Yeah. This really belongs on rec.ski.nordic. But since you're here ....

Well, I'm afraid I won't give you a simple answer. First of all, height
is far less important, almost not a factor, compared to your weight
and, to a lesser extent in beginners, how you ski. What the person who
recommended the stiffer ski was talking about was camber - the way
the ski bends upward when it's flat and you're not standing on it.
Basically, the heavier you are, the more camber you need, but if you
have too much, you can't press the ski to the snow and get good grip.
Too little, and your skis will drag and make you feel slow and tire you
out quickly. You have to find the right balance, and going by your
height and ski length might be a general guide but isn't really enough.
High-end shops selling high-end skis to racers will do extensive
testing on camber to find just the right combination, but for
recreational skiers, any good shop should be able to help. Your height
is basically irrelevant, other than, obviously, really tall people
generally weigh more than really short people. The shop person can
weigh you and then should know what skis have the proper camber. But
the best way is to have you test skis on a flat board. If a piece of
paper can fit under the skis when your weight is evenly distributed on
both, but can't be removed when you stand on just one, it's probably at
least close to the proper camber. As for length, a general rule of
thumb is to hold your arm up above your head, and if the ski reaches to
you wrist, it's probably about the right length. Today's skis may come
a bit shorter than 15 or 20 years ago, so ask the shop person if the
ski you're interested in is designed to be skied shorter, but that is a
starting place.

That said, and with the caveat that I'm not really familiar with these
skis, I think 184 is what you need, if not longer. I'm a good bit
shorter and lighter than you, and I ski on a 180-something. You could
almost go with a 174 in an alpine ski! Unless these are specifically
made to be skied shorter, 174 would be too short. They might feel like
slippery snowshoes!

Either of the skis you mention seem good. Fischer is a good brand in
nordic skis, and these are Fischer's good average-skier, all-around
models. I'm not sure what "loipe" means, but I'm going to assume it
means "track." Yes, these are workable in set tracks and out, but I
suspect they're not really backcountry skis. It won't go as fast as a
true in-track ski, and it won't be as steady and easy to turn as a true
backcountry-touring ski. But if these are your very first XC skis, they
seem like a reasonable choice and reasonably good at both. If you
expect to do a lot of out-of-track skiing, and in a place with icy snow
and steep hills, you might consider getting partial or full metal edges
and higher, stiffer boots.

Many people push shorter nordic skis. They are easier to control on
hills. But they can be too short. if they're too short, they might not
glide well, and that's defeating the the essense of cross country
skiing, the reason to do it in the first place. If you want to have
precise control on steep hills, you should be in alpine or telemark
gear!

As for poles, go with the armpit length. The top of the shoulder is
getting into skate-length poles, and you aren't buying skating skis.
Longer can be an advantage in that you can push further. But too long
and they get harder to move and cumbersome, and that defeats the
purpose.

Don't overlook the boots. As in alpine skiing, they actually can be
more important than the ski (once you get the right camber). The second
one looks better because it has an ankle cuff. Get the most support you
can afford - though don't go too far and get a heavy, high boot,
which would weigh you down while cruising. Remember: You're under your
own power now! Be sure they fit well. Precise fit isn't quite as
important as in alpine boots, but it's important: too tight and you'll
have cold, hurting feet, and too loose and you'll have painful
blisters. In XC, you can't just step into the lodge, because it might
be miles/kilometers away.

Finally, consider whether you want SNS (Salomon) bindings or NNN
bindings. Unlike alpine bindings, these aren't interchangeable. You
can't use SNS boots on a pair of skis with NNN bindings and vice versa.
I've used both and SNS seems to offer a bit more control, but others
will disagree, and I would admit the difference is slight if any at
all. The disadvantage is SNS bindings are a little like Macintosh
computers - probably slightly better, but not quite as common and not
interchangeable with more makes of bindings and skis. If your shop
sells only SNS boots, or the boot you want only comes in SNS, that's
fine, go with them.

And remember: even waxless skis need glide wax!

Good luck and have fun.

AH wrote:
Hi all,

Maybe this isn't quite the group for it, because people normally discuss
downhill skiing, but maybe this post still fits. I want to buy my first
pair of cross country/langlauf ski's. I am interested in these newer nordic
ski's where you can ski in the loipe or out of it.

Particularly, I am looking at these ski's:

http://www.fischer-ski.com/de/produc...id_product=228
or
http://www.fischer-ski.com/de/produc...id_product=226

I am 184cm and weigh 77kgs. Are these type of ski's suitable? What length
should I get? Also, what length poles are suitable?

The reason I am asking here is that I have been to two shops. One said that
these ski's are not stiff enough and I needed these Salomon ones (forget the
model) in 194cm! I went to the other store and he said that the ski's above
are fine, but I only needed size 174cm. Frankly, I think I might need a
size in between this.

Likewise, the first guy said I need poles up to the top of my shoulder, and
the second guy said up to my armpit. So I'm a bit confused.

Any help would be great!

Thanks