g4 size question

[vinnay]

im 5'11 185, and want to make sure 188 would be the better choice over 178. ride pretty hard, like stability which either size will have. not sure if the 188s might be a little long in general, especially for when in moguls and stuff. skied a 185 stormrider xl and they were a bitch in moguls.


thoughts?? thanks.

[milkman]

G4 isn't really a bump ski, but at your size the 188 is the way to go. Me= 6ft 170 and I love my 188.

[flatlander#2]

me 6' 190, 188 g-41. it's stiff and plenty long, esp in trees. depending on where/what you ski, don't be afraid of the shorter length.

[vinnay]

should have posted that, mostly ski at squaw, but now on the east coast i will have some days out here.
for those of you with the 188, did you ride the 178 and not like it or just assume you wanted the 188 from the begining??

[milkman]

Just assumed 188 from the get go, but I used to free ski on 207 GS boards....Coming from a 207 GS race ski, the 188 G4 was a breeze

[Spats]

I'll be the maverick here and say 178. I rode 188s for two years (over 6', about 170#) and after demoing the 178s realized they were what I should have been on. No less stability or edge hold, and a lot easier to ski.

Of course they'll be marginally less stable in pow, but it's too stiff to be a good pow ski at any length. Crud is where it shines.

[milkman]

Of course they'll be marginally less stable in pow, but it's too stiff to be a good pow ski at any length. Crud is where it shines.

I love mine in pow. I guess it's just what you're used to. The pow at Whistler is usually pretty heavy though, so I prefer a stiff ski for the local conditions...

[Steven S. Dallas]

I'm somewhat smaller, 5"8'/170, and rode 178 G4s for a couple years. I agree with Spats, if you're not planning on using them for deep days. The shorter length will still fkng rail through mank and on corduroy, and will be that much easier to throw around in bumps and trees. Great ski...maybe not in the zipperline so much, but a great ski.

But then again, what do I know? I'm just a caveman.

[Shredhead]

I've skied the 178,188 and 198. I also think you could get away with a 178. They all ski similar, just much bigger turns on the long boards. I skied the 178 at Mary Jane on a powder day and was very impressed by the ski in the bumps.

[yooper]

I have both and I like my 178's better. They are plenty stable at the highest speeds, but they're more maneuverable. For comparison, I'm 5'10" , 185.

[milkman]

You're all pansies...

[yooper]

Yeah,.... on second thought, get a pair of 240 speed skis and NEVER TURN AGAIN!!!!

[irul&ublo]

I've got a pair of 188's and they turn pretty quick. great in crud and damned good in powder too. They rip the packed groom when its hard, but they do not shine in bumps. I ski mostly Alpine and Sugar Bowl, so the terrain and snow we hit is pretty much the same if you ski mostly at Squaw.

[vinnay]

yeah this is pretty much the dilemma. off the bat I feel like i should get 188s but i know id be annoyed if they ended up being too long. i think 178s would be ideal if i didnt really lose and speed/stabiliity but gained the maneuverability.

[Teletori]

For what its worth, I ski the 188 tele and love them.
They turn quick if you push them hard, or have some speed.
Tried them this weekend in tight trees and wet snow... after hitting a tree hard I went home for the BRO's!

So if you ski a lot of tight trees or moguls, you might want to get the 178. And I hear they are stable too. But if not, I would go for the 188...

[Spats]

i think 178s would be ideal if i didnt really lose and speed/stabiliity but gained the maneuverability.

That was my experience.

[bagtagley]

I had the 188s for 2 seasons, and absolutely loved them. However, there were times when I wanted something a bit more manageable. If I wasn't right on top of them and attacking at all times, then they were kicking my ass. Furthermore, they did get to be a bit of a handful in the trees and especially the moguls.

I sold my pair to finance some Pistols and I've regretted it since (though I don't regret the Pistols...quite a conundrum). I've actually been looking around for a pair of 178s to put into the quiver. Though I've never skied the 178, I can't imagine you'd lose much (if any) stability with the shorter length. This ski is super stiff and super stable.

Edit: Not that it matters, but I had the G41.

[laseranimal]

I've never felt that 178 wasn't enough ski at speed, but I'm sure in big wide open terrain the 188 would be sweet

[PulverSchwein]

I'm 6' 185lbs. I first tried a friend's 178's. I loved the ski's flex and feel but knew right away I wanted the 188 length. I spent the next 3 years loving the ride and glad to be on them vs 178 but always feeling like they were too stiff for my likings in the trees and deep pow. Solved the dilemma adding a soft pow ski to the quiver. 178 sounds like it would be most versatile for you if it's your only ride.

[altagirl]

While we're on the topic... I have a pair of 178 G4s with about 15 days use for sale, unmounted - they're the last model year they made them.

PM me if anyone is interested and I'll dig out the pics.

[vinnay]

wont be my only ride, have spats for deep days that will possibly potentially be switched out for a pistol or vicious. also have some gs boards on the way from a friend.
pulver,
specifically, whatd you notice when on the 178s that you found was gone when you went to the 188s?

[InspectorGadget]

I've skied the 178 G4/AX4 for several years now. At 5'10" 165 (+ ), the 188 is more than I want to bite off - I always wanted something in between. I absolutely love these skis because they work so well for digging trenches in the corduroy; they're a freight train in the crud; and, say what you will, but it's a hell of a powder ski too. I've yet to bump into the rev limiter on the ski.

Now, having said that, I'm selling two pair of 178 AX4's. I have a brand new pair and a used pair with about twenty days on them. If I love them so much, then why, you ask, would you want to sell them. Because I'm making way for a new pair of 184 Mantras and a pair of the reincarnated G4/AX4 - the Unlimited AC4 in a 177!

[PulverSchwein]

pulver, specifically, whatd you notice when on the 178s that you found was gone when you went to the 188s?

predictability of the ride was better with the 188 for me. It was awhile ago so memory's a little foggy but it seemed like the 178's wanted to turn more than I wanted them to. With the 188 I felt like I was the one driving the ski more. My previous ski was a 190 so it's natural that dropping 12mm would sketch out my technique some, just felt too short and my fore/aft balance was thrown off some by the shorter platform. Personally I don't think I'd ever buy a ski less than 185. If there's any way to do it try and demo either or both. Good luck

[Steven S. Dallas]

If there's any way to do it try and demo either or both.

Probably tough to do, since they've been out of the line a few years now. How different is the AX4?

[Choucas]

I've owned 2 pr. 190 G40's (1 cap version, 1 vertical sidewall version....still go those), a 178 G4 and a 178AX4. For me at 6', 175# the 178 is the most versatile option. My ex-racer son (5" 10", 150) now uses the 178 G4's as his only ski and skis very fast on them in all conditions. 178's work in all conditions and terrain. that would be my vote.