New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Short, stiff and fat.

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Yes, this is skiing related. No nekkid pics...
(This is a spin off of a previous thread)
A pair of karmas in 161 cm have just been delivered to my door.
I knew they were supposed to be stiff, but expected the shorter size to be softer than the big boys length.
Well, I was wrong. The 161 seems really stiff to me. Like a 185, with both ends chopped off.
Now, they may ski just fine. And my worries unfounded.
But still :
What's the point of a stiff twin tip in 87mm of width in such a short size !?
Those kind of soft snow skis are supposed to be skied quite long. A 161 is aimed at ligter folks.

What kind of skier / use is it designed for ?
post #2 of 12
Philippe:

The bigger question: Why did you buy that length?

Got
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotama View Post
Philippe:

The bigger question: Why did you buy that length?

Got
The "I'm retarded" issue is covered in the original thread.
(short version : They are not for me).
Current question : Who are they good for ?
post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by philippeR View Post
Current question : Who are they good for ?


Or if you prefer the original...

post #5 of 12
Keep in mind that since it is a twin tip you may be losing up to 10 cm of running length on the back end, making those effectively 151s. If you ski those in soft snow you will probably have to sit in the back seat and swizzle them to turn. It sounds like they are designed to be a park/pipe ski.
post #6 of 12
When the ski gets shorter, it should get incrementally softer. Either the glass layup or the core thickness has to change fairly significantly in order for this to happen. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

SJ
post #7 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
Keep in mind that since it is a twin tip you may be losing up to 10 cm of running length on the back end, making those effectively 151s. If you ski those in soft snow you will probably have to sit in the back seat and swizzle them to turn. It sounds like they are designed to be a park/pipe ski.
Seems too stiff, too "alpine" for a pure park ski.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post

Do you know him ? I may have a ski to sell...
post #8 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by philippeR View Post
Seems too stiff, too "alpine" for a pure park ski.
Don't know any other use for a stiff ski that short other than for doing tricks.
post #9 of 12
They are designed for park and all mountain, that's what I was told by the first person I ever saw on them, he had his center mounted, and said that there were mounting points for park, as well as alpine.
post #10 of 12
You're waaaaay over thinking this!
Your wife it a little less weight than I am so she may have fun on those. Why not try them. Maybe an awesome bump ski for her! DOOOO IT!

I doubt your son will be able to flex them, but he may surprise you.
post #11 of 12
SJ can chime in with more appropriate data, but i owned a pair of the 2006 Karmas (sold 'em off this summer) in a 177. I'm 5'11" and 185...they ended up skiiing hella short.

Also, despite being a twin tip, they definitely were made more as an "all mountain" ripper than purely a twin. I chocked that up to the stiffness (they are incredibly stiffer than a lot of other twins by other companies and of similar dimensions, Armada and Line, for example).

I always looked at the Karma as being the twin tip for hip non-park skiers. I don't think I saw anybody railing in the park on Karmas, but I saw lottsa people skiing groomers and off-piste on 'em. I always looked at them as being a "bridge" (and conversely the new Bridge from Volkl is more or less the replacement for the Karma, according to SJ).



But 161 seems hella short unless you're a youth in elementary or middle school...
post #12 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trekchick View Post
You're waaaaay over thinking this!
Your wife it a little less weight than I am so she may have fun on those. Why not try them. Maybe an awesome bump ski for her! DOOOO IT!

I doubt your son will be able to flex them, but he may surprise you.
I heard you ! I'm past the wife / kid issue. I was wondering about the target consumer for that kind of ski (short, wide, stiff).
(ie, over thinking things, me ? Are you serious ? )

Quote:
Originally Posted by dookey67 View Post
SJ can chime in with more appropriate data, but i owned a pair of the 2006 Karmas (sold 'em off this summer) in a 177. I'm 5'11" and 185...they ended up skiiing hella short.

Also, despite being a twin tip, they definitely were made more as an "all mountain" ripper than purely a twin. I chocked that up to the stiffness (they are incredibly stiffer than a lot of other twins by other companies and of similar dimensions, Armada and Line, for example).

I always looked at the Karma as being the twin tip for hip non-park skiers. I don't think I saw anybody railing in the park on Karmas, but I saw lottsa people skiing groomers and off-piste on 'em. I always looked at them as being a "bridge" (and conversely the new Bridge from Volkl is more or less the replacement for the Karma, according to SJ).



But 161 seems hella short unless you're a youth in elementary or middle school...
In what case it will be hella stiff...

Anyway, we'll see on snow.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion