How wide are your skis underfoot?

[Flan]

66

Head Cyber XP-80's 118-66-102 (can you say sidecut).

 

[east coast ripper]

126/74/105 i'm 6'1 210, mid 70's is plenty of width for east coast. i am heading to jackson hole 1st week in march though, and am a little concerned that i may be to narrow under my feet for out there. i hope not though.

 

[riverc0il]

Thanks for the responses. One thing I probably should have mentioned....I am 6' 195 lbs. so not sure how graceful I'd be on those 62 or 64mm carvers!

Steve/Boss you guys a little lighter than me I would assume? Should a near 200 pounder be on skis so thin?

i am 6'1' at 210# and have no problem on 64mm race style skis for groomer days.

 

[DEVO]

75, 76, 79, 98

 

[SkiDork]

65 and 113

 

[gores95]

i am 6'1' at 210# and have no problem on 64mm race style skis for groomer days.

Not sure why I pictured you as a little skinny guy!!!!

My bad.....

 

[Warp Daddy]

Atomic SX 10 w/65 mm waist and 170 length
Dynastar Speed SX 63 w/63 mm waist --178 length ( rock skis)

I am 6'1'' 205 lbs in good athletic shape , luv to RIP .Hey SX 10's don't like going slow Ski opening chair till 3;30, ski Blacks /blues all but bumps --i am 63 yo :blink:

 

[midweeker]

62. 79. 90

 

[jack97]

64, two at 70.

Me, 5 foot 7 inches, 145 lbs. Another thing that should be factored is the length of the ski, I go from 160 to 170.

 

[bvibert]

Thanks for the responses. One thing I probably should have mentioned....I am 6' 195 lbs. so not sure how graceful I'd be on those 62 or 64mm carvers!

Steve/Boss you guys a little lighter than me I would assume? Should a near 200 pounder be on skis so thin?

I'm 6'4" at 230ish and ski on a pair of 65mm skis that rip on groomer days. I haven't gotten to try them in any east coast 'powder' days so I can't comment there.

 

[Greg]

6' 1", 165 lbs., advanced skier. My 2006 AC3s are 74 mm underfoot. My favorite terrain is variable natural snow (crud, bumps, powder). I also really enjoy bumps which is why I think the AC3 is a good all-mountain compromise. The 2007 AC3 is 76 mm underfoot and gets great reviews.

Moving to Gear.

 

[goldsbar]

There seems to be a big push towards wider skis these days. Just take a look at the posts on epic or tgr. For general EC skiing, though, it doesn't make any sense at all. Most of our skiing is on groomed hardpack or icy bumps. We all dream about those powder days in the woods but it's not the usual reality (Jay Peak, etc. perhaps). I have a pair of Metron M11's that are 76mm underfoot and can still carve up the groomers very well. I wouldn't go much above that for an everyday EC ski. I can't recall what my Fischer WC SCs are - somewhere in the mid or upper 60's - but they do hold an edge better (not exactly a fair comparison). Narrow skis allow for higher edge angles and quicker turns.

That being said, wider skis can take you up a couple of levels in soft snow and/or mixed conditions. It's almost like cheating. The skill level of the general powder/crud skier out West has gone down dramatically. Powder used to take skill.

 

[Puck it]

K2 Recons - 119/78/105 @ 174cm -18m
Head iRace - 112/66/98 @ 177cm - 16m
Hoping to have Head Supershapes soon - 121/66/106 @ 160cm 10.4m

 

[tjf67]

AC-4 84 under foot 125/84/119.
Great ski they eats things up

 

[DEVO]

Like I said in the thread I started here:

http://forums.alpinezone.com/13069-...kiing-east-coast-groomers-98mm-waist-ski.html

I spent one day skiing on my 98mm waisted Rossi Scratch BC's and the next day on my 79mm waisted Dynastar Legend 8000 and found that that they didn't ski that differently. Maybe it was because even though the scratches are much wider, the two skis are similar in sidecut/turn radius and camber. Even though I still think a mid 70's to lower 80's wide ski is ideal for the east coast, I think you can ski a wider ski here and really enjoy it. Volkl Mantras, Salomon gun's, etc come to mind. I would ski the scratch's every day if that was my only ski. After skiing it on groomers for a day, I plan on skiing them much more than I had planned.

 

[koreshot]

That being said, wider skis can take you up a couple of levels in soft snow and/or mixed conditions. It's almost like cheating. The skill level of the general powder/crud skier out West has gone down dramatically. Powder used to take skill.

I see where you are coming from, but thats the same thing as saying that the invention of shaped skis has made an average hard snow skier worse... the skis turn for you... its like cheating.

Yes, powder skis help dramatically in powder, and make a transition from hard snow skiing to soft snow much easier. Yes it allows some skiers that normally wouldn't venture off piste to get out there. But for many powder skiers, including myself, the difference is that people going off piste can now focus on other aspects of skiing rather than suffering through a bunch of overemphasizes jump turns :grin:

 

[goldsbar]

Hoping to have Head Supershapes soon - 121/66/106 @ 160cm 10.4m

10.4m ?!?! That's a tight turn radius!

 

[tjf67]

I read through a lot of the posts. IMO what determines the edge grip is the rigidity of the ski but more so the side cut. The larger the side cut the more grip I get. My AC4 have more grip than any of the other skis I have owned except for my atomic metrons. I dont remember the excact dimensions but they had a ton of side cut. I could stand right on them and they would grip just about anything.
I always say I am not going any fatter and I always seem to.
I ski Whiteface. I have a little exp on hardpack

 

[skibum9995]

64, 65

 

[koreshot]

I read through a lot of the posts. IMO what determines the edge grip is the rigidity of the ski but more so the side cut. The larger the side cut the more grip I get. My AC4 have more grip than any of the other skis I have owned except for my atomic metrons. I dont remember the excact dimensions but they had a ton of side cut. I could stand right on them and they would grip just about anything.
I always say I am not going any fatter and I always seem to.
I ski Whiteface. I have a little exp on hardpack

Yup. Grip on hard snow is probably mostly determine by the stiffness of the ski. Actually skis with very sharp sidecuts keep less of the edge on the snow when not fully bend into a carve, which probably results in less grip. So strictly mechanically speaking, edge tune and stiffness is probably key for edge grip. But that needs to be balanced with a sidecut that will allow you to carve the turns you are trying to make. Otherwise one will be forced to skid the ski into sharper turns, giving the sensation that there isn't as much carving edge hold.