Thread: Moment Comi Kazi review

okay, january has been a good month for tahoe & i have enough days now on the CK's to justify a review.

facts & figures: the CK's nominal length is 196, tip-to-tail straightline length 190 cm. 160 / 136 / 145 mm. Weight = 10 lbs 4 oz. Tip rocker begins around 53 cm from the tip. the rest of the ski has a mild traditional camber. Mine are the standard split tail version. Aspen core / glass wrap, as I recall. BD O2 bindings/ridic-stiff cartridges, boot center mounted just over 1 cm behind the topsheet ABC mark.

Me: 195 lb / 6' 3", mostly ski tahoe resorts / BC and mammoth with occasional trips to UT/CO/PNW and CH/FR.

Background: I have owned or skied a number of skis in the 95 - 110 waist category (volkl / blk diamond / head / iggy / AK / bros / atomic etc) but in this review i'll mostly refer to the big daddies (orange bondage plate version) and praxis 185s for comparison since i those are benchmark skis for me.

Bottom line: best pow ski i've skied. Manages to combine much of the versatility i like about the big daddies, with much of the powder possibilities enabled by an inverse ski like the praxis.

History/review: i really liked my 107 waist big daddies--bust the crud, float in powder, reasonably versatile between open high speed terrain and tight trees (but work better in open terrain). Having met Keith a while back, I got the camo praxis skis Oct '06 as my first reverse sidecut/camber ski (mounted tele, like all my boards); unfortunately at that time only the 185.5 cm praxis existed, which was too short for me, but nonetheless there was a lot to like about the praxis -- tele and parallel turns in any kind of powder were pretty much effortless, and float was good. But wanted a bigger/longer board, and based on comments from Casey & others I started thinking the CK might be the best of both worlds i was looking for---a design focussed on soft snow but versatile enough that you could carve high speed turns (alpine and tele) on consolidated snow.

hand-flexing the CK's shows a moderately stiff (by fat ski standards) mid section and relatively soft tip and tail. noticeably stiffer overall than the long pontoon or ARG, but still in the softish category nearly all 120+ mm skis seem to occupy.

Getting the praxis ski technique dialled took 3 or 4 runs. The CK's req'd no technique adjustment at all.

The first thing i noticed was the low swing weight. I have other skis in the 10 - 11 lb range that feel heavier on my feet than the CK's. So in steep or tight terrain, you can whip them around no problem.

the 160 mm square tip, plus the rockered forebody, means massive tip flotation obviously. during a 10 foot storm cycle this has been very noticeable. More flotation and speed than w/ the 185 praxis.

So, relative to the big daddies: when arc'ing high speed turns thru cut-up crud, the CK's are flexing around rather than plowing through. Fortunately the CK's have decent torsional stiffness (relative to other skis in this category) so the flexing does not translate into a mis-directed feeling. What I'm trying to say here is that the Reno-based Moment CK is (just) stiff and damp enough to work well in the chop and crud you encounter on a typical sierra pow day, unlike some of the softer superfats that seem more designed for wasatch fluff.

Relative to the 185 camo Praxis (which I think has more rocker than the current Praxis): the CK's are definitely more versatile than the praxis, as expected, but also manage to maintain much of the fun-shape advantages: a) you can ski from the center of the ski even on a waist-deep day, since the forebody planes so well b) the combination of the rockered forebody and the split tail (which softens up the tail) means that you can smear/slarve as needed (but not as easily as on the full inverse praxis).

the moderate stiffness translates into low-effort short radius turns, but most of my turns are more GS on these.

Durability: the CK edges are fat and hard and have resisted numerous rock hits well. The base appears to be fairly thick (one core shot so far, but that was a hit that would have core shotted any ski).

To anyone w/ a 100 - 105 waist ski thinking of going bigger...don't mess around going incrementally bigger. in terms of leg stance, i don't notice the 160/136 dimensions at all -- spend a day on these and they seem completely normal. I'm also glad that moment has put out a fat ski in a reasonably long length. Really the only other ski I would even consider instead of these is the 200 cm lotus 120.

:thumbs up:

(bonus pic: me transporting a roll of invisible carpet in my left arm)

nice review..

I've got three days on mc_roon's (TGR full tail version) Comi Kazis that I traded/loaned for my 192 Bros while he spends the next three months in Kashmir.

All three days have been in 15" plus with yesterday being a cat skiing day at Mt. Bailey in 4' to 5' of new on 40/45 degree slopes.

I'm 6'2/215 and ski the Mantra as my everyday driver, but I've only been on them once this year due to our enormous winter so far.

Compared to the Big Bros the Comi Kazi is a much mellower ski - not in a bad way for me. In the pow that I have been skiing I can't say enough about these boards. They are super easy to ride and as frorider indicated, very little learning curve even with the vastly increased waist. These are the widest skis I've been on and haven't had any difficultly with the transition.

I mounted them alpine with Jesters and am impressed with the stoutness this combo affords. I've had a few unexpected releases from the Jesters, but I think it had to do with too much snow on my boot and I might need to crank the DIN a bit more.

I love how I can drive in a forward stance if I want or pressure more from a neutral/heel stance and slarve out turns - very versitile turn shape. Big arching turns pushed into short radius speed checks are simple and tighter trees are managed fairly easily. Rolled off several large drifts with enough speed to air and never once have I felt like I was going over the top. The tip on these are not as silly big as the Pontoons, but they're plenty big enough to provide that push the top for my fairly big boy status.

Two of my three days have been resort days that within two hours turn to chopped up pow. I was worried that the CK's wouldn't perform here, but I just get a little further back in my stance, let the tips ride up and power from my feet. This seems to work very well for me in the chop, but I'm not sure I'd want to ride these in thicker/stiffer chop all day long - that is what the 192 was for.

Really, this is the most fun I've had on huge dump days - ever. Yesterday at Bailey was awesome and never once was I concerned about how the ski was performing in the conditions. Having never ridden at Bailey before, the fact I wasn't thinking about this ski after only having two days on it was very confidence inspiring. I had a couple of ejections with the Jesters hitting some faces of bigger drifts in low visibility on fairly mellow terrain, but that has nothing to do with the skis.

Only complaint was the run-out/traverse back to the cat. Skating, if you can call it that, was difficult to ugly and kicking them through the deep in a fixed alpine set-up wasn't much fun either. But, what I got to ski to put me in this situation was well worth the effort

Great ski, a ton of fun and easy to ride. In a couple of months I'm going to have to figure out if I'm trading back with mc_roon for my 192's . . . . .

Originally Posted by tchpdx

I love how I can drive in a forward stance if I want or pressure more from a neutral/heel stance and slarve out turns - very versitile turn shape. Big arching turns pushed into short radius speed checks are simple and tighter trees are managed fairly easily.. . . . .

I agree, you can play around with the fore/aft pressuring of the ski a lot with these skis. One of the reasons i can ski trees fast on these is knowing that i can dump speed and redirect quickly. the stiff/wide/heavy skis i generally prefer do tend to lock me into a turn which can make things , errr, interesting in the trees at times.

I was surprised by your comment about skating on cat tracks. i've had some sidecountry days where massive amounts of skating and traversing were involved, and the CK's worked very well for that & I was faster than the rest of the crew. much better than the praxis in those situations.

one add'l note to my review -- i just tuned up the CK's tonight and saw that one of the new gouges actually went thru the base. not quite core shot #2, but has me thinking that the base thickness is 'average' (i.e. similar to atomic, but not as thick as some others out there).

btw the pontoon tip is 160 mm, same as the CK tip.

Originally Posted by frorider

One of the reasons i can ski trees fast on these is knowing that i can dump speed and redirect quickly. the stiff/wide/heavy skis i generally prefer do tend to lock me into a turn which can make things , errr, interesting in the trees at times.

I was surprised by your comment about skating on cat tracks. i've had some sidecountry days where massive amounts of skating and traversing were involved, and the CK's worked very well for that & I was faster than the rest of the crew. much better than the praxis in those situations.

btw the pontoon tip is 160 mm, same as the CK tip.

Skiing in the trees is pretty intuitive on the CK's. Makes it much less stressful at speed and more enjoyable at slower speeds due to the float.

My experience on the relatively flat traverse out was probably not the place to judge to harshly. With that much fresh and so little pitch it most likely would have been difficult on any ski. I did feel like I was stepping on the tails a bunch - maybe I just suck at it.

One of the guys in our group had the Pontoons and they "looked" much bigger - maybe it was the squared tip of the CK, but they didn't look quite as massive

Sounds like you and I are both stoked.

FWIW - I have beat the shit out of my CKs more than any previous ski I have owned and have taken them over plenty of bare spots with very minimal base damage, if you can even call it that. In my opinion, the bases are completely bombproof and the idea of getting a coreshot is the furthest of my concerns.

I also found skating to be pretty easy as well. After several days in multiple conditions, I wont dare to bring them out in anything but powder.

The first day out on my CK's I took out a HUGE 3-4" section of base material right near the edge. Not saying another ski wouldn't have done the same, but I would NOT say that "the bases are bombproof." Yes, the Praxis, EHP & Iggy bases are bombproof but these, my friend, are not.

I've heard an awful lot of reports of Moments delaminating, breaking, decambering, and the bindings ripping out. For some reason those reports ain't making it in these reviews and they should. The thin bases is a new story.

Originally Posted by Slim Pickens

I've heard an awful lot of reports of Moments delaminating, breaking, decambering, and the bindings ripping out. For some reason those reports ain't making it in these reviews and they should. The thin bases is a new story.

If any of the above had happened to the boards I'm riding it would have been in the review - I'm surprised about the "lots of reports" comment. This would appear to be the venue to have heard and confirmed this.

mc_roon had a 2" core shot repaired before he shipped me the skis and I haven't hit anything with our snow pack as it is. No new damage, but in all honesty I don't know how they would hold up bushwhacking or with low coverage.

I'll back people up on the bomber bases observations- I grinded the bases of my Ruby's over a bunch of thin cover in Abasin for a couple of days, and was pleasantly surprised that they didn't even have a deep scratch to show for it.

20+ on my M1s so far and there like new. Scrapped them over rocks, stupid climbing cables, or whatever else you find here in Euroland and no issues.

I've got only two days on the Comi-Kazis. Mounted on the line with 916s. One day was windbuffed and bumped out pow fields at Kirkwood, and another super storm tree day at Sugar Bowl. 6-2/200lbs. Ex-nerd, videogame and A/V club president.

1) They carve on the groomers...which is kickass for a ski that wide.
2) They ski very similar to the Comi, which I had before I traded up to these because their bigger size.
3) Didn't notice any drawbacks to the swallow-tail. They still go switch, lifted up a bit before the swallow.
4) The rocker is perfect. Its not a super rocker, so mentally, when you look down at your feet, its not super tweaked up to the sky.
5) Stability is amazing even in the chop.
6) On a deep Sierra Cement day, these things were beyond radical. You can butter out the turns like a dream.
7) The tail is perfect stiffness. It gives you some leverage but then snaps back into position.

it was 666's recommendation a few months ago that helped convince me to pull the trigger on the CK's (i.e. he knew what he liked about the comi's, and what the design intent of the CK's was.). i'm glad i pulled the trigger.

I never slagged the base durability -- just said the thickness was average i.e. similar to typical skis out there. However i would single out the edges as being tougher than average, and more than thick enough for many retunes. I wouldn't mind if the CK"s had thicker bases, but don't see it as something essential at this point.

i forgot to point out how mild the rocker is. i think it's pretty dialled. enough rocker to work well in weird crust or heavy pow, but not make you feel like you're skiing on a banana.

also, i forgot to mention topsheet durability. i have enough days on the CK's to give a thumbs up on topsheet durability. I used Pat's trick of running a utility knife down the topheet edge (holding the blade near-perpendicular) to trim the topsheet edge when the skis were new. With even the stoked DPS owners still muttering about topsheet durability, this was an important factor for me. Tele + superfat skis = topsheet challenges.

great thread, thanks. I am trying to decide where to go for my superfats!

To note - the rocks I hit were at X-stal which apparently have some of the sharpest rocks on the plannet. I prolly was a little too gruff with my statement as I WOULD buy these again even with my rock encounter & what I know now.

I've put them through their paces and I love the ski's versatility. I skied them about 20 times at the bird over 4 weeks. For me they're the weapon of choice in any soft snow- I skied them so often because it wasn't worth taking another pair of skis out because they're so much fun in the soft.

Trees are intuitive, it's stupidly easy to get them sideways to make sharp turns. The split tail is nice because you can really scrub speed if you need to, even if you get caught in the back seat, but it was frustrating to not be able to carry high speed through a turn in powder. They SLAY windbuff and heavy smooth snow, and are surprisingly stable and powerful through softer crud.

It's basically impossible to sink the tips when landing anything less than 10 feet, even if you're ALL the way forward, it's ridiculous.

It would be nice to see them a little stiffer, I think that it would make the ski more enjoyable on harder snow and it would give it better high speed abilities. Flotation would be sacraficed a little, but giving it more late tip rise could counter this.

Durability is very good, no deep gouges. The edges have held up better than I expected. I even beached one of the tips on a rock and cartwheeled with virtually no damage (keep in mind I weigh 150).

On a side note toward the end of my winter break (mid jan) I had some gnarly shinbang on the outsides of my shins, I can only think to attribute this to the additional torsion that the width creates in a turn, especially on hard snow.

Charging crud under Gad 2 late December:


Repeat, but digging deep under Gadzoom mid January:

fro...nice review. Did I see you at Heavenly on Saturday in line for the Mott lift? Someone was sporting Comi-Kazis with tele's.

yep, AFAIK i'm the only guy around here w/ CK's mounted tele, so yeah that was me at the mott chair.

got killer untracked all day that day. the heave has some special places within that 4,000 acres...

and when i say the CK's worked well for skating and long traverses, i am definitely speaking from experience there.

you should also post the review at the hippy forum...

Untracked all day? Amazing, because short of Mott, and 'brew the rest of the mountain was pretty windblown IMO. Tell me where your secret stash is or the kitty gets it!

Originally Posted by Slim Pickens

I've heard an awful lot of reports of Moments delaminating, breaking, decambering, and the bindings ripping out. For some reason those reports ain't making it in these reviews and they should. The thin bases is a new story.

...i have not seen one complain about delam...

Originally Posted by Slim Pickens

I've heard an awful lot of reports of Moments delaminating, breaking, decambering, and the bindings ripping out. For some reason those reports ain't making it in these reviews and they should. The thin bases is a new story.

Bindings ripping out??? ...... then why didn't my 916's pull out instead of blowing up ??

Anyone skiied the kazis and Pontoons to compare? I have some toons at the moment and they slay in the pow but when it comes to chop/variable they do tend to get thrown around. I may swap them out for some kazis as a Christmas present to myself

would these work at kirkwood? and for a 130# 5'11'' skier?

Originally Posted by Zeppelinskier

would these work at kirkwood? and for a 130# 5'11'' skier?

Moment told me that they lose their power the further they get from Reno, so (especially at your weight) you're better off at Heavenly.