Older Alpina Discovery Ski size chart

[mik84]

Hello,

I'm looking for used Alpina Discovery crown skis (68mm) for my wife. Her body weight is 70kg (154 Ibs) , height 175 cm (5'9), she mostly travels with light backpack 2-5kg (6,6-11lbs).
I already have Magnum Manual NNN BC bindings.

I've found this model of Disco, seller declares those are 190 cm (picture) , but size chart shows only 185 and 195 cm.
Do You have any sugestions on how to check real size (length) of this model year, and what weight are those made for?

PS Are those edges just slightly neglected or rubbish?

Thanks,
Michael

[Woodserson]

I'm not convinced it's 190, with the numbers in front, often there is a break, or the size is the first number. Can you just measure them with a tape? Unless that's a 0/190 ?

IF IT IS 190, then possibly an older model and Alpina changed the production lengths. This happens.

The edges are fine, just a bit of surface rust a small stone will clean them up.

Despite the chart, if she is not a complete beginner and you are skiing somewhere that is not characterized by steep up&downs, the 190's should be fine...? Alpina sizing is weird. People go short with them, but then they are slow. My friend has a pair, he got 185? I think and he weighs 180... and he is slow. But that's what they put him on.

There are a lot of variables in play here: weight, experience, terrain, predominate snow type.

If they are cheap enough for you to experiment with I'd go for it. If this is a nail-biter as far as the economics go, think about other options.

[satsuma]

My skis are Discovery 68's which I bought in 2012 and I believe were a current model. These are compact/short length (in my case, for a short/compact skier!) skis. That year, the sizes were 170, 180 and 190 cm. I was well over 200 lb. and could use the 190 cm. length. I believe the correct length for a 154 lb. skier would be 180 or 170 cm.

When I get a chance to look in daylight, I'll see if the waxless pattern on my skis match the ones in the picture.

[satsuma]

I got a look at my skis and they have a similar waxless pattern. I am guessing, from when I bought them and the not quite linked 2012 sizing chart, that they are 2011's. Yours may be from the same year. These are not skis bought for speed, and at a body weight of 154 lb, I would say that 190 cm skis are too long.

http://alpinasportsus.com/wp-content/up ... -Chart.pdf

[mik84]

Thank Your for very valuable replies. I'm sorry for my delay - because of partial lock down we had some business issues and my head went in totally different directions, but it's better now

Seller measured those Discos for me and 190 cm it is. Those are quite cheap but satsuma might be right. Although used BC skis are still quite rare in Poland and those Discos are a good deal, for me priority is to find proper size for my wife to keep entry level as low as possible. Key is to convince her, that BC is better than easier and very popular Cross Country she used to . I have limited amount of bullets here, if You know what I say.

I've already bought her Alpha Kikut NNN BC boots and Magnum Manual bindings, so waxless skis is all I need. Maybe I'll look for a bit narrower model like 65mm? I believe 62mm are to skinny for Magnums... Although for upcoming season I believe she'll stay in tracks for 75% of time, as all the rest of the group have XC's.

[peterindc]

I own the predecessor to the Alpina Discovery, namely an Alpina Cross-Terrain which has the identical dimensions as the Discovery 102 (102-64-87). I am 167 pounds, 5'10", and ski the 180 cm.

EDIT: Sorry, moving too fast there. My skis are comparable to the Discovery 102, and I have found them to be more like a downhill ski with not much kick-and-glide. So what I originally posted applies to those wider more xcD skis.

The Discovery 68 skis you're considering are 68-60-65, would fit into tracks, and presumably would have more kick-and-glide where the added length might actually be an asset in keeping up with the XC skiers. It depends on how much downhill turning she is interested in doing. These might be a good introduction and if after skiing them, she decides she wants them shorter you could look to trade them once you rehab the edges.

If you do decide to look at other skis, I would say don't worry about the width of the Magnum bindings you have, which are 67mm in width. It's fine for them to hang a little over the edge of a narrower ski. I just read this on rei.com about the Magnum: "Although the binding has been designed for use on wide skis, it may be used on skis with a minimum width of 52mm." I believe you could look at any BC skis, virtually all of which are wider than that, and those bindings should work fine with her Alfa Kikuts.

Good for you for getting her backcountry! Have fun and let us know how it turns out.

[satsuma]

The disadvantage here of the skis being too long is getting grip on the uphill. The strength of these skis is the ability to climb (due to the excellent waxless pattern), and your wife might lose that advamtage. These skis are quite stiff and difficult to compress for a backcountry ski.

While the Discovery 68's will fit into tracks, the stiffness of these skis makes them difficult to keep in tracks going around curves and therefore less than optimum. I ended up getting a second pair of skis to use in tracks, which are also much faster.

If you are going to get backcountry skis to use in tracks, consider getting something slightly narrower and especially softer, maybe with partial or without metal edges. From descriptions, I would suggest something like the Madshus Pellestova, or the Alpina Control (without metal edges).

[mik84]

Hey! Thanks for Your suggestions
I've just found a bargain - slightly used Fischer Spider 62 on NNN BC Auto bindings. Those are 169 cm so
"145 and under pounds" (my wife is 154 pounds). Because last season I've already found nice set for her twin-brother, those Spiders would be for his wife (140 pounds)
BUT because my wife and I are going to ski a month before them, shell give them a try
I'll keep looking for skis for her, but if nothing will appear, she'll give those Spiders a try.
Girl selling those skis told me she's about 122 pounds (55 kg) and on steeper ascends grip is slightly to weak for her,
so she is to light to properly compress them or crown might be not as good as in Europa99 or Discoveries (maybe it's pressed, not cut). I heard from Alpina reseller that Woody is also a cheaper version of Discovery and crown is pressed.

As for the steel edges- we still have some alpine skiing habits, so we like them Also where we like to ski, there are often some icy places (day temp. oscillates around melting point), so this extra grip for turning and braking is a serious advantage.

By the way - how should I understand user weight? We have backpacks, weight depends on trip type: from 5 to 15 pounds for her. Should I look at user weight as total user+backpack weight?

[mik84]

Ok, so I've just unpacked those Spider 62 skis. Bottom side is like after just few days on snow, crown is sharp, and one can see the original machine made structure along the gliding parts. Like I wrote before, if I won't find anything for my wife, will give them a try in January. Hope that after some care (proper waxing procedure) they'll grip and glide better than rented XC skis, which as we remember , used to be maybe not too old, but cheap and neglected.