For the upcoming season

[gawd]

i need new skis, i'm looking at the Elizabeths, Sir Francis Bacons, Seths, and the Hellbents. But i cant make up my mind on which ski would be best for me. i ski mostly woods in VT and when the woods arent good i hit up the park 6 feet tall at 165lbs. what should i go with?

 

[joe_cool_ski]

Elizabeths

 

[vermontsteez]

yeah dude i would say lizzies...

 

[DannyMac]

seth's for real

 

[=FLO=]

Probably seths

 

[Capurnicus]

seths or ARV

 

[jes_readyforsnow]

seth's

 

[Pirruccio]

you might even be able to ski seths in park

right?

 

[jes_readyforsnow]

ye

 

[SirFryanator]

seths.

 

[SkierX]

Best question is, what type of ski construction do you like?

Do you want something stiff and powerful, or something soft and playful.

 

[gawd]

i like something that can go pretty fast on groomers, but soft to butter around in the fresh stuff

 

[pbandj]

elizabeths

 

[gawd]

think the elizabeths would be good for my height cause they are short skis

 

[pbandj]

if you were out west i'd say bacons, but since you're in vt i'd go with elizabeths, really really sick fun ski, seths are on the stiff side, but bacons are almost to big to rep the park and hell bents shouldn't be any where near the east coast

 

[invader7]

seths or lizzys

 

[luke8]

Elizabeths are cool, ARV too

 

[SkierX]

Hmmm... 172 at 6 foot tall...

It is a touch short, but with the width flotation would be great. And it'd be very quick and agile in the tight trees.

What length skis are you currently skiing?

I'm 6'0 and have 178s, before that were 176s.

 

[poofartpee]

seth or bacon

 

[Ryanvdonk]

too bad all those skis are pretty soft. out of those i'd say 179 seths, but also look at some big troubles and fischer misfits.

 

[396222687862]

ARV or lizzies

 

[Matty_C]

anyone skied the 08 misfits? how are they? are they the same ski as the 07 atuas?

 

[Ryanvdonk]

yeah same as the atuas, or kehuas if you're looking at 177. great skis, poppy, not wet noodles, stable. good all arounders.

 

[potato_man]

seths, but the SFB's are really nice deep skis

seths would be better for a more all mountain ski, in your case, better for groomers and crud, while the SFB's are all deep and pow

 

[Jahhsss]

Bacons

 

[gawd]

I'm on 178s BCs right now, and i can man handle those bad boys pretty well in some tight trees

 

[gawd]

plus i have already had seths and I'm trying to move on from them

 

[pbandj]

lizzies for sure dude, lively fun ski as i said previously

 

[[]Soul_Steeze[]]

elizabeth

 

[SWA666ER]

HELL BENT

 

[alaskakid]

lizzie, dont listen to him

 

[KL.]

elizebeths or seths if the seths are similar to last years

either would be fine

 

[SkierX]

If you're on a 178 now, I don't think you'll notice much the 6cm less running length. You'll likely have equal usable surface area.

I've never skied the Elizabeths, but they sound like a very fun ski.

For something a bit stiffer, maybe the Scratch BC WRS? Light weight, good width. good all-around.

 

[Valind]

I would say Hellbents if you are riding POW all the time, otherwise the SETH's are awesome for all-mountain riding. I use the SETH's for everything!!!!! SWEET SKI, and this year they have a mini-rocker. So the Hellbents are reverse camber so there only really good for powder and not too good for groomers or park really!