EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Getting Together, Gatherings and Let's Go › Epicski Academy › THANKS for a great ESA ... & help me pick some K2s :)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

THANKS for a great ESA ... & help me pick some K2s :)

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
Thanks to everyone for a fantastic ESA - we made some more friends, learnt some more ski stuff, had a lot of fun and came away with our first pair of skis

I'm still thinking about (and making some notes on) the coaching for another post. This post however is all about my massive quiver!!

Well, the quiver is massive since I get the entire K2 range to pick from - and in any size too. Of course once I've picked a pair then that's it for a while...

So which K2 would people suggest?

I'm
* 40
* 170-180lb
* 5'9"
* level 7-8 ish (according to Bob B)
* aggressively challenging my skills+technique

I like skiing:
* steeps
* glades+bumps
* off the groomed runs
* on the groomed runs
* but mainly steeps

Realistically most of my skiing will be at an ESA in Aspen/BigSky or in Whistler. I've rarely even encountered snow that I've been more than a foot deep in so I'm not particularly worried about fat skis. I don't get to pick where/when I go based on a recent dump... If it happens then I'll enjoy it on whatever I'm on!

I'm thinking the 167 or 174 Recon because they're narrow enough to be agile in bumps, not too edgy for steeps, good for developing my carving technique and wide enough for off-run lumps+crud.

The Outlaw seems more suited to off-piste/powder and the Crossfire seems more a carving specific tool (which is fun but by no means all I want to do!)

So can you help validate my decision and confirm the size I should get?

I am interested if you think I should consider alternatives...

A final detail: I see here: http://k2skis.com/skis/ski.asp?ProductID=2
that the bindings are 14.0 / 12.0 - what does that mean? Is there a choice I need to make?

cheers
post #2 of 20
Recon with 14.0

Or a pair of Extremes.
post #3 of 20
Why not the PE? Seems to meet all your criteria. I've skied the PE's (own an older pair) and the Recons, Crossfire, Outlaw and the (I believe) older version of the Stryker. All are good skis but I really like the PE's more then the others. Surprisingly good ski for Colorado. Good edge hold, quick in the bumps, and agile in the glades. Work in powder and on hardpack. The newe model is 85 mm instead of 80mm underfoot. My brother has a pair and loves them. Free skis, can't go wrong with any choice.
post #4 of 20
David

As a one-ski quiver for Western ESA events, I'd go for either the Outlaw or the Recon. Given where you are currently skiing, I think your development is going to focus on off-piste skiing. There's nothing wrong with the Recon for that, but a wider ski is probably going to give you a bit more confidence in skiing crud and steeps. And if you just happen to find yourself with a big dump, the Outlaw will certainly be a bit easier to handle. Finally, you should be able to ski the Outlaw in most any bumps, so I wouldn't worry about that.

Either of those two skis will be fine -- but you should recognize that you'll be spending relatively little time going forward on the groomed.

The 12 vs 14 binding is simply the max DIN setting. At your weight and level, you don't need the 14.

Mike
post #5 of 20
Ooooo, I like the idea of the Extremes, though that may be a tad, .......extreme.
post #6 of 20
Even if you don't need 14 DIN, the 14 has a better toe. As fr the PEs, I thik the Extreme is the same ski, but with a cooler topsheet (and maybe a flat tail?).
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by lbt View Post
Thanks to everyone for a fantastic ESA - we made some more friends, learnt some more ski stuff, had a lot of fun and came away with our first pair of skis

I'm still thinking about (and making some notes on) the coaching for another post. This post however is all about my massive quiver!!

Well, the quiver is massive since I get the entire K2 range to pick from - and in any size too. Of course once I've picked a pair then that's it for a while...

So which K2 would people suggest?

I'm
* 40
* 170-180lb
* 5'9"
* level 7-8 ish (according to Bob B)
* aggressively challenging my skills+technique

I like skiing:
* steeps
* glades+bumps
* off the groomed runs
* on the groomed runs
* but mainly steeps

Realistically most of my skiing will be at an ESA in Aspen/BigSky or in Whistler. I've rarely even encountered snow that I've been more than a foot deep in so I'm not particularly worried about fat skis. I don't get to pick where/when I go based on a recent dump... If it happens then I'll enjoy it on whatever I'm on!

I'm thinking the 167 or 174 Recon because they're narrow enough to be agile in bumps, not too edgy for steeps, good for developing my carving technique and wide enough for off-run lumps+crud.

The Outlaw seems more suited to off-piste/powder and the Crossfire seems more a carving specific tool (which is fun but by no means all I want to do!)

So can you help validate my decision and confirm the size I should get?

I am interested if you think I should consider alternatives...

A final detail: I see here: http://k2skis.com/skis/ski.asp?ProductID=2
that the bindings are 14.0 / 12.0 - what does that mean? Is there a choice I need to make?

cheers
lbt. We all like different characteristics in our skis. I skied Outlaws 174 for 2 years and like then but replaced with a Nordica Afterburner. this may not apply to you but let me give you a little info. and it may help you make a decision. Me 5'11, 200 lbs, good skier, ski just about everywhere and prefer off piste skiing expecially in good snow or powder. I found the Outlaw very good on groomers, a very damp ski, I found very comfortable and predictable at all speeds. Liked in powder and off piste except for one thing. To me the ski was /had a little delay in initiating a turn. this became noticable to me when skiing trees and/or places where I had to turn quic kly and decisively. They seem to me to have an approx. one second delay in the the initiation phase of a turn. Following some recommendations after I posted this question regarding the Outlaws I demo'd and subsequeently bought some Nordica Hot Rod Afterburners. Anyway thats how I found the Outlaws, others would probably disagree but that was me impression (and bye the way the Outlaws are for sale). The PE's look good, ski3ed the Atomic Snoop Daddys (08-09) last week and they were a lot like the PE's. Liked the ride, he turn but not damp enough for my taste. Good Luck Pete
post #8 of 20
lbt,
Out of the K2 line (and what I know about your skiing from sneaking a peek in Big Sky ) I would recommend the 167 Recon for you.
Ursula
post #9 of 20
I'm a long time fan of the XP's/Recons. I also own the Outlaws. I love both. But, if I were going for JUST ONE ski, I'd try the new Xplorer. The Outlaw gets to be just a bit much in terms of weight for groomers and the Recon really needs to float more in powder, I'd say it's only the right ski until the snow is about 5 inches deep, then you really want a different ski. Doesn't mean I haven't spent entire days on groomers with the Outlaws OR that I didn't get down slopes with a foot of fresh powder with the Recons, just means I thought on those days that the other ski would have been a better choice. Hence, my vote for the Xplorers, which split the difference for you.
post #10 of 20
I suppose the explore may not be bad, but he'll go "fat" soon enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Bear View Post
lbt,
Out of the K2 line (and what I know about your skiing from sneaking a peek in Big Sky ) I would recommend the 167 Recon for you.
Ursula
-Thank goodness another light in the dark along with epic.
lbt,
We're not against fat skis, but probably against learning on fat skis. On something narrower, the recon (hardly "narrow"), the feedback you get is much more immediate. If it's relatively short,(notice Ursula recomm. the 167), you can get to feel the function of the inside ski at reasonable speeds and in smaller areas.
I haven't seen you skate on skis but I can say with near certainty you need work on it. One can develop a lot just by doing something simple like skating- on the free foot land on the outside edge (little toe side) and then allow the foot to roll over to big toe side and then push off. It should look similar to speed skaters with ice skates. Narrower skis (were talking a midfat here-not even narrow) this motion is much easier to develop. On a fat ski, esp. one without lift, one feels like a reincarnated Dodo bird just trying to skate to the lift.

Being "in the snow" rather than on it can be a lot more fun. Fat skis let you get away with bad technique like heel pushes in soft snow.

You can always demo on days with snow. All you have to do is walk up to the counter and mumble "ski" with your arms outstretched and someone will hand you something fat.

Perhaps epic knows if there is a problem with the K2 integrated binding. Remember that guy at BigSky who went on and on, and then on some more about how you wanted a flat ski? Then demonstrated how the recon you were holding had a loose toe piece? Well your ski was actually flat but had a not so good demo binding on it. I don't know if the K2 integrated system has a problem or not. That guy claimed you could buy it without the integrated rails (you have to buy the binding that fits on them) and get it "flat" so you can put any binding on it.
post #11 of 20
If the Xplorer really is between the Recon and Outlaw it would be my recommendation. If you can't get the Xplorer go with the Recon.

The integrated Marker binding on K2s work fine for the vast majority of skiers. I wouldn't hesitate getting them if they come with the skis.
post #12 of 20
I heard enough about the integrated bindings that I went with the flat ski when I got my latest Recons. But, if they're paying, I'd go with the integrated bindings. I was also concerned about the weight of the integrated binding, but you're probably stronger than I am.
post #13 of 20
Thread Starter 
Wow - thanks for all the advice

Some excellent snippets in there (eg: epic's binding comment - ta) and some good points to consider. I'd wondered about the PEs being halfway between the Recon and Outlaw (which seem to have gone up to 92mm from 88mm this year and I think would no longer be in the right ballpark for a 1-ski quiver).

Also I would rather suffer a little and be forced to polish my technique than get a ski that lets me 'get away with things' - I'm not sure how rational this is but WTH.

I haven't found much info about the Extremes out there - I guess that's a new version that's not on the K2 site yet. If it weren't for the bindings coming with the Recons then I'd consider them much more seriously
Any money saved not getting bindings now go to getting Mrs lbt some skis (OK, and some new boots for me, and some poles, and an extra ESA trip... I sure hope bindings are expensive enough to justify that lot!)

Tog I do recall that guy being a tad critical of the K2 bindings but I haven't seen much about it on here (or Google) so I'll just put it down to mild paranoia on his part.

Oooh - found them.... the Extremes look excellent! Not fair - I want pretty skis! Hmm. Black paint...

SierraJim also mentions that they are trying to improve the 'damped' feel - which I think I understand and am pleased about...

Nah, the voices I hear in my head are telling me that I'm getting a good reputation for being a sane and rational skier : so I'll get the Recons in 167 with the M2/14.0 bindings. Thanks for the length advice Ursula - I wasn't sure about 167/174. Hopefully I'll get to show you a bit more next year at Aspen and/or BigSky...

Now, where's that voucher...
post #14 of 20
The PE might be between the Recon & Outlaw in width but its a totally different ski. Personally, I have a strong distaste for PEs in the steeps due to their reverse camber tip.....they just don't engage a carve in the steeps as quickly or solidly as a traditional ski.
post #15 of 20
I wouldn't worry about the K2 system binding. There was a recall a year or wo ago, but you are getting current stock. It shouldn't be a problem.
post #16 of 20
Hey, if you get to choose any ski, get radical...

How about the K2 Hellbent? 150 / 122 / 141cm

You will totally own the off-piste and I dare say, all of Great Britain will stand up and take notice at the size of your tools.
post #17 of 20
Thread Starter 
I was seriously considering them. With a little knife and some care I reckon I could actually whittle out a pair of Outlaws *AND* some skinny carvers ... and they'd have cool graphics too!

But seriously - I wouldn't want people getting tool envy over my skis as well...
post #18 of 20
Let me know when you send in your order...
post #19 of 20
Thread Starter 
Thanks nolo - I was just about to fill it in with Recon 167 + M2/14 when I saw this post with a link to the K2 2008-9 range catalogue.

I'd gotten the idea that the Explorer was in a different (intermediate) class to the Recons but that's not the case - it just appears to be midway between the Recon and Outlaw as suggested. Like Mike says, I aim to keep off the groomers whenever possible so I'm happy to have a little more assistance in the deeper snow and hopefully 84mm underfoot isn't too fat Tog

And since it appears the Recon no longer comes in 167 and doesn't have the M2/14 anymore it looks like the Explorer 128/84/112 at 170cm with the 14 binding is the best fit for all the advice I've been given.

So, everyone's advice taken into account - thankyou all.
post #20 of 20
Interesting that they now call it 3 cm longer... are they changing the way they measure the length again?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Epicski Academy
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Getting Together, Gatherings and Let's Go › Epicski Academy › THANKS for a great ESA ... & help me pick some K2s :)