Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 82
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    166
    Iíve actually gradually sized up as Iíve gotten older...I started 10 yrs ago with a fx94 in 168 and have worked my way to a WC108 in 190. Skis have changed a TON in 10 yrs with all the rocker tech thatís being used now. Iíve never been disappointed I went bigger.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    land of the free
    Posts
    8,824
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Campbell View Post
    I’ve actually gradually sized up as I’ve gotten older...I started 10 yrs ago with a fx94 in 168 and have worked my way to a WC108 in 190. Skis have changed a TON in 10 yrs with all the rocker tech that’s being used now. I’ve never been disappointed I went bigger.


    So true. Rocker has allowed longer skis to ski shorter.
    A 195 rocker and a 195 traditional are way different.
    ďLife has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.Ē
    Hunter S. Thompson

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    19,014
    yeah but unless you got way fatter/gained 60 lbs in yer autumn years are you able to bend a 195 ?
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Campbell View Post
    I’ve actually gradually sized up as I’ve gotten older...I started 10 yrs ago with a fx94 in 168 and have worked my way to a WC108 in 190.
    Let me guess, you are 21 years old now?

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    12,078
    Quote Originally Posted by The SnowShow View Post
    Pop a pill boomers
    that's racist

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    407
    Yeah, my quiver is all effed up right now. The Rustler 9 (which I bought in Utah after 2 hours of contemplation) is freaking fun. It bridges the gap between my 180 cm Brahma and Bonafide.

    I wish it were 2cm shorter. What I was trying to accomplish with the purchase didnít happen, but instead it is just more fun to ski on.

    Iím not thrilled with the center-feeling mount. Also, the 17m turn radius can feel ďhooky.Ē

    But, itís much lighter than my 180 cm Ď14 Bonafides.

    But the heel-to-tail is longer than the Bonafides, so in STEEP chop I canít say itís easier (what I was going for; yeah long story short in the shop I couldnít bring myself to buy the new Bonafide in a different length or even the same length; just couldnít do that mentally when I already had the 180 Bonafide).

    If there was a 177 Cochise in a 94-98mm waist, that would be amazing. I really have no business owning a 108mm ski.

    The 185 Cochise was undeniably too much ski for me, but I can understand from skiing it why the Cochise was legendary.

    A few years ago 100-110mm skis were all the rage... now they seem like a niche product. Oh well.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    22,089
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    I haven't exactly downsized with age, but I've changed the type of skis I prefer.
    Same. Used to ski stiff skis, wider skis. But a few years ago I downsized to a Rossi S3, similar length to what I had been skiing but soft and fully rockered and narrower. Best decision I ever made. I live for skiing in the trees, and they turn on a dime and are light enough that my legs stay fresh longer (I don't get as many ski days in as I used to). Sure, they have a speed limit and flop around on groomers, but that's ok for me.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    land of the free
    Posts
    8,824
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier View Post
    that's racist
    That little blue pill makes you African American?
    ďLife has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.Ē
    Hunter S. Thompson

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Let me guess, you are 21 years old now?
    Ha, nope

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    11,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Orthoski View Post
    Btw, this is one of the best TGR quotes I've seen in a while. I've actually used it with patients since...

    Thanks Old Goat!
    Quote Originally Posted by Orthoski View Post
    And by the way, can you explain this to my wife? My ski hoarding is not a flaw, it's medically necessary!
    A bunch of Sacramento Kaiser docs used to ski once a twice a season with the 65 year old Permanente executive director (who has a place at Squaw). He loved to ski fast and show up the younger docs, until he broke his arm skiing with us.

    If I were younger I would tell you to post naked pictures of the wife, but it would be beneath my dignity, so I won't.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,718
    I'm still in my 184 katanas, metal inbounds and carbon in the Backcountry.

    I Don't understand why people think it's harder to bend a ski as you get older.

    Any turn will produce at least 1 g, which should be more than sufficient to bend a burly ski.

    The only disadvantage to a longer ski, for me, is that it's harder to do kick turns when skinning

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Winthrop, WA. Methow valley
    Posts
    845
    This has been an increasingly common conversation topic in our house. On the tour side I'm a freakish gram counter now as I can watch my vert go down almost linearly with incremental increase in gear weight. But as far as inbounds skis go, some of the new boards are really changing the equation for the more mature crowd. In the past I've only skied the longest lengths of the burlier skis. Recently got on the Katana 108 and M102, both in 184 and 191. For me personally the beautiful part was that even in 191 those skis don't REQUIRE peak effort to just ski along, but when that moment arrives that you want to toggle from stun to kill, like you used to do all the time 10-20 years ago, these skis can step up and get it done. And now I'm really starting to eyeball some of these slightly lighter boards like the Corvus, that according to the fanboy's here, don't sound like much of a compromise for performance but are a couple hundred grams lighter. Interesting times and shit tons of cool new gear

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    12,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post
    That little blue pill makes you African American?
    race-baiting edgelord = triggered

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    5,497
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Campbell View Post
    I started 10 yrs ago with a fx94 in 168 and have worked my way to a WC108 in 190.
    What do you weigh? Guessing that 168 was way undersized for you, especially being intended as a 50/50 touring ski that's kinda light for inbounds use.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    What do you weigh? Guessing that 168 was way undersized for you, especially being intended as a 50/50 touring ski that's kinda light for inbounds use.
    Yeah it was WAY undersized for me and I didnít ski much when I got them. Iím 5í11Ē 185# so Iím where I should be now. Everyone in Michigan skis way too short so it took a bit to figure out that longer ones are ok for east and west trips.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    99
    I'm 66, 5' 9" & 150lbs. Strong skier but need to cover everything from volcanoes and snow droughts to deep touring days. Skis range from 170 (2pr), 176, 177, 178, 180. For reference, I started (serious) skiing on the legendary VR 17's & didn't ski anything shorter than 203 for years. When Research Dynamics first produced skis, I got on a pair of 190's. That was a transformational ski for me and I found myself in the 185 - 195 length profiles. Stump movies showed up, skis went back to 205 for a few years. Wider skis emerged & lengths shortened. 186 Stockli Stormrider and R-EX's in 186 were staple ski's for several years. I would answer the age / length question by saying no, didn't go shorter due to age. Modern ski's just don't need the length to deliver and between 170 - 180 is my sweet spot.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    5,497
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke Campbell View Post
    Yeah it was WAY undersized for me and I didn’t ski much when I got them. I’m 5’11” 185# so I’m where I should be now.
    Yeah, had the 176 FX94 and it wasn't enough ski for 168 lbs. Fun in soft stuff, but not damp enough at speed on hard snow.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    Yeah, had the 176 FX94 and it wasn't enough ski for 168 lbs. Fun in soft stuff, but not damp enough at speed on hard snow.
    Agreed, was a blast just messing around with but not stable enough or have good enough float or playfulness for my liking for a 1 ski quiver.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,742
    Sized down for the fatties 8 years ago. Gained some weight as I aged but started sippin' from the fountain of youth via diet change and Wim Hoffing, so, added a bunch of weight and 5cms of length to the Darksides this year. 3 cm tail xtension via cutting boards, 2 cm tip xtension via multiple layers of gorilla hot gun glue. Game changer. I'm 46 but kinda feelin' better than in my 20's, prolly due to totally dialing in all the ski stance, boot flex, ski tip to tail balance via custom front rocker modification, etc.... It's fucking awesome and I'm just so stoked on skiing these days...any conditions as long as there aren't any tracks. Cutting boards got used today on the ski bench. Shaving Intuition foam for a helmet mod; custom heat molded earplugs attached through the ear pads for instant in/out use for heliskiing, which work awesome so far....and, added a foam stomp pad to the heel piece 'cause the plastic tabs for 'flat' tour mode broke off. Bindings are back in bizzness for the evening ski tours.

    Oh yeah, and those Rossi S3 186's...what an awesome blend of prefered ski characteristics for a middle aged trying to be young guy: damn good float for the width, great tip to tail suspension, easy turning, pretty damn high speed limit for untracked snow, easy high speed zipperline soft bumps performance, damp...just plain super fun.

    Name:  P1120801.JPG
Views: 222
Size:  79.7 KBName:  P1120792.JPG
Views: 224
Size:  35.6 KBName:  vlcsnap-2020-02-15-15h24m44s433.png
Views: 224
Size:  239.0 KB

    Name:  P1120799.JPG
Views: 222
Size:  43.8 KBName:  P1120800.JPG
Views: 218
Size:  50.2 KBName:  P1120600.JPG
Views: 219
Size:  51.9 KB
    Last edited by swissiphic; 02-15-2020 at 09:08 PM.
    Master of mediocrity.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    6,573
    I've tried downgrading skis a few times since I passed the halfway mark. I'm tall and not too heavy. Yes, a bigger quiver is a good thing to tailor the ride to the day. That said, my go-to is still a Moment Governor 196.
    Quote Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles View Post
    If I lived in WA, Oft would be my realtor. Seriously.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    land of the free
    Posts
    8,824
    I admit to downsizing when I moved to New England

    But thatís only cuz your bumps suck
    And your mountains suck

    On a real mountain
    Short skis suck, long skis truck
    ďLife has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.Ē
    Hunter S. Thompson

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the shadow of the white rocks
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post
    I admit to downsizing when I moved to New England

    But thatís only cuz your bumps suck
    And your mountains suck

    On a real mountain
    Short skis suck, long skis truck

    I found a 175-180 in New England gives up 10% on the first 2 runs, but gains as the day rolls on & fits between the trees much better.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The greatest N. New Mexico resort in Colorado
    Posts
    1,206
    100% agree with the quivers for geezers comment. Iím only 40 but things are starting to hurt if Iím doing what I used to and given the option to ski the big bad mammerjammer for three hours at full tilt, or something a little less so for the whole day, itís becoming a reasonable compromise. Iím 6í3, 205 so I got pretty hosed by the everything-rocker-always-all-the-time movement. Everyone thought they were sizing up, and then manufacturers axed anything over a 185 that wasnít basically a powder tool. And while there are some exceptional options on the wider end of the spectrum, thereís fuck all for a big guy when things firm up nowadays. But while Iím still skiing the longest iteration of whatever ski Iím on, Iím inching my way down bit by bit. I would likely be content with a shorter ski for hardpack, but the shorter turn radii on everything nowadays kills it for me. I can have plenty of fun on my invictus 95ti in a 185 in the bumps and dicking around on the side of the run all day, but when I want to turn it up to eleven the 21m radius is more than I care for. But while I love my 194mx98, Iím not scooping up pfluffenmeisters pair because by the time I wear mine out I may well not be able to do that ski as much justice. So Iím incrementally reducing my length, flex, and turn radius across my quiver as skis get replaced so I donít have to ski in anger every turn. And I will absolutely miss the ability to do so as I age, but I can focus on other things to keep me entertained if I canít just rage all the time.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,445
    I find the whole rocker trend and shape revolution has made skis so easy to ski I can't fathom sizing down. I've been on something ~185cm for the last 25 years. Basically, the second biggest option-- as I've never considered myself big enough to justify purchasing the biggest ski a manufacturer makes. I'm 5'8" and 160ish.

    But both my 186 Renegade and my 184 M102 are the easiest skis I've ever been on. I've just been sitting on the sidelines of mainstream buyers wondering what all the fuss is about as I could easily enjoy more float & a longer radius in both skis. "Too big." Is not something I have uttered since the word rocker became part of our lexicon.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dreamland
    Posts
    915
    I agree. Full rocker skis make it so easy to turn and "cheat" on turns with a little smear (which is easier on the old knees) that I can see no reason to size down. Plus, I am no longer charging the fall line much but rather resorting to bigger smoothie turns for which short skis would not be as nice a ride. Even though I'm on 188 or 192 boards the full rocker makes them adequate bump skis, but my zipper line days are definitely over. I find shorter skis too nervous and that in most situations they prevent relaxing my attention and body. Speed in funky snow is just to sketchy on short boards for me to feel like sizing down, although once I get to the point of only skiing groomers I'm sure that'll happen.
    Gravity Junkie

    How can you be in two places at once when you're not anywhere at all?

Posting Permissions

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