One my best friends (63 y.o.) has a pair of Gen 1 Woodsman 108’s that uses for Tele and he LOVES them. Says they “were made for Tele.” As for size, he’s about your size/weight and on the 186? He’s happy there and commented that a shorter ski would probably be even less work without giving anything up aside from top speed, maybe?
He put Meidjo 3.0 bindings on them, which was a whole other variable he wasn’t ready for, the preciseness of those bindings. Now, he flies on those skis. When he’s NOT on his Billy Goats though… He’s really taken with the BG shape for Alpine and AT (he has both).
Since Kit and I are talking offline about my 182 woods 108 with outlaws…. the 182 woods skis long enough to be effective as a tele daily driver while being nimble in tight terrain. They ski slightly longer than my 180 Ripstick 106 with a very similar feel. They’ve got a higher top speed than the Ripstick as well.
Listed my J118s for sale on the gear swap page. With all the love for they've been getting in this thread I am expecting a full inbox by tomorrow morning![]()
How tall are y'all? Just curious... The shop recommended 181cm for a more playful style and I'm 5'11. I get the feeling the average person on this site likes longer skis.
There are a few of us smaller guys here. That 181 J118 would be an awesome powder ski for me (5’8”/140lbs) but I’ve already got something I like at that 118 quiver spot and have other ski gear priorities. You can also see right now in GS a lot of 180ish skis listed recently, so people here ski that length, but yeah just a lot less demand under 185 cm on the TGRz!
_______________________________________________
"Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.
I'll be there." ... Andy Campbell
I'd love a touring C&D after touring non-stop with my standard 2019 C&D's for 3 weeks in a row now. We've had the best snow in years up here lately and there is no better ski than the C&D for this, so leg torture it is. Still worth it
But yeah. A C&D with the new core and thinner edges/base. I'd buy that.
Just my .2, I wouldn’t take ski recs based on height unless it’s your first time/you’re brand new to snow. Skis know how much you weigh, not how tall you are. Once to have technical skills, longer skis pay dividends in the stability department.
If a ski has a ton of rocker (ie. jeff, wildcat, JJ) always just go for the longest length or just look at the effective edge and base your decision off that. And If you hate it cause it’s too long, I guarantee you can resell it on here
If you were local to Tahoe I’d have you borrow my 191’s and let you see that they are just as manageable but they provide so much more with the extra few cm’s
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Well, when my 110s are clapped out in 4-5 years I'll give it a go in a longer length. In the meantime I'll also try demoing some longer stuff when I get the chance.
If a ski has a metal laminate does that factor into your decision on how long to go? My thinking is that a more supportive/stiffer ski would let you get away with a shorter length.
I still use the effective edge measurement as my guide. I think it depends on what you want the ski to do. I have one ski with metal in the layup, it’s a 186 and I use as a on/off piste weapon. I think around a 150-160cm EE is a good guide for myself when picking out skis that would fall into the “charger” category. I’m 5’8” but also weigh 210.
IMHO I think longer skis give you more pop and a bigger sweet spot when landing in natural terrain.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
[emoji869]🤌[emoji869] dude I bet, fall line slayers, esp once it gets tracked!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
After a few more weeks on the Woods 108 I’m just checking in to say these skis are absolute 1 ski quiver all mountain slayers. Good god they are fun and can do pretty much anything on the mountain and enjoy it. I’m surprised and pleased.
That is all.
Jeffrey 116/118 skis short AF. 191 or it be the snowbladezz.
wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
Zoolander wasn't a documentary?
I think it depends on terrain as well. I tele the 182s in the east (in the woods mainly) but wouldn’t hesitate to go 187cm if I primarily skied open terrain. If you want something more kind in tight space 182s will not ski short. I am about your weight. Super fun ski. Give it a shot. Standing next to a 184cm Lotus 120 in my basement currently for a scale reference
![]()
Uno mas
Figure this is a long shot, but tossing this out. Looking for a Jeffrey 102 (or similar) in a 166 or 171 length. My youngest skied his sister’s 161 Jessie 102’s last weekend and loved them. He’s a bit bigger than her. So looking for something a bit longer.
In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...
oh, nice! We haven't been doing too poorly down here either - supposedly got 35cm today with more on the meny for bluebird tomorrow!
Did you ever pick up any L124s, and if yes - any comparison to BG/CDs?
man, I would have picked them up immediately if I could. Alas, the pond lies in the way. Freaking great price for a dream setup - whoever gets them is really lucky.
damn, those graphics are just so increadibly amazing. Would you terribly mind posting some closeups of the complete sections fore and aft of the bindings?
I agree with this. I’m 6’2 and 200 without issues on the 186. Truly feels a lot more playful then my 189 BGs and that’s what I wanted.
Have zero issue with float and can toss them around so easily.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Bookmarks