• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

sizing question....

BeanoNYC

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
5,080
Points
38
Location
Long Island, NY
Always easy to criticize, a bit tougher to produce. Show us what you got tough guy! :roll:

Oh, and my wife did the video, you don't want me to tell her what you said! :-x

Well, If your wife did the video, I like it then...because I like her. It's you I'm not so hot on. ;)
 

SKIQUATTRO

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
3,232
Points
0
Location
LI, NY
considering my Metrons are 74 underfoot..would i be better of going to something like a Dynastar 8800 at 88underfoot or going for it and grabbing a Sugar Daddy at 99 underfoot??
 

andyzee

New member
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
10,884
Points
0
Location
Home
Website
www.nsmountainsports.com
considering my Metrons are 74 underfoot..would i be better of going to something like a Dynastar 8800 at 88underfoot or going for it and grabbing a Sugar Daddy at 99 underfoot??

Depends what kind of skiing. I imagine the Sugar Daddy, as it's name implies, is a powder ski. Probably the Dynastars are a better choice. You may also want to consider the Nordica Jet Fuel or their latest ones, the Hellcat.
 
Last edited:

severine

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Messages
12,367
Points
0
Location
CT
Website
poetinthepantry.com
based on height and wait..derrrrrrrrrr
There's a lot more that factors in than that.

I switched to a pair of 2007 Marie Martinod pro model Dynastars (same as She's Trouble, different graphics) this season and I won't ever look back. 112-78-102 in 165cm length. They're awesome. What I was skiing before was... I don't know, 60-something mm waist. Much shorter. Feel squirrelly in comparison. I bought the Maries without demoing thinking they would work well as a midfat, all-mountain ski and I've been very pleased with them. Granted, they're thinner in the waist than what you're considering for your wife, but it's the only first-hand experience I can share.

My only advice? Don't go too short. My first skis (4 yrs ago) were 140cm as a beginner. I bought 154cm Dynastar Novas at the start of the season, figuring that was more accurate for weight/ability (and was laughed at because they came to my nose - I'm 5'5"). The Maries are about as tall as I am, but they rock! I can't imagine skiing them in a shorter length.

You can also ask Trekchick for advice. She has a wide array of midfat to fat skis and she also skis longer than the height/weight ratio recommend for her.
 

Hawkshot99

Active member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
4,489
Points
36
Location
Poughkeepsie, NY
The Maries are about as tall as I am, but they rock! I can't imagine skiing them in a shorter length.

You ski a Twin longer than you do a normal ski. When you hold them up to your face they need to be about 3 or so inches higher than a non-twin. The reason is with a turned up tail you lose a lot of affective edge if you ski your normal length. Companies do not measure what is on the ground, they measure tip-to-tail.
 

severine

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Messages
12,367
Points
0
Location
CT
Website
poetinthepantry.com
You ski a Twin longer than you do a normal ski. When you hold them up to your face they need to be about 3 or so inches higher than a non-twin. The reason is with a turned up tail you lose a lot of affective edge if you ski your normal length. Companies do not measure what is on the ground, they measure tip-to-tail.
I know that. But it's still more than 3 or so inches longer than my non-twin (remember 165 vs 154, the 154s supposedly being too long when I bought them :roll:). My point was just to make sure not to short change yourself on length. It really sucks when you do.
 

Hawkshot99

Active member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
4,489
Points
36
Location
Poughkeepsie, NY
got a line on a set of new, not mounted Line 90's at $300.00 good deal or not??

Phrophet 90? If yes that is a awsome deal! My boss has them and loves them. A stiff, and fat twin. (Has a sheet of metal running right under the skin). Plus they look cool;-)
 

SKIQUATTRO

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
3,232
Points
0
Location
LI, NY
coming down to the following:

-Rossi B3 174cm (124/88/111) with binding $335
-Atomic Sugar Daddy 173cm (124/99/118) with binding $500

suggestions?
 
Top