I need some help deciding on a ski length

[robgeib]

Hello, I will be purchasing the 2005 Volkl Supersport 5 Stars in the next couple weeks. I ski the blacks and blues and have an aggressive all mountain style. I weight 145 and am 6'0. I know these skis can perform great at the 161 length from reviews I have read but I am used to at least a 168. Does anyone have any suggestions about this Volkl ski? Thanks, for any advice, Rob

 

[First Tracks]

Those 5 Stars ski very well in shorter lengths and are designed to be skied in shorter lengths than most mid-fats. Their shaping is more dramatically than your typical mid-fat. At your light weight the 161s are probably about right. They do come in a 168 if you'd prefer, but I definitely wouldn't go longer than that in the 5 Star were I you. I skied the 6 Star last season in a 168 last season (140 lbs, 5'8" tall, skied for 34 years but always have new things to learn and refine), and found the length to be perfect. IIRC the only significant difference between the 5 Star and the 6 Star is that the 6 Star is a bit stiffer.

 

[jwind]

Damn dood, thems some short sticks. I currently have two pairs of alpine skies. I've got a pair of Volkl G4's that are 188 and a pair of Atomic R:ex's which are also 188. I'm 5'9 175 and both these skies are "more ski'.
I don't care if the skies "are meant to be skied shorter". If you are as aggressive as you claim to be and can't see skiing anything under 175 really. Personally I'm not sure i could even do 180.

 

[bigbog]

re:....

jwind,
Try some 5_Star Supersports out at the River's DemoDays and I think you'll find them to be just simply a different ski than either the R:EX or the G4. Ya' got nice boards though 8)

 

[jwind]

Re: re:....

jwind,
Try some 5_Star Supersports out at the River's DemoDays and I think you'll find them to be just simply a different ski than either the R:EX or the G4. Ya' got nice boards though 8)

I agree wit you, skiing a a 170, 175 would be fine. If your cruising pretty good ya gonna want a a little bit more length, the chatter will get to ya.

 

[First Tracks]

Re: re:....

I agree wit you, skiing a a 170, 175 would be fine. If your cruising pretty good ya gonna want a a little bit more length, the chatter will get to ya.

I have to respectfully disagree. You can't paint every ski with the same broad brush regarding length. Every ski is engineered to be skied on a different length. If that wasn't true, we'd be skiing shaped skis in the same 200cm+ lengths of old, but clearly we aren't.

The proper ski length is a factor of ski width, surface area, sidecut, even damping materials. For example, looking at my own quiver, my Salomon X-Scream Series is a 179, my Salomon X-Scream Pilot Hot is a 175 cm, and my Völkl Explosiv is a 165. Each one feels perfect, yet just in those 3 pair of skis you're looking at a 14-cm difference from one extreme to the other.

The 5-Stars and 6-Stars being discussed are very heavy and damp skis. Again, I skied the 6-star in a 168 cm length and pushed it hard, very hard, at speeds of 30-50 mph on a relatively deserted intermediate groomer at Sutton last year. In that situation it was rock-solid stable, and in fact it was dead as a doornail until I pushed it above 30-35 mph. Thus chatter at that length was non-existent, and the 168cm ski didn't come to life until I was "cruising pretty good." In fact, when I took that same ski into the woods the 168 cm length was actually too much ski in there and I longed to have grabbed the 161cm pair from the demo van.

 

[Terry]

I need help deciding on ski length

I am 5foot 11 inches and weigh 220 lbs and skied on 168 6 stars last year. I thought that they were absolutely perfect for me. The skies are incredible especially at high speeds. A lot of fun! Can't wait to get back on em!! :beer:

 

[jwind]

Re: re:....

I have to respectfully disagree. You can't paint every ski with the same broad brush regarding length. Every ski is engineered to be skied on a different length. If that wasn't true, we'd be skiing shaped skis in the same 200cm+ lengths of old, but clearly we aren't.

Yes, clearly. No ones is debating this or "painting the every ski with the same broad brush"

[/quote]
The proper ski length is a factor of ski width, surface area, sidecut, even damping materials. For example, looking at my own quiver, my Salomon X-Scream Series is a 179, my Salomon X-Scream Pilot Hot is a 175 cm, and my Völkl Explosiv is a 165. Each one feels perfect, yet just in those 3 pair of skis you're looking at a 14-cm difference from one extreme to the other.[/quote]

When i was living in Durango Colorado i had a pair of Explosiv's. It's ALOT of ski, I skied a 185's. I prefer a slightly longer ski then most i find. It's simply a stability issue. There isn't a ski out there ( too my knowledge) that is stab;e enough for me shorter then say 180 175 MAYBE. I just don't like 'em...and don't tell me i havn't skied enough ski's. I 've skied the whole volkl line as my roomate was a rep over in NH prior to moving back to maine. Don't get me wrong, one can ski these skis awfully short if thats what you want/prefer. However, If you come from a racing background as i do or lean towards a beefier ski I would reccomend 180.

 

[First Tracks]

Re: re:....

I just don't like 'em...and don't tell me i havn't skied enough ski's.

I don't recall saying anything of the kind.

However, If you come from a racing background as i do or lean towards a beefier ski I would reccomend 180.

I didn't get the impression from the initial request for help that the requestor came from a racing background. There's also a huge difference between carving figure 11s out west and skiing in the relatively confined spaces of the NE.

Be that as it may, you like blue cars, I like green cars. No biggie.

 

[Lostone]

As to the original post, I don't know and would suggest demoing both lengths.

As to where the thread has been going, I've found whenever my skis get squirrelly, I'm not on edge.

Took me a long time to buy the "go short" mode. :wink:

 

[GadgetRick]

Racing...

Hmm, last time I checked the World Cup circuit, those guys were skiing short skis...VERY short skis. I believe Bode Miller was skiing something in the 160-something range even in the non-slalom events. Could be wrong but I'm pretty sure about that.

Basically, I can understand someone liking or disliking certain skis, lengths, shapes, etc. However, it's tough to paint such a broad picture as not liking any ski below a certain length. I never liked shorter skis until I found one I liked. Now that's all I've been skiing for the last two seasons. Haven't skied a ski LONGER than 170 in over 2 years now.

Not trying to convince anyone to ski short or long skis, just saying I wouldn't paint such a broad picture when talking about ski lengths. You just never know, you may find a short ski you like someday...

 

[robgeib]

WOW THANK YOU for all this information. I will not have the chance to demo the skis before my first trip in a couple weeks (Mammoth, CA) so this information is very helpful. I'll be going with the 168 length based on the info from this thread. My local shop will match any internet price so I can pick up a pair for $750 tax included with the Motion PCOS system. Thanks to all that posted, Bob

 

[First Tracks]

WOW THANK YOU for all this information. I will not have the chance to demo the skis before my first trip in a couple weeks (Mammoth, CA) so this information is very helpful. I'll be going with the 168 length based on the info from this thread. My local shop will match any internet price so I can pick up a pair for $750 tax included with the Motion PCOS system. Thanks to all that posted, Bob

I'm sure that I speak for others when I say I'll be eager to hear the results of your demo.

Have fun, and I'm jealous of your Mammoth trip!

 

[Lostone]

" first trip in a couple weeks...."

It just sounds good, doesn't it? :wink:

Yes, by all means, let us know how you like them!

I have a paif of G4s. I love them. Tough ski! Goest thru anything. Nice in the woods.

 

[jwind]

Re: Racing...

Hmm, last time I checked the World Cup circuit, those guys were skiing short skis...VERY short skis. I believe Bode Miller was skiing something in the 160-something range even in the non-slalom events. Could be wrong but I'm pretty sure about that.

Basically, I can understand someone liking or disliking certain skis, lengths, shapes, etc. However, it's tough to paint such a broad picture as not liking any ski below a certain length. I never liked shorter skis until I found one I liked. Now that's all I've been skiing for the last two seasons. Haven't skied a ski LONGER than 170 in over 2 years now.

Not trying to convince anyone to ski short or long skis, just saying I wouldn't paint such a broad picture when talking about ski lengths. You just never know, you may find a short ski you like someday...

I'm not trying to tell anyone to go out and buy as long a ski as possible. All this shaped ski thing is somewhat misleading sometimes. I'm simply saying you may want take out a slightly longer ski then "recommended"... You say you havn't skied a ski over 170 in 2 years... ya well neither has my father, but he's 55

As for Bode, when i was at CVA he was surely skiing on longer skis then 160's. ... besides slalom of course and this hasn't changed - but this is a different topic all together. slalom skis have ALWAYS been short.

 

[robgeib]

I will give a full report when I get back. Thanks again, the info here is excellent. Bob G