great, IMO!) Mine were also Rossi Temptation but 84 width. Demoed a bunch, (wiped out on some during demoing - another story for another time), and what I was able to learn from demoing was not a specific make/model but features to look for that suited me/my style.

Initial reaction to "shaped skis" probably has a lot to do with how well someone skied back before 2000. My first demo was in 2000 from a free demo tent at Heavenly. I had cheap straight skis bought in the 1980s and rear-entry boots bought in the 1990s. I was very happy that I could make nice parallel turns from the start. I only skied two seasons on straight skis decades before and never mastered a good parallel turn. My natural stance in terms of distance between my boots was actually the "athletic stance" that works best with current ski design, not the "as close as possible" approach that used to be necessary.

My primary ski buddy was an expert skier in high school in the 1960s. After I started him on semi-private lessons at destination resorts, it took him 2-3 seasons to keep his feet far enough apart to really take advantage of the sidecut of the skis he'd bought after 2010. He's still working on making the athletic stance his natural ski stance.

 

[Amie H]

Initial reaction to "shaped skis" probably has a lot to do with how well someone skied back before 2000. My first demo was in 2000 from a free demo tent at Heavenly. I had cheap straight skis bought in the 1980s and rear-entry boots bought in the 1990s. I was very happy that I could make nice parallel turns from the start. I only skied two seasons on straight skis decades before and never mastered a good parallel turn. My natural stance in terms of distance between my boots was actually the "athletic stance" that works best with current ski design, not the "as close as possible" approach that used to be necessary.

My primary ski buddy was an expert skier in high school in the 1960s. After I started him on semi-private lessons at destination resorts, it took him 2-3 seasons to keep his feet far enough apart to really take advantage of the sidecut of the skis he'd bought after 2010. He's still working on making the athletic stance his natural ski stance.

My dad treated the family to group lessons for a week in Killington in the 90s and then, living in PA , day trips to Poconos, plus other Spring break trips in VT, Quebec, Co... I feel like I nearly mastered my old straight skis back then. Or maybe that's just hindsight. I definitely had no fear back then! I feel quite confident in my current skis. Took a bit of trial& error but happy w my choice.

 

[vickie]

I was reading about Head Absolut Joys today on SkiEssentials. I found the Q&As to be the most interesting.

A woman, 5'6", 123 lbs, good skier, but doesn't like to go too fast, trying to decide between the 153 and 158 lengths. They recommend 153 due to her speed preference.

A woman, 5'8", 137 lbs, low intermediate, skis blues and some blacks, doesn't like to go fast, trying to decide between 153 and 158. They recommend 158, but say there's nothing wrong with 153.

And all of their testers of this ski said they needed longer skis, especially given how light the skis are.

Link to the Absolut Joy page

Did we miss the memo? Is no one at the company reading/heeding their own testers?

 

[VickiK]

I would probably recommend a longer ski to both, like 161-164.

Sometimes I wonder how much depends on their inventory.

 

[VickiK]

View attachment 15405

The length of ski in front of the binding is amazing!

 

[marzNC]

I was reading about Head Absolut Joys today on SkiEssentials. I found the Q&As to be the most interesting.

A woman, 5'6", 123 lbs, good skier, but doesn't like to go too fast, trying to decide between the 153 and 158 lengths. They recommend 153 due to her speed preference.

A woman, 5'8", 137 lbs, low intermediate, skis blues and some blacks, doesn't like to go fast, trying to decide between 153 and 158. They recommend 158, but say there's nothing wrong with 153.

My NC friend is around 5'4". She's skiing on old skis that are 149cm. Has been having lessons at Alta with my instructor in the past week. Arthur become a Level 3 instructor when he was teaching at Wintergreen and then Snowshoe before working at Alta. Has been at Alta for 20+ years. Based on her current abilities and interests on blues and easy blacks (good snow only, following an instructor or knowledgeable friend), he doesn't think there is any reason to go longer. What he said is that if she is comfortable, that's most important. She's skiing faster than a couple seasons ago, but the skis she had aren't chattering or acting in a way that is any sort of issue. She usually only skis 5-6 days in VA and 5-6 days at Alta. Has been on snow many more days this winter for assorted reasons.

I used the Volkl skis she is using for a couple of seasons. Bought them used from a knowledgeable father who had gotten them for his growing tween/teen daughter (after demo'ing at Big Sky). That was right after knee rehab when I wanted shorter and narrower skis for MidA skiing and lessons. My all-mountain skis were mid-150s when I was an advanced intermediate. As a solid advanced skier, my all-mountain skis are around 160cm. I'm 5'0", 110 lbs, over 60.

 

[chasinghorizons]

Although one time I had nothing better to do than demo whatever skis an enthusiastic Line tech threw at me, for shits and kicks, including a Line Sakana - when I looked closely at the ski 3/4 of the way down the mountain, I found it was 174, nearly 15cm taller than me I guess that ski has a short effective edge, I found it ok, kinda glad I didn't realise how long it was at the top of the run though!

Omg thanks for this. My fiance just picked up a Line Pescado on sale for $500 - IT LOOKS SO COOL. I have major ski envy and have been contemplating picking up a Line Sakana next year if I see one on sale, but was concerned the 166 would be too long. You seem to prefer the same lengths as I do for rockered skis though, so that bodes well if I ever do get one!

 

[mustski]

Hmmm. I've been debating a shorter ski for improving my mogul and tree skiing. My frontside skis - camber only Kastles are 157, every pair of all mountains skis with tip (and some with tail) rocker are in the 161 - 163 range and my powder skis are 169. They all feel stable at speed and in chopped up crud. Maybe I'll demo again at Taos so I can see what I like in the moguls. Of course, that's how I ended up with my SR 85s at 161 so maybe those are responsive enough that length is a moot point.

 

[Cyclone6]

I realize this is an old thread, but I finally got to try my Nordica Santa Ana 100s this past weekend, which I got at 177cm. I am 5'7", and I was worried that they might be too long, but they were a steal for $189 last summer and I couldn't pass them up. I was AMAZED at the stability I had at speed and going over crud! For reference my first set of non-rental skis were 154cm, and my hardpack skis are 162cm. I wouldn't take the Santa Anas over bumps or down a super narrow run, but they were great for a powder day that turned into crud later in the afternoon.

 

[santacruz skier]

Initial reaction to "shaped skis" probably has a lot to do with how well someone skied back before 2000. My first demo was in 2000 from a free demo tent at Heavenly. I had cheap straight skis bought in the 1980s and rear-entry boots bought in the 1990s. I was very happy that I could make nice parallel turns from the start. I only skied two seasons on straight skis decades before and never mastered a good parallel turn. My natural stance in terms of distance between my boots was actually the "athletic stance" that works best with current ski design, not the "as close as possible" approach that used to be necessary.

My primary ski buddy was an expert skier in high school in the 1960s. After I started him on semi-private lessons at destination resorts, it took him 2-3 seasons to keep his feet far enough apart to really take advantage of the sidecut of the skis he'd bought after 2010. He's still working on making the athletic stance his natural ski stance.

His skis are still pretty close together.

 

[santacruz skier]

 

[Tennessee]

Ok, so I ski the 2018 Volkl Kenjas in a length of 170. I’m short (5’3”) but heavy at 165 lbs. I have loved my 2018 model Volkl Kenjas in length 170 — until this Spring at Brighton. I usually ski “hard pack” if not ice. And this year I skied a lot of Western hard pack in Colorado and the Kenjas were (mostly) working well. They even excelled in a few to four inches of powder. Fun! Then came Brighton in March and some deep not very Utah-like powder. A bit heavier than their usual. And I struggled. I was definitely coveting a lighter flexier ski for sure. If they were available, I would had demoed something like an Elan Ripstick. That was what I was wishing for — I was even coveting my friend’s newer Volkl Kenjas. And then there was my boot issue. I have long been a proponent of soft boots. Have always loved them for their flexy ankles. But in soft snow not so much… desperately wanted something stiffer. Ski hard in soft snow and ski soft in hard snow, right??? Right!

So I guess if this post has a point (good question!) it’s that everything is relative. What kind of skier are you? What kind of snow are you skiing?