or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Blizzard Bonafide vs Kabookie?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blizzard Bonafide vs Kabookie?

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 

I tried the Blizzard Bonafide 180 and loved them, but thought they were at times too heavy for me.  They performed well in open powder fields and packed powder.  I loved their speed, stability, and ease of turns.  They turned well in powder runs in the trees as well.  I'm not sure how well they'd perform in more typical Eastern conditions though.


Should I buy the 173 Bonafides or 173 Kabookie or 180 Kabookie?  Unfortunately I haven't tried smaller Bonafides or any Kabookies.  I'm 5'8" and 145-150 lbs and ski mostly off piste in Vermont and in Europe.  These will be my all-purpose ski.  I'm considering using them for backcountry skiing.  They will be replacing my 2007 red 170 Mantras.

post #2 of 13

My impression is that heavier guys prefer the Bonafide and lighter guys like the Kabookie.  Of course you have to adjust for aggressiveness, but both skis are supposed to be pretty serious skis.   While the Bonafide performs very well on hardpack, it is still a 98mm ski, so it won't match your typical eastern ice skate. It will run circles around those ice skates in any kind of softer snow.

post #3 of 13

Don't go with a shorter length if you feel they're a bit heavy; that's not the right move.


At your weight, the Kabookie might be better.  Read Dawgcatching's review, he's basically the same size as you and found the Kabookie much more loved (for his size) than the Bonafide.


I'm 6'2", 190lbs and loved the 180cm Bonafides.  I've got ALOT of weight on you though, so I'm guessing you'd find the Kabookie much better suited.  Probably stick with the 180 length though.


They won't kill it on East Coast ice, but they'll do rather well actually.  I was impressed with the Bones at Sugarbush, I got the chance to use them on 8" fresh, soft bumps, groomers, and scoured icy bumps.  They're not in the same league as my 75mm GS carvers, but I was very impressed with their hard snow performance for a 98mm width.  I'm assuming the Kabookie should perform comparably for someone at your lower weight.

post #4 of 13

You really should demo the 173 and 180 lengths.  If you want these for the trees in VT, you might find the 173's more maneuverable at your height and weight.

post #5 of 13

As Gunnerbob suggested, weight shouldn't be the primary factor for down sizing a ski. In downsizing, you'll be reducing the weight by a small amount, but also dramatically changing how the ski performs for you. If you skied the 180cm and loved it, then stick with that length. 


In terms of the Bonafide vs. Kabookie, the big difference to consider is their stiffness. As you might now, the Bonafide contains two layers of metal, while the Kabookie has none. So really the debate between these two skis, should be settled over how you ski. Both the Bonafide and the Kabookie are excellent expert level skis that handle a range of conditions and terrain quite well. The question to consider though, is how aggressively you approach advanced runs. If you consider your style to be more finesseful, meaning you take your time and perhaps perform a lot of hop turns, then the Kabookie would be an excellent choice. If you're more of an aggressive straight shooter who likes to find his way to the bottom ASAP, then you're going to want a stiffer ski with you to handle more intense situations.


Both skis are excellent, and are highly capable of East Coast skiing. You won't be making tight slalom turns on hardpack days, but you'll be able to make it from top to bottom with no problem. I definitely don't see these skis as being too big or burly for east coast conditions by any means. Really, you've just gotta make the call on how aggressively you ski, and how stiff you need your skis to be.


Hope this helps!


Matt @ Skiessentials.com

post #6 of 13

I'm 6"0", 185 and have been skiing on a 180 Kabookie this year.  This is the first ski without metal that I've owned in decades.  I can't say enough good things about the way it skis in general.  Easy, user-friendly, relaxing, solid, predictable all in one package.  I don't have any experience with the Bonafide.  I bought the Kabookie to use as a wider touring ski but have ended up using it almost all the time.  I have a Blizzard 8.0 Magnum as my hard snow ski.  Spent a week skiing off piste and touring in Switzerland in January on the Kabookie.  Ideal ski for that sort of thing.  I'm headed back to the alps for a couple of weeks in March and that will be the ski that I take.  Better performance than you would guess in harder snow.  Wish I had skied a Bonafide to have a frame of reference, but most folk who have skied both do not downgrade the performance of the Kabookie much from the Bonafide if at all.  The upside is the lighter weight and very friendly feel on snow.

post #7 of 13
Thread Starter 

What are the weight measurements for the 173 & 180 Bones and 173 & 180 Kabookie?  


The 180 Bones were stable at very high speeds and easily maneuvered in open terrain (powder, chopped powder and packed powder), though I wonder about the harder snow, tight trees and touring (Chamonix).  I only tried them for 2 days during a powder storm.

post #8 of 13

the Kabookie is laterally pretty stiff, certainly enough for softer groomers.  For rock-hard groomers, it may take more edge angle and commitment to get it to hold.


Also, check out the Soul Rider if you are looking at the Kabookie. I found grip to be very good for a 98mm w/o metal, and super versatile.

post #9 of 13

Has anyone 185+lbs skied both the Kabookie and Bonafide, who can provide a description of the differences in terms of feel, stability, hard vs soft snow, etc?  Dawg, I absolutely respect and love your reviews but I've got 40lbs on you (and at speed it's a lot more since F=ma) and it's very different for bigger guys.  I haven't met a supposedly stout non-metal ski that I didn't hate, so I'm wondering how the Kabookie shakes out for heavier guys compared to the Bones.

post #10 of 13
Thread Starter 

Where are dawgcatching's reviews of Bonafides and Kabookies?

post #11 of 13
post #12 of 13

I agree w/ skiessentials 2nd and 3rd paragraphs. Your style is loaded w/ finesse.........elegant and smooth skiing............. w/ your style and the Euro-hiking.......... the 180 Kabookie vs the 173 Bones approaches your sweet spot. 180 Bones were too long. While you skied them perfectly,  I could tell your style was compensating for the ski length and weight.................you needed just a little less length or a little less heft to the ski .............You really cannot go wrong w/ either ski.............If you plan to ski out west a ton...... get the Kabooks............. if you plan to stay east and ski ice and packed .......... get the 173 Bones............ the rest is splitting hairs as they both are great skis...............you'll be Rockin on either pair........... as MarcP says; " It's not the arrow, it's the Indian!"

Edited by Yo Momma - 2/15/13 at 2:12pm
post #13 of 13
Thread Starter 

Many thanks!!  173 Bones it is then!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Blizzard Bonafide vs Kabookie?