Ski buying help.

Just got a nudge on this one through my email. Bandit I am unfortunately no longer a lightweight (as you can see from my avatar). When I say I go faster than most I mean my fellow middle aged, slightly overweight ski-ing friends. I can keep up with the kids at times but it is bloody hard work. Because of the tips the skis reach the bridge of my nose - I am 164cm like you - which is about right I believe so I hope I won't be classed as one who wears shorter skis to mask a shoddy technique. I probably have one but do not intentionally try and mask it :lol: The blurb on my skis when I bought them recommend them for 60 groomed 40 off?

ParalyticSkiCrazie wrote: Because of the tips the skis reach the bridge of my nose - I am 164cm like you - which is about right I believe so I hope I won't be classed as one who wears shorter skis to mask a shoddy technique.I probably have one but do not intentionally try and mask it :lol:

I just looked back at your post containing the length of your skis. I'm surprised that they are as tall as the bridge on your nose. I hope that you will not worry in the slightest about what other folks might be thinking when you ski. If I want some of these.....

http://www.evogear.com/skis/icelantic-pilgrim-2009.aspx

for example, I would go shorter. If I follow the "short means naff" logic, then I'll be parking them at the restaurant nearest to the gondola, and bagging a deckchair :D

Or mebbe not :twisted:

The blurb on my skis when I bought them recommend them for 60 groomed 40 off?

I was quite surprised to listen to that youtube dealer review, however they have a 72mm waist, and Fall Line magazine review described them as an "on piste" ski. An expert skier could make them work off piste, but for me there would be many other skis in the 40% category that would make my life easier.

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am afraid most holidaying skiers spend a lot of time on a flat ski shoosting :lol: ;)

I think length is mostly a preference thing but most people over estimate the advantages of really short skis and often use them to cover up their shoddy technique ;)

Yes I think you right, I'm going down to 140's, thanks for the tip :thumbup:

bandit wrote:

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am afraid most holidaying skiers spend a lot of time on a flat ski shoosting :lol: ;)

I think length is mostly a preference thing but most people over estimate the advantages of really short skis and often use them to cover up their shoddy technique ;)

:shock: Pabs...so cutting :lol:

Thats not cutting, thats the arrogance of youth :wink:

Ian Wickham wrote:

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am afraid most holidaying skiers spend a lot of time on a flat ski shoosting :lol: ;)

I think length is mostly a preference thing but most people over estimate the advantages of really short skis and often use them to cover up their shoddy technique ;)

Yes I think you right, I'm going down to 140's, thanks for the tip :thumbup:

Those probably won't qualify as skis Wickers....more Snowblades really. Still, it's your choice :lol:

Ian Wickham wrote:

bandit wrote:

Pablo Escobar wrote:I am afraid most holidaying skiers spend a lot of time on a flat ski shoosting :lol: ;)

I think length is mostly a preference thing but most people over estimate the advantages of really short skis and often use them to cover up their shoddy technique ;)

:shock: Pabs...so cutting :lol:

Thats not cutting, thats the arrogance of youth :wink:

Beats the ignorance of age.

I think you would suit the 140s Wickers.

I think I have found the perfect 140's for Wickers :D

http://www.fatypus.com/home/a-lotta.php

:lol: Not quite Wickers' required width but I would love a pair of these.