It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
I ride 171 blends for park and then rip all mountain with 176 Kartels. I want a pair of candide 3.0s to start getting into backcountry type places like tucks but also have a ski that is good for all different types of powder but still can do fine on hard pack and groomers if need be. I was wondering if 182 is to big. I know people that are 5"9 and ride 182 park and Cody Townsend in his recent video who his 6"2 rides a 192 powder ski as a professional. I seem to like my skis a fairly average length and im 5"8.
I’m 5’4” and ski 180+ all the time. My smallest skis right now are 174 directional wren 112s. Definitely go longer. Faction skis also aren’t measured true to length or post press so they tend to be pretty short. I have a pair of 176 3.0s and they are short short short and very easy for me
**This post was edited on May 19th 2019 at 10:34:20pm
Yeah I’m on the East Coast too, the 3.0 is a great option. I’m waiting until next season when they bump it up to 112 underfoot, I’m gonna throw some Shifts on them and get into BC skiing more. I would wait until next year, the new 3.0 is supposed to be more like a slimmed-down 5.0 which is an insane ski for just about any condition
animatorYeah I’m on the East Coast too, the 3.0 is a great option. I’m waiting until next season when they bump it up to 112 underfoot, I’m gonna throw some Shifts on them and get into BC skiing more. I would wait until next year, the new 3.0 is supposed to be more like a slimmed-down 5.0 which is an insane ski for just about any condition
Not looking to go that fat and I think next years lineup is the ugliest yet but I see where your coming from
animatorYeah I’m on the East Coast too, the 3.0 is a great option. I’m waiting until next season when they bump it up to 112 underfoot, I’m gonna throw some Shifts on them and get into BC skiing more. I would wait until next year, the new 3.0 is supposed to be more like a slimmed-down 5.0 which is an insane ski for just about any condition
I got the chance to try the new ones :) still with proto topsheets, and I can say they're amazing. I am buying a pair. Any questions, ask me
LukeTheWaffleI got the chance to try the new ones :) still with proto topsheets, and I can say they're amazing. I am buying a pair. Any questions, ask me
You tested the new 112 3.0s already???????? I’m jealous I can’t wait to buy a pair. How do they ski?
you can go either way but since you said you seem to like your skis kinda average length and you're on the east i'd say 176. that's 4cm taller than you and will handle everything you need on the east. you could definitely do 182 but you really don't have many times on the east where the benefits of that extra length will be serving you
animatorYou tested the new 112 3.0s already???????? I’m jealous I can’t wait to buy a pair. How do they ski?
Yes I did, I ski in verbier so ya know. They're like the 5.0, just a touch softer, and more nimble. Fairly chargy, and I was confident doing threes on em.
SofaKingSickyou can go either way but since you said you seem to like your skis kinda average length and you're on the east i'd say 176. that's 4cm taller than you and will handle everything you need on the east. you could definitely do 182 but you really don't have many times on the east where the benefits of that extra length will be serving you
Yeah, stability and float, but only at a scale and speeds that you will almost certainly never need on the east. When I’m in the west my biggest skis are significantly bigger and stiffer etc, because there’s just big terrain that makes that helpful there that just doesn’t exist for the most part over here
