Spend any time on a ski forum and the most common questions tend to revolve around ski sizing. And I can see why. The internet’s advice when it comes to ski shopping is pretty bad. You find your height on a chart, and it gives you a whopping 20cm range, and then they follow it with a lot of little pointers. Go longer because you mainly ski off piste! But shorter because you’re thin! But also go longer because you ski fast and aggressively! Yet, shorter if you ski a lot of trees!
It doesn’t have to be that confusing.
In apparel, we want our best-selling size to be our middle size. Demand tends to fall on a bell curve, and we want our 5 sizes to cover the meatiest part of the curve. (If you’ve ever noticed you’re a small in one brand and a large in another, I promise we’re not trying to confuse you. Each brand may be targeting a customer market with different body sizes or body shape). If there’s a mismatch between our sizing and our customer demand, we aren’t optimized for sales:
I started assuming the same was true for skiing and had a lot of success with ski sizing. I’m 5’4, which puts me right around average height in “skiing” countries (the biggest ski markets are in Western Europe, and US/Canada). As I demoed skis, I noticed that I kept gravitating towards middle sizes. My Atris Birdies? A 169. DPS Yvettes? A 168. Santa Ana 110? 169. When I shopped for the Backland 98s, I felt torn between the 164 and 172. But when in doubt, I aim for the middle size, and it worked out for me.
And looking at a range of skis, it’s easy to see how those size charts offer such a wide range of sizes. Here’s a few examples of skis on the market, their size runs, and the suggested sizing for someone 5’4 coming out of this process:
- A beginner ski for total newbies (Volkl Flair 72):137, 144, 151, 158, 165
- Intermediate piste ski (Volkl Flair 79): 149, 156, 163
- Piste ski for ex-racer experts (Head Power Joy): 153, 158, 163, 168, 173
- “Beginnermediate” all mountain ski (Pandora 84): 151, 158, 165
- Intermediate-advanced all mountain ski (Sheeva 9): 150, 156, 162, 168, 174
- “Big Mountain” (100-something) ski (Sheeva 10): 156, 162, 168, 174, 180
- Powder skis (Sheeva 11): 168, 174, 180
The recommended size gets longer for 2 reasons. First, as length increases as skiers progress. Second, length increases as more rocker is added to the ski from piste to all mountain to powder. And those sizes match up with online ski size charts, that suggest a range from 150 to 170 for my height.
What about skis that come in an even number of sizes? This is where those round up / round down pointers come in handy. Are you heavy or light for height? Do you want a ski with a little room to grow and that pushes your ski skills a bit? Or do you want to be conservative and have something easy and nimble? How do your ski skills compare to the skier that ski was designed for? I’d definitely round up on the Ripstick 88, a lighter all-mountain ski with a preference for groomers. But the Volkl Secret 102 intimidates me, and I’d strongly consider sizing down.
What if you’re not average height? How does this process work? Ski sizes jump every 6-8cm, which roughly converts to 2.3-3 inches. So that middle size is going to primarily serve 5’3 to 5’5. A half inch taller or shorter, they’re probably in that “rounding zone” mentioned above. For a ski with 3 sizes, that would make the shortest size for women roughly 5’ to 5’2, and the longest size for women around 5’6 to 5’8. 90% of women fall between 5’ and 5’8.
What if you’re extremely tall or short? Some skis come in 5 or 6 sizes, which allows brands to capture more demand from the tails of the bell curve. For example, the Stockli Nela comes in 3 sizes that range from 152 to 168 (only 16cm of coverage). But the Black Pearl 88 comes in 6 sizes that range from a 147 to 177, a range of 30cm. You’re more likely to find broader size ranges for best-selling skis. There are enough 4’10 women buying Black Pearl 88s to make that size profitable after all the design and manufacturing costs. It’s a well-rated all-mountain ski that works for a lot of ability levels and a lot of snow conditions. It sells in Europe. It sells coast-to-coast in the US. But there’s not that same demand for specialty skis like powder skis, touring skis, or indie brand skis (except for Coalition Snow, who went into business to address these sorts of pain points that existed in the market). If you’re a 1%er (under 4’10 or above 5’11), I’d also consider Juniors and Men’s skis, respectively.
Is this method failproof? Not entirely. A few brands skew a little short or a little long. Liberty tends to skew towards shorter women and I like their Genesis skis in their longest length (171). Meanwhile, Armada skews long. A lot of their skis are unisex, so they’ll take a handful of their 180+ skis and put the women’s graphic on them. For example, the ARW 100 runs in 164, 172, 180, and 188.
I really like my skis shorter than this exercise would suggest. A preference for shorter or longer skis is totally possible and valid. But ski brands are addressing the market and therefore the average taste. But it may also be a slight discrepancy between your skillset and the skis. Brands are pretty bad at assigning a rating to their skis. Sometimes they assign the same rating to men’s and women’s skis, where they know men favor something rated advanced-expert. Or they know women tend to underrate their ability levels and put an intermediate-advanced rating on heavy, stiff, demanding skis. And therefore you see a lot of skiers enjoying a burly ski like the Secret 96 or Black Pearl 97, but hedging a fair bit on sizing to make it accessible. I don’t find that trade-off to be the best solution, especially for things like powder skiing where surface area impacts your ability to float or the length of your edge influences edge hold.
These lengths are a huge jump from my rental skis. Rental skis are short for 2 reasons. One, all basic rental fleets consist of those “beginner skis for total newbies” similar to the Volkl Flair 72. Two, rental shops further round down 1-2 sizes. If a renter gets a ski that they feel is too long, they’ll go back to the rental shop or it may even ruin the day if they rented off-mountain. If a renter gets a ski that’s too short, they usually just slow down, turn more, and wedge more. Renters are more likely to blame their slow, conservative skiing on their skill level or their preference rather than recognizing they need a longer length for more stability. Serving the lowest common denominator makes it easier for the shop.
Who is not “the market?” People who ski in a professional capacity, like athletes, patrollers, and guides. Serious ex-racers are going to ski differently than us recreational mortals. The market is also a little problematic. It’s very White and very affluent, which means it’s usually thin. Ski brands aren’t making plus-friendly apparel, which means they’re certainly not making plus-friendly hardgoods where the discrimination is less obvious. Heavier skiers should definitely increase the flex of their skis but may also appreciate extra length as well. On the flip side, senior skiers and skiers with mobility impairments may appreciate sizing down.
How do unisex skis work? This process no longer applies. Unisex skis are very inconsistent. You’ve got brands like Blizzard who make the Spur powder ski down to a 159. It’s a 125mm-wide powder ski that easily suits petite women. But the Armada Locator 104 goes down to a 162, which work for women down to around 5’2. Then you’ve got skis like the Kastle ZX100 that bottoms out at 168 and fits some women, but very few under average height. “Unisex” means different things to different brands and they have very different standards for the number of women they need to serve with a ski before they slap a unisex label on it.
Keep up with Femignarly
Find me on Instagram or hit follow at the bottom of your screen.
FemiGnarly 