Height is 15.7" when open, and 22" when closed

I can't tell you the exact weight but I can recommend this ski for touring. It has Rossignol's WRS (weight-reduction system) which basically consists of using lighter source materials in the structure of the ski. It's not a heavy ski, not a beast of a ski by any means, but definitely stable while having a fun and lively flex pattern. Remember, if the ski is constructed too light it won't ski very well (unless it's made of carbon fiber) because you lose stability and dampness when you go ultralight. This ski is a perfect balance of lightweight-minded construction while still having enough meat to it to ski properly. I highly recommend it for touring, general west-coast resort use, and backcountry booters. Hope that helps!

Go for the 180cm. It may seem a bit long at first but you will get used to them, and your technique will probably improve from it! You'll get more float and stability out of the longer length as well.

The 178 Gotama is probably plenty long for you - if you're 5'9", a 178 will be just about head height. The 186 might give you maneuverability issues in the trees. At your size, I'd only go 186 if you're planning to do lots of straightlines and minimal turning.

As far as your other options go, the Kung Fujas and Shoguns are excellent all-mountain skis for the west coast. I'd avoid the Czars, though, as they are more freestyle specific and less practical for the all-mountain use you described above.

I use a 20L to carry a highly compressed sleeping bag, pad, thermal base layers, and a few other misc items, with plenty of room to spare, so I think the 20L could handle your two sleeping bags and some clothes. You could go for the 35L to be on the safe side - if you don't fill it up, the extra material rolls up into the top so it shouldn't take up too much extra room.

I don't think the carbon is related to the taste. In my experience the purified water tastes about as good as the source. For example, swift moving mountain creek water tastes amazing.

Strength Tested - 350 lbs

The general idea is that if you're right handed go for a bag with the zipper on the right (and if you're lefty go for a left zip).

I don't have one on-hand to measure for you, but I'm fairly certain Line is one of the "truer" brands when it comes to reporting length. The "shorter" brands are Rossignol and as of last season K2. If you really want to know the straight tape pull length of the 172 you can chat in to a Gearhead and they could probably research it and email you back!

These skis have pretty dramatic tip and tail rocker so they are going to ski shorter than they measure. I'd say go right for the 193cm, unless you plan to go with the AT binding and do a lot of touring, in which case you probably want to cut down on weight and improve maneuverability and would thus go with the 185cm.

Its true that skis with rocker/early rise tend to ski a little shorter than they measure, since they have less active edge. If you're an aggressive skier you probably would have been fine on the 170cm, but I don't think you're doing too bad on the 162cm. In my opinion, this is one of the best women's-specific skis out there for aggressive female skiers.

I'd go for a Salomon STH16 with a wide brake or a Marker Jester with a wide brake. Not positive but I believe the Jesters mount wider between the screws, thus giving you that wider-specific setup you're looking for.

This board has the channel mounting system, which works perfectly with Burton's EST bindings, but also should include a universal mounting plate to allow your non-EST 2009 Burton bindings to work.

Yes. Pretty much all Smith goggles have interchangeable lenses, including this model. This goggle comes with one lens, and you have a couple of options. Your best two choices are the Sensor Mirror and the Ignitor Mirror. Sensor is better for low light, but still works in partly sunny conditions. Ignitor is better for sunnier days, but is still universal enough to work when it's overcast. Hope that helps!

I run a 20L compression/drybag for backpacking and it holds my 40 degree ultralight sleeping bag, pad, thermals, and insulators, with space to spare, so depending on how much compression you want and how much you load into there I'd say the 15L would be your best option. Hope that helps.

Deep dusk is closer to blue than gray.

I'd go for the 8L to be on the safe side. If the sleeping bag compresses smaller than 8L you can always roll the excess dry-sack material up into the top. I use a 20L model to carry my 40 degree bag, sleeping pad, base layers, insulating layer, beanie, and gloves, and I still have a little extra room in the top, and it still fits horizontal across the bottom of my 80L backpack.

They do not. Soft microfiber bag only.

I use a layer similar to this in exactly the way you described. As a midlayer under my waterproof shell, a hooded midlayer is useless and gets in this way. This is because I always run with a beanie, and my shell has a hood of its own (that is also waterproof and thus more useful). Bonus tip - when you go to bed you can ball up your puffy midlayer and use it as a pillow!

Here's the best I can do without actually touching the item: according to the North Face performance wear catalog, these shorts feature one "zip pocket" and also "hand pockets". In my mind, this implies that this zip pocket is a third and is thus probably located in the back. In the catalog picture, there is a smooth seam that moves up from the hips over the back to the tailbone, where a zip pocket could easily be concealed. Hope that helps!

Awesome tacos! Just kidding it stands for "Alpine Touring".

Yeah I don't think that's a good idea. Things shrink mainly if they're cotton and then exposed to lots of heat from a high setting on a tumble dryer. With this shoe, you have rubber, suede, and leather. If you try to use the drier trick, either nothing will happen, or you will warp or ruin the shoe, particularly the suede. I wouldn't risk it. If you bought them from Backcountry.com you can set up a return by calling 1-800-409-4502. Or just resell them to a friend!

According to the sizing chart below the size selection drop down menu, size 7 AU is a size 8 US Men.

The "Legend" name has been retired and now all of the Legend skis have an equivalent model "Cham" (short for Chamonix, the biggest, baddest ski area near where Dynastars are actually designed and made in the Mont Blanc Valley in France). The mildly rockered 2011-12 Legend 94 is getting and update and will be the Cham 97 for 2012-13. It has significantly more tip rocker, a slightly wider waist (from 94mm to 97mm) and of course a new topsheet graphic, but the overall construction is very similar (it will still have wood core 3D construction and similar sidecut). I had an opportunity to test the entire Cham line (Cham 87, Cham 97, Cham 107, and Cham 127), and I would say it is an improvement over the already good Legend series. So what you get next year from Dynastar will be even better!

You'll be fine on the 179. The longer ski will give you more stability and it will make you a better skier as you adapt to the length. Plus the ski has mellow rocker so it will "pivot" a bit into turns, making it ski a bit shorter than it looks.

Hayden is right, you'll adapt to these and get better! You'll be fine on the 182. I tested the 182s a few times and found them quite easy to spin and flip in the park, yet they also held a solid edge around the mountain. Go for it!