I am trying to find the right length for the k2 pontoon. First i am 5'8 and weigh 190 lbs and a advanced powder hound. The last few years i have skied the k2 apache chief in a 174 and felt like the 174 was not to big at all. I have gotten mixed reactions about the right length pontoon i should get. I am looking at the 179 and the 189 . I just read in this years powder buyers guide and found an article on rockered ski lengths by shane mconkey and found the info very interesting to say the least. It said rockered skis ski short and should be bought long. He said that we should go up 10 cm from our big mountain set up. I did the math and came up with 185 cm . for the proper ski length . As we all know the pontoon comes in a 179 or 189 but not 185. Should i go with the 189 or stick with the shorter 179. If anyone has advice or an opinion on this subject please let me know.
How to size a rockered ski?
- Thread starter wb1996
- Start date
dont listen to this guy.
If i were you i would go with the 189, while it will be long u should be able to handle it. you are pretty heavy and the pontoon is a meticulously soft ski with a big rocker. I weigh about 200 pounds and im about 5'10 or 11 so we are pretty comparable on ski choice, this year i bought some obsetheds in the 189 and this ski will ski bigger than the pontoon because it is stiffer, im pretty sure its heavier(but who really cares) and it has less rocker. i also demoed some hellbents last season so i think you should be able to handle the 189 perfectly fine, especially seeing as you are an advanced skier.
just a little insight to me, ive decided not to buy skis under 180 now i have 181 addicts and even those are feeling a little short, you will love the added length
If i were you i would go with the 189, while it will be long u should be able to handle it. you are pretty heavy and the pontoon is a meticulously soft ski with a big rocker. I weigh about 200 pounds and im about 5'10 or 11 so we are pretty comparable on ski choice, this year i bought some obsetheds in the 189 and this ski will ski bigger than the pontoon because it is stiffer, im pretty sure its heavier(but who really cares) and it has less rocker. i also demoed some hellbents last season so i think you should be able to handle the 189 perfectly fine, especially seeing as you are an advanced skier.
just a little insight to me, ive decided not to buy skis under 180 now i have 181 addicts and even those are feeling a little short, you will love the added length
height doesnt really make that much of a difference especially when it is just 2 inches, and i only weigh about 10 pounds more which is pretty much nothing, to very minute differences in our sizes. demoing is a good thing to do but i tihnk you would be safe going with the 189 especially seeing as u are a strong skier.
dont listen to this guy, he's a kiwi
dont listen to this guy, he's a kiwi
Squirrel_Murphy
Active member
i always use this as a rule of thumb: " if you're stuck between two sizes, go bigger" I haven't been dissapointed
Height does make a difference, if it didnt you wouldn't need to know anyones height to recommend a ski length.
It might not seem like a big difference to you but your at least 5cm taller which puts you in the longer length to start with then you add the extra weight as well, which means that there is a signficant difference between you.
But its all personal preference in the end, and from the original post it sounded like you thought your 174s were just about too much for you, so you should definitely try and demo some skis before you buy, because you dont want to be stuck with a ski you cant quite handle
It might not seem like a big difference to you but your at least 5cm taller which puts you in the longer length to start with then you add the extra weight as well, which means that there is a signficant difference between you.
But its all personal preference in the end, and from the original post it sounded like you thought your 174s were just about too much for you, so you should definitely try and demo some skis before you buy, because you dont want to be stuck with a ski you cant quite handle
skisquaw@420
Active member
view my post in this thread:https://newschoolers.com/web/forums/readthread/thread_id/381655/
sorry, read his post again. he said his 174 didnt seem too big at all.
and height really isnt that important in ski sizing, it helps for a general guid line if you look at average weight to height ratios. you are obviously misinformed, where are you getting your information?
weight is the main factor in deciding skis, your hieght doesnt affect the way a ski rides at all really
please dont try to call me out for not knowing things when you have no idea what you are talking about
and height really isnt that important in ski sizing, it helps for a general guid line if you look at average weight to height ratios. you are obviously misinformed, where are you getting your information?
weight is the main factor in deciding skis, your hieght doesnt affect the way a ski rides at all really
please dont try to call me out for not knowing things when you have no idea what you are talking about
skisquaw@420
Active member
listen to invader46, he knows whats up
Your height does affect how a ski rides! you are obviously misinformed!
Learn some basic physics, the taller you are they higher your centre of gravity and therefore how much pressure you will apply to a ski. E.g if it had no effect then 2 people who each weigh 200lb should have the same ski length even when one is 5'2 and the other is 6'5 so your logic is flawed.
If you really want to work out what size a ski should be it should be determined by the body shape and where their centre of gravity is but thats just stupid.
And weight is only a help as a very general guideline just like height.
It all comes down to personal preference in the end, hence why i suggested he demoed skis to find out what length suited him.
Learn some basic physics, the taller you are they higher your centre of gravity and therefore how much pressure you will apply to a ski. E.g if it had no effect then 2 people who each weigh 200lb should have the same ski length even when one is 5'2 and the other is 6'5 so your logic is flawed.
If you really want to work out what size a ski should be it should be determined by the body shape and where their centre of gravity is but thats just stupid.
And weight is only a help as a very general guideline just like height.
It all comes down to personal preference in the end, hence why i suggested he demoed skis to find out what length suited him.
Go with the 179. End of thread.
skisquaw@420
Active member
shut the fuck up. you dont know what your talking about
haha, but word up, 189
but ya, stfu u kiwi, height plays almost no role in the difference of ski selection in the norm. we arent talking about a guy who is 5'2'' to a guy who is 6'5'' we are talking about someone who is 5'10 and someone who is 5'8'' ur argument is erroneous, grow up and accept your defeat.
but ya, stfu u kiwi, height plays almost no role in the difference of ski selection in the norm. we arent talking about a guy who is 5'2'' to a guy who is 6'5'' we are talking about someone who is 5'10 and someone who is 5'8'' ur argument is erroneous, grow up and accept your defeat.
skates_mcfarlin
Member
When sizing a ski, height does not matter at all. even with your argument they would still be on the same ski becuase even though the center of gravity is different the mass they put on the ski into a turn is the same. a ski cant tell how tall you are, only how much you weigh. There is two ways to look at this, fat skis are by design meant to be skied shorter because there is so much surface area. but in reality the 189 skis so much better its not even funny. Dude go with the 189 , you will never regret it
styl.tweakit
Member
rocker?
You obviously don't get my argument!
What i was trying to say with comparing two guys one 5'2 and the other 6'5 is that height obviously has a significance in ski height otherwise they would be on the same length ski which they obviously wouldnt be!
It is a combination of height and weight not just weight, so when you combine the extra 2 inches you have AND the extra 10 pounds that will combine to make a difference.
What i was trying to say with comparing two guys one 5'2 and the other 6'5 is that height obviously has a significance in ski height otherwise they would be on the same length ski which they obviously wouldnt be!
It is a combination of height and weight not just weight, so when you combine the extra 2 inches you have AND the extra 10 pounds that will combine to make a difference.
So you're trying to say that a guy 5'2 should be on a 189 ski?
You obviously dont understand physics.
If someone has a higher centre of gravity it means that they can put more pressure on the tip or tail of the ski by leaning forward or backwards.
A ski can only not tell how tall a person is if they stand up completely straight otherwise there height will have some impact on the ski flexing.
Just go ask your physics teacher at school
You obviously dont understand physics.
If someone has a higher centre of gravity it means that they can put more pressure on the tip or tail of the ski by leaning forward or backwards.
A ski can only not tell how tall a person is if they stand up completely straight otherwise there height will have some impact on the ski flexing.
Just go ask your physics teacher at school
mmckechnie
Active member
more height means a greater distance from the ski and more force (lbs) over the ski, resulting in more torque on the skis and more direct control over them, obviously a 10 inch difference in people would be more noticeable than a 2 inch difference, but the 2 inch difference is still noticeable, and the effects can be seen and shouldn't be neglected
You still don't grasp the issue do you.
2 inches would make a difference and then when you add the effect of your extra weight as well it combines to make a significant difference.
Your argument is erronous so just grow up and accept you lost the argument, and maybe you should concentrate next time your in science class
2 inches would make a difference and then when you add the effect of your extra weight as well it combines to make a significant difference.
Your argument is erronous so just grow up and accept you lost the argument, and maybe you should concentrate next time your in science class
haha. actually you're right. I misread his weight.
However, you didn't need to be so harsh about it lol.
However, you didn't need to be so harsh about it lol.
its all very well inflicting your personal opinion on everyone else, but read the guys post.
1) he likes his 174s. Im sure you would all say go bigger but he likes them.
2) He says mconkey says go 10cm bigger than your normal setup.
3) 174 + 10 is 184 . 179 Pontoons are 184.
4) The guy says he is looking for approximately 185.
On this basis.. he should go 179.
There is also a difference between Bents and Pontoons, the mounting point on 'toons is much further back.. I think he will be fine on the 179s and probably happier a bigger percentage of the time.
That said.. i ride 181 rockers and im 5'8 140 pounds..
1) he likes his 174s. Im sure you would all say go bigger but he likes them.
2) He says mconkey says go 10cm bigger than your normal setup.
3) 174 + 10 is 184 . 179 Pontoons are 184.
4) The guy says he is looking for approximately 185.
On this basis.. he should go 179.
There is also a difference between Bents and Pontoons, the mounting point on 'toons is much further back.. I think he will be fine on the 179s and probably happier a bigger percentage of the time.
That said.. i ride 181 rockers and im 5'8 140 pounds..
Klick_2_klaim
Active member
Buy the ski you would normally ride.
they are measured to ride the length they are printed at.
if you ride a 181 or 79 buy a 181 or 79, if you want to go longer, you will have much more ski to move. the 79 hellbent is as long as a 185 steez from last year. the running length and girth allows you to go shorter.
I say, go with the length you know.
they are measured to ride the length they are printed at.
if you ride a 181 or 79 buy a 181 or 79, if you want to go longer, you will have much more ski to move. the 79 hellbent is as long as a 185 steez from last year. the running length and girth allows you to go shorter.
I say, go with the length you know.
dorikin
Active member
^That IMO is the argument right there. The surface area of that ski pretty much guarantees it will be able to float at smaller sizes. It is totally about personal preference. You could easily ski the 179 at your weight. Height has nothing to do with it. Given your stats you are probably pretty stout, or just a fatass. If it is the first, then you definitely have the strength and power to ski the 189, and if you are willing to put up with a little bit extra getting used to you should go with the bigger size because it will perform even better.
SHUT THE FUCK UP!
im sick of you posting all this stupid advice, you obviously arent even reading what he posted, and i quote "The last few years i have skied the k2 apache chief in a 174 and felt like the 174 was not to big at all" He said they were not to big at all, this means he could go longer in a ski.
"The last few years i have skied the k2 apache chief in a 174" The k2 apache is a directional ski that is decently stiff, the hellbent is a ski with a 20/40 rocker, this means the rocker is 20cm in from the tip and 20cm in from the tail, rising a combined 40mm between the tips/tails
the running length of this ski is only 149cm! the apache has a running length of 174cm
the hellbent is about 120mm and the apache cheif is about 100mm at the waiste just 2cm wider, it wont be much of a jump at all for him to ride the 189 hellbent from his 174 apache chief.
im sick of you posting all this stupid advice, you obviously arent even reading what he posted, and i quote "The last few years i have skied the k2 apache chief in a 174 and felt like the 174 was not to big at all" He said they were not to big at all, this means he could go longer in a ski.
"The last few years i have skied the k2 apache chief in a 174" The k2 apache is a directional ski that is decently stiff, the hellbent is a ski with a 20/40 rocker, this means the rocker is 20cm in from the tip and 20cm in from the tail, rising a combined 40mm between the tips/tails
the running length of this ski is only 149cm! the apache has a running length of 174cm
the hellbent is about 120mm and the apache cheif is about 100mm at the waiste just 2cm wider, it wont be much of a jump at all for him to ride the 189 hellbent from his 174 apache chief.
The 179 hellbent skis like a 123cm length (they measure 183cm in length). The running length does not suffice the same way a normal, or flat camber ski would.
SHastatahoe
Active member
Go 189 for sure. You will be dissapointed with anything less.
last i heard this was an opinion forum. the guy is between sizes and I have my opinion on what he should do. And i did read his post including the quotes in yours. Did you read his post? Because he is looking at Pontoons not Hellbents, pontoons are definitely directional. Anyway at least you are giving well reasoned advice which is above average on here.
SnowJumperAK
Member
Well....My 2 cents on these types of threads......
If your buying a pontoon, best bet is you aren't skiing on your 1995 set of K2 210's. That being said, you should pretty much know what ski length you prefer and you've probably at a minimum molested a set in the local shop. So why do people ask these kind of questions, why not go by the recomended weight rating over anything? You dont just wake up and say "shit, i need some new skis, lets go buy a set of pontoons" and for some reason you have been living in a cave (or the east coast) and you havent seen a set of these at the local hills, just go with the recomended weight, and dont forget to add to your weight the weight of your pack and all your avy gear that your hopefully carrying (cause if your not you probably dont need these skis).
If your buying a pontoon, best bet is you aren't skiing on your 1995 set of K2 210's. That being said, you should pretty much know what ski length you prefer and you've probably at a minimum molested a set in the local shop. So why do people ask these kind of questions, why not go by the recomended weight rating over anything? You dont just wake up and say "shit, i need some new skis, lets go buy a set of pontoons" and for some reason you have been living in a cave (or the east coast) and you havent seen a set of these at the local hills, just go with the recomended weight, and dont forget to add to your weight the weight of your pack and all your avy gear that your hopefully carrying (cause if your not you probably dont need these skis).
its not very often, that most people have an opportunity to ride these specialty skis, and the point of this community is to see what other people's experiences are and elicit their help.
and to twig, i guess i got off track because everyone was mentioning hellbents, but the same logic can be applied to the pontoon as my previous post except for a little more running length and a way more noodley ski
and to twig, i guess i got off track because everyone was mentioning hellbents, but the same logic can be applied to the pontoon as my previous post except for a little more running length and a way more noodley ski