Heard rumours that the Coombacks measure long, making the 188 well over 190 something. Anyone know how the 181 measures?
Printable View
Heard rumours that the Coombacks measure long, making the 188 well over 190 something. Anyone know how the 181 measures?
K2's typically measure about 4 cm longer than said length. Doesn't really impact their skiability though.
odds are it will measure long like very other K2.
most k2's ive skied measure long but ski true to size... I have 174 Coombas (tele), they have become a BC only ski. When i skied them at the resort I always wished they where longer. I suspect this will be the case with Coomback as well if not more because of the tip rocker.
My 181 AP's measure around 184 or so by my foggy goggle measuring stick
IMO, you can't get caught up with measurements in cm, especially when you're talking about 5cm or less.
I would say, if you are good skier and looking at K2's you should probably be on the 180cm+ version of there ski. Anything smaller (unless you are under 140lbs) will be too small.
Yup - K2 measures effective edge length not ski length.
188cm Coomba was exact same length as 194cm Dynastar XXL
thanks. being a tall, aggressive skier I have no problem with the idea of a 188, my issue being that I spend as much time in the trees as I do wide open bowls, so when said 188 measures 194 it is getting to be a lot of ski in tight places. not too worried about flotation as the surface area of a 181 (measures 186 I believe) more then floats me at 175lbs, but I do like the length for stability
I agree that K2s are long for their stated size, but I dont know if it is that they measure effective edge length. If that were the case there would be no way to have a 189 Hellbent, unless it measured 280cm long. Can anyone actually explain to me why K2s have always been long for their stated length?
Because the Chinese are stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor
MF
Dont be intimidated by the length or size of this ski. They might look big, but Coomba's are a real EASY set of boards to ski on ;) The medium flex compared to other similar dimension skis makes them much more friendly in tight trees, piste, bumps, couloirs etc. If you are tall and aggresive then the 188cm was made for you.Quote:
thanks. being a tall, aggressive skier I have no problem with the idea of a 188, my issue being that I spend as much time in the trees as I do wide open bowls, so when said 188 measures 194 it is getting to be a lot of ski in tight places. not too worried about flotation as the surface area of a 181 (measures 186 I believe) more then floats me at 175lbs, but I do like the length for stability
Coomback has identical dimensions with subtle tip rocker - so *should* be even easier to ski off the piste - However... I really want to try and pair of Coombacks and see for myself what they are actually like vs Coomba (on all conditions - not just pow!)
EDIT - measured my 188cm Coomba and it came out at 190cm tip to tail BTW.
Must be a legacy thing from when Glen Plake was their top dog ? :fmicon:Quote:
Can anyone actually explain to me why K2s have always been long for their stated length?