Wider ski > more OR less effort?

[Slim]

Hi,

My wife is looking for new skis.
We ski CO for 8 days each year, hopefully a few days in UT too this winter. Live in MN, ski the 'hot pow' in spring at Lutsen.
We started skiing as adults, never raced, so her style is smooth and easy, not hard charging. Take lessons in bumps every year.
Priority is ease of turn initiation and speed control in moguls, trees and steeps. High speed is not a concern, but must have some stability for run outs and roughed up groomers at moderate speed. We almost exclusively ski (tight!) trees and moguls, mostly black diamonds at Winter Park, no double blacks.
She is 5'7", 155lbs. Bad knees (no MCL on right). Her current skis are Savory 7, 179cm. Too big (impulse discount buy). Despite that, she has managed alright on them.
Looking for a 1 ski quiver.

The question I have is your thoughts on waist width (wider or narrower ski in the same model line) affecting effort.
We all know you can ski a wide ski on the groomer and hit power on a narrow ski. My specific question is, for example comparing the K2 Luvboat (105mm) and the Fullavit (95mm) (or the same shaped last season Pinnacle 95 and 105), Which do you think is easier on the legs?

My gut feeling says that (on firmer snow) the narrower ski will take less effort to edge and switch edges, and supposedly it skis well in some softer snow to.
On the other hand, a wider waist helps keep you up higher in the snow, which in deep snow, will make for less effort to (pivot) turn. And deep, grabby snow is where you have to work the hardest. And she never complained about the effort of edging her Savorys. So, overal, for CO resort skiing which do you think will be less fatiguing?

Thought on the general idea or specific to these skis? Other ski recommendations? (Salomon QST?)

 

[tch]

Another thing to consider is height. All things being equal, a shorter person has shorter legs, which means a shorter lever to accomplish edging. Also, weight comes into it. Regardless of length, wider provides more floatation, which may not always be needed. Heavy men require wider skis than light women, which is why women's "powder" skis are generally one width category narrower than men's.

I have no specific skis to recommend, but I would think 95 is plenty wide for almost any situation and 105 would be unwieldy in non-powder conditions.

 

[Doug Briggs]

On firm snow a narrower ski will be easier to ski and edge.

It is too bad the Savorys are so long. A shorter model would be perfect for CO skiing on groomed and in powder. A friend has a pair she loves. 170s for a 5'10" woman. EDIT: Actually my friend has the Saffron which is 98mm underfoot. Much more apropos.

A ski in the low to mid 90s under foot and no more than 170 cm, preferably a bit shorter, would handle CO snow conditions. I don't know the models you mention in detail.

 

[Started at 53]

I’ll wait for the Z-90 recommendation coming...

 

[mdf]

None of the answers really capture it.
1) as Doug says, "On firm snow a narrower ski will be easier to ski and edge. "
2) in fresh powder, almost anything is easy to ski. More float (wider and longer) is marginally easier.
3) the big difference is in cut-up powder, and what it turns into as it transitions to crud. There is a "stop-go" effect as your skis go through regions of varying resistance. Reacting to that to stay in fore-aft balance is one of the most fatiguing things in skiing. A bigger ski averages out the resistance over more patches, leading to a dramatic reduction in that "stop-go" feeling.

 

[coskigirl]

I agree that I would go toward the narrower side, especially with knee issues. If I'm skiing a wider ski and trying to get them on edge it can really strain my knee. If you happen to hit Colorado or Utah during a dump you can always rent a wider ski. That being said, my Head Great Joys are 98 underfoot and I'm quite happy on them in nearly everything because they have a very wide shovel and a short turn radius. For her you might consider Head's new Wild Joy as well.

http://www.skiessentials.com/2018-ski-test?skis=head-wild-joy

The Luvboat is a nice ski and I was considering it for my powder ski but I don't think I'd want it as my only ski. Especially if I spend more time on groomers. I haven't skied the Fullavit.

 

[Doug Briggs]

[QUOTE="mdf, post: 146883, member: 141"]None of the answers really capture it.
1) as Doug says, "On firm snow a narrower ski will be easier to ski and edge. "
2) in fresh powder, almost anything is easy to ski. More float (wider and longer) is marginally easier.
3) the big difference is in cut-up powder, and what it turns into as it transitions to crud. There is a "stop-go" effect as your skis go through regions of varying resistance. Reacting to that to stay in fore-aft balance is one of the most fatiguing things in skiing. A bigger ski averages out the resistance over more patches, leading to a dramatic reduction in that "stop-go" feeling.[/QUOTE]

Oh. I disagree. My answer is perfect.

 

[crgildart]

Length also matters proportional to speed. At slower speeds, shorter skis are easier to manage all other things equal. At higher speeds a longer ski is more stable and thus less work to keep under control..

 

[mdf]

none of the poll answers.

 

[newfydog]

Flawed poll. The right ski for the conditions is easier. Might be 63 mm, might be 120 mm.

 

[Monique]

Agree with Doug.

I never understood the complaints about wide skis being hard on knees - until last season, getting back from ACL surgery. Fine on powder. Not good on firm. Hoping that will get better with time. I tend to ski fat skis in general, and the cut off point for me was somewhere over 106. My Zeldas were okay, but knee pain kept me from properly tipping my La Ninas - which had been my daily driver the previous season . My husband thought maybe the problem would be fixed with better technique, but a) I'm not sure and b) that didn't help in the moment.

 

[Tricia]

comparing the K2 Luvboat (105mm) and the Fullavit (95mm)

We ski CO for 8 days each year, hopefully a few days in UT too this winter. Live in MN, ski the 'hot pow' in spring at Lutsen.

It comes down to the questiono you want to buy the skis for conditions you actually ski or for the conditions you want to ski?

Ideally a two ski quiver, sticking with K2, I'd go for an Oooolaluv and LuvBoat.
If you're thinking one ski quiver, then the Fulluvit 95 is a great ski with a versatile mindset.
In this particular photo, I'm skiing the Fulluvit 95 at Mammoth on their closing day this year.
The conditions ranged from early firm, to spring crud to moguls, to...(it was August 6th, so there is that)

 

[1chris5]

Flawed poll. The right ski for the conditions is easier. Might be 63 mm, might be 120 mm.

I agree the poll should be something like:
A. Narrow Ski - Mostly Hardpack (more forgiving, easier to maneuver)
B. Narrow Ski - Mostly Powder (more forgiving, easier to maneuver)
Etc.

 

[1chris5]

It comes down to the questiono you want to guy the skis for conditions you actually ski or for the conditions you want to ski?

Ideally a two ski quiver, sticking with K2, I'd go for an Oooolaluv and LuvBoat.
If you're thinking one ski quiver, then the Fulluvit 95 is a great ski with a versatile mindset.
In this particular photo, I'm skiing the Fulluvit 95 at Mammoth on their closing day this year.
The conditions ranged from early firm, to spring crud to moguls, to...(it was August 6th, so there is that)

I like your recommendation. I was thinking for a one ski quiver - maybe Black Pearl; If that design isn't too long in the toothe? I've always heard great things about it. Depending on how much skiing is done at Lutsen - I'm not sure a 95 is going to be easy on the legs. The trade-off is 88 for Utah and CO. Also, maybe consider Demo bindings as you can change the mount point with the different conditions. http://www.skiessentials.com/2018-blizzard-black-pearl-88-women-s-skis.html Cheers

 

[fatbob]

I know what I'd do for where you ski* but then I'm not your wife so my answer doesn't really have any value. I suspect the answer is that either is fine.


* Planing beats drag in crud, chunder, spring snow. You're not skiing real hardpack so...

 

[Rod9301]

Actually, a wider ski will be more forgiving in all conditions.

Narrower skis carve easier, better on firm snow.

But wide skis work better not just in powder or cut up snow, but Audi in soft, skied off snow, like you get 3 days after a storm.

It will not catch up an edge as easy as a narrow ski.

 

[Doug Briggs]

Anytime you are going to be skiing in rather than on snow, wider is an advantage over narrower. Within reason. Your outside edge tends to stay above the snow, not catching as @Rod9301 mentions. Additionally, your balance point on the ski moves from the inside edge toward the outside edge as the ski is supported by more than just the edge (as it is on hard snow).

 

[Monique]

Even in soft snow, there is a bit of extra effort that goes into tipping a fatter ski. It usually takes me 1-2 runs before I don't notice it anymore. The first two turns feel exceptionally planky. I believe from personal experience that the better a skier you are, the less this will trouble you. But it's possible that it's not better skiing, but simply better ski design that had this effect for me.

 

[Jilly]

As a person with 2 pairs of skis, one at 68mm and the other at 88mm.....the narrower ski is easier. And the wider ski DOES(MONIQUE )hurt my knees. In fact there is research on the fact that wider skis are not good for you on hard surfaces. So I ski my narrow stuff here in the east. And the wider ski goes west or a rare powder day here in the east. I have skied the 68's (Rossi Hero) in 20cm of new snow. It wasn't anymore work that skiing the old straights.

But if I were skiing only CO, I would have a 80-85cm for a daily driver and a pair (or is it set??) of powder skis, like something out of the 7 series.

 

[Slim]

Thanks for all the answers.
Just to clarify a few things:

• She is looking a 1 ski quiver to take on trips. We usually fly with our whole family, so are limited in how much baggage to take, also don't want to buy 2 sets of new skis and bindings(at least in one year). So yes, a conditions specific ski is better, but not the choice we made.
• I am not asking what will perform better, or perform ok, but what will be less strain on the knees (and legs). I know the Fullavit will ski (moderate)powder just fine. I also know she can easily and happily ski her 106mm Savorys on hardpack.
• Doesn't ski groomers (at least only in between other stuff and pretty mellow)
• Except in fresh snow, so crud, soft piles etc.
  
• Doesn't care about (high speed) carving.
• Unfortunately slaying an open powder field is not likely for us.
• Biggest question for soft snow use would be moguls (or tree runs) filled with fresh snow. Need to pivot and slip through the bumps/ridges, but doing so in a foot or more of fresh snow.

Tanks for the replies!