or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 110 - 120mm Powder Ski Suggestions?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

110 - 120mm Powder Ski Suggestions? - Page 2

post #31 of 47

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrizzlyAdams View Post
 

Yup. I definitely will look at anything as when it comes to ski's I want what is going to give me the most out of my skis not what fits my wallet best. I definitely think the JJ 2.0's fit the profile of a larger but still very playful version of the shreditors. Has anyone had experience on the k2 pettitors. They are right at the top end of the waist width im looking at but seeing as they are the larger brother of the shreditors it could be just what I'm looking for.

 

The K2 Pettitors 120 can fool you, from appearances and if you ski them at the wrong lengths or mount positions.   

Such a big rockered twinned-tip ski should not be able to quick turn tight spaces, gs charge/carve fast or smear sideways all three, at your whim, but these do.

 

I've owned the Pettitor 189 and 179 for two-three seasons, skied them both a bunch.   They are playful: fast or slow, forward drive or more upright, your choice.  Intermediate to expert.   They are quick turning in trees and bumps, though they are pretty heavy skis (their biggest limitation, for me, unless I'm in shape for them).   They charge groomers very well.  This and the K2 Pinnacle 118 are the only fat skis I've been on that I enjoy groomer carving (or smearing) fast as much as a race ski, once I'm conditioned to the extra heft.   

 

you can also trick them well - at least Sean Pettit does (tho the 189 is probably not quite as playful as the Opus or JJ 2.0).

 

Quote from the Silverton Mtn. ski area Website/fat ski rentals:

 

  • K2 Annex – 117 Under Foot – Seth Morrison’s pro model. A great transition to rocker for those who have never tried it before. Made for speed and everything from crud to deep powder snow.
  • K2 Pettitor – 120 Under foot -Sean Pettit’s pro model. The most well-rounded powder ski on the market.

Edited by ski otter - 9/27/16 at 1:59pm
post #32 of 47

@GrizzlyAdams,

If you have the Shreditor 102s you have a very similar carve, turn radius, feel to the Pettitors, at the right mount points for both. Especially the longer (191) Shreditor 102s, mounted forward, at around +2 to +4, will have almost the same carver/smear turn radius feel as the 189 Pettitors at the same mount positions, except in a much lighter ski. (The straight pull length of the two skis is the same when I measured - 191 cm.)  

 

But the heavier, wider Pettitor 120 does not get tossed around in crud, etc., and has great float.  

This ski handles both deep powder and resort crud well.  

 

Sean Pettit skis the 102 early season, I'm told, then switches to the bigger ski.    

 

Maybe to an outside observer the Pettitors may seem to flap, but they do not when you're on them.  Instead, they are like a tank through almost anything, rough crud, resort powder days from start to finish. 


Edited by ski otter - 9/27/16 at 1:53pm
post #33 of 47
Rossi Super 7
Salomon QST 118
Atomic Backland FR 118

Top three that will be able to do it all... demo or test before you buy!!
post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockerTwo100 View Post

Rossi Super 7
Salomon QST 118
Atomic Backland FR 118

Top three that will be able to do it all... demo or test before you buy!!

Looks like the Backland replaces the Automatic--very similar specs except some carbon instead of some metal. Which means there are good deals on 2016 Automatics.

post #35 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockerTwo100 View Post

Rossi Super 7
Salomon QST 118
Atomic Backland FR 118

Top three that will be able to do it all... demo or test before you buy!!

It depends on your own skiing preferences, style, and what you want in a ski.

 

I own the Super 7 and the previous, apparently more solid version of the Backland 118, the Automatic 117.   I really love both skis, but they have pros and cons.  From the reviews, though heavier, the Auto 117 is a bit more stable in crud and chop than the Backland - or the Super 7, for that matter (especially if you can adjust the mount position forward on the Auto to optimize it for the given conditions).  But I haven't had a chance to try the Backland ski, and want to.  It may not need the forward mounting the Auto 117 benefited from.  

 

The Super 7 and the Auto 117 have wonderful float and behavior in powder and chop, as long as things don't turn too rough.  On many powder day, chopped up late mornings and crud afternoons in the Rockies, the Super 7 (and the new HD version, though less) will handle things, but it's much more work, for me, than with a good combined crud and powder ski.  

 

The Auto 117 does much better, really fun, for me; but it's sure a bigger deal to handle rough chop with these skis than with the Pettitor 120 or the Katana 112, for instance (both skis that can still be playful and float, unless you're much bigger).  

 

On the other hand, the Auto 117 mounted  at least 1.5 cm. forward (for me), is hard to beat for pure powder feel and performance.  (It was designed for two lighter weight pro guys, ~150 and 165 lbs, but works at least up to 185 lbs for friends, in the longer versions.)  I would expect the Backland ski to retain this strength, and become even more manueverable, perhaps. (If mounted forward? Dunno).

 

I haven't been on the new Quest 118, which has gotten mixed reviews, from what I can gather.  It's good in crud but maybe still has a float problem, relatively speaking?   


Edited by ski otter - 9/30/16 at 12:23pm
post #36 of 47

Sounds like you want a playful powder ski with really good float?  How about Line's Sick Day 125?  Bonus - You can pick up leftovers from the past few seasons for next to nothing right now.  I paid around $200 for my 2014s brand new and still in the plastic last season.   

 

Review:

http://www.skinet.com/ski/gear/line-skis-sick-day-125-2014


Edited by Fisheyes - 10/5/16 at 4:27pm
post #37 of 47
I ski the K2 Obsetheds, which is the same ski as the Annex. It's a fairly close comparison to the shreditors as far as performance, and I'd say would work well for you.
post #38 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeski919 View Post

I ski the K2 Obsetheds, which is the same ski as the Annex. It's a fairly close comparison to the shreditors as far as performance, and I'd say would work well for you.

This is a common misconception.   The Annex/Pinnacle 118, Seth Morrison's pro model, is a completely different ski, stiffer, not twinned like the Obsethed 116, much lighter.  Seth wanted a more backcountry ski, more directional, less turny.   He got it.   It's a great ski, but maybe not as versatile or playful as the Obsethed 116 (except maybe for guys like Seth).  By "less versatile" I mean it isn't as turny, so it's not as quick in trees, and a handful, for me at least, in bumps, though doable.  SG speed, if wanted.  

 

The K2 Obsethed 116s do have a successor: the K2 Pettitor 120, Sean Pettit's pro ski, described above.   Seth handed off the Obsethed 116 to him, so he modified/improved it, but in a way that suited him, working with Pep Fujas.   It retains the soft flex twin tips/tails, the turniness/slarvability, and also the powder/crud versatility; but the middle section is stiff. ("Stiffest ski we make," says K2.)  

 

To folks I know who've skied both the Obsethed 116 and the Pettitor since they came out, the Pettitor 120 is an improvement in most every way.  (Probably my favorite ski.)  Also SG speed, if wanted.   But good slow too.   


Edited by ski otter - 10/6/16 at 5:48pm
post #39 of 47

To @Mike78 :  Love to hear more.   

 

I do really want to try both the 109 and 118 FR Backland.   There are great You Tube videos of Sage And Dana, on their Atomics (Auto, Backland) and Pep Fujas and the boys on K2 Shreditor 112s, 120s, Marksmen and other K2 fats.   Freewheeling.  (Snow blowing has started.   Soon.)   :)

 

For example:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kd8U5r_F7c

post #40 of 47
Thread Starter 

From what I've heard the 117 was made less stable than the automatic but with a little more float. I'm not sure if that improves more than it takes away though.

post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

To @Mike78 :  Love to hear more.   

 

I do really want to try both the 109 and 118 FR Backland.   There are great You Tube videos of Sage And Dana, on their Atomics (Auto, Backland) and Pep Fujas and the boys on K2 Shreditor 112s, 120s, Marksmen and other K2 fats.   Freewheeling.  (Snow blowing has started.   Soon.)   :)

 

For example:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kd8U5r_F7c

 

I am really interested in the 109 also.  Long story that started with me trying to find that perfect length for my ability.  I am doing a couple of training events in RMNP this winter and while looking for "that" ski I had the opportunity to have a great discussion with an Atomic rep.  Really peaked my interest with the 109 although I would probably be smarter to be on the 118.  I will pm you with more info.   First we need some snow  :)

post #42 of 47

I didn't get to demo them but all teh shop guysa round here are talking about how amazing the Elan Ripsticks are. Having owned the Olympus/ 1010 Elan is very under rated and has produced some of the best skis on the market. Sounds like the new Ripstick designed by Glen Plake is a winner. You should def. add that ski to your list. I would also say Kastle BMX 115 but they pretty $$. I own them, prefer them to the automatics and Kantana. Elan Demo's were all done in Whistler which is very demanding on a ski as conditions vary so much and we have heavier snow. Guys all raved about how easy and fun it was for a ski with that much top end and groomer performance. If didn't own the Kastles the new Ripsticks would be the first ski on my list to demo.

post #43 of 47
All the stuff above is probably correct, but with last season's Volkl 2s available with over 50% off rrp I took a punt. Whenever the snow is soft they are good. Ace flotation, based on 124mm and deeeep rocker. Enough for Japan and fine in Swiss off piste and moguls. Not much tip flap on hard stuff either as they are stiffer than most soft snow skis.

Although Volkl reckons they don't carve, they carve just fine in my experience as long as you ski them rather than just rolling your ankles and expecting the ski to do the work. That said, Italian 100% artificial ice rink like pistes are not their home turf. Use piste skis for that.
post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyAdams View Post
 

From what I've heard the 117 was made less stable than the automatic but with a little more float. I'm not sure if that improves more than it takes away though.

Odd.

The old Auto 117 has plenty of float, at least for lighter weight guys like Sage & Dana (and myself).   Its only problem was rough crudability, especially for larger folk (maybe 190 lbs. and up?) .   I think the recommended line so far back was an attempt to fit those heavier skiers as much as possible, given this was a custom ski for those two lighter pros.  

 

The main thing about the two new Backlands is how much lighter weight they are supposed to be.   I haven't found a direct comparison for the 109 yet, but the 117 Backland is about 10% lighter, ~2050 g @186 compared to ~2250 for the old Autos.  

 

This should make the ski quicker, more manueverable, if nothing else.   But if it's lost some stability, that will be a shame, so have to wait and demo to see.  

 

To me, the old 109 was less strong on edge than the 117.   You had to accept some slarve instead of edge on packed out or corduroy, but then the ski was fine.   But the 117 could pure carve on edge, you add the slarve or not - at least for me.    

post #45 of 47
I would like to add that a pow ski you would want in Tahoe may be different than summit county. Out here in Tahoe the "pow" conditions vary so much depending on water content.

I'm about the same weight: 6"1 190

My daily driver is the on3p 191 Jeffery 114 for squaw/alpine/N*. As long as the snow is soft it's perfect. When 8-36in of Sierra cement/cream cheese fall I'm on my 194 praxis ullr 123.. Most west coast skis from local companies are somewhat region specific. I doubt I would use my Jeffrey's as a daily driver if I lived in Colorado. The past few trips to co I've taken my 189 bluehouse miestro. The miestro is prefect for trees, soft groomers, and pow that's cold smoke light. Put them in deep Sierra cement and they don't have the backbone.
Edited by Eric267 - 10/8/16 at 3:45am
post #46 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric267 View Post

I would like to add that a pow ski you would want in Tahoe may be different than summit county. Out here in Tahoe the "pow" conditions vary so much depending on water content.

I'm about the same weight: 6"1 190

My daily driver is the on3p 191 Jeffery 114 for squaw/alpine/N*. As long as the snow is soft it's perfect. When 8-36in of Sierra cement/cream cheese fall I'm on my 194 praxis ullr 123.. Most west coast skis from local companies are somewhat region specific. I doubt I would use my Jeffrey's as a daily driver if I lived in Colorado. The past few trips to co I've taken my 189 bluehouse miestro. The miestro is prefect for trees, soft groomers, and pow that's cold smoke light. Put them in deep Sierra cement and they don't have the backbone.

This "heavy snow" ability is why some West coast skis, specifically from Moment and ON3P., that I know of,  are often very good here in Colorado for resort powder days (with uneven or rough chop/crud/crust/bumps/skid-off in the P.M.).

 

I own the ON3P Jeffrey 110, and have demoed the Jeffrey 114, and both are good in Colorado full days, seems like.  Stand-outs, for me - perhaps because of my lighter weight.  I could easily have gotten the Jeffrey 114, since it's so different than the older Jeffrey 110.   The closest ski, in its quick turn behavior esp., to the 114s I can think of is the Volkl V-Werks Katana 112, which is what I'd already gotten instead.  (Not sure if the Jeffrey 114 is as good in rough crud as the Katanas - didn't get a chance to try it there.  The 110s aren't quite.)   

 

And the ON3P Billy Goat 116, to me, is possibly a complete Colorado resort ski, almost a quiver of one ski here.  Yes, they were designed to handle Sierra Cement and sketchy conditions also, but that makes them great in both powder and uneven, rough, windblown, etc. P.M. conditions in Colorado - soft bumps, corduroy, steeps....   I almost bought the Billy Goats, may still get the new and improved '17 version for resort conditions here.  It has such a unique feel.   


Edited by ski otter - 10/8/16 at 1:52pm
post #47 of 47
Guess I got off my point a little.. On3p makes great skis that will crush all conditions! My point is that I ski the praxis ullr when we get deep cement out here. It's a ski that Keith at praxis designed and tested on Sierra pow. It's long and burly which helps keep your speed up through the mank. A regional designed pow ski that's heavy and burly. It might not be my first choice for summit county as its heavy so to rip through cement
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 › 110 - 120mm Powder Ski Suggestions?