kragan Posted February 8, 2006 Report Posted February 8, 2006 My buddy is a rep for Dynastar and can get me a great deal . I am looking for some carving skis and found on their website the Contact S10. Here is what the site has to say about them: CONTACT ST 10 Rider Profile For technical on trail carving skiers who love to link perfectly executed turns Advantages Instant carving Exaggerated, technical carving sidecuts, short radius = 13m Responsiveness Autodrive Rebound System plate Grip and precision Autodrive Technology, oversized sidewalls Level Technical skiers-Carve their best Terrain Piste Technical Features AUTODRIVE REBOUND SYSTEM I am not sure what length to go with on skis that have such an exagerated side cut. I am thinking either a 165 or 172 Anybody have an opinion? Thanks Quote
xNick11 Posted February 8, 2006 Report Posted February 8, 2006 well idn how the race skis are compaired to their freestyle skis but with the freestyle skis the edges crack like no other.If u wait and get the 07's then definitly get them the 07s have reconstruceted edges so they wont crack so easy. Quote
LineSki Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 enless your hitting rails with the freestyle skis, they wont crack. Quote
kragan Posted February 9, 2006 Author Report Posted February 9, 2006 165 Thanks, toast. With the side cut as pronounced as it is on those skis, thats what I was guessing. Just weird to be 6 feet tall and be on 165's ... but I bet they would be fun Quote
Metz the Jersey boy Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 Those are definitely going to be a fun ski. They're about the same as a slalom ski, only a bit softer. A 165 is going to be super quick edge to edge. They might become a bit of work... the longer length will be a bit more stable at higher speeds. Just my two cents. at 6 feet tall, I'd probably step up to a 170-something. Quote
Justo8484 Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 if you are 6 feet, i would go for the 172. i demoed a bunch of skis so far this year, and the best all around seemed to be in the mid 170 range for me, and i'm also 6 feet tall, and pretty skinny. the shorter length would be fun for running gates or in the bumps, but you'd probably want something a little more for ripping high speed turns down razors or challenge. the shorter ones will get you more of a workout however. Quote
AtomicSkier Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 World cup slalom racers, before the new FIS rules were on 155cm slalom skis. Ski999 skis on 157cm slalom skis, I'm on 160cm's, and skidude is on 165's as per USSA regulations. Something with that sidecut is to be enjoyed in a shorter length. I can go just as fast on the 160's as I can on my 170's.... Quote
Justo8484 Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 ^ it totally depends on what you wanna do with the ski though. if he wants super quick turns, then yeah, go shorter, but if you want something thats going to handle crud, all mountain cruising, or faster, longer radius turns, then going for the longer size would work out better. Quote
Metz the Jersey boy Posted February 9, 2006 Report Posted February 9, 2006 Thats what I'm saying... in a 165 those skis will be one hell of a workout... Jeff... racers were on the smaller skis to get quicker turns... I wouldn't want to be on something that would throw me around like that all day every day. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.