XCD: What's up with weight range?

[JeffXCD]

I have Fischer Spiders. 180cm. Got em from a friend. The size chart says 150-200 lbs is the fit range! What the heck? That's basically everybody. What is the takeaway here? That such skis fit by your height not your weight? Are we back to oldtime sizing? Where any length ski will supposedly fit any weight but you'll want what you can handle?

I'm 6ft 180 and I've always used 210's for trail striding. Midlength skis came around 20 yrs ago. I'm behind the curve. I'd like to try new-era shorter skis but still have good glide. So I thought 190-200cm in a modern BC striding fishscale ski would give me more handling and keep some glide, so glide wdn't suck as bad. I also usually go kickwax or otherwise work pretty hard to boost glide. I have friends who don't care. I care.

I haven't tried these 180's yet. No idea what I'll think. Yes, I will try em...

But in the meantime, my hunch is that if someone wanted these shorties I'd gladly trade em if they had longies.

Do you have 190-200 Spiders or similar skis and would you like 180's? These are only used a few times, with NNN-BC bindings.

I ski with a 200 lb guy who definitely uses the, what, 196cm Spiders. And he's a handling master.

I'll wanna power turn em. But these aren't gonna be linked turn skis... Just wanna have more control and ease with technical singletrack and fast twisty downhills and uphills...

And let me know if you have a trade to propose. I really want to try out the concept. I haven't ever even used a metal edge ski for trail striding yet. Partial sounds good to me. But whatever... I'm not fussy. I just want glide. And, yeah, handling.

[fisheater]

I’m 5’9” and 190, no way am I skiing a skinny ski that’s 180 cm. I personally have not skied the Spyder, however I don’t understand how you have glide and handling that short. I understand a very stiff, supportive ski having glide, and then being easy to step turn because it might be short and light. I also understand being soft enough to turn, but boring and slow.
Good luck, for what it’s worth I ski in small glacially deposited hills in Michigan. No big vertical, but plenty of steep and twisty. I ski a 210 Gamme. Perhaps a 200 E-99 ( Trans-Nordic now ?) would be a bit short, but a good compromise.
A good trail ski might cost a little, but in reality you can beat them up for a lot of years. You can scratch the topsheet to heck, and repair the bases with a p-Tex candle. They can look like heck but still ski like a dream. They really aren’t that expensive if you ski them for years.

[JeffXCD]

Maybe we know each other! I'll get my name into my profile/sig if it's not there now. Jeff Potter.

Rik says the Trans ski is great. And the Asnes too. We'll see what I can come up with. I might get a real job soon and go hog wild...

I've used race skis in the technical stuff. No go. And I can handle w the best of em. ...Not enough edge power even using whole ski, which of course we do. They skid out without changing my direction. Wash out. So I need some width. Normally 50 is fine for me. A nice step up from a racing 44. But I'm game to try something beefier yet. I suppose I should spring for some Asnes magic. "It's wide and light and fast and turns!"

[fisheater]

Jeff, I’m Bob Wiest from Auburn Hills. I just reacquainted myself with an old friend from the west side of the state. It looks like I may have a little Saugatuck snow reporting snow reporting next season. I’ll be happy to share