Proper ski length

[beantownace]

Hello Pusgki community,

I know that there are a number of factors when choosing the correct ski length weight, height, ability, terrain etc. Curious of thoughts on this. I am on the shorter size 5" 5" male approx. 150lbs. I have been skiing in a 163cm for a few years and comfortable at that size and my ability. I am looking at a ski that only comes in a 158cm and a 166cm so thinking about going with the 158cm really like the ski. I am a strong intermediate skier mostly piste groomers can ski the blacks but not carving on edge all the time longer turns overall. The 163cm Salomon is over my head and the 158cm comes right about close to the top of my head with boots on. Any thoughts would you think the 158cm although shorter than what I am skiing with now is still a good option?

 

[François Pugh]

Brand and model of skis (the one your comfortable with and the one you are thinking of getting) is a required bit of information, before an opinion should be formed.
You said SL ski? Can you be more specific.
I will say that if you are primarily on ice and hard pack and don't tend to push the ski out of it's design element (i.e. don't use it as a GS ski), shorter would be better. If you ski it on softer groomers and other soft snow, longer might be better.

 

[beantownace]

Brand and model of skis (the one your comfortable with and the one you are thinking of getting) is a required bit of information, before an opinion should be formed.
You said SL ski? Can you be more specific.
I will say that if you are primarily on ice and hard pack and don't tend to push the ski out of it's design element (i.e. don't use it as a GS ski), shorter would be better. If you ski it on softer groomers and other soft snow, longer might be better.

I had a Salomon ski not an SL. Ski is a Blizzard Firebird 158cm Competition 76 sweet ski but only a 158cm and 166cm unfortunately.

 

[François Pugh]

A quick google reveals that this women's performance carving ski comes in four lengths: 158 cm, 166 cm, 174 cm and 182 cm. Based solely on that I would say go for the 166 length; the 158 is likely made for lighter or slower skiers than you. Just out of curiosity, are you on the shortest length your Salomon ski comes in? If so, I may be wrong.

 

[beantownace]

Ya I don't know why I have seen that too it saying a women's performance carving ski but it's a unisex ski.

 

[TDCSPRINGS]

If everything else is equal, 3cm will barely be noticeable. You are the same height and 10 pounds heavier than my wife and her skis are all in the 165sh range. Don't overthink it. You would notice mount point far more than you would notice a 3cm difference in length.

 

[François Pugh]

Who knows? Regardless, even if it's for a male, the 158 would be for someone lighter or slower than you, or someone who wants to make shorter turns or turns on ice and want a shorter length to increase pressure, and is willing to put up with the loss of a little fore-aft stability.

BTW the Blizzard site doesn't discriminate on the sex of the ski. https://www.blizzard-tecnica.com/us/en/men/racing-1/skis/firebird-competition-76-tpx-12-demo

 

[martyg]

....and is willing to put up with the loss of a little fore-aft stability

Could also be worded, "....seeks to improve pressure control skills."

 

[Aquila]

What model of Salomon is your current ski? Since you know that you're comfortable with it, that will help determine an appropriate size for your new ski. Eg is your existing ski a similar style of narrow, fully cambered/minimal rocker ski?

I'm not how a 163 ski can be over your head though. I'm two inches shorter than you and my 159 skis are visibly just a smidgen shorter than me, when I'm standing in bare feet. 166 length should be around your height or just a fraction of an inch taller .

And lol those are definitely mens or unisex skis. I can tell they're not womens skis by the lack of true shorter lengths!

 

[Aquila]

... or someone who wants to make [...] turns on ice and want a shorter length to increase pressure,

I'd never thought of shorter skis having increased grip on ice before. I suppose that makes sense!

 

[Philpug]

There are a lot of depends here. Depends on the shape, tip rise, tail rise and contact length. For somone the size of the OP..the proper length could be anywhere from a 155cm SL to a 170 (+?) cm powder ski.

 

[KingGrump]

I am on the shorter size 5" 5" male approx. 150lbs.

I had a Salomon ski not an SL. Ski is a Blizzard Firebird 158cm Competition 76 sweet ski but only a 158cm and 166cm unfortunately.

For the Blizzards Comp 76, go with the 166.
I am 1" taller (Not something I get to say often) and 10 to 15 pounds heavier. I am usually 150/155 by mid season (summer fat.). Even though I like my skis on the shorter side. I know the Blizzard Comp 76 in 158 is definitely not enough ski for me. The 158 would be good for someone around 125 pounds.

 

[beantownace]

For the Blizzards Comp 76, go with the 166.
I am 1" taller (Not something I get to say often) and 10 to 15 pounds heavier. I am usually 150/155 by mid season (summer fat.). Even though I like my skis on the shorter side. I know the Blizzard Comp 76 in 158 is definitely not enough ski for me. The 158 would be good for someone around 125 pounds.

Thanks man appreciate it. I am also now looking at the 163cm K2 Disruption 82 ti seems like a heavier ski and I like the idea that the 82 can also work well in some light powder in the Northeast built like a race ski but more all mountain. Appreciate the info the K2 has a 163 and 170 and I am currently in a 163cm so that may be just right. It has a 18 turn radius so definitely a speed ski I think I can handle it although I consider myself a strong intermediate to advanced and not going to be making a lot of short turns.

 

[JFB]

I suspect that what is really needed is some demo time. If that's an option. Preferences in ski length, sidecut, flex, torsional flex, dampness, etc., are so personal that other peoples experience and preferences are of limited value.

 

[oldschoolskier]

Read some of the older posts from @ScotsSkier, seriously consider a FIS SL in 165 (some model/brands are a little softer than others depending on year, seek his advice on this matter).

The main difference here is that FIS SL skis are very predictable and skiable. Don’t let a race ready ski scare you.

About 5 years ago my daughter (about 14 at the time weighing less and slightly shorter than you) skied mine and loved them (same BSL) because they where so easy to ski. At the time she was just a budding intermediate.

 

[Bill Miles]

210's, like when I was growing up.

 

[ScotsSkier]

For the Blizzards Comp 76, go with the 166.
I am 1" taller (Not something I get to say often) and 10 to 15 pounds heavier. I am usually 150/155 by mid season (summer fat.). Even though I like my skis on the shorter side. I know the Blizzard Comp 76 in 158 is definitely not enough ski for me. The 158 would be good for someone around 125 pounds.

this!

 

[bob.knox]

210's, like when I was growing up.

HA! I remember those days in the 80's, oof, not fun. I did learn how to properly crash at high speeds though. Sorry to hijack.

 

[DanoT]

There are a lot of depends here. Depends on the shape, tip rise, tail rise and contact length. For somone the size of the OP..the proper length could be anywhere from a 155cm SL to a 170 (+?) cm powder ski.

^^^Bumped and QFT. The other thing to pay attention to is actual ski length as these days 2 pairs of skis that each say that (for instance) they are 166cm can in fact be different lengths.

 

[markojp]

A quick google reveals that this women's performance carving ski comes in four lengths: 158 cm, 166 cm, 174 cm and 182 cm. Based solely on that I would say go for the 166 length; the 158 is likely made for lighter or slower skiers than you. Just out of curiosity, are you on the shortest length your Salomon ski comes in? If so, I may be wrong.

It's not actually a gender specific ski. It was tested as such because manufacturers were limited in the numbers of skis they could bring to the SKI mag test last year. It's built in the same mold as the HRC but uses a different plate and is a bit easier to bend than the HRC.