New skis for my wife - strong intermediate

[Tony S]

Confusion here. My wife does not guide or teach avi classes. Back to my original query - after very helpful suggestions, she will purchase a fully cambered 76-82 cm Head, Fisher, etc. ski for front-side skiing. Also, just because she can ski with talented skiers, does not mean that she has the skis or technique.

Total confusion. In post 46 you wrote:

After a long day fitting ski boots or teaching an avi class, she gets bored by after I start discussing feet or faceted snow.

So whatever.

I'm out.

 

[Jerez]

@Tony S - I like a devils advocate. My wife is not interested in reading ski, ski touring, and equipment postings. After a long day fitting ski boots or teaching an avi class, she gets bored by after I start discussing feet or faceted snow. She a proactive skier and gets out ~35-40/days per year. Just before the pandemic closed down ski areas, she skied with a L3 instructor friend at Snowbasin, and asked about her technique and getting better skiing the fall line with short radius turns. Over the years, she asked me why her skiing hasn’t progressed as much as hoped. Thus, my reaching out to skitalk. Her friends told her to find a ‘SL ski and move on’ or a Head Supershape, but I thought that was a bit too much to bite off from her 94 mm daily drivers. She skis with a small posse of talented female skiers that all come from a racing background.

Perhaps this is where Tony got the idea?

 

[David Chaus]

Total confusion. In post 46 you wrote:


So whatever.

I'm out.

I’m guessing he meant to convey:
“After a long day of my fitting ski boots or teaching an avi class, she gets bored by after I start discussing feet or faceted snow.”
or
“She gets bored anytime I start discussing feet or faceted snow.”

 

[charlier]

I’m guessing he meant to convey:
“After a long day of my fitting ski boots or teaching an avi class, she gets bored by after I start discussing feet or faceted snow.”
or
“She gets bored anytime I start discussing feet or faceted snow.”

David, correct.

 

[James]

The thread has become Hamlet.

 

[David Chaus]

To post, or not to post. That is the question.

 

[charlier]

After all the excitement due to my poor syntax and helpful suggestions, I will try to find Head v8 (v10) or Elan Wildcat Black 76 skis. To keep myself sane while on groomers, I will perhaps look for a SL ski.

 

[Lauren]

My wife is 5’7” (measured now) and tops out at 135lbs. My friends at Blizzard agree that the 172 cm Sheeva is too much of a ski for her. That ski is designed for a strong and highly skilled female skier. Many people say, ‘go big’ without considering their height, weight, and skill level. Trish suggests that the Fisher RC ONE 82 at 166 cm is an appropriate length. The shorter 158cm seems a bit short for her.

At her height, weight, skill, she’s going to probably fall in between a lot of size runs...speaking from experience as a similarly sized human (I'm slightly shorter at 5'5", but same weight). There will often be times where she needs to decide between going a bit too long, a bit too short, or just choosing a different ski. If the opportunity comes up to demo...I would recommend trying something longer in the freeride category. She might not know what she's missing. With that being said...as AmyPJ put it, if she likes them in the sizes she has them in, I also wouldn't sweat it or actively seek out the opportunity.

My original thought in asking you what sizes she is currently skiing is because I normally size a front-side ski 5-10 cm shorter than a freeride ski like her Ripstick/Sheeva. I didn’t want to recommend anything that would be too long based on what she’s used to.

For a status point from someone close to your wife's size, 5 years ago I would have considered myself to be a low advanced skier...the ski that really upped my game was the RTM 84 in a 162. I still ski it. It's stiff enough that I can go that small in size, and still have enough stability. I have always (since I got back into skiing 12-ish years ago) found upper 160s and low 170s to be my happiest freeride length. My powder skis are 176, but fully rockered.

On the RC One, I would probably lean towards the 166 as well, but I think that’s a big step up in length. The Wildcat will be softer than the RC One and thus, I would think the 166 should work for her well. The Head V8...I think she is very much in between the sizes; I would probably cross it off the list for that reason. If you want to go with a Head ski, I would probably look towards a stiffer version and go shorter (maybe a Supershape in a 163).

 

[François Pugh]

The difference between her and her friends is that her friends spent time learning to ski on narrow carving skis, and she did not. If she wants to learn faster, she needs to go there. Get the Supershape e-original or magnum (in 163 or 156).

 

[motogreg]

One thing I've learned here, skis are cheap. Get a couple pairs used with demo bindings, have yourselves your own demo day, keep the keepers and resell the rest.

Also, totally guilty of overthinking for my wife. "Try these, honey, you'll find....."

 

[Mendieta]

After all the excitement due to my poor syntax and helpful suggestions, I will try to find Head v8 (v10) or Elan Wildcat Black 76 skis.

Excellent. As an extra benefit, they are both system skis. She can play with binding-center positions and see what works best for her!

I still remember when I got my rallies,coming from "all mountain beginner" skis. I tipped them on a mild, hero-snow groomed slope and I felt this inexplicable feeling of being pulled into a turn. I'll never forget!

 

[Lauren]

I still remember when I got my rallies,coming from "all mountain beginner" skis. I tipped them on a mild, hero-snow groomed slope and I felt this inexplicable feeling of being pulled into a turn. I'll never forget!

The Rally was also my first front-side ski I enjoyed when demoed. There aren't too many skis I remember that vividly. Unfortunately, it took 3 or 4 more years of just skiing freeride skis to understand how much a skinnier ski would help me progress...enter RTM 84 mentioned in post #88.

 

[charlier]

The difference between her and her friends is that her friends spent time learning to ski on narrow carving skis, and she did not. If she wants to learn faster, she needs to go there. Get the Supershape e-original or magnum (in 163 or 156).

The big difference is is that her friends learned to ski and race as children. My original post out to Skitalk was a die to the Blister article on beginner skis. I realized that she was not progressing as a skier, in part due to skiing on mid-90 to 100 cm skis.

 

[Henry]

SL skis, now we're talking my language.

Atomic Cloud series
Rossi Hero MT
Rossi Hero SL Ti or I think I saw Ca was back.
Rossi Nova 10 or 14
Dynastar E lite series
Blizzard Phoenix R 14

I don't know much about Head skis I'm afraid. Do they still make the Elite Joy, I think it was called. It was a slalom skis.

Add the Head e-Original Supershape skis to your list. 156 cm, 66 mm waist, 10.1 m radius (11.1 for the 163). I ski the 170, and they are a treat. And, Corbetts sells them for C$1350 with Protector bindings which isn't as bad as other shops. The Head e-Rally Supershape is always a favorite, great on the pack and fun everywhere you don't need the float of a powder ski. 78 mm waist, 156 cm with 11.6 m radius or 163 m w/12.8 m., the same price, or C$1200 with standard PRD bindings.

 

[Viking9]

If you’re thinking about the size go the shorter route for sure , take ADVANTAGE of being able to ski on shorter skis.

 

[Betaracer]

My first thought whenever I see a post title similar to "(Merchandise) for my (person)" is if this would be a good trade. Do I really want to have (person) who the poster wants to exchange for a commodity?

 

[charlier]

E-Rally 163 cm is the final choice with either protector or traditional Tyrolia bindings.
Off to Revy for a week and will report back in early December.

 

[James]

Maybe too much concernabout being held back by length for this endeavour. While that may be true in an all mountain sense, if you want to learn technical skiing skills, a shorter ski is better.

Back in the day with the transition to shape skis, people really got it when going down from the 190’s and high 180’s, already way down from 205, 200cm straight skis. They went down to the low 170’s, and <gasp> 160’s and even 150’s!

Remember that very large and strong wcup men now started racing slalom on 155’s and 160’s. They had to be prevented from going that short, and the 165cm minimum length rule came in, 155 for women. It has remained to this day.

The point about the short skis is they enabled people to get the “new” technique down in relatively small spaces and lower speeds. It was also a lot easier to feel and engage the inside ski. It translates going back to longer and wider skis.

For advancing to high levels, you don’t want a torsionally soft ski that can’t handle holding edge angles.

 

[Pequenita]

E-Rally 163 cm is the final choice with either protector or traditional Tyrolia bindings.
Off to Revy for a week and will report back in early December.

Good luck. It was a bummer for me to read that she was getting 35-40 days a season and not really progressing; the narrower ski will hopefully get her fundamentals dialed so that she can be out ripping with her posse!

 

[Tony Storaro]

My first thought whenever I see a post title similar to "(Merchandise) for my (person)" is if this would be a good trade. Do I really want to have (person) who the poster wants to exchange for a commodity?