Comparing an XCD ski and a skinny downhill ski of similar width with leather boots on firm groomed snow.

[mca80]

Thanks, good info there about torsional stiffness I hadn't considered.

[JB TELE]

@JB TELE would you remind me what you weigh? I keep seeing She's Piste in my length but wonder if I'm too heavy for them at 185lbs. It looks like you got the 174cm length and ski the 98 in 179. My 98 is 189 which is great but I was considering the K2 in 174, but you have me thinking that might be too short.

I'm 160 pounds. I honestly don't know how weight matters when you are talking about skis with a downhill camber rather than a nordic camber. Anyone care to elaborate?

[Lhartley]

I feel like a giant on this forum. Is there no protein outside of Canada?

[The GCW]

Off topic, but that Dynastar Vertical (near the beginning of this post) was one of My favorite alpine skis.

[Mattafix]

The Dynastar Assault Vertical is a 1992 moguls ski. I called it an 80s ski in an earlier post because of how it looks and how it’s built. I found it completely new and unused two years ago. It is built like some of the 80s/early 90s skis were built: There is no wood inside this construction. It’s a kind of plastic foam. I had to mount the binding carefully in order not to overturn the screws. If ever they come loose, although there is not a lot of power on them skiing in leathers, I will glue them in with 24h epoxy. Anyways, they are powerful skis in the resort and even lightweight mounted with 3pins.

[Montana St Alum]

@JB TELE would you remind me what you weigh? I keep seeing She's Piste in my length but wonder if I'm too heavy for them at 185lbs. It looks like you got the 174cm length and ski the 98 in 179. My 98 is 189 which is great but I was considering the K2 in 174, but you have me thinking that might be too short.

I'm 160 pounds. I honestly don't know how weight matters when you are talking about skis with a downhill camber rather than a nordic camber. Anyone care to elaborate?

Bigger (mostly heavier but height can play into it as well as you can press the tips harder in both cases) people are often stronger and can "drive" a bigger ski (as in, pulling more G's can overwhelm the grip and stability to track at speed.). A longer ski may be needed to provide more floatation for a heavier skier. When carving, a skier who is too heavy for a ski can cause it to wash out in a turn.

Ski designers have to make certain assumptions regarding skiers. When they put together a ski, they expect customers to fall within weight parameters and build skis to handle that. The performance is optimized for people inside the bell-shaped curve for flex and torsional stiffness. If you're outside that, it can work, but it's not optimal.

I had a pair of 175cm JJ's and a 185cm pair. The shorter ski got completely "worked" in deep chop as it was continually being deflected. The 185's were fine. I'm also 160 pounds. Part of the calculus for ski length is also application, of course, but picking a length based on skier weight is a legitimate consideration even if it's not the only consideration.

[Krummholz]

Here is Rossignal’s size chart for a reference. It is based on How Tall You Are.

[bbense]

Here is Rossignal’s size chart for a reference. It is based on How Tall You Are.

Which is a really lazy way to pick ski length. Skis for turning care a lot more about how much you weigh and how good you are at pressuring the ski. Most skis come in 4 or 5 lengths. Better to think of them as xs-xl than a specific length.
Look at the lengths the ski comes in and start with your t-shirt size. Size down for softer boots and easier turning, size up for stiffer boots and more stablity/float.

[Krummholz]

Yes, and size down for less experience and up for more.