What's the best ski length

I'm aware that over time the answer to this question is likely to change - new developments etc etc. But... I'm 6ft tall - 13.5 stone and am quite happy skiing in good control at a good speed on European Reds. For short spells I can really push myself and the skis. However - I'm not a fit as I could be and therefore ski well within myself. I'm looking to purchase a new pair of 'All mountain' skis - I'm looking at last years Atomic Nomad Blackeye's.

Am I right in think that 164cm would be easier to turn and generally give a more relaxed ride and 171cm would be more demanding?? This model are stiff than a lower model and therefore I feel would take my weight at 164cm.

What's the collective opinion???

Thanks

Any time you buy a ski without trying it you are taking a risk that you won't like it. Having said that, I do it all the time, life is for taking chances. I think you are right that a short ski is more versatile and the ski you mention would be great in the 164cm length. Also going down in length shortens the sidecut radius. Modern short skis carve well, but because they are short also skid around easily too. I like that wide waist, which should make them versatile enough, unless you are into and have access to a lot of powder. I think I'd be tempted to buy a pair at the right price.


Trencher

I agree with Trencher about the risks of buying without testing. I too have taken the plunge and purchased without testing on a few occasions. I don't consider this ski to have a wide waist, and it should be easy to ski. I believe that it has a foam core so may not stay snappy for long. My own view would be that you would do better with the 171 with your height. If you want a short ski, buy a proper slalom model.

171

bandit wrote: I don't consider this ski to have a wide waist,

Not to a powder hound like you, but at 79mm it falls in that mid fat term that people use. That implies that in traditional terms, anything much over 70mm is a little bit fat. I think most skiers have been slow to appreciate wider skis, more so than carving skis. This may stem from a tendency people have in many sports to look at the racing arm of the sport for guidence in selecting gear. Bad idea, as racing in any form is always out of date because the specifcations of equipment are so restricted. I notice in snowboard racing, where a wider range of widths are allowed, the trend is toward wider boards. The old argument of faster transitions on narrower skis/boards does not seem to matter. Also the idea that a wider nose pushes more snow, is suspect as well now skis are nearly always on edge and that nose shape is small, even assisting the sidecut in carving.

Trencher

Trencher wrote:

bandit wrote: I don't consider this ski to have a wide waist,

Not to a powder hound like you, but at 79mm it falls in that mid fat term that people use. That implies that in traditional terms, anything much over 70mm is a little bit fat.

Trencher

I think wider is easier :D I would maintain that in Europe (the places I go) anything under 80mm is considered a piste oriented all mountain ski. The US perspective may be different.
This would be fine for the OP, and there are plenty of models to choose from. Good prices on the Nomad Blackeye over here.
http://www.snowtrax.eu/proddetails.asp?idprod=1396

Agree with Trencher and Bandit. If you don't know what you want, then I suggest you rent skis. You generally get a good price from SkiSet. Explain to them what you think you want. Try them for a day or two, and think about how they are performing for you.

After a day or two, exchange them for a shorter, softer pair. You will be surprised at the difference in performance.

Then, unless you fall in love with the skis, ( I have had several passionate romances over the years), change them again. Do make a written note of the ski specifications, and what you felt about them.

After two/three holidays like this, you should be able to have a fairly good grasp of what suits you. It costs you a rental fee, less the amount you pay for air shipping your own skis, less something for the facility to try new and different skis.

So now you have the "what". Then go to the "how, when, where, how much" so as to buy some skis. By that time you may have decided that rental is a good way for you to keep up with modern skis.

Good luck

Trencher wrote: Bad idea, as racing in any form is always out of date because the specifcations of equipment are so restricted.

I can see why that might appear to be so but it's not entirely true, the trend to high sidecut skis started with racers. In part they were exploiting some new technology and a loophole in the rules gave some guys a first mover advantage. We know how true that is in formula 1 motorsport, the technology is at the leading edge and continually pushing the rules leads to product development.

What's odd in skiing at this moment, and some other areas, is that a series of trends have come together to stimulate innovation, most notably cheap manufacturing, cheap computer aided design and modelling, slow reactions by some large manufacturers and just a whiff of zeitgeist where everyone wants something special. Nevertheless, most skis used by most people owe more to race skis whether it's slalom or skierX than they do to some dude in the Tetons )

& yes, that did sound a bit short to me as well :)