Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

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!

Does the waist width of the ski make a big difference?

profile picture
t-steeze
Posts: 20 - Karma: 12
Alright guys here my problem im an advanced begginer/ intermediate park skiier that is used to using skis with a 78mm waist.  Now i can get a really good deal on a pair of 170cm SURFACE WATCH LIFE skis ($260) - (without bidings) these skis are brand new and have never been mounted.  Buuut the dimensions are 118/90/112. Will this 90mm waist make a big make in my ability to ski. Also if any one knows anything about these ski let me hear it, good or bad!

And the other skis I could get are NORDICA SUPERCHARGER IGNITION skis (170's) These skis are used and have some surface scratches and some scratches on the bottoms ( that may or may not be significant). Their dimensions are 122/84/118. I could get these skis from Toronto for $250 with MARKER 12 FREE bindings.

Also i am 15,  6'4'' and weigh 190 pounds.


WHICH SKIS SHOULD I GO WITH FOR MY NEEDS?


Oct 30 2009 5:40PM
2 1
profile picture
blackoutbill
Posts: 2918 - Karma: 282
Are you just skiing park? Or will you use this ski for other things?
Oct 30 2009 5:47PM
1 0
profile picture
BWalmer
Posts: 9141 - Karma: 12,885
what are you gonna be skiing them on?

Waist changes the way you ski slightly, but its not hard to get used to at all. I'd go with the Watch Lifes, but that's just my personal opinion.
Oct 30 2009 5:48PM
0 0
profile picture
churchill
Posts: 131 - Karma: 17

I think you may want to look into longer skis, Your a big guy and at 15 you may keep growing. 170 will feel short underneath you. Of course its personal preference but think about it.

Oct 30 2009 5:55PM
0 0
profile picture
baaangthat
Posts: 2245 - Karma: 2,587
srsly, a 170 is waaaay too small for you.  you should be at the 180-190 range and around 90-95 underfoot.  check out a 189 Kung Fujas or a 185 ARV
Oct 30 2009 6:00PM
0 0
profile picture
t-steeze
Posts: 20 - Karma: 12
I will be using them for skking about 60% park and 40% all mountain

170 will pretty much be my max length ATM just my prefrence tho!

Thaks for the imput guys
Oct 30 2009 6:09PM
0 0
profile picture
baaangthat
Posts: 2245 - Karma: 2,587
Click for larger image
Oct 30 2009 6:13PM
2 0
profile picture
mr_grom
Posts: 708 - Karma: 51

This

170 will probably be to like your chin, but if you really aren't willing to go bigger, then I would definitely, no questions asked go with the watch lifes.

I'm 5'5'' and am probably going with a 164, but I was thinking about going with 169. Seriously, if you can, go bigger, not only because you are tall, but you weigh a lot (hopefully you don't take offense to that), too.

Oct 30 2009 7:11PM
0 0
profile picture
B4NE1
Posts: 876 - Karma: 16
I don't understand what you mean by "Advanced Beginner/Intermiediate"   PICK ONE!!!!
Oct 30 2009 7:58PM
0 0
profile picture
mr_grom
Posts: 708 - Karma: 51
I think he means he is an advanced downhill skier, but a beginner/intermediate park skiier.
Oct 30 2009 8:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Samckoy
Posts: 381 - Karma: 66
Having a smaller ski for being big and tall does affect your skiing. Usually for the worst. You want skis that won't flex too much with your weight, even buttery skis will disperse your weight away from under your feet and give you an edge grip. To answer your question. A wider waist doesn't change much, on those powder days, you'll love it, if your a freestyle skier who does mogul competitions, then its a bit of a different story. I don't know enough on those skis to recommend either.

I'm 6'4'' and 180 pounds so if you don't believe what i was saying about shorter skis, you should. I outgrew mine really fast, and after adding an extra 5-10 centimeters I'm never going back to shorter skis.
Oct 30 2009 8:29PM
0 0
profile picture
ThePROfessor
Posts: 101 - Karma: 13
What skis do you have now?

where do you like/ski?

adding a fat ski to your arsenal if you only have a narrow ski now would instantly tell me to get the fatter ski.
Oct 30 2009 8:30PM
0 0
profile picture
churchill
Posts: 131 - Karma: 17

hmmm...

or that he is in between beginner and intermediate. So an advanced beginner.

Oct 30 2009 8:35PM
0 0
profile picture
Fish_Sandwich.
Posts: 9108 - Karma: 16
I went from 165 waist race skis
to 84 mm waist K2 Fujatives
to 93 mm waist Line Anthems
to 115 mm waist Line Bacons
to 140 mm waist reverse sidecut reverse camber Moment Donner Party's (for pow ONLY)

Honestly, my favorite ski is the Bacon, I ride it everywhere, in the park it's even really fun, for the rare times I'm there.  I'm not recommending you go straight for Bacons, that would be too much but I'm showing you the progression I, and a lot of people take.  If somebody told me I'd buy a ski with a waist over 100 when I had my race skis I would have told them they were absolutely CRAZY.  Now I love a fatter ski.  I ride my 93 mm wast Anthems all over if there's no fresh snow and they feel like they are soooo skinny.  My Bacons Feel great.  I don't ski much park though.

You'll be fine with anything 95 or less, maybe more comfortable with something high 80's.  I'd see if you can demo some fatter skis and just see how you like the feel of them.  If you want to just buy the Surfaces, you'll probably be happy with them, you won't notice the waist being bigger than you're used to.
Oct 30 2009 9:09PM
0 0
profile picture
CTD
Posts: 6301 - Karma: 349
youll be fine, 90s not even that wide. wider skis are more stable, and just a TAD slower edge to edge, which, unless your skiing slalom or moguls isnt much of an issue. plus the width increases the torsional stiffness and edgegrip.

I too would recommend a longer ski tho. if you were just carvin groomers, a 170 would be fine, but on a centered park ski, thats gonna be WAY short, and its gonna hurt you on jumps stability wise. you should at least be on a 180 if not bigger. youll have no problem flexing just about any park ski at your height and weight, and a 170 is just gonna be a noodle. big skis seem intimidating until you ride them and realize they are MUCH better than smaller ones. faster, more stable, more pop, more grip, more everything.
Oct 31 2009 2:31AM
0 0
profile picture
DHogg
Posts: 3462 - Karma: 237

Holy Shit!  6'4" 190 @ 15 years old???

90 Is the new 80. You'll be fine.Clip in and ride.

Oct 31 2009 3:05AM
0 0
profile picture
dbstar
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 20
way to short, go longer and learn how to ski
Oct 31 2009 9:20AM
0 0
profile picture
Squid.
Posts: 1904 - Karma: 23
Seriously dude I'm 5'9" and I ski 177s... my friend is 5'5" and skis 170s. 170s are WAY to short for you. Trust us on this one
Oct 31 2009 10:30AM
0 0
profile picture
DrZoidberg
Posts: 5675 - Karma: 4,269
You're 15 and 6'4''? What the hell, I'm 17 and 5'4''. Yeah, but if they are mounted closer to center they are gonna feel very short. I'm riding 166cm right now, and mine are mounted -3.5 from true center and I think I could ride 171 or something.
Oct 31 2009 10:46AM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber
Posts: 3382 - Karma: 216
I'm 5'10 and I ride 185s.... Get yourself a longer pair of skis.
Oct 31 2009 11:05AM
0 0
profile picture
Blurst
Posts: 13577 - Karma: 10,169
with your weight the watch llifes will be like noodles under your feet at 170
Oct 31 2009 11:28AM
0 0
profile picture
wintersway
Posts: 5115 - Karma: 128
lqtm
Oct 31 2009 12:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Fish_Sandwich.
Posts: 9108 - Karma: 16
Shit I meant 165 length, 67 waist.

Damn I can't believe I, or anyone else didn't catch that.
Oct 31 2009 3:54PM
0 0
profile picture
chicken
Posts: 6843 - Karma: 2,121
no point in a 90+mm waist park ski, in my opinion.

you will want a longer ski, keep that width down it will give you less swing weight.
Oct 31 2009 4:32PM
0 0
profile picture
49566738265
Posts: 0 - Karma: 7,704
Anything under 100 feels like a park ski in my opinion.  Your talking about a half a centimeter of difference dude, do you realize how small that is?
Oct 31 2009 8:38PM
0 0
profile picture
KennyC
Posts: 1922 - Karma: 46
haha nice dood.
Oct 31 2009 9:00PM
0 0
profile picture
t-steeze
Posts: 20 - Karma: 12
alright sorry about the confusion with advaced begginer/intermidate skiier.
I'll put it like this to clear things up, Im in the middle of a begginer and an iternediate skiier, hope that helps ahah
Nov 19 2009 10:19PM
0 0
profile picture
tag_team
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10
I'm 6'4 220 and i ski on nothing less than a 180cm.  Id consiter myself an advanced intermediate. (i honestly dont know what that means, hows this i can make it down double blacks but they are scary haha) anyways i learned on a 68mm waist. it wasn't until i was out in CO when i borrowed a friends ski to try. It was wider, not sure maybe around 88. but wow i had so much more confidence and felt a lot more stable. a 90mm waist will be no problem. and get the longer ski. 170 is a joke, my gf whos 5'8 skis a 172.
Nov 20 2009 8:57PM
0 0
profile picture
PhuzzyWuzzy
Posts: 358 - Karma: 82
Okay, how long have you been skiing?  I can't be very long if your only a beginner/intermediate skier.  How do you know that you like ridiculously short skis when you obviously lack experience.  I'd listen to the people who recommended longer skis because some of them have been skiing longer than you have been alive.  They know what they are talking about.  Have you ever even tried a ski that was and appropriate size for you?  Don't bother asking people for advice if you are not even going to consider the advice that they give.  Almost everyone has said those are too short, so i strongly recommend you listen to them and at least try a longer ski. 

To answer your question, 90mm is not all that wide and you should be used to that size within a few runs.  It's really not all that much wider than what you are used to anyways (about 1.5cm wider I believe). 
Nov 20 2009 9:17PM
0 0
profile picture
DirtyMick
Posts: 1496 - Karma: 21
Dude, you're my size. You shouldn't be on anything SHORTER than a 185 IMO.

I'm on 186 JJs and they feel tiny to me. Remember, if you get a ski with rocker they will ski MUCH shorter than the actual length.
Nov 20 2009 9:44PM
0 0
profile picture
t-steeze
Posts: 20 - Karma: 12
I've only skiied for one season, but I got used to it fast, and i'm pretty good now. I rented my whole first season and the skis were 160 if not shorter, I liked how the skis were able not pop back and forth between carves, and they felt fine in the park. I know what your saying about never having tryed longer skis so how would I know, but I have tryed 175's (even though they were shitty) they were not capable of the quick poppy turns I like. I can get a really good deal on some Surface Watch Life skis (170) and if worst comes to worst and they end up being to short my friend would purchase them off me. Although I am still considering a longer ski but as of now this dealis much to good to passup!

Thanks for your input and everyone, and keep ot coming!

Also has anyone ever riden the WATCH LIFES (2008 Model) ? If so tell me how you feel/felt about them.

Jordan
Nov 20 2009 10:15PM
0 0
profile picture
uni-corn
Posts: 13846 - Karma: 651
Jordan,

Sack the fuck up and get longer skis.

-V
Nov 20 2009 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Slinger1x1
Posts: 8853 - Karma: 66
no one really answered his question

a larger waist will be harder to put on edge. there is more ski to the outside of your feet, meaning more energy needed to put it on edge. race skis are super skinny, like skinnier than your boot by a lot, which means that less energy is needed to put the skis on edge making it easier to turn.

some skis now, such as volkls, have a wide ride system where the binding is wider so it transfers the energy directly to the edge like a skinny ski would, but it still had a bigger waist.
Nov 20 2009 10:49PM
0 0
profile picture
t-steeze
Posts: 20 - Karma: 12
Alright V if you've got new skis that are 180 that you want to sell  me let me buy them.
half the reason im going with 170's is becuase i can purchse 2 pairs for under $300, that will work fine for me.

Another point I guess I didnt make clear enough is that I live in southern ONTARIO, therefore the mountain i ussually ski on isn't even close to half the mountain all you guys ski on. What is considered a black diamond run at this hill isn't even as big as a green circle at your hill. I dont need a ski capable of hitting your moster hill, I only need one that I can bum around in the park or my small hill on 2 months of the year.
Nov 21 2009 12:49AM
0 0
profile picture
uni-corn
Posts: 13846 - Karma: 651
I am 5'9" 145lbs and skiing 179 Hellbents in Ohio.

That is a 122 waist ski. In Ohio.

Sack up dude.
Nov 21 2009 2:13AM
0 0
profile picture
Newschool_Pope
Posts: 2473 - Karma: 267
maybe u wanna go away from that binding, marker 12 free has a too low din range and isnt really for a guy as tall and a s heavy as you.

on another note, im 6" and ride 183 park skis and 189 (actually 194) hell bents for pow.
you feel way better skiing longer sticks. get the skis in 180 minimum with a better binding.
Nov 21 2009 7:39AM
0 0
profile picture
Jacobsen
Posts: 112 - Karma: 18
Wow, I'm 6'1", and I would never consider a ski shorter than 180.


Nov 21 2009 8:11AM
0 0
profile picture
remove
Posts: 2566 - Karma: 1,026

A. Get the watch lifes

B. Get some bigger fucking skis i'm an inch taller than you and 20lbs heavier. 180's at least

Nov 21 2009 10:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Lemuel
Posts: 14499 - Karma: 10,719
It sounds like you like to make shorter radius turns than long radius turns.  Therefor, you need a ski with more sidecut, not necessarily a wider base under foot.  The Nordica's have a shorter turn radius.  It also depends on which year you are looking at, I know the ignitions were one of the softest skis for the 08 model and last year they were slightly stiffer and this year, whatever they call it, is rather stiff.  You definitely need longer than 170, I am 5'11" and I would never go under 180 for park skis.  I do have Lizzies for the trees which are 172 but I got them because they were short.  If you are going to stick with those two choices, go with the Nordicas.
Nov 21 2009 11:25AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)