Going shorter in a wider ski for powder, narrow terrain and dense trees?

[Kulharin]

I notice in most line ups whenever a ski has additional width, it also often gets additional length...

Does it make sense to drop a size down in length for an overly wide ski... Something between 115-120 underfoot with a lot of rocker? If I want a surfy, playful powder ski that will spend most of it's time in powder filled dense trees, chutes, and steep/narrow terrain?

[GeezerSteve]

Your font color sucks

[mntlion]

yes,

to both you

[toast2266]

Depends on the ski.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Tailwind]

Keep in mind that ski length does not equate to how quickly they turn as you change from model to model. When I want a ski that will turn quickly I look more at the shape and rocker profile than the length. Shorter skis will have more tip dive and have a harder time getting floating at slow speeds, neither of which are good for trees. The general principle that a 'tree' ski will be shorter than your charger setup makes sense but only within a given model. My 190cm squad 7's are WAY better for trees and tight terrain than my old 177cm Volkl Mantra's.

[SJG]

I ride a short(er) Protest on deeper days, the entries to a lot of my shots are extremely tight, and there's no way to slip into them with my regular skis, and you sure as hell can't straight run the entry. I like being able to quickly shut down too, which is easier on the shorter boards. YMMV

[DropCliffsNotBombs]

Keep in mind that ski length does not equate to how quickly they turn as you change from model to model. When I want a ski that will turn quickly I look more at the shape and rocker profile than the length. Shorter skis will have more tip dive and have a harder time getting floating at slow speeds, neither of which are good for trees. The general principle that a 'tree' ski will be shorter than your charger setup makes sense but only within a given model. My 190cm squad 7's are WAY better for trees and tight terrain than my old 177cm Volkl Mantra's.

Bullshit. The OP is on the right track... A shorter, wider, and rockered ski IS THE TICKET for tight trees.
I've designed and built a ski specifically for this. And they rock! Long skis don't fit as well in small places... It's just math.

[Benny Profane]

Why length in tight places? I have a short (174 Meier Doc) for the east, and they work pretty well at tight western mountains like Taos. I see no need for Rocker, though, but, that's me. I want all the running length I can get at that size to hold hardpack and ice when I have to.
They are a pain in the ass, and knee, getting back to lifts on groomers, though.

[stuckathuntermtn]

I think the correct answer is "it depends".

[ticketchecker]

For me a 178 Lotus 120 spoon is money in fresh snow and EC trees, it's got plenty of balls to ski the entire hill and loads of maneuverability in tight places. I'd have the 189's if I still lived in Jackson

I'm 5'6 so YMMV

[Timberridge]

I'd try snowboarding.

[Alpinord]

"It depends"...The pilot and attitude/confidence also comes into play.

My Keepers are massive boards at 189, but turn quick and plow through or over anything it seems. While heli skiing and per recommendation, they provided 177cm or so K2 Pinnacles which was about the same width as the Keepers (120ish IIRC) and I had a great time on those, too. It took a little time to get used to less fore and aft (4+") compared to what I was used too.

[GeezerSteve]

I have a short (174 Meier Doc). . . I see no need for Rocker, though, but, that's me

Cool looking ski. It does have tip rocker, right?

[Benny Profane]

Not really. A little, but, compared to some, no.

[Kulharin]

I was considering at going a length down in the rustler 11 or Backland 117. Than what I'd normally take for a big mountain/all mountain ski. Or Bent Chetler

[PNWbrit]

I'd try snowboarding.

Get a red snowboard.

[Andyski]

Trees up, ho’s down

[old goat]

I have Atomic Automatic 117's at 185. The longest ski I've owned since college (205 cm Kneissl Reisenslaloms) and the easiest to maneuver in tight spaces. Sidecut, rocker/camber profile and stiffness matter a lot more than length.

[GeezerSteve]

I have Atomic Automatic 117's at 185. . . the easiest to maneuver in tight spaces.

That's my soft snow lift-served ski, indeed easy to maneuver and a great dense tree ski. Compared to a flat tail ski, the effective length is closer to 175cm than 185cm. That is, it skis quite short for a 185.

[Kulharin]

That's my soft snow lift-served ski, indeed easy to maneuver and a great dense tree ski. Compared to a flat tail ski, the effective length is closer to 175cm than 185cm. That is, it skis quite short for a 185.

Lies, it only comes in a length of 186.

[GeezerSteve]

Ah, you got me on that one. Yeah, it's 186cm

[Tailwind]

Other people may have had a different experience but for me 10cm-20cm of extra length has never been an issue. Any chute that's narrow enough that you cannot get sideways it to narrow to really turn much and you need to straight-line. Basically if you want skis for tight terrain something turny with lots of rocker and likely soft is what matters. Length is not the factor there has never been an instance where I've said '5cm less in front of my boot and I would have been able to make it though there. If you want good skis for tight terrain in good snow buy something like JJ's, Wailers, Opus', Pescado, Super 7's, of whatever else fits that mold.

[doebedoe]

Not just fatter and more rocker -- more taper will make things easier to swing around. Think 5-point design like a Fatypus, JJ, etc.

[Toro]

http://www.skiboardsonline.com/p/rvl8condorRC18.html

https://www.spruceski.com/spruce-130cm-osprey.html

[SJG]

Depends where you are starting and finishing. You'd get laughed at if you said a 190 turns the same as a 180 or 170, being the same make/model ski.

Other people may have had a different experience but for me 10cm-20cm of extra length has never been an issue. Any chute that's narrow enough that you cannot get sideways it to narrow to really turn much and you need to straight-line. Basically if you want skis for tight terrain something turny with lots of rocker and likely soft is what matters. Length is not the factor there has never been an instance where I've said '5cm less in front of my boot and I would have been able to make it though there. If you want good skis for tight terrain in good snow buy something like JJ's, Wailers, Opus', Pescado, Super 7's, of whatever else fits that mold.