What size?

JuanBautista

New member
Hi guys, i wanna buy armada skis arv 96. for all mountain and park! Mi size is 161 cm, male, and 130 lbs. Which size you think i should buy? 163 or 170? i think 170 is going to be a little bit big but i dont know
 
13959192:Swiftyski572 said:
I'd go for the 170, you'll grow into them and no shame getting better on a longer ski

I should clarify that I am 21 years old and I will not grow more haha. or you mean it in my ski skills??
 
163 will be perfect. you don't need to even consider 170 here unless you're growing like a piece of bamboo or you like bigass skis
 
13959196:JuanBautista said:
I should clarify that I am 21 years old and I will not grow more haha. or you mean it in my ski skills??

sorry, i clicked to reply but took a while to actually reply so i missed this

yeah if you're done growing def go 163. right around your height is perfect

9 cm over your head isn't necessary or beneficial for park skis unless you just love big ass skis. i only get skis way bigger than me if theyre for big mtn charging (and even then, only size up that much if you have extremely good control over your skis)
 
13959200:SofaKingSick said:
sorry, i clicked to reply but took a while to actually reply so i missed this

yeah if you're done growing def go 163. right around your height is perfect

9 cm over your head isn't necessary or beneficial for park skis unless you just love big ass skis. i only get skis way bigger than me if theyre for big mtn charging (and even then, only size up that much if you have extremely good control over your skis)

It really make sense what you said. I’ll go for 163 then, I have a really good control over my skis but I’ll be in east cost this.. not big mountains haha. Thanks for your time bro!
 
13959213:JuanBautista said:
It really make sense what you said. I’ll go for 163 then, I have a really good control over my skis but I’ll be in east cost this.. not big mountains haha. Thanks for your time bro!

yeah for east coast def not even a question, 163. youre welcome, have fun!
 
13959318:JuanBautista said:
Thanks man! One more question. About bindings, I should mount them in the centre right??

i wouldn't, unless you are only going to use them in the park. centermounting them means you won't have as much nose which makes it harder to drive the ski correctly, and will make you tip dive more in soft snow. plus the recommended mount point is there because it jives with the sidecut of the ski. when you don't mount there, it means your boot isnt in the intended place re: the sidecut so itll hurt your carving a little bit.

these aren't huge issues but they outweigh the advantages of centermounting unless you are literally only skiing park. even then, skis work just fine backwards when theyre not dead center mount, and armada's mount point is pretty "progressive" anyway, that is, they don't have a recommended mount point that is way back. it's probably a couple inches back from dead center anyway. i'd say tell them to mount recommended and youre going to have the best setup for all around AND park skiing, not just one or the other (ive used ARV96s myself for years and years, and i dont centermount anymore)

some people disagree with this and love centermount but i believe it's gotten less popular over the past few years
 
13959320:SofaKingSick said:
and armada's mount point is pretty "progressive" anyway, that is, they don't have a recommended mount point that is way back. it's probably a couple inches back from dead center

it's probably a couple inches back from dead center MAX i should say. if i had to guess it's like an inch and a half back or something. not way back like some more "traditional" skis are
 
13959321:SofaKingSick said:
it's probably a couple inches back from dead center MAX i should say. if i had to guess it's like an inch and a half back or something. not way back like some more "traditional" skis are

The 16/17 has two lines: progressive at -2.5 and all-mountain at -4.5 fwiw
 
13959325:mystery3 said:
The 16/17 has two lines: progressive at -2.5 and all-mountain at -4.5 fwiw

okay yeah, so 2.5in is like an inch back, and 4.5in is like 1.7 inches back. i'd suggest ""progressive"" (said in slow mo douche voice)

thank you Mystery!
 
13959327:SofaKingSick said:
okay yeah, so 2.5in is like an inch back, and 4.5in is like 1.7 inches back. i'd suggest ""progressive"" (said in slow mo douche voice)

thank you Mystery!

okey then, i`ll go for the progressive then!! thank you both guys!
 
Back
Top