Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Hi,

I've been lurking for a few months, thanks for the information so far.

I'm wondering how much difference there is in glide between a 179cm and a 189cm ski. In this case, I'm looking at S-bound 112s. I weigh 180lbs. I have the S-bound 88s - I'm right between the two sizes - and sized down (179cm) since I knew I'd be bushwacking a fair amount. With the 112s, if I size down I'm afraid that, since the camber is already probably softer than the 88s, I might be slogging too much. I really want to have some glide with these skis. But I'm also buying them to turn.

Background: I'm a good alpine skier, but tele is new and I have a lot of work to do - but I plan on getting some used boards to practice that lift-served.

Thanks!

I've dropped 10 cm on the same model dbl camber ski and didn't notice any difference in glide. I think a bigger variable in how much glide (speed) you get is the snow on a particular day. Unless you are skiing to work or appointments or are on a schedule, whats a few extra minutes. I'd go with the shorter ski if you want to make turns.

I'm pretty sure that's the right call. Especially if there isn't a big difference between the two sizes for glide.

By way of explanation: when I talk about wanting some glide, it's not about time savings, it's all about enjoying the tour - I have an AT setup that I can shuffle in anytime... Call me greedy but I'm wondering if, with this much sidecut, it might be possible to go with the longer size for extra glide and still have a hoot on turns.

I don't know which type of bushwhacking you're considering, BillM, but I prefer shorter one even for glide because of its easiness of handling in a bushy environment.

I had that greedy feeling one time and got an old karhu xcd gt in a 115 and hated them. I have a more modern version of that ski in a 195 and wish I had the 185.

It took me 25 years to realize most of my skis were too long. IMO the longer you go the less hooten you'll be doin.

Cool, thanks. You guys just gave me the nudge I needed to pull the trigger on a good deal on SierraTP - $194 for the 179cm (deal expires tonight). Much appreciated. It rings true.

Btw there are 195cm Annums for about $150 on STP right now if you catch the deal on the right day - you have to sign up for the Dealflyer, and check daily for the discount.

Bill

As wide as the 112's are you can get by on the shorter ones...This year with all the powder no doubt the longer ones would have been better but this was one of the best deep powder seasons in memory....Shorter will turn better generally but not in the deeps we had...TM

Yeah especially if you are just starting the telly thing, you might want to start with a shorter length... And buy longer skis in a year or two...

Hey I don't know why, those STP deals by email never worked for me... Who wants to start a new thread with all the cool daily deals?

Amun @ 161$ right now with 99cents shipping!

http://www.sierratradingpost.com/madshu ... rFamily=99
please mention keycode SPE3637S

Rossignol BC70 @ 125$
http://www.sierratradingpost.com/rossig ... rFamily=99

I don't think the 10cm length will make an extreme difference in glide on the downhill (obviously a high-performance racer would disagree).

But the extra 10cm makes a huge difference on the tour.

When it comes to classic K&G: length=glide.

(Forgive me for my long-winded lecture - tends to take me many words to express my thoughts!)

In a XC context; double-cambered ski length needs to be fitted to the skiers weight, snow conditions and technique (i.e. if the ski is too long- you cannot compress the traction pocket against the snow for the kick) (XC skiing on a groomed track allows a longer length and higher stiffer camber- the snow surface is smooth and firm). About 205-210cm seems to be ideal for me with most double-cambered backcountry skis (I weigh 185lbs on average- depends on the time of year! ). If I use a shorter ski, the traction pocket is always dragging on the snow during the glide phase. There is no way around it- if you XC ski on a double-cambered ski that it is too short- you will most definitely lose glide performance.

Some people are clearly using double-cambered skis in a downhill context- this necessitates a short ski- so that the double camber can be flattened out in a downhill turn. Again one must give up XC touring performance to gain that downhill control on a double-cambered ski.

There is such a thing as camber and a half as well. For example- we have Madshus Eons in both 195cm and 205cm. At my weight there is a slight traction pocket on the 205cm. At 195cm- I find that the Eon flexes and performs like a typical single-cambered ski.

As far as single-cambered skis (e.g. your S-112s)- the entire ski base is always on the snow surface. Therefore there really is no limit to potential ski length (e.g. the Finns make 300cm single-cambered skis).

IMO- when it comes to single-cambered skis- it is a matter of intended use and personal preference.

For example- in a XCd context- I will take a single-cambered ski as long as I can get it (e.g. I would take my Annums longer than 200cm as a XC ski).

As a mountain touring-XCD ski- I wouldn't want any longer than 190-200cm. Although I would love even more length for touring efficiency- I have trouble on the downhill over 200cm.

Even in mountainous terrain I want touring glide- hence my 195cm Guides.

For many- they are willing to give up glide for easier downhill turns.

And as a final note- individuals that weigh less, can get away with a shorter ski without losing glide efficiency.

It's easy for someone that weighs 150lbs to say they don't lose glide with a shorter ski!