Women having issues skinning/touring with fat skis?

For one, 102 is about the perfect size for consistent touring use. Went touring with my girlfriend on her 102 Icelandics earlier today.

For two, the difference in ski weight is most likely not going cause hip flexor tears, but I guess that everyone's at a different spot in their fitness.

For three, in my opinion, boots and bindings are the most important weight concerns when touring. Each time you take a step, they're at the end (and thus the least amount of leverage, most amount of force) of your legs. If you really want to get into touring, I'd recommend a tech binding (Dynafit or similar) with a boot that has at least 30 degrees of walk mode and a rubber sole.

sounds like your friend needs to grow some muscle (and maybe work on technique) to help prevent her hip problems. My lady is 5'2", ~120#, rocks DPS YVETTE 112RP with dynafits, kinda shitty BD Shiva boots and crushes pretty hard. She has better days than others but goes up and down 4k ft in a day when she wants. A snowboarder at resorts, Kelly believes that fat, rocker and taper tipped skis are the only reason she hasn't purchased a splitboard. Her only problem is finding a ski boot that is small and stiff enough for her liking (also a problem boarding). Seems there is a really poor selection for size 22.5 feet.

snomasterDPS YVETTE 112RP with dynafits

168cm

K2 skis are notoriously heavy, dps skis are incredibly light, I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.

I don't really consider a 102 ski to be a powder ski, more of an all mountain ski, but again K2 skis are heavy so they aren't the best choice for touring long distances.

You could definitely get the remedy to work depending on your fitness level. Look into some quality lightweight touring bindings like dynafit as someone previously mentioned, and a good lightweight touring boot. Boots and bindings are a huge portion of your weight load, my boots for example weigh around 9 pounds alone, you wouldn't want to tour in them.

i think she tore her hip flexors due to the wide stance the skis but her in, not the weight.

b-kuli think she tore her hip flexors due to the wide stance the skis but her in, not the weight.

The skis are 102 width, not really wide at all. And I highly doubt a couple mm is going to make a difference.

Have faith, I tour with a number of girls who regularly put in 12 hr, 7k vert days. Some tour on super light dynafit-DPS setups, some do it on EHPs w/ Dukes. Its a matter of picking how much downhill matters to you and then building up the baseline fitness to do longer tours. But, believe in yourself, learn to enjoy the burn, and you're gonna love it!

Size is not really an issue in my opinion.

Weight and the type of boot make the difference. When I hike over 4 hours in my Super7s, I get hip issues and pains in my back that really kill the hike. With lighter skis and dynafit system, I found the quality of the ski takes a hit. They become unstable and more difficult to maneuver in harder terrain. But, the hike is easier, faster and much better. Its really comes down on what you want to focus on; up or down and your physical strength and endurance.

Profahoben_212The skis are 102 width, not really wide at all. And I highly doubt a couple mm is going to make a difference.

However, one should check to make sure their 150mm skis aren't making them do this:

Too wide, and it may be uncomfortable over several hundred meters.