Thread: Height as a variable when choosing ski length, boot stiffness

I'll be honest that when reading this forum, I feel like a complete pansy because it sounds like most folks around here are on 180-195 length skis, and I prefer skis in the mid 170s to low 180s. I'm probably about at the median for weight (170 lbs) but shorter than most at 5' 5".

My theory on this is that if you think of the skier as a lever, the longer lever for a given weight will have an easier time flexing the longer skis and stiffer boots. I'm not an engineer, so I have no idea if this is true. All I have is my anecdotal evidence that 90-100 flex boots are plenty stiff and 178 cm skis are plenty long.

In terms of skill, it's all relative I guess. I feel like I can hold my own but certainly don't measure up to a lot of folks around here.

So is height a factor, and if so, how much? Would love it if Pechelman and some of the other engineer types would weigh in here.

170 and 5'5 id say youre fine in the mid to upper 170's
id also even say that depending on which boot it really is, that 90-100 flex boots are MORE than enough support and probably too much.

if you're not hucking and maching straightlines through icy bump fields or groomers, youd probably be a much more effective skier with softer boots.

for reference I find I am most happy on skis in the 185-190 range with boots that are around a 55-60 flex index. 5'10, 170 and i ski centered, dont huck, and like to turn occasionally. I also ski whatever damn skis I feel like. The only skis where Ive found the "limits" of my boot in resort skiing has been on 192 stiff big bros. Even then, a change in technique and its very doable but takes a little more work on your part and willingness to commit more to the fall line.

this long stiff ski and super stiff boot is hold over from the last era of skiing when skis were straight and all gear development came from racing.

Im betting itll be another few years before people & industry wake up.

and i know there are a lot of people who disagree that soft and short sucks no matter what so im not here to convince anyone and fight the lonely battle.

Soft boots are fine as long as they are torsional stiff. Same thing with skis. Unless you are straighting it like pechelman said. But i have found that i can ski longer skis than people that are shorter than me. Even if they have some weight on me. I kinda think it is because I have longer legs. But i may be way off to. Just my .02

5ft9in, 140# skiing Salomon X-wave 8's (90 flex on salomon scale), on anything from a 179-185.

I'm perfectly happy with that range.

If you are having fun on a 170-180 range, why are you worrying about it? Feel like you need a bigger ski? Try a bigger ski.

Originally Posted by pechelman

170 and 5'5 id say youre fine in the mid to upper 170's
id also even say that depending on which boot it really is, that 90-100 flex boots are MORE than enough support and probably too much.

My anecdotal experience bears this out as well. My alpine boots are Lange Fluid 100. I think they're on the soft side for a 100 flex, feel softer fore/aft than my X wave 8 (90 flex), but that could also be due to the lower cuff. My AT boots are Garmont G Ride, which work fine in soft snow, but feel too soft on challenging snow surfaces such as suncrust and windpack.

My experience suggests that height is and should be a consideration. Is my theory regarding lever length sound, or is there another explanation?

thinking of you, your boots, and your skis all as levers that have to work in some sort of harmony is good thinking

Originally Posted by char

If you are having fun on a 170-180 range, why are you worrying about it? Feel like you need a bigger ski? Try a bigger ski.

Not worried about it, just curious more than anything else. I've skied the LP in 186 and felt like it was a bit too much ski. Skied the Atomic Pimp in 183 and didn't feel like it was too long, but would have liked something stiffer. Just trying to explain why the LP felt like too much since skiers of comparable ability and weight seem to handle it just fine.

They may have spent more time on that ski than you. And it may just be a mental thing. Or comfort thing

When you guys are talking about skier weight are you referring to stark bollock naked weight or fully kitted-up in boots & backpack?

Originally Posted by MarnMan

They may have spent more time on that ski than you.

Yes--I was only on them for one day.

Originally Posted by MarnMan

And it may just be a mental thing. Or comfort thing

Also likely. But I've never felt like 176ish skis are too short, either.

FWIW, the 186 LP is my go to ski, and I'm 5'7" and 150lbs. But depending on where I use it, it can seem either too short (wide open terrain at WB) or too long/heavy (hop turn chutes in the Alpental backcountry). Since I don't spend most of my days at wide open areas going longer is silly. At the same time, the ones I demoed before I bought were 176 and they skied great, I just wasn't ready to go that short yet.

Do I think someone 6' and 150lb should be on the same ski as me? No, I think they need to go eat some cheeseburgers.

You calling me skinny Mofro... Yea i Guess

Originally Posted by Mofro261

FWIW, the 186 LP is my go to ski, and I'm 5'7" and 150lbs. But depending on where I use it, it can seem either too short (wide open terrain at WB) or too long/heavy (hop turn chutes in the Alpental backcountry). Since I don't spend most of my days at wide open areas going longer is silly. At the same time, the ones I demoed before I bought were 176 and they skied great, I just wasn't ready to go that short yet.

Based on my demo of the 186 LP and feeling like it was a bit too much, I bought a pair of 176 LPs from another mag. The weekend after I demo'd the 186, I was at Snowbird and felt like the LP in 186 would be perfect there. I also felt like skiing the 186 every day would force me to be a better skier and learn to keep it under control in tight spaces. But for the 90% of the time that I'm not skiing at Snowbird, I think the 176 would be more versatile. Nice thing is that with the mag deal, the penalty for changing my mind is pretty minimal.

You do most of your skiing around here (Bogus, T-Rack, Brundage)? I'm a bit bigger than you at 6', 205 nekkid. My Bogus ski tends to be a 183 Got, 185 Kilowatt (tele), or 185 Wailer 95. If it gets soft or I travel somewhere bigger, I have 192 Bro comps for when I'm angry and 189 Kahunas for mellow moods pow.

I ski ok and I have no problems with being on mid 180s skis unless they are really soft. It all depends on the terrain and day.

At your size, I wouldn't worry about being in the 170s. I think you'll miss some ski at other areas like what you experienced in UT.

As for boot flex, some like it stiff, some don't. I fall in the middle. I think my Rage Pros flex around 120 or so on a Solly scale. It's not bad. I definitely wouldn't go any stiffer. I have Megarides I stiffened up but actually went back to stock tongues with my Verdicts. I just liked touring with a softer boot. It's not bad to ski on as it is. Some people use a stiff boot as a crutch for a lack of balance...kind of a jam it forward and you won't fall backward approach. There's a sweet spot somewhere in the middle and it's nice.

Originally Posted by Conundrum

You do most of your skiing around here (Bogus, T-Rack, Brundage)?

Yes, speaking of which, we should get out together one of these days.

Appreciate the perspective. Important thing is am I having fun? Answer to that is "yes." Having the right equipment is an important variable in that equation. The geek in me wants to know not only what the right equipment is but why.

Originally Posted by Wasatch_Expat

Having the right equipment is an important variable in that equation. The geek in me wants to know not only what the right equipment is but why.

You just need to acquire a large quiver like Conundrum and I.

I think this thread is interesting.

I'm 6'6" and 185 lbs. Yes I eat a lot of cheesburgers, no it doesnt change a thing.

I like skis that are 190. Thats my sweet spot as far as I have found. shorter and I feel uncomfortable straightlining, longer and I cant make em come around when i need to (as a side note I think terrain type, snow type, and skiing style play a huge role in determining which equipment will be ideal for a given skier). I also like them to be pretty stiff, although not as stiff as many better skiers than me. b104 squad = little too much, explosiv, movement goliath, DPS #2 flex = money.

Boots I like medium stiff as well(lange 120). This allows you to both pressure the tip immediately, and lean back to avoid tip hook in a high speed runout.

I think height is an important factor in one's consideration of equipment, but balance may be even more so. A taller skier may benifit from a beefier setup because he is cranking on his boots from a point of greater mechanical advantage, but a I think a balanced skier will benifit the most from the same because he will reap all the benifits (responsive turn initiation and stability at high speed) while avoiding the detriments (difficulty making short turns at low speed, shinbang from getting tossed into the backseat)

+1 height, weight, terrain, snow, skiing style.

I'm 5'9" and 150lbs. I'd guess that in 'effective leverage' we're pretty close. I have a (what might be considered a rather weird) two ski quiver: 170 mantras (not a typo) and 194 lp XXL's. Still using technica ICON race boots (I'm guessing about flex 130). Tried some softer flex boots a couple of years ago and hated them, but I think that has more to do with my balance not being as good as it should be.

Big bumps, very tight trees, steep chutes with tight chokes (think taos west basin) and generally skiing like you're getting paid by the turn I like the short mantras. Boomin' and zoomin' in open terrain the XXL's get to play.

I find that I can use either ski anywhere and still have fun on them, but I have to pay much closer attention when I get away from the ideal intended usage. Above a certain speed, particularly in crud or heavy snow, skiing the baby mantras is like taking kindergarteners on a field trip right after cake and ice cream. In big bumps, tight trees and chutes, the XXL's require me to plan quite a ways ahead and make sure that every turn is spot on to avoid a game of white knuckle dodge em'.

Either of these scenarios can be fun and I find that it makes me focus on using good technique (not a bad thing). On the other hand, relaxing and having gear that doesn't require as much focus for the situation at hand is really nice too.