Instructor Said My Skis Were Too Wide

[Unpiste]

Ah, yes. A lot of the reason width matters is because it is a proxy for the designer's intended use, not because there is anything magical about a few millimeters.

Indeed. There are 100+ skis which will absolutely rip if you have the skills to set an edge. There are probably a lot more that won't do great in a high-G carve, just because they're designed to do other things which dictate a different sort of ski.

Anything with a sidecut will carve, it's really just a matter of how easy it is to set it on edge, how stable the ski is in a carve (big flappy tips and tails are fun in powder; not so much on hardpack), and whether it will do well at the speeds you're interested in.

 

[oldschoolskier]

Pure Race SL can be a blessing is disguise (provided they are on the softer side).

Difference between race SL’s is how predictable and consistent they are. As an example my Daughter at about 12 twelve tried my SL and didn’t want to give them back. It’s not that she is a World Cup racer, just the opposite a 12 year old low level intermediate learning to ski. (For the record she has large feet hence the boot size and BSL allowed for this, don’t go into DIN settings which was way to high)

Her instant love of the skis stemmed from the fact that the skis basically allowed her to feel and appear to ski like a significantly better skier simple by the extremely predictable responsiveness of the ski.

Now if someone says race GS while similar in nature, they are out to kill you unless you are truely ready to control them.

I have both, ski both and love both, SL’s absolutely recommend, GS only if you’re truely ready and be prepared for a painful learning curve until you are the boss.

Non race SL’s look similar however in most cases are more difficult to ski as they are not internally constructed to the same precision.

 

[Prosper]

I ski on Liberty V76 165cm as my everyday ski in CO and love it. Sierra Trading Post has the 165cm for $199 and the 172cm for $299 both of which are great deals. The V76 has been highly rated by many here on Pugski and on other ski review websites. You could go with either size. I’m 5’6” weigh 150lbs and love making short, fast, slalom turns which the 165cm can do in spades. Also, I haven’t had any problems with the 165cm at high speed making bigger turns. It’s a really fun ski. IMHO this would be a perfect ski for the Midwest.

 

[François Pugh]

OP Here. Thanks for the responses. The skis I have are Dynastar Legend 88s. They are 165 long. I’m 5’8” and weigh 140lbs.

Based on initial responses, it sounds like improving my technique on something in the 70-75mm range would be easier.

Any recommendation on make/ model or general guidance on flex?

165 cm or a bit (5 to 10 cm) shorter if you are sticking to small hills.
Stockli SC
Head Rebel i. SL
Fischer WC SC
Kastle RX12 SL
Volkl Racetiger SL

 

[François Pugh]

165 cm or a bit (5 to 10 cm) shorter if you are sticking to small hills.
Stockli SC
Head Rebel i. SL
Fischer WC SC
Kastle RX12 SL
Volkl Racetiger SL

At 140 lbs, FIS SL would be fine if you already new how, but a little softer ski makes them easier to bend and thus easier to learn on.

 

[Wendy]

OP Here. Thanks for the responses. The skis I have are Dynastar Legend 88s. They are 165 long. I’m 5’8” and weigh 140lbs.

Based on initial responses, it sounds like improving my technique on something in the 70-75mm range would be easier.

Any recommendation on make/ model or general guidance on flex?

You can stick with Dynastar, and get the Speedzone 10 or 12. The 10 will be softer.
The tune on the ski matters too....if you’re on a race ski with an aggressive (say 0.5/3) tune, carving might be harder, because you’ve got to really tip it on edge and it will feel grabbier. Plus the plate might make it really stiff underfoot. An instructor is going to have you doing some lower speed drills...though they can do that on a race ski, it may be harder for you on something that stiff.
I‘d stick with a width of < or = 72mm.
I do ski clinics and teach beginners on a 68mm waisted ski here in PA. Skied it yesterday in 4” of new snow and crud.

 

[dbostedo]

165 cm or a bit (5 to 10 cm) shorter if you are sticking to small hills.
Stockli SC
Head Rebel i. SL
Fischer WC SC
Kastle RX12 SL
Volkl Racetiger SL

At 140 lbs, FIS SL would be fine if you already new how, but a little softer ski makes them easier to bend and thus easier to learn on.

I feel like all of those may be stiffer than optimal for learning. I know that range of ski was more difficult for me when I was just learning to carve. And I have the Stockli SC now, and would say that it definitely would have been too stiff a couple of years earlier.

I like the Speedzone 10 suggestion. I like the 12's now, but I'm thinking the 10 would be better for learning.

 

[Uncle-A]

Don't disagree with the suggestion for the Head Rally, but you are light at 140 lbs. Consider the Head V8 instead.

The Head V8 is probably a good ski also, although I don't know if we have many PUGSKI members that own it to provide enough positive feedback to recommend the ski. Do we always have to pick the latest model just because it is new?

 

[PinnacleJim]

The Head V8 is probably a good ski also, although I don't know if we have many PUGSKI members that own it to provide enough positive feedback to recommend the ski. Do we always have to pick the latest model just because it is new?

I own it. Had demoed the Rallys a couple of times and really liked them. Last fall I demoed the V8 and was shocked at how good it was. I went back to the Head tent and got a pair of Rallys to see if I was crazy. Nope, the V8 was that good. Now have about 20 days on them in a variety of conditions. A great ski for lighter skiers looking for something a bit more versatile and a bit less demanding.

 

[martyg]

OP Here. Thanks for the responses. The skis I have are Dynastar Legend 88s. They are 165 long. I’m 5’8” and weigh 140lbs.

Based on initial responses, it sounds like improving my technique on something in the 70-75mm range would be easier.

Any recommendation on make/ model or general guidance on flex?

Fife - 88 underfoot isn't a huge handicap, but your instructor is correct. Width is not so much about your height, but you tib / fib length. Look up work by Dr. John Seifert. He's at Montana State University, but on sabbatical now in Austria. He has a great prezo on YouTube from PSIA National Academy, if you really want to geek out.

I have a number of private students in your same boat. A screaming deal right now is the Dynastar Speed Zone 10. I taught on it for a season or two. Great ski. Very comfortable all day, five days a week. I can model technique at 3mph in the beginner area, or at 30mph on advanced terrain. Last I checked they were $350 / w binding on close-out. There is also the Speed Zone 12 and 14. That might be too much ski for you. I enjoy them, but not to work on.

If you want o go all out, if this is your passion, if this is the craft that you want to hone, Stockli Laser AX.

Enjoy.

 

[martyg]

You can stick with Dynastar, and get the Speedzone 10 or 12. The 10 will be softer.
The tune on the ski matters too....if you’re on a race ski with an aggressive (say 0.5/3) tune, carving might be harder, because you’ve got to really tip it on edge and it will feel grabbier. Plus the plate might make it really stiff underfoot. An instructor is going to have you doing some lower speed drills...though they can do that on a race ski, it may be harder for you on something that stiff.
I‘d stick with a width of < or = 72mm.
I do ski clinics and teach beginners on a 68mm waisted ski here in PA. Skied it yesterday in 4” of new snow and crud.

This. FYI I have seen a number of skis come out of the Rossi factory that are railed. Best to get any new pair tuned locally, on the newst, best maintained stone grinder that you can find.

 

[Coach13]

From my personal experience I’d suggest something in the upper 70s to low 80s in width. Thinner skis are easier to learn to to get onto edge but wider skis are easier to balance over imo. Most have my learning and lessons were on Dynastar Legend 8000 with a 78mm waist. I think it was the best of both worlds, not to mention it was a forgiving ski with a huge sweet spot which is also important for a learning skier.

 

[Tricia]

I’m middle aged and just getting back into skiing this year after 2 decades off. I live in the Midwest and plan to split my ski time between Minnesota and Colorado. I bought my first pair of skis hoping for something that would ski all conditions well.

Yesterday I took my first private lessons of my life. I am trying to learn to carve instead of just skidding through turns. During the lesson the instructor said my skis were a bit wide for Minnesota groomed snow conditions. He said it would be easier to learn to tip my skis and carve with narrower skis.

For those with experience with groomed Midwest snow, what are your thoughts? How wide should skis be for someone learning to carve? For reference I’m 5’8” and weigh 140lbs.

I was going to ask what skis you have, but I see you posted later in the thread.

I'd say wider than 90mm is pretty much too wide. If we have to pick a number. Now cue up all the posts of people carving on wider skis.

This for sure, once you get a good handle on carving.

OP Here. Thanks for the responses. The skis I have are Dynastar Legend 88s.

That ski actually has a pretty nice TR at 15.
The irony is that the Legend 96 in a 172 length has a TR of 14.5

So, your skis are not necessarily too wide for, but something narrower may be good for you to do drills and get a good handle on carving.

 

[Uncle-A]

I own it. Had demoed the Rallys a couple of times and really liked them. Last fall I demoed the V8 and was shocked at how good it was. I went back to the Head tent and got a pair of Rallys to see if I was crazy. Nope, the V8 was that good. Now have about 20 days on them in a variety of conditions. A great ski for lighter skiers looking for something a bit more versatile and a bit less demanding.

OK that's one. I am not the light weight I used to be maybe I can demo the V10.

 

[JimL]

I concur with the others. I learned to ski in Minnesota, and I am approximately your height and weight. Back then all skis were around 65-70mm. You don't need to be that narrow, but especially since Midwest powder, i.e. ice, is pretty prevalent, a narrower ski really helps. The research by John Seifert mentioned above (and also the research by Zorko et. al) showed that even with expert skiers (e.g. ex-National Team members, and in Seifert's case, Olympic Gold medalist Debbie Armstrong), on hard snow, turn technique on narrow (66mm) skis differs from technique on 88, 95 and 110mm skis - lower edge angle and more skidding, presumably due to increased stress on the knees. Once you've learned proper techique, your body can adjust to wider skis and softer snow. I would think a ski of 80mm or less would be better for learning to carve.

 

[Jilly]

I belong to the narrow waist ski club. (My skis, not me sad to say) My daily driver for western Quebec and Ontario is 69mm underfoot. I can crave arcs with these. I'm shorter, heavier and female, but I'm skiing the Nordica Doberman SLC this year. Previously it was the Rossi Hero Elite ST carbon. They have discontinued that ski and brought out the MT in Carbon at 74mm. I'm selling those skis, but they would be too short for you at 159.

All these skis are tuned down race skis. I demo'd the Dynastar Speed zone and they were on the list before the Nordica's came into my life. It was all about the deal, not so much the ski.

 

[Uncle-A]

I belong to the narrow waist ski club. (My skis, not me sad to say) My daily driver for western Quebec and Ontario is 69mm underfoot. I can crave arcs with these. I'm shorter, heavier and female, but I'm skiing the Nordica Doberman SLC this year. Previously it was the Rossi Hero Elite ST carbon. They have discontinued that ski and brought out the MT in Carbon at 74mm. I'm selling those skis, but they would be too short for you at 159.

All these skis are tuned down race skis. I demo'd the Dynastar Speed zone and they were on the list before the Nordica's came into my life. It was all about the deal, not so much the ski.

That is so true, sometimes it is all about the deal. As long as you are in the same ball park when it comes to the ski, close does apply.

 

[cantunamunch]

I picked up a last year model of Atomic X7 few weeks ago. Soft(er) carver, great price for new skis with bindings. Easy to find via google. I’m 5’11”, 160#. Love the way X7 carve...

The X7 or even the X7 wide would be an *awesome* learner ski for OP. I find them more supple and rounder flexing than the Rallys above.
The Rallys have an advantage in frozen-over reef and mank: they get tossed around a lot less. To get that kind of control OP would have to step up to the X9 / X9W - and that's a bit much.

 

[PinnacleJim]

OK that's one. I am not the light weight I used to be maybe I can demo the V10.

No reason the V8 or V10 wouldn't work for other than lighter skiers. It's just lighter and a bit less stiff than the Supershapes. Haven't demoed the V10, but I was looking for narrow versatile carver for groomer days at Killington. The V10 was too close to my other ski (Fischer Motive 95) in width, so it wasn't on my short list. If you read the Pugski reviews of the two skis, both get good reviews with a couple liking the V10 better. I'm guessing the V10 would make a great one ski quiver for an eastern skier.

 

[Tricia]

I was just thinking... When I lived in Michigan, my powder skis were 88mm under foot...
They were not the shape and TR of the Legend 88's but... just a sidetone about where skis have come and how this discussion is all relative.