Waist width in skis

[CMCM]

I'm having the worst time figuring out what to get. The skis I'm interested in I can't demo....the ones I can demo I think I'm not interested in.

Question: Since I'm groomer oriented, and my long-time Nordicas are 68mm at the waist, do you think going up to 74mm (such as the Nordica Drive) will make much of a different one way or the other? Will I notice that difference?

I measured my skis against the Drived, and that 6mm difference sure didn't seem like much....

I found some Nordica Victorys to demo if I want, BUT....that's a more advanced ski than the Drive. I don't know if I could judge the Drive by testing the Victory....

 

[MaineSkiLady]

Although I'm not familiar with these specific skis you mention, I do often make the switch from 70 to 74 in the skis I generally use. While there is a difference requiring a slight difference in technique, I wouldn't call this a huge difference or anything. It's quite subtle. The difference you WILL notice is how the skis track through crud - even light powder (74 still won't cut it through the really deep stuff, though you'll manage). Another factor to consider is the shovel/tip width in relation to the waist, i.e., the ski's sidecut. A really wide shovel, even with a wider waist, is going to be a more actively turning ski.

However, the mm differences that you're giving are relatively small ones. I think you'll enjoy the wider waisted ski.

 

[vanhoskier]

I think a lot of skis are using wider waists, and a 74 really isn't that wide anymore. You may notice a difference at first, but you'll get used to it, then forget about it.

I ski a 90mm waisted ski, even on groomers. It felt different at first but now that's what I'm used to. I'm sure I can't make those small radius linked turns that MSL can, though.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

^^^^ Uh, yah, but vanho can probably whop my butt in all other departments! Including air, from which I have been officially and medically BANNED for LIFE!

 

[ski now work later]

I think the Nordica Drive is a great ski for an intermediate skier and won't be outgrown too quickly, and that 74 is just the right width for groomers, crud, soft/mushy snow, death cookies, and everything but deep powder and chop. My skis are 72, 81, 92, and 94 width and I primarily ski in the East where groomers reign.

 

[volklgirl]

Going from 68 to 74, you will notice a small difference on groomed snow. The bigger difference will show up when the snow gets soft, deep, or junky. Then you'll love the added waist width. However, more important when discussing differences in performance and feel of a ski is sidecut/turn radius and stiffness/flex pattern. You'll notice those differences far more readily than a simple difference is waist width.

For example; my Karmas are an 87 waist but fairly soft and with a 22.3 meter turn radius. They're great as long as the snow is medium to soft, but get cranky and skiddish when the snow gets hard or icy. In contrast, the Auras are a 94 waist but have a more dramatic side cut. The turn radius is approximately the same (23.2 meters), but they're much stiffer. The Auras rock on the groomers, even when the snow gets really hard. And, despite the similar turn radii, the Auras are actually much better at making smaller carved turns.