What should I look for when choosing a ski that's shorter or longer than another one by 7 centimeters?

[MikeHunt]

That is, the standard ski lenght jumps from one size to another.

I've always rented and just take whatever the person behind the counter suggests, which is chin height.

Should I go shorter or longer? Can you feel the difference of 7 centimeters (yeah that's what she said)?

What do I look for when jumping from one size to another?

 

[MikeHunt]

7cm is just about 3 inches.

I just couldn't imagine how higher level skiers can discern the difference of 3 inches. What do you people see or feel going shorter or longer by 3 inches?

Or is the differnce noticeable going 2 sizes up, ie 14 cms/6 inches?

 

[AlpedHuez]

I don't go by chin height, but around the face for frontside, longer for off piste. But then, I am a Level III+ aggressive skier, so, like @Noodler has said, I choose the ski length for how I want to ski, not solely on my height (which the ski can't feel) or my weight (which it can, to a degree).

Real name account, or cheeky pseudonym?

 

[MikeHunt]

I don't go by chin, but around the face for frontside, longer for off piste

Real name account, or cheeky pseudonym?

What would you "feel" if you went longer or shorter, ie chin level or forehead level, for frontside, instead of face level?

I just can't imagine the difference those few centimeters would feel like.

Don't tell anyone, buy my real name is Dixie Normous. I don't use it because I'm laughed at.

 

[AlpedHuez]

What would you "feel" if you went longer or shorter, ie chin level or forehead level, for frontside, instead of face level?

I just can't imagine the difference those few centimeters would feel like.

Don't tell anyone, buy my real name is Dixie Normous. I don't use it because I'm laughed at.

That really depends on where and how you intend to use the ski. If you like to ski moguls and make tight turns, you are definitely going to notice the difference between a 177 and a 184, or a 175 and a 182, the longer length will be less manoeuvrable. On the other hand, if you like to grip it and rip it down a groomed, chopped up, or softer snow piste, you will find that a shorter ski is less stable at high speed, more want to edge and turn and slow you down, which could hold you back.

 

[François Pugh]

Has anybody seen Mike Hunt?

It's very noticeable.

It used to be that you needed length for vibrational stability at speed. These days, a good ski designed for speed will be stable, even at shorter lengths, and a ski that is not designed with speed in mind will be even more unstable in longer lengths - more mass flapping around out there.

Shorter is easier to push around and make egregious, but sometimes needed corrections with. It is also quicker and more mobile smearing and pivoting. Shorter is also less forgiving of fore-aft errors and has less mass which makes it a bit less able to punch through heavier crud. Longer also smooths out the bumps a bit more and the extra mass has a reassuring presence at speed.

 

[Andy Mink]

It also depends on the ski. A long ski with lots of rocker can feel twitchy at speed on the groomers while a shorter ski with full camber can feel long in the bumps. So many variables.

 

[dbostedo]

FWIW, I'd suggest trying different lengths for yourself. Demo as many skis as you can, to learn how they feel to you. I've learned a lot that way - plus I think demo'ing skis is fun.

 

[KingGrump]

In the good old days, many manufacturer would have the same skis in 2 or 3 cm increments. Ex. The Volkl P9 RS would be offered in 200, 203, 205 and 207 cm. The variable isn't so much the length but the stiffness.

With today's skis. The length of the ski doesn't really matter unless one picks up the ski and rotates it. Like some would do in the bumps or trees. The variation in stiffness is the differentiating factor.

 

[Nobody]

At beginner level, all one would notice, unless one is very gifted, will be an increased difficulty at turning the skis (the longer they are).
So yes, you will notice 7 cm longer skis, because you would think, at first "oh gosh, I can't make these darn things turn, aaargh I'm gonna die!!!!" and "gosh how fast these things go! Aaaarh I'm gonna die!".
Then as one learns the proper technique and the proficiency at it increases, one will start to notice the above mentioned characteristics and differencies between skis (f the same type) length.

 

[PinnacleJim]

The short generic answer is that the shorter ski is more nimble and easier to maneuver in tight terrain. The longer ski will be more stable and more comfortable to ski at higher speeds. Note that most skis retain the tip, waist and tail widths in all sizes, so shorter skis have a smaller turn radius, and longer ones have a larger radius.

 

[locknload]

To me it just really comes down to application....as has already been stated. For off-piste to include open bowls, POW and crud once its been tracked out...I ski longer skis. They are stable and love open spaces and variable snow. That said, if you are tree skier and want to ski very tight trees...you'll have to think about the length of the skis and its rocker/camber profile and how is it is to throw around in tight trees. For true on-piste and moguls (which I love), I go down about 6 to 8 cm to have something that excels in short radius turns and in bumps.

 

[Philpug]

7-8cm seems to be the norm for size breaks with the low being 5cm and some as heigh as 10cm. We are also seeing more scaling of sizes and flexes in the model range. Example: The "Your Brand Here" 99Ti is

171cm- 130/96/110
179cm- 132/98/111
184cm- 133/99/112

What confuses me that in many cases brands will use the longest length as the reference length.

 

[dbostedo]

7-8cm seems to be the norm for size breaks with the low being 5cm and some as heigh as 10cm. We are also seeing more scaling of sizes and flexes in the model range. Example: The "Your Brand Here" 99Ti is

171cm- 130/96/110
179cm- 132/98/111
184cm- 133/99/112

What confuses me that in many cases brands will use the longest length as the reference length.

Some questions on that...

1) Are manufacturers consistent in listing somewhere - like the website - when they scale the width? Or do you only find that by measuring the ski?
2) Do you know of any ski names like your example that have the width in the name but still scale it by length?
3) Is it becoming standard to use the longest ski as the reference?

Manufacturers seem to be pretty good about listing how the radius changes with length... but I haven't looked at the width listings.

 

[Philpug]

Some questions on that...

1) Are manufacturers consistent in listing somewhere - like the website - when they scale the width? Or do you only find that by measuring the ski?
2) Do you know of any ski names like your example that have the width in the name but still scale it by length?
3) Is it becoming standard to use the longest ski as the reference?

Manufacturers seem to be pretty good about listing how the radius changes with length... but I haven't looked at the width listings.

It is not published as much as it should be but it is something that we will be adding to our product pages for next season. Some scale lengths, some constructions, some both. As far as an example, Atomic is very good at scaling the whole product collection in shape, Volkl's new Mantra M6 and Secret 96 keep the shapes the same but are scaling the construction.

 

[dbostedo]

...scaling the construction...

Meaning the stiffness/flex?

 

[Philpug]

Meaning the stiffness/flex?

So someone skiing a 170 will get the same experience as someone skiing a 184.

 

[dbostedo]

...the same experience...

Meaning in terms of stiffness/flex?

 

[Henry]

In general the longer skis in any ski line are stiffer; they're made for the biggest, fastest skiers on the hill. The shortest skis in that same line are made softer for the slower skiers or the featherweights.

Within the same make & model look how a ski length compares to the rest of the line. I have good results picking the next-to-longest for my weight & speed. My powder skis are 180 cm, my all purpose Stockli Laser AX skis are 175, and my slalom carvers are 170--all the next to longest in their line. I'm agnostic about the actual centimeter length.

 

[François Pugh]

In general the longer skis in any ski line are stiffer; they're made for the biggest, fastest skiers on the hill. The shortest skis in that same line are made softer for the slower skiers or the featherweights.

Within the same make & model look how a ski length compares to the rest of the line. I have good results picking the next-to-longest for my weight & speed. My powder skis are 180 cm, my all purpose Stöckli Laser AX skis are 175, and my slalom carvers are 170--all the next to longest in their line. I'm agnostic about the actual centimeter length.

Same here. My old SGs are 208 cm, my Fischer SCs are 165 cm, a 43 cm difference, but both pairs of skis are the 2nd longest length.