Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 44 of 44
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    4,785
    Unless you plan on touring, who cares what they weigh. Light skis suck, heavy skis truck.

    If you're really worried about the ski being manageable in bumps and tight trees, don't look at the weight of the skis as a factor. Look at the shape and profile. I'll ride a heavy ski all day long in trees if it has rocker, camber, rocker profile. Even just an upturned tail vs a flat tail is night and day easier to ski in trees.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    Unless you plan on touring, who cares what they weigh. Light skis suck, heavy skis truck.

    If you're really worried about the ski being manageable in bumps and tight trees, don't look at the weight of the skis as a factor. Look at the shape and profile. I'll ride a heavy ski all day long in trees if it has rocker, camber, rocker profile. Even just an upturned tail vs a flat tail is night and day easier to ski in trees.
    I know I'm already giving up ground in the tail, sidecut and flex vs my Apostles with these skis so weight is all I have left to work with. You guys have convinced me to hang my purse up and stop worrying about what will probably amount to less than a 1/2lb per ski (I know I'm not gonna find a sub 8lb ski with the build and dimensions I want). Just needed some reassurance before dropping over $500 on something I probably don't actually need and can't demo before buying.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Maine Coast
    Posts
    4,681
    too heavy for tele

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    393
    I'm a fat ass...6'3" 235. Scott P4 191cm, Hammerheads, T1s for inbounds. I like, plow through everything, super fun. Never thought heavy, I'm heavy.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    10
    Inbounds on a lift I could care less about weight

    Now if your putting it on my back....then I'm all about grams and ounces !
    For the civil engineers: Theres no "I" in BEAM!

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW -> MSO
    Posts
    7,889
    There it is.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    I prefer a heavier ski for resort skiing.

    Deflects less in the chop, and has a more stable feel.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Big Sky/Moonlight Basin
    Posts
    14,413
    195 Motherships. Men's size.
    "Zee damn fat skis are ruining zee piste !" -Oscar Schevlin

    "Hike up your skirt and grow a dick you fucking crybaby" -what Bunion said to Harry at the top of The Headwaters

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    58
    My buddy loves his 195 Folsom Gambits. He is same size as you. Has 22 designs outlaws on them and wears Scarpa TX comps. He'll tell you bigger heavy skis are great as long as the boot/binding is up to the task. 73mm not so much, too much play in the boot/binding interface.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,896
    If you are a big guy, then heavy skis are not actually heavy relative to your bodyweight and strength. Sack up, and get in better shape.

    If worried about swing weight, a more forward mount will even out the weight distribution and make them feel lighter to throw around.

    Lastly, ski them fast, and have them bail you out of "when in doubt, straightline out" situations.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    here and there
    Posts
    18,583
    Thinking over I am weight ski? hmmmmm
    watch out for snakes

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Sun Peaks Resort
    Posts
    865
    Head Kore 117 are very light, so might be worth checking out. Don't delay too much as most shops are going to sell out of Kores very quickly.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by DanoT View Post
    Head Kore 117 are very light, so might be worth checking out. Don't delay too much as most shops are going to sell out of Kores very quickly.
    Picked em op a couple months ago. Haven't mounted em up yet but they look pretty in the ski closet. Keep thinking I should upsize to the 193s though.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Skiing during your summer
    Posts
    293
    TL;DR. Yes. Yes, you are overthinking it.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Sun Peaks Resort
    Posts
    865
    Quote Originally Posted by GPP33 View Post
    Picked em op a couple months ago. Haven't mounted em up yet but they look pretty in the ski closet. Keep thinking I should upsize to the 193s though.
    Something to consider is that ski designers start out building prototypes in a length that most testers ski on. Let's say that is a 180cm ski that gets tweaked until perfect. They then try to emulate that same performance and feel in the tallest and shortest lengths, often times utilizing different waist widths and sometimes different tail and tip widths. And of course the taller and shorter lengths will have a different turning radius than a ski in the middle of the size range.

    Another thing to consider is 117mm x 193cm is a lot of surface area and it won't me as light or as maneuverable in tight trees as a shorter ski.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Praying for Fresh
    Posts
    2,343
    Yes

    Sent from my XP7700 using TGR Forums mobile app

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    between campus and church
    Posts
    9,925
    I bought a pair of skis to ride inbounds this year that are more than a pound and a half heavier than what I was skiing. I only have a few runs on them so far, but can attest the weight isn't what I noticed about the difference. FWIW - I ride them tele in Vermont.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Mexico 2.0
    Posts
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Nwsno View Post
    73mm not so much, too much play in the boot/binding interface.
    Well yeah when you're missing 2mm of duckbill there's going to be some play

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Toddball View Post
    Well yeah when you're missing 2mm of duckbill there's going to be some play
    Oh man typos and a lack of proof reading always inhibit ski performance.. meh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •