Advice on ski length

I'm a 5'10" 150-pound dude riding 181 Jeffrey 102s. I think I'm going to get Wides for my next ski, and I'm curious if I should get the 183s or size down to the 177s. With a ski a bit longer and wider, I feel like I may find it hard to control, but I don't want to go to short. Thanks for any advice
 
topic:Wadyatalkinabout said:
I'm a 5'10" 150-pound dude riding 181 Jeffrey 102s. I think I'm going to get Wides for my next ski, and I'm curious if I should get the 183s or size down to the 177s. With a ski a bit longer and wider, I feel like I may find it hard to control, but I don't want to go to short. Thanks for any advice

Something with that much early rise is going to ski short so I'd go 183
 
i mean, 5'10" is almost exactly 177cm. and you're a medium weight, a bit on the lighter side. sounds like a 177 would be perfect unless you will be using them for stuff you want more stability on. and they have early rise so they'll ski a little short so you'd be fine either way. but shit man i'm hyped when a ski comes in exactly my height, that's as easy a choice as it gets imo
 
Imho almost no one should ever size down with wides or wets. They're super light skis with a lot of rise and less effective edge so they feel shorter. Of course personal preference comes into it but if I wouldn't advise getting vishnus that are shorter than your current skis.
 
I'm 5'9 140 and I'm planning on getting 183 wides. I've taken a few laps on both wides and wets at 183 and they felt much shorter than my 181 Mags I'm on right now.
 
If it’s a park ski you’ll want it between eye to forehead length. For all mountain your height or a few cm taller is fine.
 
14611445:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
If it’s a park ski you’ll want it between eye to forehead length. For all mountain your height or a few cm taller is fine.

Maybe one day you will learn about the right sizing
 
14611524:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
A few of the best skiers in the world using skis at eye height.

Maybe one day you’ll stop being a retard

View attachment 1092883

You really think that picture is somehow relevant?

On first place there is a giant (Ahole)who can't get bigger skis because Faction doesn't make bigger skis.

On the second place there is a dude who shat himself mid pencil seven. So he is irrelevant.

And on the third place there is some random dude.
 
14611378:SofaKingSick said:
i mean, 5'10" is almost exactly 177cm. and you're a medium weight, a bit on the lighter side. sounds like a 177 would be perfect unless you will be using them for stuff you want more stability on. and they have early rise so they'll ski a little short so you'd be fine either way. but shit man i'm hyped when a ski comes in exactly my height, that's as easy a choice as it gets imo

Also consider that Vishnu's ski very short due to lots of rocker. I would go 183 personally. But also I don't really care, OP is going to be fine either way
 
14611551:Schoess said:
Also consider that Vishnu's ski very short due to lots of rocker. I would go 183 personally. But also I don't really care, OP is going to be fine either way

i agree, 183 would also be great and OP def shouldn't sweat it

i like my skis above my head but i think people get carried away with it on here. vishnus are soft and forgiving and have lots of early rise yes but that's because that's what suits the ski and makes it behave appropriately for its uses. they didn't make them like that just to size up and have ornamental extra length, you know? and if OP is asking i think that's an important part of the answer, cause if OP liked his skis big on him he'd know it
 
do I think a photo of pros who make money from skiing is relevant? Yes I do. If someone at the top skill level of their profession is using shorter skis, it’s probably a good indication of what provides the best performance…considering that’s how they make money..

idk if you realize how stupid you sound talking shit on pro skiers behind your keyboard lol and probably haven’t made a cent from skiing. it’s incredibly cringe

14611528:JalmarKalmar said:
You really think that picture is somehow relevant?

On first place there is a giant (Ahole)who can't get bigger skis because Faction doesn't make bigger skis.

On the second place there is a dude who shat himself mid pencil seven. So he is irrelevant.

And on the third place there is some random dude.

**This post was edited on May 17th 2024 at 1:05:56pm
 
14611576:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
do I think a photo of pros who make money from skiing is relevant? Yes I do. If someone at the top skill level of their profession is using shorter skis, it’s probably a good indication of what provides the best performance…considering that’s how they make money..

idk if you realize how stupid you sound talking shit on pro skiers behind your keyboard lol and probably haven’t made a cent from skiing. it’s incredibly cringe

**This post was edited on May 17th 2024 at 1:05:56pm

First of all, I'm not behind my keyboard, I'm on top of it. I write with my toes

Second of all, They don't know what they are doing(except Ahall)

Last of all, I'm sponsored by the church of Satan so I basically have unlimited funds for skiing. I also have unlimited supply of edgy Nietzsche quotes. If you read those quotes carefully you might realize that they are all about telling you to shut the fuck up and buy longer skis.

:)

P:S don't take everything i say seriously
 
183's are perfect because the skis have so much rocker.

For reference, a full camber ski is gonna feel like a longer ski than one with early rise. A lot of comp skiers are running full camber, therefore makes sense why they are only up to their eyes maybe forehead in length... its all in the profile, turn radius, and rocker/camber that make a ski how it feels and its ability to turn, not its length
 
Yes but none of that matters on jumps and rails. Regardless of having more rocker you still have extra length that you need to spin and clear rails

14611842:Angioedema said:
183's are perfect because the skis have so much rocker.

For reference, a full camber ski is gonna feel like a longer ski than one with early rise. A lot of comp skiers are running full camber, therefore makes sense why they are only up to their eyes maybe forehead in length... its all in the profile, turn radius, and rocker/camber that make a ski how it feels and its ability to turn, not its length
 
14611445:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
If it’s a park ski you’ll want it between eye to forehead length.

What is between your eyes and your forehead? Eyebrows? That doesn't give you a lot of leeway on sizing for skis. Not sure how tall your eyebrows are but mine are probably one centimeter top to bottom.
 
14611844:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
Yes but none of that matters on jumps and rails. Regardless of having more rocker you still have extra length that you need to spin and clear rails



1092976.jpeg

buy some of these if you're worried about spins and catching tips
 
My point in saying that was basically to say: if it’s a park only ski, you want it to be a couple cm shorter than your height. Doesn’t need to be exactly forehead or eye height.

14611845:Non_State_Actor said:
What is between your eyes and your forehead? Eyebrows? That doesn't give you a lot of leeway on sizing for skis. Not sure how tall your eyebrows are but mine are probably one centimeter top to bottom.
 
14611855:SkiEnthusiast420 said:
My point in saying that was basically to say: if it’s a park only ski, you want it to be a couple cm shorter than your height. Doesn’t need to be exactly forehead or eye height.

This can be correct for some people. Depends on many factors. For younger skiers, or less experienced skiers, sure. Also if the skis are heavier and you really care about getting rotations around easily, it's a good call. However, in addition to looking way better, long skis give you more stability.
 
Back
Top