EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review - K2 Outlaw 181CM/184 CM Mythic Pro Rider
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review - K2 Outlaw 181CM/184 CM Mythic Pro Rider

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Demo'd both these at Alpental.

Me- 6'0" 162 lbs
Advanced/Expert Level Skier - 32 + yrs skiing

Conditions - Pow, tracked pow, soft groomers and crud.

Outlaw
Skied the back bowl and did a run through some fresh 8" of heavy wet pow. Float was very nice. Getting down into the cut up pow, they floated over most of it. Ski is damp and smooth. Getting into some narrow areas, the ski turned quite well. The ski has a very nice solid feel but it didn't feel too stiff for the conditions. I had no trouble handling the moguls. Not quite as quick and lively as the Mythic Pro Riders but still manageable.

Railed the groomers. Very easy to make nice medium turns and the ski was unflappable at speeds as fast as I felt comfortable going.

Overall a nice mid-fat ski with decent float for a 88mm waisted ski. Not overly stiff and handled all terrain from steep narrow treed chutes to wide open soft groomers. Would make a nice all around every day ski.

Mythic
Skied basically the same runs as the Outlaws. Float is very nice. Not as damp or stiff as the Outlaw. A bit of deflection in the wet crud but it also was a bit warmer and the snow was getting to a slushy consitency as the sun beat down on it. Was about 40F toward the end of the ski day. The skis were easy to ski in the moguls. They are lighter than the Outlaws and they just killed it on the groomers. Very quick edge to edge for an 88mm waisted ski. Liked them slightly better on the groomers and the moguls than the Outlaw. Honestly it was a tie in regards to float in the 8"+ of untracked pow that I took them through.

To sum it up; I liked both skis. Both float well, would give it a tie on performane. Both handled the groomers well, though I would give the Mythic a slight edge here, and same goes for moguls. Outlaw felt more stable in the crud but I was also pretty whipped when I took the Mythics for a test run. Either way, I would be happy on either ski and both are suited for hitting the slopes here in the PNW.
post #2 of 21
Who did you get the demos from? I live in Seattle and I am trying to decide between the Mythics, Watea 94s and Line Prophet for our powder crud days.
I am surprised that you felt the Outlaws were stiffer than the Mythics- I thought the Mytics were much stiffer.
post #3 of 21
Thread Starter 
Sturtevants had a demo day at Alpental on Saturday August 22. I also demo'd the Atomic Snoop and the Sugar Daddies but I really don't care for the feel of Atomics.
post #4 of 21
Thanks Toadman!
Do you have any experience with other powder skis that you could recommend more? Would you consider the Mythic a good overall powder/crud ski for the NW? I have some old K2 Axis X pros for packed or spring snow days.
Me-I ski mostly new snow days at Crystal, Alpental. 180Lbs 5-10, Advanced/Expert Level Skier - 40 + yrs skiing.
What size did you demo-178s?
post #5 of 21
I would just like to add. One of the regular female Skiers @ Mt. Rose just started skiing a 178 CM Mythic Rider. She is 40 sumthin 5.6 140 sumthin pounds. She is having a very good time all over the mountain on these skis. Very happy.

If I were a 6 ft 170 pound guy, I would be looking for something bigger
post #6 of 21
I'm 5'10, 165 lbs, advanced/expert skier.

The 178cm MR is plenty of ski.
post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel View Post
I'm 5'10, 165 lbs, advanced/expert skier.

The 178cm MR is plenty of ski.
I concur.
post #8 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTT View Post
I would just like to add. One of the regular female Skiers @ Mt. Rose just started skiing a 178 CM Mythic Rider. She is 40 sumthin 5.6 140 sumthin pounds. She is having a very good time all over the mountain on these skis. Very happy.

If I were a 6 ft 170 pound guy, I would be looking for something bigger
She was the one I saw doing keg stands and hucking 40' cliffs right?

At that height and weight she is in the minority of people that would enjoy being on a ski that long and that stiff.

Perhaps she's the founder of TGR? :
post #9 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystalite View Post
Thanks Toadman!
Do you have any experience with other powder skis that you could recommend more? Would you consider the Mythic a good overall powder/crud ski for the NW? I have some old K2 Axis X pros for packed or spring snow days.
Me-I ski mostly new snow days at Crystal, Alpental. 180Lbs 5-10, Advanced/Expert Level Skier - 40 + yrs skiing.
What size did you demo-178s?

My current fresh snow ski is the Fischer Atua. (Current version is the Fischer Misfit) Not really all that wide of a pow ski (96mm) but I can ski it all day in the PNW pow and skied it last year at Crystal in waist deep pow in the North Back with no problems. I like the medium flex and all wood construction.

I also demo'd the Atomic Sugar Daddy in 183 cm length. 99mm waist. It didn't have any better float than my Atuas but they are lighter and easy to ski. They were fine in the cut up pow.

I demo'd the Mythic in a 184 length. At 180 lbs, that would be a good length ski for you. IMHO, they ski shorter and I did not distinguish a difference in feel between the 181 cm Outlaw and the Mythic other than the swing weight on the Mythic felt lighter and easier to hop turn in some of the narrow chutes at Alpy (Trash Can area). Really no issues with slaying the crud on the Mythics.

My everyday ski is the Legend 8000 in a 178cm. I now wish I had it in a 184 after how easy the Mythic skis in a 184 cm length. I notice that the Mythic mounted at center has a lot of tail. You could probably get 'em and mount them -1 and they would be great in the pow. When it's time to replace the 8000's, I'll be looking at replacing them with the Mythics.

Hope that helps.
post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post
Perhaps she's the founder of TGR? :
Good one.....................

SJ
post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
Good one.....................

SJ
I hope your kidding? My post was an honest observation.

I thought the response was kinda telling about the person who made the response.

I just don't know what else to say? I guess myself and the people I ski with are just living in a different skiing world than you
post #12 of 21
I was...hence the grinny.

SJ
post #13 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTT View Post
I hope your kidding? My post was an honest observation.

I thought the response was kinda telling about the person who made the response.

I just don't know what else to say? I guess myself and the people I ski with are just living in a different skiing world than you
That's one thing we do agree on.
post #14 of 21
Thanks for the great info Toadman-
I got a chance to demo a 179cm Watea 94 and a 179cm Mythic Rider last weekend at Crystal. Great conditions with ~10" new in the AM but it got very warm in Later with the Sunbaking.

Wateas (skied in AM):
Great float and very turny-easy to initiate. Very good over soft chopped snow and moguls, but squirrely when going fast on packed.

Mythics (skied in the PM on heavy crud, moguls and packed):
The Mythics were much better on packed runs and going fast, good on Crud and moguls. They were harder to initiate in crud and had a tendency to separate if I was not careful, but were definately more stable. The snow was very heavy and stiff though. Overall I liked the Mythics better than the Wateas.
Ideally I think something in between the two would be great- a little softer than the Mythic for initiation and powder, but still stable for speed and crud. Maybe the Outlaw fits that bill,
post #15 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystalite View Post
Wateas (skied in AM):
Great float and very turny-easy to initiate. Very good over soft chopped snow and moguls, but squirrely when going fast on packed.

Mythics (skied in the PM on heavy crud, moguls and packed):
The Mythics were much better on packed runs and going fast, good on Crud and moguls. They were harder to initiate in crud and had a tendency to separate if I was not careful, but were definately more stable. The snow was very heavy and stiff though. Overall I liked the Mythics better than the Wateas.
Ideally I think something in between the two would be great- a little softer than the Mythic for initiation and powder, but still stable for speed and crud. Maybe the Outlaw fits that bill,
K2 is coming out with an update to the Outlaw for '09. IIRC, It's a 90mm waist instead of 88mm. The Outlaw that I demo'd was the '08 version. K2 is also coming out with an entirely new ski, the Explorer with an 82mm width. I saw someone at Crystal last Saturday that was on them but he had not yet made a test run. The difference between the Outlaw and Mythic was in the damp ride of the Outlaw and the Mythic with a lively, lighter feel to it.
post #16 of 21
OK, I'm old and tired, but at 52, 5:8, 170, but haven't felt a need for anything longer than my 165 Mythic's (or 168 8800's) in Tahoe, Whistler or LCC in anything ranging from 16 inch fresh to hardpack.

What movies is this gal in? SKI movies I mean.

Anyway, bigger than 178 for 6:0, 170? I think not.
post #17 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
OK, I'm old and tired, but at 52, 5:8, 170, but haven't felt a need for anything longer than my 165 Mythic's (or 168 8800's) in Tahoe, Whistler or LCC in anything ranging from 16 inch fresh to hardpack.

What movies is this gal in? SKI movies I mean.

Anyway, bigger than 178 for 6:0, 170? I think not.
I'm always surprised that folks think that a long ski is difficult to ski unless you are 200 lbs + and squat 500 lbs x 8 reps and ski 100 days a year. As my review indicated on the MR 184, it is really easy to ski. I'm 162 lbs when I have my pack on. The 184 MR is just as easy to ski as my Legend 8k's in a 178. In fact they feel very similar, except you can go faster, float better and bust crud much easier on the 184 MR than you can with the 178 8K's.
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadman View Post
I'm always surprised that folks think that a long ski is difficult to ski unless you are 200 lbs + and squat 500 lbs x 8 reps and ski 100 days a year. As my review indicated on the MR 184, it is really easy to ski. I'm 162 lbs when I have my pack on. The 184 MR is just as easy to ski as my Legend 8k's in a 178. In fact they feel very similar, except you can go faster, float better and bust crud much easier on the 184 MR than you can with the 178 8K's.
Interesting... If I am not mistaken, 184 MRs have a larger turn radius than 178 (and 178 has the same as 172). I have not tried the MR in any size other than 178, but I did try the 8K in 184 and 178. To me 184 was just a tad less quick. It was still quick but not the lightning-quick of the 178. I don;t think I need more length in my MRs than 178, I have not yet managed to hit the speed limit with those anyway. Having said that, I can't imagine having 184 MRs feel similar to the 178 8Ks, just hard to imagine a stiffer burlier longer ski feeling the same as a shorter, softer and lighter ski. Just my 0.02.

Alex


Alex
post #19 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post
Interesting... If I am not mistaken, 184 MRs have a larger turn radius than 178 (and 178 has the same as 172). I have not tried the MR in any size other than 178, but I did try the 8K in 184 and 178. To me 184 was just a tad less quick. It was still quick but not the lightning-quick of the 178. I don;t think I need more length in my MRs than 178, I have not yet managed to hit the speed limit with those anyway. Having said that, I can't imagine having 184 MRs feel similar to the 178 8Ks, just hard to imagine a stiffer burlier longer ski feeling the same as a shorter, softer and lighter ski. Just my 0.02.

Alex


Alex
Just to clarify my post, I didn't say that the MR was quicker, just that it has a similar feel. Both skis are constructed with a layer of metal and sandwich construction. They both have that lively trademark feel of a Dynastar. The difference is in the speed you can go with the longer length and the stability that comes with it. I've been on the 178 Legend 8K's for 3 years and my first impression when I hopped on the 184 MR, was WOW this is just as easy to ski as my 8k's. Then I took it through some 8" of pow, and my next impression, was wow, this is EASIER to ski than my 8K's. Easy in the sense that a longer, wider, ski floats better, and handles variable snow better.
post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadman View Post
Just to clarify my post, I didn't say that the MR was quicker, just that it has a similar feel. Both skis are constructed with a layer of metal and sandwich construction. They both have that lively trademark feel of a Dynastar. The difference is in the speed you can go with the longer length and the stability that comes with it. I've been on the 178 Legend 8K's for 3 years and my first impression when I hopped on the 184 MR, was WOW this is just as easy to ski as my 8k's. Then I took it through some 8" of pow, and my next impression, was wow, this is EASIER to ski than my 8K's. Easy in the sense that a longer, wider, ski floats better, and handles variable snow better.
Interesting... My first impression when I hopped on 178 Mythic was also, wow this thing is almost as easy to ski on groomers as my 8Ks. The only differences were that MRs actually can go straight (8Ks kind of need to be kept on an edge all the time), and that MRs were MUCH more stable. Have not had a chance to test them in powder, so can't say much... My expectation is that 184s will be a better powder ski due to longer length, but probably at the expense of quickness in all other conditions. I do have a kind of a pure powder ski in my redundant and too-closely-spaced quiver, a pair of B4s, so I am not too much worried about powder performance of my new 178 MRs; although I am sure they will do just fine...

Enjoy the MRs, they seem to be a great ski.
post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadman View Post
I'm always surprised that folks think that a long ski is difficult to ski unless you are 200 lbs + and squat 500 lbs x 8 reps and ski 100 days a year. As my review indicated on the MR 184, it is really easy to ski. I'm 162 lbs when I have my pack on. The 184 MR is just as easy to ski as my Legend 8k's in a 178. In fact they feel very similar, except you can go faster, float better and bust crud much easier on the 184 MR than you can with the 178 8K's.
Who said it was more difficult to ski? :

The point is, what's the point of the extra length? The shorter length has great advantages in trees, bumps etc. and I've not had any problem reasching the speed top end of the ski. I'll take the shorter, more maneuverable ski everytime because it does more of what I like. At 160lbs, it's hard for me to find a reason for anything longer than 178, particularly if, like me, you want trees and glades etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review - K2 Outlaw 181CM/184 CM Mythic Pro Rider