• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

Super helpful video chosing your skis

Mudgirl630

Angel Diva
So, many people wonder about the skis we are on or wishing to find new pairs.

I am sure many of you have watched this fantastic video already, but thought to share in case you have not. It is one of the videos of my favorite ski instructor, Deb Armstrong.

I love her, don't you?

Enjoy!

 

Emilyelf1

Diva in Training
Wow - thank you so much! I'm a former racer in MI who has been skiing my old race equipment (67 underfoot) for almost 20 years. My 5-year-old daughter is finally off the leash and I'm skiing enough to justify new equipment (mostly just cruising around our local small hill with her and hauling gates for our local high school team, but still! I'm on snow 3 days/week minimum during the season!) and I have been just in a panic about going from such a narrow waist to the skis that typically come up as recommended with a 94+ waist. This clarifies a lot of my concerns, but I'm curious - The Elan Ripstick 88 from last season is on sale at my local store in a 170 and looks like a ski I'd enjoy from the reviews I've read (demos in my desired size are very thin on the ground here - I'm 5'9" and am currently on a 170, which I like). As a fairly aggressive former racer who will be skiing mostly frontside with lots of crud, is 88 still going to be too wide? Anything with a narrower waist that east coast or midwest folks are liking? I'll be lucky if I get 1 powder day per year and would probably demo for that anyway.
 

Mudgirl630

Angel Diva
Wow - thank you so much! I'm a former racer in MI who has been skiing my old race equipment (67 underfoot) for almost 20 years. My 5-year-old daughter is finally off the leash and I'm skiing enough to justify new equipment (mostly just cruising around our local small hill with her and hauling gates for our local high school team, but still! I'm on snow 3 days/week minimum during the season!) and I have been just in a panic about going from such a narrow waist to the skis that typically come up as recommended with a 94+ waist. This clarifies a lot of my concerns, but I'm curious - The Elan Ripstick 88 from last season is on sale at my local store in a 170 and looks like a ski I'd enjoy from the reviews I've read (demos in my desired size are very thin on the ground here - I'm 5'9" and am currently on a 170, which I like). As a fairly aggressive former racer who will be skiing mostly frontside with lots of crud, is 88 still going to be too wide? Anything with a narrower waist that east coast or midwest folks are liking? I'll be lucky if I get 1 powder day per year and would probably demo for that anyway.
I would go narrower for your situation such as mid 70s.
 

liquidfeet

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Wow - thank you so much! I'm a former racer in MI who has been skiing my old race equipment (67 underfoot) for almost 20 years. My 5-year-old daughter is finally off the leash and I'm skiing enough to justify new equipment (mostly just cruising around our local small hill with her and hauling gates for our local high school team, but still! I'm on snow 3 days/week minimum during the season!) and I have been just in a panic about going from such a narrow waist to the skis that typically come up as recommended with a 94+ waist. This clarifies a lot of my concerns, but I'm curious - The Elan Ripstick 88 from last season is on sale at my local store in a 170 and looks like a ski I'd enjoy from the reviews I've read (demos in my desired size are very thin on the ground here - I'm 5'9" and am currently on a 170, which I like). As a fairly aggressive former racer who will be skiing mostly frontside with lots of crud, is 88 still going to be too wide? Anything with a narrower waist that east coast or midwest folks are liking? I'll be lucky if I get 1 powder day per year and would probably demo for that anyway.
On hard snow groomers:
The wider the ski is, the longer it takes to get it up on edge on hard snow. Many skiers without a race background have difficulty edging skis with a width of 80+ in the first place. Edging is difficult for them so they opt to rotate the skis while flat to get turns to work. You'll be able to edge anything with your race background, but it will feel like it takes a year to get them up on edge after all those years on 67cm race skis.

On soft snow that your skis sink into:
You'll have no issue getting 88s up on edge on soft penetrable snow. The issue is whether they will give you the float you are looking for when you want to stay on top of deepish snow. You are tall and I'm supposing have the weight to go with the height, so a ski 88 or higher should be good for floating on top of 8"+ floatable snow.

I'm assuming you know how to handle you narrow skis in sink-in-able snow anyway. You won't need to put as much athletic energy into controlling your travel in 8" of chopped up snow with 88-90 skis.

For years I've used skis with 84-85 waists as my daily driver in New England and been very happy with them on our hard snow, but I'm shorter and maybe lighter than you (guessing). My ankles and knees don't like skiing on our snow (frequent thaw-freeze cycles) with skis wider than that, nor am I happy with the delay in reaching desired edge angle. In recent years I've gone back to skis 70-78 for the performance I'm after. I like short turns. Again, talking about hard snow here, shaped by edged skis, not rotated skis.

If you are interested in charging downhill with speed on seriously chopped up deep snow in a bowl a few days after a storm, you might want to go 90+ and longer than 170. Others with more experience in these conditions may disagree.
 

Jilly

Moderator
Staff member
I ski a big hill, mountain in Quebec. We have the Northeastern conditions. I have 2 pairs of skis. A tuned down race ski in 68mm underneath and an 88 underfoot. The 88's have seen maybe 3 days.
Also I see most of the ski instructors on the same type of ski as my tuned down race ski. Whichever brand it might be.

Like @liquidfeet I don't really like the time and effect it takes to get the 88's on edge in our hard packed conditions. And I've had a few pairs over the years. Hence the 88's are my travel skis. Also to put it bluntly the 88's make my knees hurt.

I know the sales are on, but it might be worth demo'ing in your conditions to know how these react to your type of skiing.
 

Skier31

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
My everyday ski is a Rossi Pursuit 71 wide ski. Love it. Ski it in up to several inches of snow.

It is heavy and goes through crud easily.

I am 5’8 and 150.

I also have a Kastle MX 83. Not as heavy as the Rossi. I use this when there is more snow.

I have a pair of 98 Nordica Nemesis that are great on a true powder day.
 

nopoleskier

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I LOVE Deb Armstrong and her videos are SO Good- I give them as 'homework' to my lessons!

Skis- what one person loves another hate- so I hope you can demo!
I personally do not like volkl's they feel too planky for me (the flair was OK but not as fun as others)
I like poppy energetic skis that "I Ski" I'm not on for the ride. I'm ex race back ground so I like a responsive zippy ski. Seems you like your 20yr old skis? Often staying with the same manufacturer works out well, (for me anyways)

My daily driver east coast and I take west is a Liberty 76w (76 under foot).
I have skied them on ice, hard packed and up to 6" of new snow- and in Spring conditions- piles of corn.
I bought a back up pair brand new 165cm but thinking of selling them because I'm now lusting after Stockli Laser CX- they are 69 under foot and pocket rockets at 163cm. I had a blast on them on demo day. Absolutely awesome stable carvers and go really really fast. If you can afford the sticker price Stockli's hype is real.

My Renoun 90's (90 under foot) are my 'buicks' they are crud busters and easy peasy on my old knees- best for 5-6+ of snow- they do carve but my old knees sometimes feel it. They are high tech ski- very smooth skiing- they do make others less width, they are fine skis (like stockli's $$ but worth it)

I just bought Sheeva 10's 102 underfoot- for western big snow days. - I demo'd them and fell in love and traded skis for them. they were a blast out west in over a foot of snow. Fat skis you will find you are not carving but 'schmearing' piles of powder and slower speed for tree skiing.

Coming from racing background you'd probably like under 80cm IMO, it's hard to carve the fatties- you really have to skid more than carve and I don't like to skid- fine in piles of snow but not on groomer zoomers. If you're interested in Liberties, let me know- then you can enable me to get the 1300$ stocklis, lol
 

Mudgirl630

Angel Diva
Wow - thank you so much! I'm a former racer in MI who has been skiing my old race equipment (67 underfoot) for almost 20 years. My 5-year-old daughter is finally off the leash and I'm skiing enough to justify new equipment (mostly just cruising around our local small hill with her and hauling gates for our local high school team, but still! I'm on snow 3 days/week minimum during the season!) and I have been just in a panic about going from such a narrow waist to the skis that typically come up as recommended with a 94+ waist. This clarifies a lot of my concerns, but I'm curious - The Elan Ripstick 88 from last season is on sale at my local store in a 170 and looks like a ski I'd enjoy from the reviews I've read (demos in my desired size are very thin on the ground here - I'm 5'9" and am currently on a 170, which I like). As a fairly aggressive former racer who will be skiing mostly frontside with lots of crud, is 88 still going to be too wide? Anything with a narrower waist that east coast or midwest folks are liking? I'll be lucky if I get 1 powder day per year and would probably demo for that anyway.
Thanks for writing in.
My current favorite is Atomic Redster WB. The waist is 75. I love them. Stiff. I have been on Volkl Kenja for about 10 years, three pairs. The newest pair is from 2021. The waist is 88. I have 2020 that are 90. They all also very good still skis.
I had Volkl 100Eight, but got rid of them last season. I ski, basically, everyday. I skied 147 days last season. So, whatever equipment I use are important part of my life.
I am kind of in search for new powder skis for the next season.
 

Emilyelf1

Diva in Training
On hard snow groomers:
The wider the ski is, the longer it takes to get it up on edge on hard snow. Many skiers without a race background have difficulty edging skis with a width of 80+ in the first place. Edging is difficult for them so they opt to rotate the skis while flat to get turns to work. You'll be able to edge anything with your race background, but it will feel like it takes a year to get them up on edge after all those years on 67cm race skis.

On soft snow that your skis sink into:
You'll have no issue getting 88s up on edge on soft penetrable snow. The issue is whether they will give you the float you are looking for when you want to stay on top of deepish snow. You are tall and I'm supposing have the weight to go with the height, so a ski 88 or higher should be good for floating on top of 8"+ floatable snow.

I'm assuming you know how to handle you narrow skis in sink-in-able snow anyway. You won't need to put as much athletic energy into controlling your travel in 8" of chopped up snow with 88-90 skis.

For years I've used skis with 84-85 waists as my daily driver in New England and been very happy with them on our hard snow, but I'm shorter and maybe lighter than you (guessing). My ankles and knees don't like skiing on our snow (frequent thaw-freeze cycles) with skis wider than that, nor am I happy with the delay in reaching desired edge angle. In recent years I've gone back to skis 70-78 for the performance I'm after. I like short turns. Again, talking about hard snow here, shaped by edged skis, not rotated skis.

If you are interested in charging downhill with speed on seriously chopped up deep snow in a bowl a few days after a storm, you might want to go 90+ and longer than 170. Others with more experience in these conditions may disagree.
Super helpful! Knee pain is a definite consideration for me and MI skiing is similar to NE in terms of thaw/freeze cycles. I'm starting to look more at carving skis with an 82-84 waist as opposed to the all mountain options since I'm not planning to ditch my racing skis but am very unlikely to get any true powder. I definitely have the weight to match my height, but will probably be charging crud more than actually needing to float.
 

Mudgirl630

Angel Diva
Super helpful! Knee pain is a definite consideration for me and MI skiing is similar to NE in terms of thaw/freeze cycles. I'm starting to look more at carving skis with an 82-84 waist as opposed to the all mountain options since I'm not planning to ditch my racing skis but am very unlikely to get any true powder. I definitely have the weight to match my height, but will probably be charging crud more than actually needing to float.
Then stay between 75 to low 80s for sure.
In this country, people tent to love wider skis vs in Europe, you will find mid 60s to 70s in rentals even. Don't know why....
Sounds as if you would love being staying narrower waisted pair.
 

volklgirl

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Wow - thank you so much! I'm a former racer in MI who has been skiing my old race equipment (67 underfoot) for almost 20 years. My 5-year-old daughter is finally off the leash and I'm skiing enough to justify new equipment (mostly just cruising around our local small hill with her and hauling gates for our local high school team, but still! I'm on snow 3 days/week minimum during the season!) and I have been just in a panic about going from such a narrow waist to the skis that typically come up as recommended with a 94+ waist. This clarifies a lot of my concerns, but I'm curious - The Elan Ripstick 88 from last season is on sale at my local store in a 170 and looks like a ski I'd enjoy from the reviews I've read (demos in my desired size are very thin on the ground here - I'm 5'9" and am currently on a 170, which I like). As a fairly aggressive former racer who will be skiing mostly frontside with lots of crud, is 88 still going to be too wide? Anything with a narrower waist that east coast or midwest folks are liking? I'll be lucky if I get 1 powder day per year and would probably demo for that anyway.
Take a look at the Atomic Redster X9s or the Volkl Deacon series. Both are in the 70s and are going to keep the racer in you happy while maintaining a bit of versatility.
 

MissySki

Angel Diva
Then stay between 75 to low 80s for sure.
In this country, people tent to love wider skis vs in Europe, you will find mid 60s to 70s in rentals even. Don't know why....
Sounds as if you would love being staying narrower waisted pair.

I thought a part of that difference in Europe is that more people tend to stay on piste than in the US where we like to ski on any white surface and many prefer to stay off piste as much as possible. These are just generalizations I've heard, as I haven't yet skied in Europe myself. Divas who have.. would you say this is about right?
 

santacruz skier

Angel Diva
I thought a part of that difference in Europe is that more people tend to stay on piste than in the US where we like to ski on any white surface and many prefer to stay off piste as much as possible. These are just generalizations I've heard, as I haven't yet skied in Europe myself. Divas who have.. would you say this is about right?
Basically, yes. Except for a place like Chamonix.
 

scandium

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
My recollection is that in most of France (have not skied elsewhere in Europe), off-piste is considered mostly to be something for high intermediate and better skiers. I've heard that in many places, anything ungroomed is not controlled for avalanche risk or managed by patrol therefore the knowledge required to be safe is greater.

In New Zealand, anything inside the ski boundary is usually managed by patrol and there is usually access to runs that are "off piste" and ungroomed, but not unpatrolled.
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
Along with picking a ski model in terms of design and width underfoot, a common question is about length. Here are some thoughts about length for women from Kim Reichhelm, who heads up the K2 ski test team.

August 12, 2022
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJM

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
26,235
Messages
497,609
Members
8,503
Latest member
MermaidKelly
Top