I'm 6' 135 (yeah light AF I know), but I'm atheltic and lift regularly so I feel like my legs are plenty strong for what I do. I ride east coast almost exclusively these days. I mostly like to hit park, go fast, blast goomers and side hits, and hit the woods if they are open. i'd call myself an expert skiier comfortable on anything.
I Rode 86mm AR7's for many years in 176cm. I recently picked up some Magnus 90's for mostly park days and Jeffrey 96's (both in 181cm) for all mountain days with a few parks laps. I really like the Magnus, even all-mountain it feels great. I've got about 12 days on the pair of them this season combined.
The Jeffreys feel great too, but every time I ride them I wish they were 90mm ish underfoot. Everyone says that 95-100mm ish is the new all-mountain norm these days so I thought those would be good for me, but I can definitely feel that extra 6mm underfoot when I turn or go in the woods. It's just a tiny bit harder to turn and I have to say pickup the inside ski a tiny bit where my other skis it's not noticeable. In the air I can still rotate fine so it's just on-snow agility that I miss. I don't really feel like the extra width underneath gives me anything but I also don't ski much variable terrain in the ice coast, mostly hardpack. I don't really care about the ice part since I'm used to riding on whatever in the ice so I don't notice it even if the edge hold is ass.
Am I just bad at skiing/not strong enough or is it okay that I just prefer 90mm ish skinnier skis? I'm very light so maybe it's just harder for me to ski them? Opinions are appreciated