# twin tip sizing



## steve112112 (Feb 1, 2009)

Hi

My son is looking to get some twin tip skis.  He is currently on 150cm skis which seem about right (5'4", 110 lbs, 13 yrs).  

For twin tips, I've heard sizing is different.  Trouble is, some people say twin tips should be shorter than traditional (shaped) skis, but others say they should be (comparatively) longer.  Can anyone help?

Thanks 
Steve


----------



## severine (Feb 1, 2009)

Twin tip skis generally ski shorter than their stated length; the upturned tail means less contact length than a conventional ski. That said, there is variation in how companies report the length on these skis, so it's hard to come up with a rule. Usually, though, you'll want to go longer than your carving skis. How much exactly depends on the ski itself, what the skier wants to do with that ski, and the skier's ability.


----------



## riverc0il (Feb 2, 2009)

Length is all about actual surface/edge length in contact with the snow. The rear turned up tail makes a comparable twin tip ski shorter than a normal tip of the same size (assuming the ski is measured from tip to tail). With a true twin and a high degree of turn, it could be as much as a few cm's difference. It really depends on how much the tips curve up as to how much longer you might want to go. Plus preference of the skier.


----------



## Glenn (Feb 2, 2009)

To further complicate matters...will he be using the twins in the park and all mountain...or will the twins be a park only ski? My all mountain ski is a Hot Rod Nitrous in a 178. For twins, I have a Nothing But Trouble in a 175. However, my twins aren't a park only ski; I use them to ski the entire mountain. So with that in mind, I went with a length similar to my all mountain ski and mounted the bindings a bit more forward than my all mountains.


----------



## tcharron (Feb 2, 2009)

steve112112 said:


> Hi
> 
> My son is looking to get some twin tip skis.  He is currently on 150cm skis which seem about right (5'4", 110 lbs, 13 yrs).
> 
> ...



They are typically a bit longer if you are going to be using them for all around use.  How much does he ski, and what's your general price range?  Another benny for a 13 year old is getting them a bit on the bigger size can last him a little bit longer.


----------



## steve112112 (Feb 2, 2009)

Thanks for the feedback!

He currently skis 150cm and some people were recommending up to 169 for him!  Yet others said go shorter.  Should like around the same size is about right, maybe give or take 5cm.  (He'll be using these for all over, not just park).

Thanks again
Steve


----------



## Glenn (Feb 3, 2009)

169 seems a bit long. I could probably ski a 169 twin and I'm 5'-10" and 155-160lbs. 

Take a look online for twins. I've found sierraskis.com and evogear.com (the outlet) have good prices on skis. I'm a big fan of buying leftover (but brand new) skis that are a season or two old.


----------



## severine (Feb 3, 2009)

169 definitely seems long. I'm 5'5", weigh more than Glenn, and I ski 165 twins. Weight is more important than height, as is skill level and what they'll be used for.

Is there anywhere he can go to demo some? Might be worth a shot to see what length he feels comfortable with.


----------



## prisnah (Feb 3, 2009)

164-169 is a pretty good range if he is a solid skier. 169 might be a bit long, but he'll grow into them and benefit from the added stability. As was mentioned, different companies measurements can vary, for example, K2 twins tend to be bigger than their stated length while Line skis tend to ski very short. But again anywhere in that range will work, he may struggle a bit at first with the added length but will learn to control it over time and he will become a better skier because of it.....plus you won't have to buy another pair next year.


----------



## ski the trees (Feb 3, 2009)

Anything from 150-160 should be fine for him.


----------



## prisnah (Feb 5, 2009)

ski the trees said:


> Anything from 150-160 should be fine for him.



WAAAAAY too short if he wants twins.


----------



## hammer (Mar 4, 2009)

My 16YO son's outgrown his Fischers and I'm thinking that a decent pair of "all-mountain" twin tips would be good for him to have at this point.  He's mainly an all-mountain type of skier but I know he likes to dabble in the park on occasion.

Height: 5'10" (now taller than his dad)
Weight: 130 lb
Skill Level:  advanced intermediate

What length would work well for him?  Any advice on where to get any good deals?  Is now the time to buy or can I wait?


----------



## hammer (May 5, 2009)

hammer said:


> My 16YO son's outgrown his Fischers and I'm thinking that a decent pair of "all-mountain" twin tips would be good for him to have at this point.  He's mainly an all-mountain type of skier but I know he likes to dabble in the park on occasion.
> 
> Height: 5'10" (now taller than his dad)
> Weight: 130 lb
> ...


Bump for question...seeing some good prices out there, any advice would be appreciated...


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (May 7, 2009)

hammer said:


> Bump for question...seeing some good prices out there, any advice would be appreciated...



what length is he on now...has he recently gone through a growth spurt...ie jumped up in height and now you'd expect him to fill out a little?  His current length ski would have an impact on what length I'd suggest.


----------



## hammer (May 7, 2009)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> what length is he on now...has he recently gone through a growth spurt...ie jumped up in height and now you'd expect him to fill out a little?  His current length ski would have an impact on what length I'd suggest.


He was on 160s for the past few years...I think he's grown in height by at least 3 inches since we bought his current skis.

If his metabolism's like mine was when I was his age, I would expect some filling out but would not expect him to get much over 150lb for several years.


----------



## Glenn (May 8, 2009)

I'm 150lbs (dropped a few more lbs as of late) and 5'10". I'm on 175 Nothing But Trouble Twins...mounted a bit more forward than a traditional mount. I had originally bought these skis to suplement the Hot Rods and use them exclusively in the park. I ended finding out that they're a darn good all mountain ski and a heck of a lot of fun (for me at least) in the spring and in the spring bumps. 

As mentioned, twins ski a bit shorter than a traditional ski. Binding mounts will change the handling as well. Being more forward on my twins, I can initiate the turns a lot quicker. The things actually bang out some decent slalom turns. 

I'd look into a 170-175 for him at this point. That should give him some room to grow. I'm a fan of buying a year or two old skis online. evogear.com (the outlet section) and sierraskis.com are both great places to look.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (May 9, 2009)

hammer said:


> He was on 160s for the past few years...I think he's grown in height by at least 3 inches since we bought his current skis.
> 
> If his metabolism's like mine was when I was his age, I would expect some filling out but would not expect him to get much over 150lb for several years.



I'd say 168 - 175 or so...the vendors use different methods for measuring their skis so they're not all consistent.  K2's are longer for their length so a 169 K2 twin is going to have the same running surface of a 175 from another brand.  If you had luck with his Fischers, they make a pretty solid twin for his age/ability called the Villain Pro, won an editor's pick from Freeskier Magazine...sidewall ski (better edge grip vs a cap) with a wood core, 82mm waist...so good all mtn waist width.  Look for the 0809 model...sierra skis, evo gear, get boards, ski-depot.com, etc.  Try ski depot first, they're located in Maine, a couple of brothers, good ole boys from Jay, Maine...the others are in CA and WA.


----------

