or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

need advise on K2 skis

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 
I'm thinking about buying a pair of K2T9X skis. I'm 48 yrs. old, been skiing for 25 yrs.,weigh 160 and am 5'6" in height. I am an advanced skier and generally ski fast but am starting to mellow with age! I want a ski that will carve easily, can handle our midwest ice conditions and also be skiable on Colorado vacations. Do you think the K2T9X would be a good choice for me? Do you think 167 would be a good length?
post #2 of 5
Sue, the K2 T-Nine X is the women's version of the K2 Axis [no X]. I am a mediocre skier, sixty years old, about ten years experience. I am 5'8" tall and weigh 145 soaking wet [or full of beer]. Last year, I skied this model in 174 cm length and loved it. However, in order to get more maneuverability, I sold it and got the exact same ski in 167 cm - which I also love, and it definitely is more maneuverable. If I stayed on open slopes, I'd have stuck with the 174. This is an impossble question to answer. I know that whether you get the 167 or the 174, you'll be happy. If you stay on open slopes, get the 174. If you get into trees, bumps or narrow, winding trails, get the 167. Please let us know what you decide and why. Also, what breed of dogs are you working with?
post #3 of 5
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the info, oboe. The guy at the ski shop was trying to talk me into going even shorter than the 167! I don't think I'd be happy going shorter than that since I've been on 180's for 15 years. Do you think there's much difference between the Axis that you have, the T9X and the Escape 5500? Do you think the 5500 is more of an intermediate ski? Oh, and to answer your question, I have Giant Schnauzers - a 107 lb. male and a female puppy who's 57 lbs. at 7 months old. Thanks again and I'll let you know what I decide.
post #4 of 5
Sue, the guy at the shop obviuosly does not think you ski very well!

FIRST: the Axis/T9X is a ski that does well in crud and powder - VERY well. The longer the ski, the better it handles that stuff, so there is a trade-off: Sure, a shorter ski is more maneuverable - but it also is less stable at speed and gives less float. A longer ski is stable and gives more float, but there is a point at which you're skiing a locomotive rather than a Jeep. So by going TOO short, you'd be giving up something that this particular ski is known for. My 167 - for this aging lightweight [60 yo and 145 lbs] - is SHORT ENOUGH, thank you! It certainly would be short enough for you, being somewhat heavier and more experienced.

SECOND: You already are looking at a ski specifically made for women - you do not need to go for shorter lengths "because you are a woman".

THIRD: The Escape 5500 is a totally different ski. It is lighter, narrower, and more flexible than the Axis/T9X. It IS a terrific ski, easy turning but not too shabby going fast. It's a BETTER short turner than the T9X would be. The 174 I demoed made shorter turns VERY easily. They did not have it set up in 167, so I do not know how that would have worked for me. It IS an "intermediate ski", but no more so than the Axis/T9X. They're just different. The Axis/T9X is more of an all mountain, all terrain ski. Also, the 5500 costs less. It's a GREAT value for the money. They may also have that in a female specific model. When you're on this site on the home page, look to the left side of the page. Skip down past the forum part and look for "gear info". From there, go to where they list brand names and click on K2. That will take you right to the K2 website, and the info on female specific skis will all be there. By the way, a lot of the advice you need depends heavily on where you ski, what kind of terrain you ski, what kind of snow you encounter, how FAST you ski. Would you please fill me in on this info? Then we can "fine tune" the information passed along to you by me and perhaps others. But I DO believe that, if you get the T9X at all, you should NOT go shorter than 167, and depending on the considitions in which you ski, even the 174 could be ok. In the 5500, I myself would hesitate to go as short as 167 - but since I have not demoed that length in the 5500, I can't say that for certain.
post #5 of 5
P.S. The 180's you've had for 15 years have nothing to do with correct lengths in today's modern skis - believe me! In fact, I would have considered that length TOO SHORT for me in the older skis! Today's skis have a lot more shape and width. When I skied on the older skis, like your 15 year old skis, I was on 190's and longer! Today, I would not dream of skiing on that length in a modern ski. Whatever you decide to buy, you will be amazed at how solid and stable modern skis feel at their comparatively shorter lengths. It's a different world, and I only wish I could see the look on your face the first time you make a run on your new skis! You're gonna love 'em!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion