EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2010 Fat Ski: Gotama or Sidestash
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2010 Fat Ski: Gotama or Sidestash

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Firstly, apologies for yet another "what ski" thread ... yawwwnnnn... I know you guys MUST be tiring of it, but this is by a long way the best forum to get good and friendly advice IMO, so i'll test your collective patience :-)

 

Over the last months I’ve been reading literally hundreds of reviews and forum postings mulling over the benefits of a variety of fat skis.  Thanks to these, my “short” list started off with about a dozen skis, which I’ve now withered down to the following:  2010 Gotama (@178cm) and K2 Sidestash (@174cm).

 

My details are as follows:

Me:  36yrs old, 5’10” and 170lbs.

Ability:  Experienced and aggressive, technically proficient but not brilliant.

Quiver:  Nordica Hot Rod TF @ 170cm and 78mm underfoot which is my everyday ski (meaning 80% of the time).  Fischer Kehua @ 179cm and 92mm underfoot, which I use only when we get fresh powder.

Location:  Italian Dolomites & European Alps

 

The Kehua was my first fat ski, and was bought when I started venturing off-piste.  Its soft and forgiving, great for skiing trees, and has enabled me to develop my ability and confidence in backside skiing.  After three years of faithful service, I feel that I’ve outgrown it, and need something a bit more challenging, which will help me further lift my level.

 

According to my research the 2010 Gotama and Sidestash are pretty similar skiis in terms of dimensions, stiffness, and the way they ski.  You could write a book on the Gotamas with all the reviews, but the K2, being completely new, has got far less coverage on the forums, despite having won a bunch of awards.  I’ll be using the skis almost exclusively for off-piste (plus the occasional piste to transfer from one side of the mountain to the other).  The offpiste terrain is a mixture of wide open bowls (40%), steep and narrow (30%), trees (30%).  Snow is generally fairly light powder, which gets cut up fairly quickly, and subsequently crust and crud.  I don’t ski bumps.  Most of my backside skiing is done within 30min hike of the lifts, so weight isn't a huge issue.  BTW - i'm planning to fit Marker Duke or Barons.

 

My Hot Rods will remain my everydays ski so I don’t really care about groomer performance, and my Kehua will remain for days when I’m offpiste but lazy or less than 100% focused.

 

I’m sure I’ll be perfectly happy with either ski, but would love some input from you guys about how the two compare, particularly if you’ve skied both.

 

Cheers,

 

redline

-------------------------------
"Pain is temporaty.  Quitting lasts forever".
Lance Armstrong

 


Edited by redline - 2/28/10 at 5:10am
post #2 of 12
I think either ski would work great for the intended purpose. I ski something very much like the Gotama and really enjoy it when there is fresh snow on the ground. Based on the below comments on the Sidestash, it sounds fun too.
Quote
K2 SideStash (181cm?)
: new ski for 2010, 108mm (ish) underfoot, tip rocker (5/15 or so), fairly stiff flex, laminate sidewall.  I tried this ski in all sorts of snow, really soft, crappy new snow w/rain, soft slushy bumps forming, and somewhat groomed stuff.  Overall, I was very impressed.  I thought it to be quite a bit more nimble than the Answer, a slightly softer ski that worked well for me. It floated well in the crap, was easy to ski, but didn’t really get nervous at speed: there was some beef to this ski.  On the slushy groomers, it was quick edge to edge if you were doing fast releases, but wasn’t confidence-inspiring in bigger GS arcs. You could engage the edge and set/release, but trying to arc out a turn on sidecut only felt very weird, due to the rocker and lack of tip engagement.  Off piste, this wasn’t any sort of an issues, and I could take this into bumps and do OK.  The Answer was a better (still not good) carver, but stiffer and a bit more work: the Sidestash may be the better choice for the lighter skier.  In cruddy snow, I felt as confident as I did all day, and would have thoroughly enjoyed it, had my leg not been killing me and hindering my releasing out of the old turn.  I think this is going to be a very popular ski for that person who wants a solid wide ski that isn’t too horrible on the harder conditions and that doesn’t make too many compromises.   Should target that Obsethed customer who wants a versatile soft snow ski w/o the park graphics, or anyone looking for a versatile soft snow ride: a very good ski.
Frankly, whichever you can get the best deal on would be my choice.
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 
Hey Liv2, thanks for the reply!  I figure it will come down to which I get the best deal on or which graphics/colours I prefer :-)  
I may even opt for the Sidestash because the goat is absolutely everywhere!  
I've never bought a ski for such trivial reasons, but with these two its hard to make up my mind.

Thanks again for the input...

redline

-------------------------------
"Pain is temporaty.  Quitting lasts forever".
Lance Armstrong

post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by redline View Post
I’ve now withered down to the following:  2010 Gotama (@178cm) and K2 Sidestash (@174cm).

 

My details are as follows:

Fischer Kehua @ 179cm and 92mm underfoot, which I use only when we get fresh powder.

Location:  Italian Dolomites & European Alps

Cheers,

 

redline

-------------------------------
"Pain is temporaty.  Quitting lasts forever".
Lance Armstrong

 


I forgot to mention that you want a longer ski depending on where the early rise/tip rocker starts. I normally ski a 184 Mythic Rider as my DD and bought 190 Praxis Backcountry's as the tip rocker starts about 15 inches from the tip. That said, on hard pack they ski really short, like a 170, where as in soft snow the extra length is great for float yet the rockered tip really helps initiate turns so no worries about the longer ski. Just something you need to think about.
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
 Hey liv2,

Thanks for your thoughts... which make a lot of sense.  I may go up on the length based on what you've said, and also the fact that  my kehuas make awesome tools for the tight trees anyway, so i've got an ultra-nimble alternative if needed.

I've been looking around some more, and I'm surprised that for a ski thats practically sold out everywhere, there are not many reviews on the Sidestash, which if I manage to find one, will be my first choice.

Thanks again for the feedback, which is much appreciated.

redline

-------------------------------
"Pain is temporaty.  Quitting lasts forever".
Lance Armstrong

post #6 of 12

Redline:

 

I know it's a while afterward, but if you get the Sidestash, please post a review. I'd be very curious in how they perform off piste. Particularly in the areas you mentioned (bowls, chutes, and trees).

post #7 of 12

p100s?  Just a thought..

post #8 of 12

I rode the Sidestash all last season, and while I haven't been on the 2010 Gotama I have been on some previous versions. The difference between those two skis are are the tails, flex pattern and metal. The Sidestash has flat tails so they finish turns crisply and there is a lot of support back there, the Goat depending on version is twinned or semi-twinned so they are more forgiving and slightly looser in the tails. The Stash has metal to it has a damp feeling to it whereas the Goat is lighter and snappier feeling but not as stable in rough junk. The Stash also has a medium soft tip and gets stiffer towards the tails, so they are forgiving in the front of the ski but have decent power underfoot and through the tails. The Goat seems to have a decent firmness underfoot but gets softer through the tails.

 

Regarding length, I have the 181 and it actually measures 184 cm. It skis true to mid-180 size though, while there is a little rocker in front the flat tails offset it. What you get is a ski that can feel like a 190 and is capable of big turns and fast speeds through rough snow but if given input will turn and can be skied slowly like a 180 because of the rocker. If you live in a place where softer snow or off piste conditions are the norm these can be an everyday ski. They have the usual 108mm width drawbacks, slower edge to edge on groomers and barely fit in the trough of tight moguls, but they have great edge hold on firmer snow for their size and are stable and fun on the groomed. Their inclination is longer turns but they can be whipped around in shorter turns with no resistance.

 

The Sidestash is a medium-wide version of what K2 does best, make bell curve skis. That is, skis that cater to a wide spectrum of skiers on the meat of the bell curve and don't cater to the extremes at either end. As a result they come off unassuming, they get the job done but aren't going to wow you in any one factor. Their wow factor is their versatility and range and they do what any good ski does, allow you to focus on skiing and not on the ski.

post #9 of 12

Any tips on choosing between the 181 and the 188 Sidestash?  I'm 6'1'' 185lbs and ski everything.  I've got some Nordica Enforcers in a 177 that are super fun but too short, and I go over the top in deeper snow 

 

I was leaning towards the 188s, but didn't know if they would ski like 185s, or true 190s ( I was on a 190 Volkl Katana last year, which was a lot of ski)

post #10 of 12

I've heard K2 changed their sizing this year, it's confirmed on the twin tips but I haven't heard confirmation on the backside series skis. So last years Hellbent 189cm measured out to 195, the 179cm Obsethed was a 183. This year those skis are true to size, 189 is 189 and 179 is 179.

 

Last year the Sidestashes were 3-4cm longer than their listed length so I'd wait to see what they are this year. A true to size 188 would probably fit you well while a true 181 might be a tad short depending on how hard you ski. Whatever size they are they ski true to their actual measured length (last year 181 = 184 = skied like 184cm).

post #11 of 12

All hail Gotama!!! j/k

I have the 186 Gotamas, and freaking love them. However, I can't compare them to the Sidestash since I've never tried those. I'd be willing to demo a pair, though. As said above, I'd probably go with whatever you can score the best deal on. It would be cool to have something kinda different from the rest of the crowd.

If you're going to buy them without trying some first, though, you won't be disappointed with the Gotamas. They're a real pleasure to ski. Except in super icy conditions, which I have used them in before to get to the good stuff. You have to man-handle them through the hardpack/ice, but they'll actually do surprisingly well. Not a true one-ski quiver like many claim it to be, but so freaking fun and floaty in the powder, and busts through crud like a freight train. If you're still unsure, demo a pair...I've seen them available to demo almost everywhere.

post #12 of 12

I have skied both and the Gotama fairly extensively. The Gotama is somewhat better in deep/untracked snow. The Sidestash is better at everything else.

 

SJ

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 › 2010 Fat Ski: Gotama or Sidestash