Results 1 to 13 of 13
Thread: Coomba vs Coomback.
-
01-15-2010, 10:44 AM #1
Coomba vs Coomback.
Has anyone skied the new Coom-back ?
And how do they compare to the original Coomba ?
I saw the K2 marketting blurb in the autumn - which claims the additions of small rocker (2/30) actually makes the Coomback better on hard snow. With obvious soft snow benefits.
So now fishing for a few comments from peeps who have been out using them. Especially as hard snow performance is quite important to me.
If I get chance will defn demo the new Coomback this winter to see for myself.
Cheers.
-
01-15-2010, 11:33 AM #2
For your home mountain you need ice skates, not Coombacks.
Putting the "core" in corporate, one turn at a time.
Metalmücil. We've been giving people pink ear since 2010
-
01-15-2010, 03:30 PM #3
^^ not at the moment
D
-
01-15-2010, 04:28 PM #4
new ones have tip rocker = more fun in just about all conditions.
what else are you looking to know?
Email me at dave@fatskideals.com for boot fitting questions, or stop by
http://www.facebook.com/SoulSkiandBike in banff.

-
01-15-2010, 05:21 PM #5Ha - Normally the cool kids use cramponsFor your home mountain you need ice skates, not Coombacks.
Amazingly this year there have been at least a couple of days in Scotland when powder skis wouldn't have been so daft.
Well if i knew that I wouldn't be asking (jong) questionswhat else are you looking to know?
Big fan of the original Coomba - However still haven't had opportunity to try out the new version. Basically wondering how much different, or better, peeps have found the new version to be. In this case as an every day ski for europe (i,e skiing variety of snow conditions over big vertical).
-
01-15-2010, 05:46 PM #6
the new one is the same dimensions, weight, etc as the old, just tip rocker.
rocker = www.evogear.com & K2.com had some good info on what that does.
new one = more fun and less work
Email me at dave@fatskideals.com for boot fitting questions, or stop by
http://www.facebook.com/SoulSkiandBike in banff.

-
01-15-2010, 10:44 PM #7
Whassa matter Scottish_Skier, you don't trust me? Rocker is awesome. Even on ice.
Putting the "core" in corporate, one turn at a time.
Metalmücil. We've been giving people pink ear since 2010
-
01-16-2010, 02:23 AM #8
I trust you hop - just dont get to ski as much deep powder as you

Edit : I understand the differences between the 2 skis (same dimensions but new coomback has addition of subtle 30/2 rocker). Just fishing for a few comments now peeps have had a couple months to go out and ski the Coomback. It is a ski I really want to try out
Thanks for the link MtLion.
http://www.evogear.com/skis/k2-coomback-2010.aspxLast edited by Scottish_Skier; 01-16-2010 at 10:55 AM.
-
01-16-2010, 02:50 AM #9
Try searching for Anti Piste vs. Coomba threads. From what I've heard the Coomback is basically the same rocker profile as last years Anti Piste.
-
12-11-2010, 09:38 AM #10
Any more thoughts on this? I like my Anti Piste/Coombacks so much, I'm thinking of buying a pair for the resort but the Coomba's are quite a bit cheaper.
-
12-11-2010, 10:54 AM #11
pay for the rocker. I've had both, and makes a nice ski better.
Email me at dave@fatskideals.com for boot fitting questions, or stop by
http://www.facebook.com/SoulSkiandBike in banff.

-
12-11-2010, 11:02 AM #12
wow - old thread...
for resort skiing I reckon Side Stash or Hardside are now better options.
mainly because of the proper sidewalls and stiffer flex.
apart from addition of rocker the Coomback also seems a smidge softer than original 2008 Coomba.
-
12-12-2010, 03:05 PM #13
having skied recently the hardside and the coomback, i'd say that - if weight is not an issue - the hardside is more versatile











Reply With Quote




Bookmarks