Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 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!

Icelantic nomad rkr true length?

profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
seems like a short thread but I googled this and even searchbared for this info and came up empty handed. if anyone knows the true length of the 171 that would be great.

mucho gracias



Aug 26 2013 5:49PM
4 0
profile picture
PG_EDA
Posts: 472 - Karma: 786
Icelantic measure their skies before pressing them, so its not true length. I have a pair of danollies 181, and they measure to 178. Considering its the nomad rkr has a pretty progressive rocker profile, it will ride even shorter. More info about you as a skier, riding style, and height, and I may be able to give you a more detailed answer.
Aug 26 2013 6:10PM
1 0
profile picture
DrZoidberg
Posts: 5675 - Karma: 4,268
I've ridden the 171. I'm 5'5" 120lbs, which is like 167cm tall I think. I don't know the actual length, but they felt fine. A little stiff for me, so I didn't think they skied much shorter than 171.
Aug 26 2013 6:22PM
0 0
profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
I'm right around 5.8 and a half about 145 lbs and I am an aggressive allmountain skier with just a bit of park thrown in when it's shitty conditions. so I'm trying to pick a size cause that's a ski I can get a pretty good deal on and it seems to fit the bill from the reviews I have read so far.
Aug 26 2013 6:59PM
0 0
profile picture
TheSkiMonster
Posts: 155 - Karma: 327
Just went out to the warehouse to measure one. It is 168cm tip to tail.
Aug 26 2013 7:14PM
1 0
profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
Wow that's awesome thank you so much.
Aug 26 2013 7:20PM
0 0
profile picture
TheSkiMonster
Posts: 155 - Karma: 327
Because of this thread we're adding a 'true length' bullet to all of our tech specs in the store.
Aug 26 2013 7:22PM
1 0
profile picture
PG_EDA
Posts: 472 - Karma: 786
They might feel a bit short but I would say go 171 unless you are really growing quick, and if you are going to rip really hard. I prefer riding a longer ski rather then shorter but its personal preference and because I hit very large jumps and cliffs. Otherwise Icelandic are the way to go, they are really tough skis and the people behind Icelandic are incredible people.
Aug 27 2013 3:53PM
0 0
profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
Ya I'm pretty well done growing and the cliffs and stuff around my mountain don't go much bigger then 20-25 feet and I used to ride some really short Solly's (like mid 160's)so I'm sure they can't be that short
Aug 27 2013 6:50PM
0 0
profile picture
T.O.
Posts: 740 - Karma: 97
I'm 5'3 and only 110 to 115lbs. I'm considering 161 nomad rkr and worried they may be stiff for me. What do you guys think? I've also considered the 164 blend. Not trying to thread jack. I ski 90% all mountain and when I'm in the park I hit rails. Thanks
Aug 28 2013 12:46AM
0 0
profile picture
PG_EDA
Posts: 472 - Karma: 786
Blends are pretty soft but it sounds like you should go for a bit of extra length as apposed to the 161 nomads. Sure they are a dope ski but since they ski a little shorter the blends I would go for the blends. My buddy has them for all round skiing and he loves them but they are buttery. They handle rails well too. Having said all this I would mount the blends at -2 or -3 *From true center*.
Aug 28 2013 10:09AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)