or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Blizzard Bonafides, K2 Shreditors...questions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blizzard Bonafides, K2 Shreditors...questions

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 

I'm an advanced/expert skier, 5'11", 170lbs, ski entirely in the West...lots of days in the wetter heavier snow of Washington and BC, but also a fair number of days in Utah.

 

Looking for a new all-mountain ski. Spend most of my time off-piste...bowls, trees, etc. But, unfortunately, usually can't get up for fresh tracks on powder days, so I'm out on weekends skiing with everyone else - meaning, I'm often skiing stuff that gets carved up pretty quickly.

 

Seems like everyone's in love with the Blizzard Bonafides. But, K2 Shreditors look good, too.

 

Would love thoughts from people familiar with either or both of these skis.

 

And, if I go with the Blizzards, having trouble deciding between the 173 and 180. I'm on the lighter side for an aggressive skier, and worried that the 180s will be too much. Also worried about skiing 180s in trees.

 

Thanks in advance!

post #2 of 13
Thread Starter 

Also, if anyone has thoughts on the Bonafides versus the Kaobookies, I'd be interested in hearing that, too. I'm worried that I might not quite be heavy enough for the Bonafides.

post #3 of 13

Based on your self-description, 180 in the Blizzards should be perfect at your size.  Either Blizzard would make a great Alpental/Crystal/Stevens ski, just a slight variation in flavor, assuming you like that basic flavor.  At 5'11", 170#, I think that you are big enough for 180s.  I'm close in size, 5'11", 185#, and I have really enjoyed the Bonafides in 180 for our local mountains.

 

Can't comment authoritatively on the Shreditors as I haven't tried them, but my impression is that they are not really aimed at the same target skier as the Bonafide (or the Kabookie, for that matter).  The better K2 analog to the Bonafide seems to be the Annex 98.

post #4 of 13
Thread Starter 

Thanks, Lewy. I don't think the Annex has much (or any) tail rocker, so that's why I sort of crossed it off the list. Was thinking I wanted at least some tail rocker. The Shreditors are supposedly really nimble and great in trees because of the pronounced tail rocker, but not sure if they're as good at speed or on steeps. Your review of the Bonafides fits with everything else I'm hearing, so I'm definitely leaning that way.

 

Would still be curious if anyone else out there has experience with the Kabookies or the Shreditors, just for comparison sake. And still wondering if my weight (after all, you and I are 15lbs different) is going to be an issue with the Bonafides. But thanks for the response - very helpful!

post #5 of 13

Hey SeattlelMan-

 

The two skis you're considering are both awesome skis, but are entirely different. I think the biggest question I have that could help make your decision, is what skis are you on and do you like them?

 

Basically the skis you’re looking at are similar (though not identical) in width, but are entirely different in terms of flex. The Bonafides have multiple layers of metal and Blizzard’s Flip Core which makes them stiff and stable. I will say though, they are really easy to ski at all speeds despite the metal construction.

 

On the other hand, the Shreditor 102’s are definitely derived from K2’s park skis and have more of a freestyle feel to them. They’ve got a soft flex, so you’ll find yourself pushing into the snow more, and having a more “surfy” approach to the mountain.

 

I think between the two, it’s really more of a question of your style of skiing. If you’re more into high speeds and stability, go for the Bonafides. If you like a more finessful approach, then the Shreditor’s would be a blast.

 

One last thought- As Lewy pointed out, the K2 Annex 98 might be another decent option. I didn’t get a chance to ride them, but I did ski on the Annex 108’s last Spring and they were one of my favorite skis from all of the 2014 models I tried. They’re very powerful, and easy to ski… a lot like the Bonafides really.

 

Anyways, hope this helps!

Matt @ Skiessentials.com

post #6 of 13
Thread Starter 

Hey Matt,

 

Thank you! That's really helpful info. I'm currently on the K2 Apache Outlaws. Bought them in the winter of 06-07 and I've loved them. But I'm a different kind of skier now. I've gotten in way more days since I moved out west, and I'm a more aggressive skier and more inclined to powder (who isn't?), trees, bowls, etc. When I bought the Apaches I was pushing myself to get there, but my comfort level on steeps and trees wasn't nearly what it is now. So, while I've loved them, I'm thinking that style of ski (which, correct me if I'm wrong...is pretty soft) might not fit my style now. Also, I bought them in 167s, and so clearly it's going to be an adjustment moving up in size.

 

If I go with the Bonafides, any thoughts on 173 versus 180, given my weight (170lbs)? Or any thoughts on whether the Kabookie might be a slightly better fit for me?

 

Thank you!

post #7 of 13

Why not a ski in the middle? More like a Profit 98 (more like a snappier Bonafide) ? Or a Sick Day 95 ( like a non-twin tipped fun and slightly narrower Shred 102) ? It really IS confusing figuring out if you'd like a Bonafide or a Shredditor 102 as they are such completely opposite skis. Ski essential above gave you a good rundown. You might even like a Salomon Q-98. The question is, do you like lighter, more snappy/playful feeling skis, or solid powerful feeling skis? Are you a frequent turner, or more of a speed merchant? If you want something smack in the middle of those two general catagories, think of a Nordica Hell and Back. 177 would probably be the right length. I wouldn't let the 'no tail rise' thing get into your head unless you really like skiing switch at speed. If you did, then I'd go with a 185 Nordica Soul Rider. :)

post #8 of 13

Hey SeattleMan-

 

I wasn't familiar with the K2 Apache Outlaw, so I looked them up and found this review of them. Assuming those are the same skis, it sounds like they have a mid range flex with a system binding. After seeing that and reading about your experience on them, I think the Kabookie or Bonafides are going to be your best bets. The way I see it, the Kabookie is probably similar in flex to the Apache Outlaws, but without a system binding, an additional 10mm of width, and with Blizzard's FlipCore rocker. So while you might've outgrown the Apache's, the Kabookies will still feel like an upgrade despite having a similar flex.

 

If you really are looking for something a bit stiffer, then the Bonafides would be the way to go. I wouldn't worry about going too stiff with these, as you sound like a pretty adept skier. Besides, all of Blizzard's skis are remarkably easy to handle (I could go on all day about this, but I'll save it for later). 

 

As far as the Shreditors go, I'd say cross them off your list as I think you'd find them way too soft for the type of skier you describe yourself as. Don't get me wrong, they're awesome skis, but if you're an aggressive skier then I think you'd find them way too soft for your liking.

 

Hope this helps, and good luck!

-Matt @ Skiessentials.com

post #9 of 13
FWIW, I went from 167 Outlaws to 169 Hell and Backs. The new skis feel short, which is sort off playing to what I was looking for for the trees here, but still was an adjustment, as in fact the Outlaws are LONGER than the Hell and Backs. So, IMO, get the Bonafides in 180 unless the point of the ski purchase is to address a possible length issue. Not saying you wouldn't adjust to the 173, but with the rocker it'll feel a bunch shorter to you.

Also, mine don't have system bindings. They were available flat.
post #10 of 13
Thread Starter 

Thanks, everyone. Really appreciate all the help.

 

Settled on the Blizzards. Leaning toward the 173 since they're longer than my current skis, but perhaps will be more nimble in tight spaces. Any last thoughts before I pull the trigger? :) The guy at Evo initially told me he recommended the 180s but then changed his mind to 173 based on the fact that I like trees so much. So that, plus my weight, are the reasons I think I'm going to do the 173s.

post #11 of 13

Why not keep the Apaches for those firm days and up the ante to something in the 105 to 110 range?  Cochese?  Soul 7?  Gotama?  Cham 107?

post #12 of 13

The 189cm K2 Shreditor 102's blew me away on piste.  (Note the length-- 189cm.)  Having a strongly rockered tips and tails, I didn't expect to like them much.  I'm a hard-charging skier in the purely forward direction, but they felt long, edgy and damp.  A plank on the snow-- a lot like my 183cm un-rockered Head Monster 82's!   On the firm and grippy groomers they reminded me of my GS skis of yore.

 

Their stiffness is about medium-- I'd guess like K2 Sidestashes and just less than Line Influence 105s.

 

Off piste they steered really well when driven.  They gave me confidence to charge through trees and cliffy areas more than I had earlier in the day.  I have no use for rockered tails, but they didn't seem to hurt anything.

 

At 189cm, they're a big ski for me (155 lbs. and 58 years), so I tried the 179's.  YUCK!  There's a huge difference between the two.  The 179's are much softer and feel like greasy, short barrel staves.

 

So the 189cm model is my new favorite big mountain ski.  Better than Volkl Katanas (too much rocker), Dynastar 105s (too much rocker and too stiff), K2 Sidestashes (too much rocker), Nordica Girishs (too stiff) and maybe Influence 105s (too stiff) for me.

 

Perhaps I'd like the K2 Annex's better.  That's the similar model without a rockered tail.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

How well you are able to ski is related to how hard you are willing to fall.

post #13 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleIMan View Post
 

Thanks, everyone. Really appreciate all the help.

 

Settled on the Blizzards. Leaning toward the 173 since they're longer than my current skis, but perhaps will be more nimble in tight spaces. Any last thoughts before I pull the trigger? :) The guy at Evo initially told me he recommended the 180s but then changed his mind to 173 based on the fact that I like trees so much. So that, plus my weight, are the reasons I think I'm going to do the 173s.

He struck oil, no need for others to keep drilling . ;)

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 Bonafides, K2 Shreditors...questions