Performance skiers in higher-snow areas, why do you in general choose 106 underfoot over 88 for in-resort off-piste skiing?

[rooneykean]

I understand the point for knee-high untracked powder but the first thing that comes to my mind thinking off-piste resort skiing is crud/tracked powder/bumps/trees, where I somehow feel precise edge control is important just like being on-piste and flotation doesn't play much role.

I can do it with my 104 but doesn't feel any better than my narrow skis, whereas in any ski brand websites there are characterization descriptions/charts of the trend showing the wider the skis=the more off-piste suited... Is is because the extra rocker in wider skis make turn easier? I prefer more solid edge to it and don't think that helps performance skiers.

My guess is that you guys just so good that you can control 106 as precise as 88 so you choose the wider ones with the bonus of accidental true powder skiing. Is that right or am I totally missed?

Thanks for your input!

 

[jmeb]

Opinion: Why 100-108mm waist skis?

The current, best selling, "go to", ski category in the US is 100-108mm waist, all-mountain designs. I'm curious to hear from skiers on this forum, as to why that is. My experience is that these designs are mediocre at almost everything. Too wide and slow edge to edge to be much fun on...

www.skitalk.com

/thread.

 

[David Chaus]

Actually I choose a 94 for off-piste resort skiing in crud/tracked powder/bumps/trees. Sometimes a 102. If it's a powder day, 116. Otherwise I'm on a 77. And I'm thinking of getting a 68 SL-type ski.

OK, now

/thread.

 

[Ken_R]

I understand the point for knee-high untracked powder but the first thing that comes to my mind thinking off-piste resort skiing is crud/tracked powder/bumps/trees, where I somehow feel precise edge control is important just like being on-piste and flotation doesn't play much role.

I can do it with my 104 but doesn't feel any better than my narrow skis, whereas in any ski brand websites there are characterization descriptions/charts of the trend showing the wider the skis=the more off-piste suited... Is is because the extra rocker in wider skis make turn easier? I prefer more solid edge to it and don't think that helps performance skiers.

My guess is that you guys just so good that you can control 106 as precise as 88 so you choose the wider ones with the bonus of accidental true powder skiing. Is that right or am I totally missed?

Thanks for your input!

Even here in Colorado most times I choose my 89mm wide skis even on days that it has snowed a few inches. My Kore 99's are great so I use them quite a bit as well even on days the narrower skis would be better just to mix it up plus they are lighter and ski differently. I might even choose the 99's on legit powder days. The 122's I use just to mess about even on 6" powder days. They are fun skis and again I like to ski different skis some days just for fun.

I have been caught on my 89's as my only skis on powder days in Colorado and as long as I ski them fast and aggressively they are fun even in those conditions.

 

[Noodler]

If you're skiing off-piste, then you're never quite sure of the amount of snow coverage in particular aspects or other areas you end up skiing. A wider platform can keep you above some pretty nasty stuff that a narrower ski will get down in. If you're certain of the snow pack depth and conditions, then a narrower ski can be a blast if you enjoy skiing in the snow, not on it.

 

[KevinF]

First, I live in New England. The widest ski I own is 95 underfoot. It works just fine - if you have the room to let them run a bit.

In certain situations (ie, trees) “letting ‘em run” isn’t really advisable. And in that case, a wider ski can be a benefit in that it lets you go slower.

 

[slidingmike]

Because we all want to rip like the FWT athletes do -- and they're certainly not rocking mid-80s skis.
https://www.curated.com/journal/1886000/the-all-star-ski-gear-of-the-2023-freeride-world-tour

As always, it's more aspirational than practical. As Phil has said, we choose SUVs for the rare times they might be an advantage, ignoring any disadvantages.

 

[DoryBreaux]

I've spent more days this season on a 76mm or 84mm ski than anything else. Mostly because it's been a weird start to the season in CA. But also because I'm skiing with a lot of kids who are on narrow skis (maybe less so realarive to their weight/height but still...), and I can have almost as much fun on an 84mm ski as a 97mm ski, on almost. On freeski days, or work days when there's a significant amount (over eight inches) if new snow, or I know I'm going to ski wind chalk or crud all/most of the day and that I won't have to demo tasks/drills that are much harder on a wider ski, I will grab the 97mm ski every time. Because that ski is more conducive to how I ski. Ask @Andy Mink about how much I like charging and leaving trenches in EVERYTHING.
But those days are rare.
THAT BEING SAID... today was one of those days I so so so wished I'd grabbed the Bonafides instead of my groomer skis. Not because there was new snow, or great cold chalk, but because the mushy crusty sloppy snot was so wonky, I wanted to be as on top of it as possible, with as little sidecut as possible.
You can argue the merits/drawbacks all you want; at the end of the day, it all comes down to what you want/need to make the skis do, and what's going to work the best with how you do that.

And what's going to put the biggest smile on your face. That's the most important.

 

[markojp]

I understand the point for knee-high untracked powder but the first thing that comes to my mind thinking off-piste resort skiing is crud/tracked powder/bumps/trees, where I somehow feel precise edge control is important just like being on-piste and flotation doesn't play much role.

I can do it with my 104 but doesn't feel any better than my narrow skis, whereas in any ski brand websites there are characterization descriptions/charts of the trend showing the wider the skis=the more off-piste suited... Is is because the extra rocker in wider skis make turn easier? I prefer more solid edge to it and don't think that helps performance skiers.

My guess is that you guys just so good that you can control 106 as precise as 88 so you choose the wider ones with the bonus of accidental true powder skiing. Is that right or am I totally missed?

Thanks for your input!

I'm not understanding the question. I spend time off piste on a 68, 88, and 102. Depends on the day and what's under new snow.

 

[Andy Mink]

If you follow @DoryBreaux you want wide skis to keep you from plunging into his trenches!

Personally, I don't understand the "wider is better" for most of the skiing I do. For instance, today I was on 82 wide Dynastar M-Cross at Mt. Rose. Snow has been little and far between this year. Runs can go from scraped off to some wind blown skier piles, but not much more. Even the powder days were dicey; 12" of pow sounds great but doesn't sound great when you hit what's under it. IF we had decent base coverage off piste I'd go wider, but even then a 95 would be fine. Wider only on days with big snow all over.

I skied Utah last year during some pretty big powder days with nothing over 106. Add that I'm heavier than most, I don't know how much more fun I'd have on a wider ski.

 

[ss20]

I'm at Alta and I go 88mm over my next wider pair, a 102mm, most days of the year. Usually just a day or two after a storm.

 

[Guy in Shorts]

Last week at Killington we had back to back high density super manky storms. My 102 Mantra’s were perfect. Some folks were describing the snow as unskiable but I was able to ski all the best line’s without any problems. Then we followed that up with 15 inches of Utah like powder over the next couple of days. I had my 72 underfoot Stockli S/C’s as they are one of my favorite skis to run in light powder. If you can ski every ski in you quiver in powder then you are never without your powder skis.

 

[CascadeConcrete]

You're not getting the responses you expected because people here tend to use much narrower skis than average, and they also tend to own many skis. But the average skier tends to own one pair of skis, and a 105ish ski does make a decent choice in high snow locations, especially if you care more about having float when it does snow than precision on firmer snow. Plus people tend to be a bit optimistic and think about the good times, but skis for those conditions rather than typical conditions.

Personally, I don't even own a 105ish ski. I have a 93 that is my "do everything" all mountain ski. I use this when I expect to ski off-piste and I'm not expecting more than about 6 inches of fresh. Honestly, this ski could arguably be even narrower most days, but it's also the ski I usually take on trips, so I like having a bit of width if we do get some snow. Beyond that, I own a 116 powder ski that comes out when there is significant new snow. And I have a few race skis that I bring out whenever I expect to stay on groomers (or actually race).

 

[Jim Kenney]

I mostly ski Snowbird. My 3 primary skis 85mm 98mm and 107mm. Always choose 98 or 107 if planning to do much off piste. 85 doesn't usually cut it for me off piste.