>>> My first skis, in ~1994, were 205s. Seems incredible, but there really
>>> was a general belief that longer was better, although very few people
>>> could demonstrate why that should be the case, except at racer level.
>>Back in the day, when wooden skis demonstrated a remarkable coefficient
>>of friction, you needed long skis if you wanted to move at all.
>>As regards later plastic skis, I do remember my Rossignol Drac 210s
>>(late 1970s vintage) having remarkable straight-line stability, but all
>>the turning ability of a supertanker.
>I've still got my 195 Kastle skis - a few years ago, as I was driving to the
>Alpes, I brought them along wiht the carving skis & snowboard.
>Wow, what a difference: while they were docile enough and turned as requested,
>I could /not/ get them to carve properly. They just felt sort of lifeless.
>Also, I'd got into the habit of starting a slow turn by weighting the outside
>ski and rolling that knee in: on the old skis, they immediately started to
>diverge and I nearly did myself an injury a couple of times.
I must admit as a long time "plateaued" intermediate skier of dodgy
fitness I have no nostagia watchsoever for the days of "longer is
better" skis. I remember those 6 day ski holidays where by about day
3 I was running our of steam. These days I can pick shorter carving
skis and know that I can still be going well on day 6...