Wider ski > more OR less effort?

[Ken_R]

I can handle my 112mm wide (190cm) quite well but even at 6'-2" and 185 lbs I notice less effort when tipping over the skis when using narrower skis on harder snow. The wide skis are superb when going through chopped up snow / powder though. If I were sorter and lighter I would definitely size down quite a bit from there, somewhat proportionally to my size. Keep in mind I basically only ski in Colorado and NM.

My wife is 5-4 and 125 lbs and I would not think she would want a ski wider than 85-100mm as a daily driver even on resort powder days. As long as the ski is designed for how and what she wants to ski, she can ski on something 10-15mm narrower than what I am skiing on any given day.

 

[Tricia]

My wife is 5-4 and 125 lbs and I would not think she would want a ski wider than 85-100mm

As a daily driver, I like something in the 80-90 range.
As a one ski quiver I'd think 85-100 range
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs at my best. These days more like 145.

 

[Doug Briggs]

As a daily driver, I like something in the 80-90 range.
As a one ski quiver I'd think 85-100 range
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs at my best. These days more like 145.

Those damned peirogis

 

[djetok]

I agree that I would go toward the narrower side, especially with knee issues. If I'm skiing a wider ski and trying to get them on edge it can really strain my knee. If you happen to hit Colorado or Utah during a dump you can always rent a wider ski. That being said, my Head Great Joys are 98 underfoot and I'm quite happy on them in nearly everything because they have a very wide shovel and a short turn radius. For her you might consider Head's new Wild Joy as well.

http://www.skiessentials.com/2018-ski-test?skis=head-wild-joy

The Luvboat is a nice ski and I was considering it for my powder ski but I don't think I'd want it as my only ski. Especially if I spend more time on groomers. I haven't skied the Fullavit.

My wife skis the same ski and luvs it (pun intended) she's same height at 145 and skis a 164

 

[tromano]

We started skiing as adults, never raced, so her style is smooth and easy, not hard charging. Take lessons in bumps every year. We ski with our 7 and 9 year old girls most of the time.
Priority is ease of turn initiation and speed control in moguls, trees and steeps. High speed is not a concern, but must have some stability for run outs and roughed up groomers at moderate speed. We almost exclusively ski (tight!) trees and moguls, mostly black diamonds at Winter Park, no double blacks. we ski slow and controlled in the bumps and trees, no zipper line charging for us. She would like to improve at steeps, but again looking for quick turn initiation, doesn't care about high speed charging. Less than ~4 foot airs.

For a person that size who isnt a charger 10X underfoot skis are not the best option. I would look for something one size shorter and a bit narrower than her current setup. Moderate flex all mountain rocker. Plenty of good recommendations in this thread.

 

[SSSdave]

As a daily driver, I like something in the 80-90 range.
As a one ski quiver I'd think 85-100 range
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs at my best. These days more like 145.

Gee am 5'6" too but because of all my summer backpacking dropped 7# so am now at 137#. What binding boot size/length are you?
David

 

[Ken_R]

As a daily driver, I like something in the 80-90 range.
As a one ski quiver I'd think 85-100 range
I'm 5'6" 135 lbs at my best. These days more like 145.

Hope she doesn't read this but she's more like 135 lb now... jejeje

 

[Tricia]

Gee am 5'6" too but because of all my summer backpacking dropped 7# so am now at 137#. What binding boot size/length are you?
David

280

 

[trailtrimmer]

I'll buck the trend, I think 78 to 88 underfoot is about perfect for everyplace during an average winter if you ski mostly groomers and little off piste. Less knee fatigue, quicker to tip up on edge, better edge hold on hardpack with less effort, etc.

Now if you are having a banner year and getting dumped on all the time or skiing in spring slush, 88 would be at the bottom of my range and would be settling in around 95 to 100 for in bounds skiing.

 

[Lauren]

Here's how I tend to think about it (oversimplified)...

With my excellent Microsoft Paint skills, I spent a whole 1.5 minutes master piecing this graph. Blue indicates hard pack days, and Red indicates powder days. Where the lines cross is your ultimate one-ski-quiver. Now the scale of the graph varies based on personal skills, preferences and location.

 

[Monique]

Here's how I tend to think about it (oversimplified)...

With my excellent Microsoft Paint skills, I spent a whole 1.5 minutes master piecing this graph. Blue indicates hard pack days, and Red indicates powder days. Where the lines cross is your ultimate one-ski-quiver. Now the scale of the graph varies based on personal skills, preferences and location.
View attachment 30934

The "fun" comes in assigning numbers on the axes!

 

[AmyPJ]

Here's how I tend to think about it (oversimplified)...

With my excellent Microsoft Paint skills, I spent a whole 1.5 minutes master piecing this graph. Blue indicates hard pack days, and Red indicates powder days. Where the lines cross is your ultimate one-ski-quiver. Now the scale of the graph varies based on personal skills, preferences and location.
View attachment 30934

 

[Slim]

Do you think they are linear equations? I would much more expect something non-linear.

 

[Monique]

Do you think they are linear equations? I would much more expect something non-linear.

You can address this via uneven axis increments.

 

[KingGrump]

Page 4.

 

[Lauren]

You can address this via uneven axis increments.

I like the way you think.

 

[Lauren]

Do you think they are linear equations? I would much more expect something non-linear.

I think my personal graph would be sigmoidal

 

[fullStack]

I think my personal graph would be sigmoidal

Sounds Freudian!

 

[markojp]

I'll buck the trend, I think 78 to 88 underfoot is about perfect for everyplace during an average winter if you ski mostly groomers and little off piste. Less knee fatigue, quicker to tip up on edge, better edge hold on hardpack with less effort, etc.

Now if you are having a banner year and getting dumped on all the time or skiing in spring slush, 88 would be at the bottom of my range and would be settling in around 95 to 100 for in bounds skiing.

If I were based in MI, I'd go narrower than 88 for sure... 68-78 would cover everything except bush wacking in the woods with questionable coverage... Then I'd bust out my old Soul Riders!

 

[markojp]

You can address this via uneven axis increments.

'X' marks the spot!