# Ski Advice



## hammer (Aug 15, 2007)

OK, so I've been looking at some $299 ski deals from Sierra Snowboard for a while:

Fischer RX6:  http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,1626.htm
Fischer AMC73:  http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,1628.htm

I think I'll need to postpone purchasing for myself, but my son has definitely outgrown his 140 cm Atomic SX-7s (he's about 5'6", 120 lb) and I think he's out of junior skis at this point.  Main problem is that the minimum length available appears to be 165cm on the RX-6 and 164cm on the AMC73, which would make them pretty long at this point (although they would offer room for growth).

My son and I are both similar in skill level...best term I can think of is "solid east coast groomer intermediate."

Any opinions on getting either of these skis for my son?  Also, If I do decide to pull the trigger on new skis for myself, would either of these be good candidates or should I wait?

I guess I'd like to know whether these are too good of a deal to pass up...


----------



## Puck it (Aug 15, 2007)

I would do it.  He will get use to them and grow into them.  Both good intermediate skis.


----------



## andyzee (Aug 15, 2007)

I don't think that 164 and 165 is too long for him, probably just right.


----------



## Puck it (Aug 15, 2007)

They might be a little long for a 5"6" person due to there shape.  Again, to good a deal to apss up for a kid.  If he does not like then the father can take them.

I ski on160's supershapes and I am 5'10".  They are a blast.  Only one of skis in the quiver though.


----------



## mishka (Aug 15, 2007)

IMHO jump from 140 to 165 is little bit too much if 165 only one pair skis your son will have without 150 or 155.  Why not consider Fischer Vision 70  available in 152 or 158 and they are little bit wider good  review on those too.

http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,1630.htm


----------



## jack97 (Aug 15, 2007)

mishka said:


> IMHO jump from 140 to 165 is little bit too much if 165 only one pair skis your son will have without 150 or 155.



I agree, especially if your son is solid intermediate. 

Youy can also try these, same price but you have to pay for shipping; 
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-2007-Fische...ryZ21243QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/skis-package-FI...ryZ62182QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem


----------



## twinplanx (Aug 15, 2007)

Just pulled the trigger on a new Boeri helmet for 30 bucks.  Great site thank for the link


----------



## koreshot (Aug 16, 2007)

Go for it!  Get the 165s. 

Either one of those skis is shaped to turn, neither is super stiff or race ready and will be generally forgiving on the groomers.  They might be a little long at first, he might feel a bit overwhelmed the first couple of times out, but they will force him to become a better skier.  Plus he will be 5'9" and 150lbs in a year and the 155s will start to be too small .


----------



## hammer (Aug 16, 2007)

Thanks for all of the input.

I'm going to try to get my son to a ski shop to check some sizes...I'm inclined to go as long as I can since I think my son will be at least my height (5'9") in a few years.  If the skis don't work out I _could_ use them my self, although IMO 165 is just a bit short for my height and weight...

Any opinions on RX-6 vs. AMC 73?


----------



## jack97 (Aug 16, 2007)

hammer said:


> Thanks for all of the input.
> 
> I'm going to try to get my son to a ski shop to check some sizes...I'm inclined to go as long as I can since I think my son will be at least my height (5'9") in a few years.  If the skis don't work out I _could_ use them my self, although IMO 165 is just a bit short for my height and weight...
> 
> Any opinions on RX-6 vs. AMC 73?



Most ski shops will tell you for a solid intermediate; the length of the ski should go up the mouth to the bridge of the nose. My wife is about 5'5", she skis on 150 to 155 cm.

FWIW, ski haus has their tent sale in MA this weekend, might kill two birds with one stone... good pricing along with asking some of the guys from the ski shop about length. In addtion, they might have use skis up to that length but iirc it's really rare.


----------



## awf170 (Aug 16, 2007)

Since when does height matter?  A ski can't tell how tall you are.


----------



## Greg (Aug 16, 2007)

awf170 said:


> Since when does height matter?  A ski can't tell how tall you are.



In a way, you're probably right. Perhaps a taller skier could still use a longer ski due to leverage or something, but weight, I think, is a much more important factor. Any length estimates based solely on height are probably only good if you are exactly average weight for your height. I'm 6' 1" but only 165 lbs so I've been leaning towards shorter skis lately.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 16, 2007)

hammer said:


> Thanks for all of the input.
> 
> I'm going to try to get my son to a ski shop to check some sizes...I'm inclined to go as long as I can since I think my son will be at least my height (5'9") in a few years.  If the skis don't work out I _could_ use them my self, although IMO 165 is just a bit short for my height and weight...
> 
> Any opinions on RX-6 vs. AMC 73?



RX6 is a great ski...it's a detuned version of my ski, the RX8 and the only real difference is the RX6 has a wood core while the RX8 has a sheet of titanium in it too.

But I think the length at 165 is going to be a problem for him. I'm 6'2" and 190lbs and my RX8's are 170. But at 165, it would be a perfect ski for you.


----------



## jack97 (Aug 16, 2007)

Greg said:


> Perhaps a taller skier could still use a longer ski due to leverage or something, but weight, I think, is a much more important factor. Any length estimates based solely on height are probably only good if you are exactly average weight for your height.



I tend to agree along with skier preference. The longer length may give you fore/aft stability, some skiers prefer this over other factors, then again, to other its a minor consideration. 

Getting back to a kid whose is growing and a solid intermediate. The problem is whether he has command of his turns in most type of terrain. If he still stems his turns (causing his tips to move closer), i would caution against a significant increase in length, it would just cause major frustration and or bad develop bad habits IMO.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Aug 16, 2007)

mishka said:


> IMHO jump from 140 to 165 is little bit too much if 165 only one pair skis your son will have without 150 or 155.  Why not consider Fischer Vision 70  available in 152 or 158 and they are little bit wider good  review on those too.
> 
> http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,1630.htm



The Vision line from Fischer is their ladies collection...while it wouldn't be a bad ski performance wise it could be a bit rough on his blossoming teenage male ego if he gets called out for being on ladies skis.  
I agree on the length issue...especially if he's moving out of jr skis into adults...a ski that's quite a bit longer and stiffer could set him back a bit...better to get him into something in the mid 150 range in an adult ski...RX6 is a great choice...just not in a 165.  AMC73 and RX6 are similar ability/performance levels...the RX is narrower throughout...better fall line, groomer ski, quicker edge to edge, while the AMC is wider and will be a little more versatile in softer snow, crud and spring mush.


----------



## hammer (Aug 16, 2007)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> The Vision line from Fischer is their ladies collection...while it wouldn't be a bad ski performance wise it could be a bit rough on his blossoming teenage male ego if he gets called out for being on ladies skis.



I'd never do that to a 14 - 15 YO boy...that's too cruel.



eastcoastpowderhound said:


> I agree on the length issue...especially if he's moving out of jr skis into adults...a ski that's quite a bit longer and stiffer could set him back a bit...better to get him into something in the mid 150 range in an adult ski...RX6 is a great choice...just not in a 165.



jack97 included a link on eBay for RX-6s in a 150cm length, same price as Sierra Snowboards...may be worth considering.  Anyone here had any bad experiences with eBay purchases?


----------



## jack97 (Aug 16, 2007)

hammer said:


> jack97 included a link on eBay for RX-6s in a 150cm length, same price as Sierra Snowboards...may be worth considering.  Anyone here had any bad experiences with eBay purchases?




More than half of my online purchases have been through ebay. No problems yet but I buy from sellers who have great ratings and have been around for a while. The seller for the RX-6 meets my criterion, I would not hesitate buying from them. 

Also, it helps a farm.


----------



## molecan (Aug 16, 2007)

hammer said:


> jack97 included a link on eBay for RX-6s in a 150cm length, same price as Sierra Snowboards...may be worth considering.  Anyone here had any bad experiences with eBay purchases?



I've had some great SkiBay purchases.  I would however like to pipe in that I just got my wife a set of Volkl Attiva Queens off SierraSnowboards, and they shipped em speedily, packages well, and arrived in great shape.   
Best of all, shipping is FREE. 


One thing to watch on Ebay is the location of the seller.   You'll get a bill for tarrifs if you buy from a canadian seller.  I got $50 bill (maybe more) when I bought Gotamas a few years back.   Still a good deal, but not quite as sweet.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 16, 2007)

They are a little more than Sierra, but these guys have the RX6 in the size you need:
http://www.ski-depot.com


----------



## mishka (Aug 16, 2007)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> The Vision line from Fischer is their ladies collection...


 I didn't know.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Aug 16, 2007)

mishka said:


> I didn't know.



I figured as much...which was why I mentioned it...nip it in the bud before it leads to time on a shrinks couch.  ;-)


----------



## hammer (Aug 16, 2007)

mishka said:


> I didn't know.


No worries...I would have figured that one out sooner or later.:smile:


----------



## koreshot (Aug 16, 2007)

Just hand him the 170 Fischers and tell him "here, man up!"


----------



## awf170 (Aug 17, 2007)

Greg said:


> In a way, you're probably right. Perhaps a taller skier could still use a longer ski due to leverage or something, but weight, I think, is a much more important factor. Any length estimates based solely on height are probably only good if you are exactly average weight for your height. I'm 6' 1" but only 165 lbs so I've been leaning towards shorter skis lately.




I've actually been thinking about the leverage thing lately.  Yes, more height will give you more leverage, but being taller is also going to make you weaker (lets say the skiers have the same body fat %)

Ex:  
Skier one is 6 ft. tall and 135 pounds (15% body fat)
Skier two is 5 ft. 6 inches tall and 135 pounds (15% body fat)

Yes, skier one is going to have slightly more leverage but they also going to be slightly weaker since some of his body weight is taken away in height instead of muscle.  So in my very uninformed opinion both these skiers will even out in the amount of force they can apply on the ski, making height a useless judge.  Opinions?


----------



## koreshot (Aug 17, 2007)

awf170 said:


> I've actually been thinking about the leverage thing lately.  Yes, more height will give you more leverage, but being taller is also going to make you weaker (lets say the skiers have the same body fat %)
> 
> Ex:
> Skier one is 6 ft. tall and 135 pounds (15% body fat)
> ...



I would like to provide my equally uninformed and guessy opinion on this.  If height was not a big factor in being able to pressure the skis and get the best out of them then why are these guys all in the almost 6 feet and taller range:

Alberto Tomba - 5'11"
Herminator - 5'11"
Bode - 6'2"
Eberharter - 5'11"
Raich - 6'

Height has got to matter somewhat...


----------



## andyzee (Aug 17, 2007)

koreshot said:


> Just hand him the 170 Fischers and tell him "here, man up!"


 

Best advice yet!


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Aug 17, 2007)

awf170 said:


> I've actually been thinking about the leverage thing lately.  Yes, more height will give you more leverage, but being taller is also going to make you weaker (lets say the skiers have the same body fat %)
> 
> Ex:
> Skier one is 6 ft. tall and 135 pounds (15% body fat)
> ...



All depends on where the weight is located...if the 6' guy has a head that weighs 100lbs and the rest of his stick figure is 35lbs he's going to want a longer ski than the short guy who's cankles weigh 100lbs and the rest of him weighs 35lbs.    
All kidding aside, it comes down to fore/aft balance...the taller you are the more subtle changes in your balance will affect the tip of the ski...a longer ski will smooth out the ride.  Turn shape and type of snow will have at least as much to do with ski length...all those world cup guys race SL on 165s...but if you caught up to them on a powder day they'd be on something quite a bit longer.  
Ps.  6' tall and 135...that dude needs to eat several dozen cheeseburgers...daily.


----------



## bigbog (Aug 20, 2007)

*...better length..imo*



hammer said:


> jack97 included a link on eBay for RX-6s in a 150cm length, same price as Sierra Snowboards...may be worth considering.  Anyone here had any bad experiences with eBay purchases?


that's a much better length for him..in that ski...$.01



eastcoastpowderhound said:


> I figured as much...which was why I mentioned it...nip it in the bud before it leads to time on a shrinks couch.  ;-)


:lol: :lol:


----------



## hammer (Aug 21, 2007)

Still sitting on that fence...any other ski recommendations for a 5'6" 14 (almost 15) YO intermediate?


----------



## Greg (Aug 21, 2007)

awf170 said:


> I've actually been thinking about the leverage thing lately.  Yes, more height will give you more leverage, but being taller is also going to make you weaker (lets say the skiers have the same body fat %)
> 
> Ex:
> Skier one is 6 ft. tall and 135 pounds (15% body fat)
> ...



Also, you need to consider the type of ski. A skinny bump ski will not provide as much stability as a similar length mid-fat or powder ski.


----------



## tree_skier (Aug 21, 2007)

Here's one option

http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,2798.htm

a recreational slalom ski in 150 would be a good ski for him and size should be good for 2-3 years. 

Or

http://www.ski-depot.com/miva/merch...jr07&Category_Code=fischkid07&Product_Count=0

For $349 with binding a jr GS race ski up to 170 length but a 165 would work nicely for him.  and jr SL go up to 150 depending on if he prefers short or long turns.  I would recommend the jr ski over the adult at his age and at 349 for ski and binding tough to beat.

 My 12 yo 5'6" 135 lbs son is racing on junior 150 SL, 165 GS and 185 SG skis.  I hope to keep him in the Jr skis for at least 2 more seasons.  On most east coast days it's hard to beat a race ski especially for youth that fit the Junior ski market.


----------



## WWF-VT (Aug 27, 2007)

hammer said:


> Still sitting on that fence...any other ski recommendations for a 5'6" 14 (almost 15) YO intermediate?



Give Ski-Depot a call.  May be a few more $ than ebay or sierra but it's better to get the right length for the Fischer RX-6's and ask them about the AMC line for your son's size and ability


----------



## hammer (Sep 5, 2007)

Went the cheapo route for now...bought a pair of 160cm Fischer RX3s (with the Railflex2 system and FS10 bindings) at a local ski shop for $149.  As far as I can tell, they seem to be equivalent to the RX4s...not an advanced ski but my son's a relative lightweight so I don't think he will overpower them at this point.


----------

