EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › K2 vs. Dynastar Mid-Fats
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

K2 vs. Dynastar Mid-Fats

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
I am in the market for a mid-fat all mountain ski and seem to be narrowing down my search to K2's and Dynastar's.  

About Me
  • 25 year old, 5'9 170 pound male
  • Been skiing for about 4 years
  • Ski mostly east coast (VT) and occasional trips elsewhere
  • level 6/7
  • 60% groomed, 30% off, 10% park hitting a few jumps

What I would like (In order of importance)
  • Looking for a mid-fat all mountain ski (78mm-85mm)
  • Something that has some energy to it
  • Able to hold an edge on hardpack and rip the groomers
  • Stability at speed
  • Forgiving
  • Handle off piste when the conditions are right

What I have tried
  • Blizzard Sigma Sevens - I like them, just wish they were wider underfoot and time for an upgrade...pretty good all around feel. 
  • Volkl AC30 - I did not care for these...I thought they took too much effort and feel that they would wear me out after skiing them all day
  • Rossignol B78 - I did not find these stable at speeds.  Seemed to have good edge grip while being forgiving...but something about them seemed to be lacking.
  • Blizzard Magnum 8.1 - While I found it stable at speeds and to have great grip like the Volkls, I think they are not forgiving enough and a bit too demanding.

What I am looking at: (and I put them in order of what I am guessing is most suited for me to least suited for me)
  • K2 Apache Recon
  • Dynastar Sultan 80
  • K2 Apache Xplorer
  • Dynastar Sultan 85


Any input and advice welcomed.
post #2 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTTwin View Post

What I am looking at: (and I put them in order of what I am guessing is most suited for me to least suited for me)
  • K2 Apache Recon
  • Dynastar Sultan 80
  • K2 Apache Xplorer
  • Dynastar Sultan 85


Any input and advice welcomed.

In general, the K2's are loooong on forgiveness and short on grip and energy. So it's question of your priorities. If you prioritize grip and energy then you list should read.

Sultan 85
Sultan 80
Explorer
Recon

If you prioritze forgiveness, it is exactly reversed.

SJ
post #3 of 16
I'm not sure if you were interested in a twin tip, but the K2 Extreme/PE is a great ski.  I live in the east and they are great.  OK in bumps and powder.  They are great on groomers and chopped/crud.  Not amazing edge grip on ice, but they aren't terrible.  I ski a little more park than you and they aren't anything special in the park, but that dosn't really matter if you are only in the park 10% of your time.  Overall, they are a great all mountain mid-fat.
post #4 of 16
Sounds like you may be in a similar situation in trying to decide between the Sultan 80's and the Sultan 85's.  If that is the case, check out this thread:

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/89708/dynastar-sultan-80-s-and-sultan-85-s-need-some-help-deciding

Happy hunting.

The Beev
post #5 of 16
Sounds like you are in a similar situation as I am.  If it comes down to the 80's and 85's..check out this thread:

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/89708/dynastar-sultan-80-s-and-sultan-85-s-need-some-help-deciding


Happy Hunting.

Beev
post #6 of 16
I ski a pair of Xplorers mostly and I love them to bits, as SierraJim says they're not a particularly energetic ski (you can get some pop out of them but you have to work for it) but super forgiving and super easy to ski on. Stable at speed, plow through crud, adequate in powder etc. Even do moguls ok though my Watea 84's are a lot better for that. They hold a good edge on ice too.

I'd absolutely get them over Recons if it came to a choice between the two.
post #7 of 16
Thread Starter 
SJ-

Based on what you and rmerry have said I'm going to cross the K2 Recons off.

That would mean based on the original list, that the Explorer's and the Sultan 80's would be the sort of middle ground between grip and energy.

How do they compare in terms of flex/stiffness?
post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTTwin View Post

That would mean based on the original list, that the Explorer's and the Sultan 80's would be the sort of middle ground between grip and energy.

A small correction:  the Explorer's and Sultan 80's are are the middle ground of energy within that small group of skis.  It could very well be that even the most energetic within that list be too lethargic, or the most forgiving within that list too difficult to ski for you.  You'll only know if you demo.  Just shooting for the middle and assuming it to be the "happy medium" is not a great idea.
post #9 of 16
Head Peak 78 could fit the bill. 171cm. They are pretty damp, not light and springy, but inspire huge confidence in lots of conditions. Look at Dawgcatching's post in the 2 ski Tahoe quiver thread (and SJ's and others as well). I thought that was a great thread.
Oops, I guess this was off your topic of K2's and Dynastars.
post #10 of 16
Thread Starter 
DtEW-

That is exactly what I said...."based on the original list."

I will not have the opportunity to Demo every ski, but I know that Dynastar have a satisfaction guarantee.  If I end up with a Dynastar ski and do not like it, I can return it for a different Dynastar ski.  I am not sure about K2.
post #11 of 16
Thread Starter 
squawbomber-

would you say that the Peak 78 is more damp than the K2's?  seems from what I have read that they are not very lively or energetic, but are very stable.
post #12 of 16
I know you don't mention Twin Tips, but i'm almost the exact some stats as you except i ski out west. I just got some 09 Dynastar trouble makers with an 81mm waist. I'll let you know how they shred in feb
post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post





Sultan 85
Sultan 80


Explorer





Recon
 

That's your answer right there.
post #14 of 16
Thread Starter 
I am curious which of the 80's, 85's, Explorer or Recon that the Peak 78 would compare to...I assume the Recon only in size but more like the Explorer in terms of performance and feel?
post #15 of 16
Support Made in the USA !

And I have skied these.  VERY SOLID SKI
http://www.momentskis.com/skis/freebird.php
post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTTwin View Post

squawbomber-

would you say that the Peak 78 is more damp than the K2's?  seems from what I have read that they are not very lively or energetic, but are very stable.
 

Yeah, big time. Your read on it is right. I haven't skied the recon, but I owned the crossfire (the 68mm version) and it got bounced around big time. The Head is considered a higher performing ski, but the Recons are great skis and probably better for a lot of people.
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 vs. Dynastar Mid-Fats