Park Ski Hight advice

L

LadleHammy

Member
I'm 5'9 and just got the armada bdogs 164. Cause they looked sick with my pivots lol. I ride kastle fx95hp 165 but the binding is on the armada are center cause it's a park ski. Is it to small for me? Please help.

955195.jpeg
 
I'm 5'8 and ride 164, it's not an issue for me. For park and riding on groomers, having a short ski isn't really an issue, and even if it's 10cm shorter than what's ideal it won't make a big difference. If you're doing more backcountry, powder, off-piste, going for a longer ski might make a noticable difference, but it's not worth completely replacing your skis. Next pair you buy, you can go up in length or stay the same if you're having no issues
 
apparently penis length is directly proportional to ski size...

jokes asides I ride 171s at 5'8", used to ride 164s and I like the extra length a lot more. To each their own.
 
Way too small. I’m 5’7” and ride 183s no issue. They’re some wide sons a bitches too.

Short skis suck.

your balls get bigger when you land tricks on longer skis than shorter ones.

**This post was edited on Feb 20th 2020 at 12:16:10am
 
It’s all preference but I like longer because it’s more balance and you have more support if you land a lil backseat on a jump
 
Probably fun on groomers and rails but that's about it. I have the 172 Bdogs at the same height and those feel a bit short at times. Probably depends more on your ski style. I noticed you like carving skis. The Bdogs have a short turn radius so it seems to fit your style offering a more freestyle approach.
 
Thanks man really appreciate it. You say you have the 172. They were out when I went but the deal was to good to pass up and I already had the pivot 18s in The trunk. What hight are you riding the 172 if you don't mind me asking ? Ty

14109160:SoAnG said:
Probably fun on groomers and rails but that's about it. I have the 172 Bdogs at the same height and those feel a bit short at times. Probably depends more on your ski style. I noticed you like carving skis. The Bdogs have a short turn radius so it seems to fit your style offering a more freestyle approach.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry my guy but yeah, those are mad small. Im 5’9 and ski a 181-185 in the park. Nothing is stopping you from skiing them. They just wont be very stable and will probably look awkward if your trying to stack clips. Id try and sell if you can. Or not, practice spins and technical rail tricks so that you have em on lock when you get longer sticks.
 
"A grown man needs a ski that can kick his ass" Glen Plake

no such thing as too short, it's all personal preference. but theres a reason you don't see pro's skiing skis that aren't at least up to their nose.

I'm 5,8 and ski 185ish boards. It's fun to have something under your feet you can actually ski, instead of just wiggle around.
 
sidenote, anyone ever see a picture of henrik standing next to his competitors during slopestyle. His skis are way over his head while everyone elses come up to their nose. its hilarious.
 
Don’t worry about it man ski size is 100% personal preference and each length has its advantages and disadvantages. Don’t let anyone on here tell you differently
 
14109184:LadleHammy said:
Thanks man really appreciate it. You say you have the 172. They were out when I went but the deal was to good to pass up and I already had the pivot 18s in The trunk. What hight are you riding the 172 if you don't mind me asking ? Ty
Click to expand...

Same height as you and the 172 would be the minimum for me. That's coming from someone that doesn't even care for longer skis.
 
Will it make tricks easier ?

14109193:supersquid said:
Sorry my guy but yeah, those are mad small. Im 5’9 and ski a 181-185 in the park. Nothing is stopping you from skiing them. They just wont be very stable and will probably look awkward if your trying to stack clips. Id try and sell if you can. Or not, practice spins and technical rail tricks so that you have em on lock when you get longer sticks.
Click to expand...
 
14109339:LadleHammy said:
Will it make tricks easier ?
Click to expand...

Relatively... You will lose stability at speed and may loop out easier on forward and switch landings. But youll have less weight to move around on jumps and less length to catch when doing rail tricks.
 
Thanks man I ski 165 - 172 and love short skis these are just mounted center so I was just asking cause it looks small but I have ridden yet ..till the weekend ty

14109205:Dan-Man said:
it is a nice looking setup tho!
Click to expand...
 
Omg that's what I was thinking ... noooo I love short skis just the middle mount makes it look to short I guess we will see this weekend ty

14109215:DIRTYBUBBLE said:
lol jk you’re a snowblader now
Click to expand...
 
Do you have it center mounted also? How are they in the front they feel so short compared to my other skis mounted in the back

14109095:elliotfitzgerald said:
I'm 5'8 and ride 164, it's not an issue for me. For park and riding on groomers, having a short ski isn't really an issue, and even if it's 10cm shorter than what's ideal it won't make a big difference. If you're doing more backcountry, powder, off-piste, going for a longer ski might make a noticable difference, but it's not worth completely replacing your skis. Next pair you buy, you can go up in length or stay the same if you're having no issues
Click to expand...
 
I'm 5'5 and just changed over from my 164 cm ARV 96 to some 172 cm edollos cuz I was looking to move to some longer skis. Way more fun on the longer skis, considering that I'd say the 164 are way too short for you and definitely recommend trying out something longer

**This post was edited on Feb 19th 2020 at 12:50:13am
 
Ended up getting 177s tried the 172 but felt to short also

14109502:Trawinator said:
I'm 5'5 and just changed over from my 164 cm ARV 96 to some 172 cm edollos cuz I was looking to move to some longer skis. Way more fun on the longer skis, considering that I'd say the 164 are way too short for you and definitely recommend trying out something longer

**This post was edited on Feb 19th 2020 at 12:50:13am
Click to expand...

956678.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top