EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › K2 Lotta Luv - which length??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

K2 Lotta Luv - which length??

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
Hi to all! My first post...

It is snowing in the high country already and I am getting psyched up and ready to buy some new skis. But I need some help...because I am actually going to buy w/o specifically demoeing...These K2's are hard to come by and I have found a current bid on Ebay and also a new purchase on geardirect. So trying to decide on 153cm or 160cm.

I did demo last yrs K2 Apache Recon (mens version of Lotta luv) at approx 160 (+?). I liked it but thought it was a little not too lively, felt stable and was nice float in powder, harder to execute on bumps. I am coming off Salomon XScream 9's at 161cm. I am really getting into tree skiing, still like the bumps and enjoy fairly high speed cruising. Any feedback welcomed!!! Thnx

My details: female, 5'6", small frame at 110-115lbs
post #2 of 20
I would say the 160. I saw the 07's at the store recently, it seems like a very substantial ski.
post #3 of 20
Your "not too lively" comment is a common response toward most K2's. This is not a bad thing, just a characteristic of the brand. With your specs a 160 is the longest that you would need and given the fact that K2's run long, the 153 is not way out of whack either.

If a little more energy or pop might suit you better, then there are possibly better choices. The Dynastar Exclusive powder is a great choice and has a light and nimble feel. The Volkl Attiva AC-3 and the Nordica Olympia Victory come immediately to mind as other great models.

Generally, I'd say that really good deals on the Lotta (or most any K2) will be somewhat difficult to find. I was sold out of that model in late January - Early February. The few that are around seem to command a fairly hefty price for an '05-'06 ski.

SJ
post #4 of 20
Where is Treckchick, our resident Gear Diva?
post #5 of 20
Not having any experience on the Luv line, but having kept up on the reviews. I'd say the 160 would be fine.

I'm not much bigger than you and I wouldn't hesitate to get it in the 160.
As Sierra Jim said, I'm really intrigued with the Volkl Attiva AC3. Hate to admit it but the womens skis are really starting to get my attention.

What ever you decide, enjoy and report back. We want to know how you like them

BTW, Sierra Jim, do you know how much the K2 Luv technology has changed in the past two years. I understand that it's been mostly a graphix change, with little actual design change. Do you have any input on that?
post #6 of 20
TC:

The binding interface on the highest end Luvs is now sunken into the surface of the ski. In a general sense, this is being done on several brands. The marketing take is "more direct energy transfer" In a more objective sense, I have skied all the Luvs and of course all the Apache series too.

The most notable difference is the lighter weight, but that is often tough to feel on the snow. Katherine, (my right hand in the ski dept) has skied 'em all too, and we both have similar feelings. Ie: nice enough skis, but not a lot of difference.

SJ
post #7 of 20
Sierra Jim
I picked up the 04-05 burnin Luvs with the system bindings. I found very little information on the possible changes in the two years that transpired,but if weight and binding setting is the only difference I think I'll be happy with the deal I got. If not, I may have some burnin luvs for sale
post #8 of 20
Thread Starter 
Thanks to everyone for feedback. I headed to the ski store to just talk length with them and walked out with last yr's Lotta luv new, w/performance Marker bindings in 160. Didn't expect to see 05's there but somehow they picked up some. Got a good deal - so, hopefully will love 'em! Can't wait to hit the slopes! And maybe I will demo those Nordica's... thanks again.
post #9 of 20

Lotta's

I have last years Burnin's in 160, I'm about your height but a little heavier.

I picked up a great bargain on a brand new 07 pair of Lotta's at the beginning of our season, got them in the same length. I was hoping to try them out, but lack of snow means it was not to be, so they will just have to wait for Chamonix in February.

I'm still tossing up whether I will keep my Burnin's.
post #10 of 20
I got my wife a pair of last year's lotta luvs in 153. She is 5'4" and around 110lbs. She definitely rips on those. They are extremely stable for their short length and she can make any radius turn with ease. We ski Jay quite a bit and she wanted something with a short turning radius for the trees, and a damp ski for speed.
post #11 of 20
so now that we're into the season, does anyone have any additional insight or thoughts on this thread?

i ask because i just picked up some LottaLuvs (without demo-ing--i'm impatient) and the good folks at REI seem convinced i should be skiing on 153s. i'm having second thoughts and have a brief window here where i can go upto 160s. i would love to have some additional insight.

my specs: 5'4", 130, aggressive advanced skier. ski almost anything (except trees)

thanks,
-s
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by sas View Post
i ask because i just picked up some LottaLuvs (without demo-ing--i'm impatient) and the good folks at REI seem convinced i should be skiing on 153s. i'm having second thoughts and have a brief window here where i can go upto 160s. i would love to have some additional insight.

my specs: 5'4", 130, aggressive advanced skier. ski almost anything (except trees)
I can't quite tell, but I assume you got the 153's. What are you skiing now?

I demoed the '07 version in a 160 last week and absolutely loved them. I'm 5'3" and a LOT heavier than you. I am a fairly agressive skiier and steadily progressing, just now learning to ski the powder and bumps, but I like to fly on the hard pack. These skis did not chatter and vibrate at the higher speeds and the transition from hardpack to powder was awsome, no kick back. I had some trouble the first day on the ice, but once I let the ski do what it wanted to do, things were much smoother and even the icy hardpack was fine.

If you are skiing shorter skis now and they vibrate and chatter at speed, it's time to go a little longer. K2's do tend to be a bit longer than another brand with the equivalent cm length. For your height & weight, the 153s should be ok, but remember that does not take into account your skiing ability and aggressiveness. Remember the guys at REI have never seen you ski.

As I have recently learned, REI is not the best place for detailed advice. They can quote the brochures and have a good general knowledge, but they are not exactly experts. I will never, ever let them sell me boots again (last pair was a full size too big and not appropriate for my foot). Don't get me wrong, I love that store and spend a great deal of time and money there, but where skiing is concerned, I am very sceptical of thier advice nowadays.
post #13 of 20
I have been skiing on the 160 Apache Recons for the past 2 1/2 seasons. I love them - stable at speed, easy turning, enough width for some float. I'm 5'2", 130 lbs and I am a good skier who skis about 75 days a year at Lake Tahoe - so mostly soft snow and not much hardpack (except this week).

Go with the 160s
post #14 of 20
I couldn't get the 160's for my wife two years ago, so I reluctantly went with the 153's. She loves them and can rip the bumps. Not quite as stable at high speeds on hard snow, but she has longer R11's for that. 5'4"/120
post #15 of 20
i have the 153's. i'm 5'6 and 65 kilos ( dunno about pds!) and i absolutely love them. they do everything i ask of them, especially good in the crud where they just charge on through the stuff.
post #16 of 20
My wife is 5'2", 125 pounds a strong level 8/9 skier. Uses these everywhere....groomers, powder, crud, bumps.....

She skis the 160cm and loves them. If anything, she comments that they're a bit "too easy" which, having owned & skied the Recon, Outlaw & Chief myself, is a characteristic K2 trait. I agree with SierraJim's comments above in this regard.
post #17 of 20
thanks all! i'm going with the 160s. i will report back after i ski them next weekend! (and will take my old skis in case i need something to bang up...

think snow,
-s
post #18 of 20
So it is time for new skis this year and I am pretty sure the Lotta Luv's are the way I want to go. However, being late in the season, most shops have sold off their demos and the only ones left are the 153's. I currently ski Rossignol Bandits, 170. I am an aggressive skier and like to ski pretty much anything and everything. Love the length of the skis I have now. I have heard the K2's run a little long, the 153's are way out of the question, so I am looking at the 160 v. 167. I am 5'5" about 150 lbs. Any thoughts?
post #19 of 20
160's the 167 is a bit long for your height
post #20 of 20
I'm 5'6" and I ski the 167!
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 › K2 Lotta Luv - which length??