fat ski help

Printable View

10-18-2005, 07:51 AM
englishsmilo

fat ski help

i have found a good deal on the dynastar intuitiv bigs. i'm 5'10, 165lbs, an advanced skier and ski in colorado. i have a pair of volkl 724 ax3 in 170 for everyday use but also want some powder skis which can also be used from day to day if i so feel. would the intuitiv big in 168 be too short or would they be sweet as? i skied the b3s in 168s last season and they were awesome, they were also my only experience with fat skis except for the pocket rocket which was too soft. time is of the essense, so any help would really be appreciated.
10-18-2005, 07:56 AM
H-wood

maybe too short- unless you really like making short turns.
it's a good, versatile fat ski, stiffer than pocket rocket. not as wide as the b3 though.
10-18-2005, 08:02 AM
englishsmilo

hmmm well i do like making short turns, but that's why i have some volkls. i guess i want these more for bombing, or at least my version of bombing! eg medium radius turns :rolleyes:
10-18-2005, 08:05 AM
englishsmilo

if people think i should not get 168, what length would be a better option? i should i stick with 168 for short turns?
10-18-2005, 08:07 AM
H-wood

get the next size up then- it won't be too long.
10-18-2005, 08:10 AM
englishsmilo

the only problem is, 168 is the longest i can get them at this price. $100. NEW.
10-18-2005, 08:20 AM
H-wood

the only way you'll really know is if you ski on them.
since you can't, $100 doesn't seem like much to gamble.
10-18-2005, 08:27 AM
englishsmilo

the next size up is 178, that wouldnt be too long? i always get paranoid buying new skis, it's hard when you arent on mountain to demo.
10-18-2005, 08:31 AM
H-wood

178 is not too long. I work at a ski shop- that's what I would tell you to demo first. You're already skiing on a stiffer, heavier ski w/ more sidecut.
I have to go to work now- enjoy whatever you do get.
10-18-2005, 09:37 AM
Snow Dog

I'm about the same size as you and ski on 188 Bigs. A lttile long in tight spots -- 178s would be just right overall and 168 would be nice in the trees. For $100 I'd try the 168s. I've also got Pocket Rockets in 175 and they float through the snow just fine. Length isn't as important as it used to be.
10-19-2005, 02:39 AM
englishsmilo

anyone else have any thoughts?
10-19-2005, 06:47 AM
addict

I'm about 10-15lbs on you and ski on a 192cm but wish it were bigger. If you're skiing powder, a longer ski is often very, very fun. Wax em up and they'll still turn on a dime. It totally depends on your skiing style and ability, but I don't think 178 is a long ski for your size. I think that'd be the min size you'd want. If they're too long either eat cheeseburgers and tub up or bowflex your legs till they're both buff and ripped. That said, $100 ain't too much for a ski, you could always resell em if you don't like the length. Also look around for used bargains. I tried selling some 180cm powder plusses last year for $65 and couldn't move them, so there must be bargains out there! Good luck whichever way.
10-19-2005, 06:48 AM
Steven S. Dallas

I think that what you've been told is what you're going to hear on this board. You'll get by on the 168s, and $100 isn't much cash, but 178s would probably be better for you (assuming you want to ski fast, have fun, etc). If you want someone to tell you they'd be perfect, I suggest you check out www.epicski.com .
10-19-2005, 08:57 AM
englishsmilo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven S. Dallas

I think that what you've been told is what you're going to hear on this board. You'll get by on the 168s, and $100 isn't much cash, but 178s would probably be better for you (assuming you want to ski fast, have fun, etc). If you want someone to tell you they'd be perfect, I suggest you check out www.epicski.com .

lol, thanks for the input everyone. i'm trying to find some 178s. i always thought they would be the right length, but the price was just so good. maybe i'll buy them and sell them for more?!? thanks again