What is the difference in feeling between 65mm ski and 80mm ski?

[crgildart]

ETA: Speaking of skiing smoothly. I do not believe I had the pleasure to make turns with you.

It may or may not happen. As for longevity and experience, it's a lot like riding a bike. Most who have skied at competitive levels keep their edge as long as the still get out a few times a season. Those that have never had it need to work harder to get it.

I've skied with people you ski with a lot. I trust their expert assessment of my chops. You should too..

 

[crgildart]

It may or may not happen. As for longevity and experience, it's a lot like riding a bike. Most who have skied at competitive levels keep their edge as long as the still get out a few times a season. Those that have never had it need to work harder to get it.

I've skied with people you ski with a lot. I trust their expert assessment of my chops. You should too..

Come here and throw shade and expect to receive it. I don't care of you're the best skier on the mountain..

 

[James]

Should’ve stopped here-

15mm

 

[LiquidFeet]

Matter of fact in not so deep crud and slush the wider ski get deflected much more while 66-68 heavy ski cut through the stuff.

Story:

When I got my first wide skis - 106mm at the waist - I took them out on the first powder day of the season. This was in New England so it was not champaign powder. But it was not warm wet snow, not cement, either. Just fresh snow, 12" that fell overnight and did not get groomed. Perfect for powder skis, right?

The snow got cut up all over the mountain by 10:00. By 11:00 everything was soft bumps, and later well-formed somewhat condensed bumps. I skied these wide skis in the bumps all day long. I could do it but there was no love and no wow factor.

For my last run I put those skis back in the van and took out my narrower daily drivers. They were heavy carvers, length 170 and waist 72. Wow. I wished I had not wasted that day on my wide skis. The 72s cut through those end of day bumps. The difference was phenomenal. They made skiing this snow so easy. "Cut through" is the right descriptor. I was no longer riding on top of a pot-holed lumpy snow surface. The ride on the narrower skis was smooth and flowing.

 

[KingGrump]

I've skied with people you ski with a lot. I trust their expert assessment of my chops. You should too..

 

[cantunamunch]

The increased distance ("vertical movement") each edge has to travel around the longitudinal axis of a wide ski when tipping is WHY the narrower ski feels quicker and more accurate when moving edge to edge. With a narrow ski you are moving less stuff less distance with more leverage, and with more direct pressure on the edge when you get there.

Don't forget that skiers on wider skis angulate less when stacked.

So suitable for those with a less developed love handle elimination skillset.

 

[Tony S]

Don't forget that skiers on wider skis angulate less when stacked.

So suitable for those with a less developed love handle elimination skillset.

Too close to home these days! I wouldn't say, in my case, that it's quite reached the point where you'd say I'm stacked. More like just a little thicker in the torso than would be ideal.

 

[Tony S]

KG and Chuck. Get a room.

 

[cantunamunch]

Too close to home these days!

You can still wriggle into a Nigel Dennis boat with a fistmele to spare either side - that's like 55mm ski waist level stacking.

 

[tromano]

Story:

When I got my first wide skis - 106mm at the waist - I took them out on the first powder day of the season. This was in New England so it was not champaign powder. But it was not warm wet snow, not cement, either. Just fresh snow, 12" that fell overnight and did not get groomed. Perfect for powder skis, right?

The snow got cut up all over the mountain by 10:00. By 11:00 everything was soft bumps, and later well-formed somewhat condensed bumps. I skied these wide skis in the bumps all day long. I could do it but there was no love and no wow factor.

For my last run I put those skis back in the van and took out my narrower daily drivers. They were heavy carvers, length 170 and waist 72. Wow. I wished I had not wasted that day on my wide skis. The 72s cut through those end of day bumps. The difference was phenomenal. They made skiing this snow so easy. "Cut through" is the right descriptor. I was no longer riding on top of a pot-holed lumpy snow surface. The ride on the narrower skis was smooth and flowing.

Sounds like you were in the wrong skis. I often demo powder skis by taking them into soft bumps and wouldn't buy a pow ski that I didn't like there because to me if I don't like them in 3d snow why would I love them in 3d snow, er... pow?

 

[BMC]

Story:

When I got my first wide skis - 106mm at the waist - I took them out on the first powder day of the season. This was in New England so it was not champaign powder. But it was not warm wet snow, not cement, either. Just fresh snow, 12" that fell overnight and did not get groomed. Perfect for powder skis, right?

The snow got cut up all over the mountain by 10:00. By 11:00 everything was soft bumps, and later well-formed somewhat condensed bumps. I skied these wide skis in the bumps all day long. I could do it but there was no love and no wow factor.

For my last run I put those skis back in the van and took out my narrower daily drivers. They were heavy carvers, length 170 and waist 72. Wow. I wished I had not wasted that day on my wide skis. The 72s cut through those end of day bumps. The difference was phenomenal. They made skiing this snow so easy. "Cut through" is the right descriptor. I was no longer riding on top of a pot-holed lumpy snow surface. The ride on the narrower skis was smooth and flowing.

I ski in Niseko pretty much every year for around 3 weeks. I leave powder skis there (110mm underfoot). If it’s say knee high or deeper I’d much prefer to optimise the first hour or two powder than the late afternoon cut up conditions. So I use the wider skis (if less new snow I go narrower). So I guess in your example I’d happily take the later in the day compromise in exchange for being on the better tool for the optimum conditions.

Japan’s a pretty extreme example though!!

 

[Max Capacity]

So it looks like the OP hasn't been around in almost a month...I wonder if you guy's scared him away...

 

[cantunamunch]

So it looks like the OP hasn't been around in almost a month...I wonder if you guy's scared him away...

It's not the wave's job to accomodate all surfers

 

[James]

It's not the wave's job to accomodate all surfers

He just threw the pebble in, eventually building to a fine surf.

 

[Wilhelmson]

I was going argue a counterpoint here, but will rake a different tact. We can’t really argue that modern technology enabled a lot of advances - shaped skis, the internet, cellphones. But then we find ourselves in the monetization phase. Need to support revenue growth with fancier phones and widgets, ai generated ads up the ytw. So until the next breakthrough, just make skis wider and wider. And lol just about everyone here has bought multiple pairs of wide skis while still feeding their aged egos with skinny ski superiority. Some things are priceless I suppose.

 

[François Pugh]

80 mm ski:

65 mm ski:

 

[tromano]

80 mm ski:
View attachment 213340

For some reason I think this one has a little extra juice...

 

[Tony S]

I was going argue a counterpoint here, but will rake a different tact. We can’t really argue that modern technology enabled a lot of advances - shaped skis, the internet, cellphones. But then we find ourselves in the monetization phase. Need to support revenue growth with fancier phones and widgets, ai generated ads up the ytw. So until the next breakthrough, just make skis wider and wider. And lol just about everyone here has bought multiple pairs of wide skis while still feeding their aged egos with skinny ski superiority. Some things are priceless I suppose.

Totally guilty

 

[François Pugh]

For some reason I think this one has a little extra juice...

They used to call me Fearless Frank, not Frank the Tank; I didn't have enough Mass to be Frank the Tank.
BTW my 'vette has no extra juice, just stock from the factory z51 package, but 191 mph is fast enough for me.

 

[Slim]

Is this a joke? It's rather obnoxious to write a directive like this, even with the word "please" in front.

Apparently that‘s how it comes across to you?

To me, it seems perfectly fine, and not obnoxious at all.
When people write stuff on a forum, they often do it a bit short and concise. It is hard to convey attitude and tone in writing. And that’s not even taking into account people translating their message from another language.

Let’s just assume that everyone is intending a friendly tone and roll with that.
(Unless it truly is damaging, like someone using a derogatory tone when criticizing someone).

I also agree with the request in general. For a similar example, let’s take the common ‘what ski should I get’ question.
Many times, people answer this with just the name of a certain ski. This is not very useful. If you are trying to help someone choose a new ski, explaining why you suggested a certain model is quite useful.
So, I think a reminder like this, can be quite good.
And for people who feel that’s too much work, they can:

1. Not reply at all
2. or, choose to reply and ignore the request for more detail