Go shorter for touring skis?

[PeachesNCream]

If this has been discussed I missed it and couldn't find it in the search.

My touring skis are 193 which is in line with the rest of my skis. But someone on here said they go shorter with their touring skis. Kinda makes sense. Better in couloirs, lighter, easier to manage on tired legs, easier to do kickturns. Main downside is not as stable but I don't really ski wide open when I'm touring. Who's skiing shorter touring skis compared to their resort skis? Who's not and why not?

[tgapp]

If this has been discussed I missed it and couldn't find it in the search.

My touring skis are 193 which is in line with the rest of my skis. But someone on here said they go shorter with their touring skis. Kinda makes sense. Better in couloirs, lighter, easier to manage on tired legs, easier to do kickturns. Main downside is not as stable but I don't really ski wide open when I'm touring. Who's skiing shorter touring skis compared to their resort skis? Who's not and why not?

everyone (i know) is skiing slightly shorter skis touring than inbounds. you very rarely are charging hard while touring (unless you're boissal, and i think he even skis shorter), they're lighter weight, more maneuverable, better for kick turns, quicker in really tight trees, etc. i ski 185-189 inbounds and 171-183 touring, for the most part (there are exceptions). ymmv though.

[plugboots]

Not me. But I have a 36” inseam, and kick turns have always been easy for me.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Benneke10]

Most lightweight touring skis have flat tails and traditional mounts so they ski way longer than the dual rocker progressive mount skis most of us use inbounds. My eurotrash lighweight 170 touring skis don't feel that much shorter than my 180+ inbounds skis and they have just as much ski in front of the binding

[XXX-er]

I have a couple of setups that are really too long, 190+ is too long for 5'8" / 165lbs but they are fairly soft, were used and were a smokin deal

but 182 works better

I would say down a size is easier to handle

[MHSP1497]

everyone (i know) is skiing slightly shorter skis touring than inbounds. you very rarely are charging hard while touring (unless you're boissal, and i think he even skis shorter), they're lighter weight, more maneuverable, better for kick turns, quicker in really tight trees, etc. i ski 185-189 inbounds and 171-183 touring, for the most part (there are exceptions). ymmv though.

It’s these reasons that I went shorter for my touring setup too (184cm BG 108 Tours vs 189-191cm inbounds skis). The other reason was to “force” myself not to take as many chances or ski as hard in the BC as I can get away w/ inbounds too.

[tgapp]

It’s these reasons that I went shorter for my touring setup too (184cm BG 108 Tours vs 189-191cm inbounds skis). The other reason was to “force” myself not to take as many chances or ski as hard in the BC as I can get away w/ inbounds too.

yeah also it depends on the ski/terrain choice. if i only had ONE touring ski it would be right around 180 for me, but because touring is my primary form of recreation, i have different skis for different touring quiver slots - 171, 176, 180, 181, 183, 189. i spend the most time on my 176s (volkl BMT 94s) and my 181s (down CD104Ls). the downs are close enough to be a quiver of one ski for me, but i suppose if i was skiing a bunch of wide open stuff and charging all the time, i wouldn't mind sizing up, but there hasn't been a compelling reason to do so.

[FullStop]

Clearly in the minority here, but I like my touring skis long (Kootenay tree skiing). Not sure what you guys are doing on your kickturns but they aren't a problem for me with a 30" inseam on touring skis ranging from 185-190 with a variety of different mount points and different tail rocker profiles.
I guess all the years learning to kickturn on forward mounted fully cambered 190s with the alpine boot + pivots + day wreckers taught me something. Or maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.

[TeleBeaver]

In my current quiver my inbounds skis are 185-190 and my touring skis are 178. For everything on the uphill this is an advantage, and I have had fun on that setup the last 3 seasons. I'm not sure what it is this season but I really want bigger touring skis. I have been skiing in the backcountry less than normal for a number of reasons, so maybe I just need to get used to the setup again but going from stiff boots and 190s to soft boots and 178s had been annoying this year. I think it also has to do with my new touring partners being on burlier setups than me. I will probably get a 185ish touring setup for next season.

[nickel]

Mine are pretty in line. Resort skis are 196, 2x193 and a pair of race carvers at 184. Touring skis are both 192. I dunno, kick turns are a non issue for me and the weight savings of sizing down isn't worth the change in ski behavior. It's a highly personal choice though.

[dangur]

I have two touring setups. The old one and the new one.

Old one is 180cm, x 102mm. Skis great down. A bit heavy on the up, but manageable for strong legs. I love these skis.

New one is 170cm x 85mm. I got the skis because I'm dealing with a hip injury, and the lighter weight (due both to shorter length and narrower waist) helps a lot. I like these skis a lot. I love them on the up and on groomers. Everywhere else - they work.

Last weekend I found some knee deep powder on the skinny skis. It worked. Would have been more fun on the fat skis. But it was still fun.

[tgapp]

also maybe worth mentioning that it would be helpful to know who you get advice from.

me: not really an inbounds (or a particularly strong) skier, but i do love long walks, all the time. 4-8k feet is a "normal" length of a tour
those other dudes on long sticks(probably): way better skiers than i am, but they might not like walking or suffering as much as i do

[XXX-er]

Inbounds I know all the turns I need to make, out of bounds I usually don't know what all the turns are so an easier ski to turn means i hit less trees

[PeachesNCream]

Shorter it is! I'm not seeing (much of) a downside to going shorter if you aren't charging

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[nate s]

Go short?
Midwinter- No thanks, short is the last thing I want skiing bigger terrain and deeper snow in the backcountry. When conditions dictate staying off of avalanche terrain, bigger is better.
Spring- Yep, 6-10 cm shorter makes sense.

Don't understand the kick turn thing either but I'm long legged. I guess I could see it if you are smaller and ski the longest lengths inbounds. If you're a big dude, I feel like most of the longest lengths now are proportionally pretty small anyway.

[Boissal]

everyone (i know) is skiing slightly shorter skis touring than inbounds. you very rarely are charging hard while touring (unless you're boissal, and i think he even skis shorter), they're lighter weight, more maneuverable, better for kick turns, quicker in really tight trees, etc. i ski 185-189 inbounds and 171-183 touring, for the most part (there are exceptions). ymmv though.

I see what you did there...

I did ski 194s for years at the resort and have been shortening things a bit for touring but that's more about availability than anything else. I toured on the 190 Lotus120 for years and loved every minute of it. Now I'm on 189 or 187 because that's what Down is making. I'm happy with it and I bet if I skied the 181 CD104L I'd be annoyed and would like to go back to the longer ones. I had 2 pairs of skis under 180 and did not like them. It might not have been entirely about the length but it was a strong contributor.
My main touring partner is a 50 year old guy who's about 5'8" and maybe 130 lbs with packs and boots. Very serious racing background, he's easily one of 10 best skiers in the 'satch, watching him ski is awe-inspiring. He's on 188 skis no matter where we go and it seems to be working really well for him, even when it's sphincter-tightening steep / super tight / bulletproof.

To me length has a limited influence on weight (girth is more important on that front), a very limited influence on kickturnability (that's all about mounting point and your own balance, Fullstop is 100% right on this), and small influence on maneuverability/responsiveness (as long as we're staying reasonable and not talking about a 5'6" skier on a pair of 204), and a MASSIVE influence on float, stability at speed, ability to handle variable snow, ability to rescue your ass from back-seat excursions, etc... It's a no brainer in my book.

TL;DR: pick a tool that works for what you want to do (and be a dick about it).

Edit: jeebus tgapp, the vert spray is getting out of hand with you. Big days are perfectly doable on skis longer than 175. And if you suffer after 8k on those chopsticks and slippers you call skis and boots you're doing it wrong

[XXX-er]

I actulay have the lotus120 in 184 and 190 only 3 s/n apart same red top sheet but the 184 has more early rise and makes nicer turns if you are not sure where you are going

[I've seen black diamonds!]

[QUOTE=Boissal;6217863

TL;DR: pick a tool that works for what you want to do (and be a dick about it).[/QUOTE]

This.

There isn't one way to do it right. I've been skiing some longer, heavier ones this year, which was great, then I got back on some shorter, lighter ones this week to hang out a bunch of laps which was fun too. I did a bunch of lift assisted touring in the Dolomites on 185 OG Cochises one year. Worked great. They make bad snow good. I owned 170 Trabs at the same time. Those were good at something else.

If I need to do a handful of kickturns I don't care about length. If I'll be doing them over and over on steep firm snow then skinny and short is worth it.

When I'm pretty fit covering a lot of ground and very on light gear feels great.

When I only have a few hours to get out Praxis Protests are fuuuuuuuuuuuuun. I won't get tired if I have only have a few hours to ski. Might as well make it count. But if it's a 16 mile day? The grams, and the added effort of managing the extra cm on the tail add up.

All this is why when people ask about what to buy for their first touring ski I say "something cheap."

[Hughwindlip]

My take on it;

Finding myself preferring the bigger skis for touring. Even wider. All conditions except super steep and firm - I'd go back to a 187 for those days.

I have a cpl sets of 187 hojis set up to tour but I keep reaching for the 191 Ren's. With pomoca race, they r $$$

Inbounds I have a 186 gotama and 187 hoji.

Can't remember a time a ski inhibited a kick turn, ranging from Rogers Pass steep tree ascent and K Country rotten facets. Haven't found anything too haggered on the coast yet except some ice covered gems.

For me, having a slightly smaller ski on the resort encourages me to try hold more speed and the added benefit of not encroaching on people's personal space in the lift line.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[phattypowpow]

I'll put a check in the shorter column. With my 32" inseam, anything longer than 180 or with a center-ish mounting point and my kick turns loose their speed and smoothness. Plus, I frequently find myself in awkward places, going both up and down, where shorter makes life easier. If you're skiing wide open terrain and don't mind the weight, sure, go long. For me, length is most useful for stability when trucking through inbounds chop and crud.

A formative experience happened to me a couple years ago. I was skiing with my fat skis (186cm Helio 116) with some friends who were training for a multi week traverse and were on 170cm skis, probably 70-75mm wide. After generally making an assclown of myself trying to keep up and make passable kick turns in steep pow, we ended up at the top of a 1000' face. Time for payback! I thought I was pretty cool, making big sweepers all the way down. When we looked back up at our tracks, I had trouble figuring out who's were whose and I'm pretty sure they had as much fun as I did. Reading my thoughts, my buddy offered, "You just have to make adjustments to the gear you're on."

[ski-wpk]

I’m 6’3” 180. Skis are mid-180s resort depending on the pair and 169 for touring. I decided uphill ease was better than downhill stability. 169s are truly terrifying going down though.

[Danno]

I don't have touring skis, I just have skis. So I guess my touring skis are the same length as my resort skis.

[tgapp]

I see what you did there...

TL;DR: pick a tool that works for what you want to do (and be a dick about it).

Edit: jeebus tgapp, the vert spray is getting out of hand with you. Big days are perfectly doable on skis longer than 175. And if you suffer after 8k on those chopsticks and slippers you call skis and boots you're doing it wrong [emoji3]

ha, I'm only trying to qualify the perspective of where my advice is coming from. Lots of folks on TGR ski very hard, and there are also plenty who would say that the only binding worth touring on is a shift/Tecton/similar. I disagree. I like long schwacky walks in the woods with good sunsets. And try as I might to limit my beer drinking/improve my overall fitness, I just can't manage big days on big skis. My love of Nutella precludes me from doing so; believe me, if I could have my cake and ski as much as I want I would do it, but for now, something's got to give. And it's not the costco sized jar of Nutella, you'll pry that from my cold dead hands.

I do have fat/long touring skis, but for a lot of the touring I do (hippy powder farming), I'm pretty content with shorter skis, shorter turns, quicker laps. I agree with the right tool for the job, 200%. I'm just pushing back against the conventional wisdom that longer, fatter, and heavier is always better.

Taking my Kusalas out for tomorrow fwiw


Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

[SoVT Joey]

It’s all about the right tool for the job. And where you are in the country and your style plays into it as well.

The most important factor that has been forgotten except for once or twice above is the mount point on said touring ski. Progressive vs traditional is the most important factor in deciding length. There are a lot of touring skis I wouldn’t buy in longer then a 180 and there are a lot I wouldn’t buy in less then a 180. But I also don’t cut steak with a spoon.

[Tailwind]

What type of boot you are using matters and draws some guidelines for what you should get for skis. It’s a system that all needs to play nice.

I have a 190cm moment touring setup and couldn’t imagine going smaller on those. Skied with Hoji Free 130’s and tour wraps.

I want to get a smaller lighter setup for 20 mile days but this only makes sense if I pickup some 1000 gram boots as well. 180cm ultralight skis will feel terrible with a super stiff boot and honestly not very fun as you can constantly feel the ski limiting you.

A lighter, slightly shorter, ski paired with some lightweight boots sounds like a good call if efficiency matters. Skip this entirely if you’re using a boot over 1300-1400 grams.

For a single touring ski... just buy something that’s fun. You’re probably getting a couple hundred turns, might as well enjoy them.