4 FRNT stls!*****

Riley.

Riley.

Active member
Hey Im 6'2" and skied on 176 AR5s last year...I can get a sick deal at my shop on 177 stls this years...but only in 177 not 183...are these comparable to my armadas? Will they be too small? I havent actually gone to the shop to see em....if anyone has em they should post a pic standing next to em with you height.
 
That's going to be pretty small, since they're so light and soft. But it might work if you like shorter skis, which some people do.
 
im 6'2" and ride 186cm pollards from last season in powder...work GREAT. 177 stl's would be aiight for park if thats all you gonna ride...you weigh nothing! they'd be easy as shit to throw around. should work out decently
 
the stl's are super soft, so more length is recomended. I'm 6'2 190 and i used to ski 177 1080's but they were stiff compared to the stl's.
 
k im the same height as you bro. but like 20 pounds heavier or so. i had the 183's and they were fairly soft...but not as soft as a lot of ppl claim. i was hittin 65 foot tables and landing backseat sometimes and never had a problem with washing out or nothing. if you only weigh 160 or w/e i think 177's should be alright for you. and as for the ar5's...stl's are a fair bit softer
 
yea they work. the 181 ar5 or 183 stl would probably be a better all round ski, if your only gonna be hitting the park it'll be a good jib stick.
 
i'm on 169s and i'm 5'10. meh, that's just the way it goes. don't go with what you're 'supposed' to go with, but what feels best. if anyone tries to tell you otherwise.. fuck 'em.
 
Completely wrong, but nice try.

The STL is the single lamest excuse for a ski that I've ever seen, twintipped or not.

It's softer than my dick at an old folks home, and cheaply constructed too. I flexed one in a shop and nearly broke it...without putting much weight into it at all. I'd go so far as to call the Invader stiffer than the STL with no qualms. "But what about the "butterzones"", all you dick sucking morons will ask me..to which I'll reply "more or less the same concept as a trouble maker, look at both skis' profiles".

Furthermore, the Invader has a fully centered side cut and binding mounting position, whereas the STL doesn't. This means that the Invader is designed to be ridden at true center. Slapping bindings onto an STL at true center will cause it to turn quicker than it should, and it'll be squirrely at high speeds. The Invader won't suffer from this problem thanks to its adjusted sidecut.

Basically, the STL is WAY over hyped as a ski, and brings absolutely nothing new to the game, other than ridiculous softness in flex. You can, and should, do better when ski shopping.
 
^yeah he's probably right.....i tend to just lump all super soft park-specific skis into one big category because i know i'll never own any of them.
 
I have to sell them..some of them..Not the STL, thank god.

Buy one? Maybe the THall..if I HAD to. Thankfully, an ARV, Jp/Jl, or ANT will serve me much, much better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top