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!

Line's Sick Day 95?

profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
Sup guys, I'm new here. Thinking about grabbing the Sick Day 95 and was looking for some advice. I ski the east coast but also go out west and can't afford a two-ski quiver... I consider myself advanced intermediate and I ski anywhere from some ice to groomers to a little powder. Might try park as well. The problem I've found is that I weigh around 130-135 and the shortest option Line offers is a 172cm. It clocks in a little long but I was hoping I could make it work?? What do you think? Good ski? Too long? Will it handle east coast ice? If it's a no go, any suggestions for other skis would be great. Thanks.
Aug 16 2014 7:28PM
4 7
profile picture
joesdapoes
Posts: 171 - Karma: 1,898
Depends what you want. Dont expect a 95mm waist ski to float in pow, so pow skiing will be really difficult. They are directional as well, so they are basicly useless in the park. I would try the sir francis bacon instead, or the k2 Kung fujas. K2 has some realy good all mountain skis, check them out
Aug 17 2014 9:13AM
0 2
profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
thanks for the input- do you think 172 is too long?

i've heard the sick days do pretty well in powder, despite the fact that they're narrower underfoot. the directional part i noticed right after i posted this haha. i'm willing to compromise, although twin tips would be nice. really i just want a playful, fun ski that i can take anywhere without a ridiculous amount of trouble.

the bacon seems a little wide for me. i'm not used to wider skis and to jump all the way to a 108 would not be easy. i mostly ski the hard pack, so both skis you suggested may not work because they are more big-mountain oriented from what i've heard. the kung fujas also aren't available in a length even close to what suits me. that sucks because they look pretty sweet.
Aug 17 2014 10:47AM
1 0
profile picture
joesdapoes
Posts: 171 - Karma: 1,898
I'm 1.85 metres long, and my skis are 1.84 (kung fujas). I used to have line afterbangs, witch are quite narrow, and i had no trouble switching. Skiing on hardpack was almost the same, so the length and with isnt really a problem. Is there maybe a demo day at your mountain so you can test them?
Aug 17 2014 11:04AM
0 0
profile picture
skiersupreme
Posts: 1549 - Karma: 4,872
if your looking solely for a ski from line that is good for park, all mountain, and medium amounts of pow, then go with the blend. its 100 underfoot, and the tips have early rise to keep you up in the pow.
Aug 17 2014 12:22PM
1 1
profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
that's interesting, how width didn't really affect you too much on groomers. i've heard a lot about how length is important though, but do you think i could handle a ski that's a little too long?
there's no test day that i know of, and i'd rather buy them in the offseason anyway to avoid higher prices. :/

the blend looks sweet. how does it perform on groomers?
Aug 17 2014 1:35PM
0 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 20,804
it would be helpful to know your height op
Aug 17 2014 3:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Scotty_Boy
Posts: 777 - Karma: 1,449
Honestly I don't really feel the difference between narrow and wide skis on piste. What really makes a difference to me is the rocker profile and flex. A wider, stiffer ski with camber underfoot will grip and carve much better than a narrow, soft ski with zero camber. So don't be afraid to go wider OP as long as the ski has camber.
Aug 17 2014 9:07PM
0 0
profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
i'm something like 5'4 or 5'5. still growing but probably not too much.

is 172 too long?
Aug 17 2014 9:41PM
0 0
profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
sorry for the double post but...

i stumbled across this version of the sick day, and it's made shorter than the original. do you think it's any different besides in length? it says the tail is twin tip on the short one but slightly raised on the original. i'm confused??

http://www.backcountry.com/line-sick-day-shorty-ski-kids?CMP_SKU=LIN001D&MER=0406&skid=LIN001D-ONECOL-S162CM&CMP_ID=PLA_GOc001&mv_pc=r101&mr:trackingCode=AFE15A3B-6F20-E411-9C5F-BC305BF82376&mr:referralID=NA&mr:device=c&mr:adType=pla&mr:ad=47794360741&mr:keyword=&mr:match=&mr:filter=76847247061&mkwid=sD8SygeqN_dc|pcrid|47794360741&gclid=CjwKEAjwpcGfBRDni__JqrTIqx4SJAB9BpSOd--FZV8TbnNOk3D26WVjx1r4nlTMa3BdVKW0TA6CzRoC2t7w_wcB#sizing-chart-link
Aug 17 2014 10:54PM
0 0
profile picture
CheddarJack
Posts: 5203 - Karma: 7,380
I've heard good things about the Blends. I'd say 172 wouldn't be too long for you either, especially if you're still growing. Someone your size would probably be best on mid to high 160's so 172 isn't bad. They'd probably just take a little getting used to.
Aug 18 2014 9:25AM
0 0
profile picture
joesdapoes
Posts: 171 - Karma: 1,898
If you want to ski really stable and no quick turns, the lengt shouldnt be a problem
Aug 18 2014 10:05AM
0 0
profile picture
lgward
Posts: 301 - Karma: 404
thanks for the input. i'm pretty sure i'm gonna get the sick day, maybe the short version but i'm not sure yet.
Aug 18 2014 10:38AM
0 0
profile picture
cydwhit
Posts: 5074 - Karma: 43,034
daxtonthanks for the input. i'm pretty sure i'm gonna get the sick day, maybe the short version but i'm not sure yet.


Don't get the short version, it's a kids ski, get on that 172 and learn how to ski it. You will be fine and you will grow into it instead of out of it. Also, if the length really is an issue get on something a little more twin tipped and rockered that is the same length, it will ski shorter
Aug 18 2014 1:02PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)