Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Ok 6 feet tall are 172s to short
Posts: 598
-
Karma: 2,042
I'm six feet tall and weight 170, are 172 to small for me you think?
Posts: 1072
-
Karma: 418
Posts: 1128
-
Karma: 661
im 6'1" and i have 179 andthey are way to small
Posts: 9304
-
Karma: 3,670
im 5 6 and ride 177 and 178s
Posts: 4342
-
Karma: 811
if its a lizzie which is what it sounds like and your doin east coast shit i would say its fine. cause the surface area of that ski alone is prob equal to liek 185cm ski thats 80 underfoot.
Posts: 14332
-
Karma: 1,268
Posts: 598
-
Karma: 2,042
yeh the others ep pros are way to big for eastcoast
Posts: 10014
-
Karma: 8,386
Surface area isn't what matters... when you tower 6 feet over your skis, your body acts as a lever an will overpower your skis if they are short.
I would never buy anything shorter than 180 if you are 6 foot.
Posts: 3414
-
Karma: 20
yeah, way too short, unless you want to take it up the ass as a snowlerblader.
Posts: 12811
-
Karma: 1,971
if you are a beginning to intermediate skier they'll be fine. or if you enjoy spinning 900s off 10ft jumps they'll be fine. if not, get something bigger.
Posts: 5536
-
Karma: -1
If it's the Elizabeth, then it's ok, any other ski and no.
Posts: 4359
-
Karma: 1,382
still think its too short for 6 feet
Posts: 111
-
Karma: 15
yea....im 5'8 and ride a 176
Posts: 1746
-
Karma: 15
If it's the Eliz then just get the Bacons that is 10 cm longer and you'll be pimpin..
Posts: 18426
-
Karma: 4,888
depends how stiff the ski is
Posts: 814
-
Karma: 184
i am 5'10 and i ride 172 and they are great
Posts: 1582
-
Karma: 23
im 6'2" and im getting either a 182 or 181 next year
Posts: 7485
-
Karma: 396
i'm the same size, I wanna ride lizzies SOOO bad to see if they are too short or not, but probably pushin it
Posts: 4631
-
Karma: 726
Posts: 759
-
Karma: 36
I'm about 5' 9" and ride 181s and they ride so much smoother then shorter skis, If I were you I wouldn't even consider going shorter then 180.
Posts: 4871
-
Karma: 2,063
seriously a few cm's wont make a differnce..i am six foot and i ride 176's..4cm really dont make a difference
Posts: 10014
-
Karma: 8,386
Go back and read my post. I explain to you WHY it's too short, I don't just tell you it's too short or "OK if it's lizzies" based on personal preference.
172ss really really are too short if you are an aggresive skier, unless they are slalom skis.
Posts: 783
-
Karma: 15
I'm 6' tall and my jib skis are 168's, they work great. But for all mountain i ride 182's
Posts: 8
-
Karma: 13
im like 5 10 and i ride a 176 in the park and it feels short, if i was getting a new park ski it would be around a 180. however i ride a 169 but its a fat ski and im telemarking through northeastern woods on those
Posts: 8
-
Karma: 13
depends on where and how your skiing^
Posts: 1498
-
Karma: 254
im like 5-10 and my park skis are 176 and my pow skis (that are in the mail) are 188. hopefully they wont be too long for me, i think ill be able to handle it
Posts: 2804
-
Karma: -5
way too small. im 5'7" and i ski 176's
Posts: 665
-
Karma: 24
Just demo a few pairs and pick which one you like the most
Posts: 956
-
Karma: 171
im 6 1 and find my 181s to be to short. Dont centermount if u do get 172s
Posts: 4005
-
Karma: 38
Same here, but its hard to find a park ski thats bigger.
Posts: 3552
-
Karma: 24
5'11" 171
a wee bit short, but i dont mind
Posts: 1456
-
Karma: 116
do u snowblade??? cause that is an ovious yes there 2 short
Posts: 1216
-
Karma: 11
im 6' 1" and next year im ridin a 181
Posts: 11256
-
Karma: 424
I'm 10 pounds lighter than you and I ride 189 Seth Pistols and 186 LP's (which I think are a bit short). Unless the ski you're looking at is 130 at the waist, has no sidecut, and flexes like a 2X4 172 is going to be short. Or if you're a pansy they could be ok too.
But then again, ski length is all dependant on terrain, skier type, ski type, and personal preference.
Posts: 13839
-
Karma: 7,704
my god there are hundreds of threads about height and ski length. there are 2 or 3 a day
Posts: 1582
-
Karma: 23
no ar6 pure park and go up to like 185
Posts: 1677
-
Karma: 26
Yes way too short. 5'5 ski 171s and 168s
Posts: 2014
-
Karma: 268
Posts: 2929
-
Karma: 12
yes way to short. im 5'5 and i ride 170's and 172's
Posts: 5536
-
Karma: -1
But I think he's considering the Elizabeth, which is designed differently, and meant to be ridden shorter, like a snowboard.
Posts: 12811
-
Karma: 1,971
so many of you kids ride skis to long for you cause you're so damn light. wieght is a bigger factor in ski size than the leverage from height. and for the kid who hadn't skied 188s before and was unsure about the length, i would be worried if you're hesitant about JPs, they are so easy to ski, like my ideal BC ski for trees and jumps.
Posts: 1125
-
Karma: 93
I'm 5'10 and ski 191 ANTs and they feel fine not long at all, in fact the nose feels a bit short even mounted -2. Remember with a real twintip you are losing a ton of effective edge. 172 twintip is like a damn slalom ski, it will suck outside park if you are 6 feet tall. Even in park it will feel short and squirly.
Posts: 9086
-
Karma: 1,349
5"7' and i ride 174's a 172 is wayyy to small for you
Posts: 83
-
Karma: 10
if you center mount your skis, then yes go super long or if you ski big mountain terrain. but if you are setting them up traditionaly or ski in the east, you dont need to go that long. I'm 6ft and my skis are in the 170-180 range. It doesn't make any sense to use skis that are too long if you dont really need to.
Posts: 8258
-
Karma: 214
Posts: 4578
-
Karma: 2,512
I agree,
elizabeths are not like other skis. If your looking to butter around and doing slower carved spins off medium sized jumps, they will be sick. If your skiing forward and mostly all mountain, you would probably want a more chronic like ski(stiffer, 85 waist)
I would go demo some if you can and see for yourself.
Posts: 598
-
Karma: 2,042
I see a lot of good feed back here, but here’s the thing the skis I'm looking at are the Elizabeth. I ski mostly trees here in Vt, and some park but I have other skis for that. The trees here are kind of tight and I for one don’t think a 186 or any thing over 182 really would be good for skiing the trees here. From word of mouth I have heard that the Elizabeths are a good ski for tight trees, and they are super soft, which is a combo I would like to have for my skis, is there any other skis like them or should I just go with the Elizabeth?
Posts: 1697
-
Karma: 62
6'2" on 180's and i wish they were longer...
Posts: 1123
-
Karma: 10
just go with it, a 172 should come to about your eyes height. being a lizzie, that's perfect for you. don't listen to all the little kids that are soooooo proud of their skis that are too big for them.
Posts: 4342
-
Karma: 811
whoever said height is a huge factor is retarded. weight is what matters most. A taller person has more leverage? ok but if they are 6 ft tall and only weigh 150 they arent gonna flex a ski diff then a kid who is 5 8' 150. Many of you don't know what the hell your talkin about.....he wants to ski trees on the east coast.....in the trees you want a light and maunverable ski and the lizzie is perfect. So 172 is too short? then what? please dont tell me that a 186 prophet would be better cause it def would not be....people use skis for different shit and on the east coast pow is in the trees and this ski will float well in the trees and its light so what the hell is wrong with him getting it? also what if he prefers a shorter ski like so many of you who prefer a longer ski? I agree with whoever said a lot of kids on here ride skis that are too long for them-because it is so true mainly because they center mount which makes the ski ski shorter. but any ski over 182 on the east coast is retarded unless your skiing powder constantly or are a larger person. Go with lizzies man cuz they will float way better then a reg 182 cm mid waisted ski any day of the week.
All times are Eastern (-5)
