Results 1 to 14 of 14
Thread: who has skied the Head IM85 ?
11-18-2004, 03:02 PM #1
who has skied the Head IM85 ?
seems like it would be a fun ski... I dont have time for demos anymore, what do people thinK of this one?
11-18-2004, 03:25 PM #2
I'm on the 179cm iM85's, and absolutely love em. Previously I've owned the AK enemy and AK launcher. I enjoyed the launcher for what they were, I found that eventually they were too soft. The AK enemy is a shyte ski, possibly if I'd mounted the bindings back 5cm from where the centre was marked they could have been better, but still a bit of a noodle.
A friend was on the Volkl G4's, now there's a sweet ski, nice and stiff and so turny..The reason I went with the Monsters and not the G4's is because I prefer the nose of the ski to be slightly softer than the tail, the monsters have a stiff tail, but the nose is slightly softer so they give a really nice smooth ride in powder, they're stiff enough to charge anything though.
All up the iM85's are the best ski I've owned, I've been on them 3 seasons and they haven't bent, which is a good start, they carve nicely and are setup perfectly for ripping, none of this semi-park crocker...they turn so nicely, great ski!
11-18-2004, 04:36 PM #3
justkit is selling em for $300 /w binders (tyrolia) 179cmOriginally Posted by blurred
11-18-2004, 04:43 PM #4
I liked it. Stiff, but not quite as stiff as a G4. Very damp but still has some rebound. Surprisingly easy to butter turns considering the huge sidecut. Carves great on hardpack. I wished it were about 7mm wider in the waist -- 85mm doesn't get me as much float as I'd like in crud or pow. Topsheet is prone to chipping and peeling off at the tip, fixable with epoxy. I almost got a pair.
11-18-2004, 06:16 PM #5Last Days of Winter
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
I had the im85's but sold them this season because they were a little too stiff for me (140 lbs). I liked them a lot and would have kept them if the flex was just a tad softer. If you're over 150-160 lbs, then you won't have as much problems flexing them as I did. I found I had to be on top of them all the time.
They have great float for a 85mm ski, better than the Rex which has a stiff shovel. A real bomber ski that like to be skied fast. The stiff platform is great for landing drops, makes you feel like you can land and stick anything.
I found that a soft to medium flex ski better suits me, so I ended up going to some B3's this season.
11-18-2004, 06:39 PM #6
How are they for straightlining stuff? It seems like they'd be too turny. I'm thinkin of buying a pair next summer, and was just gonna post a thread like this, ya saved me the trouble. Anyway, sorry for the hijack.Sponsored by Haterade
11-19-2004, 10:45 AM #7
I have last years IM85 in the 179cm with Look P12's on them. Kick ass ski. Definitely heavier than most skis, but will rip chit up mang!! They tear bumps in half, will run straight at speed, rail turns on the hardpack days as well. Very damp, very confidence inspiring ski. I do wish it was a little fatter, possibly due to my weight (175lbs) and the shorter length, I have to get up some good speed before they start floating, but still kick ass in pow. If you have a boot length close to 314, PM me and I'll let you take mine out for a spin since you are in the Denver area.More fucked up than a cricket in a hubcap
11-19-2004, 01:30 PM #8
thanks for the posts everyone...Im looking to pick up a pair of used 185cm IM85 heads to beat up at A Basin and hardpack days, they seem like they would be a good addition to my bloated quiver of fatties.
11-19-2004, 01:41 PM #9Originally Posted by Spew
02-20-2007, 10:47 AM #10
Bumping up ancient thread, cuz, well, I finally skied these skis. So here's my review.
186 Head im85, the version with almost all-orange topsheet & carbon-fiber-looking stuff under topsheet, Look Pivot2 bindings mounted at the Head-recommended line. I picked these up here a few months ago, near-new condition, nice tune.
Review: damn these are fun. Very easy to ski, yet somehow still stable at speed. Turns when you want, goes straight when you want, despite lots of sidecut. Even handles moguls OK (within limits of my mogul-suckitude). Not a lot of pop -- heavy & damp. These are much more fun & responsive than the Volkl G40/41/4/whatever, which I had in a 178 and 188 version, both of which felt somewhat dead to me. I love the Explosiv, but the G40 just didn't do it for me.
Overall: the Head im85 is like Explosiv-Lite: easier to ski, not as stiff, slightly less crud-crushing ability, but close behind. Fun fun fun. I wonder what the Head im88 is like...
02-20-2007, 11:06 AM #11
I like the 88 a fair bit more. To me the 85 has a smaller sweet spot and really had to be driven by the tip. No tipping it on edge and riding the sidecut around. I liked the ski, and agree in flex, it was an Explosive-lite, but didn't love the ski.
The 88's is prolly a wee bit softer, but being a full sidewall/sandwich ski is a lot smoother and a better overall package. It has a much broader sweet spot. Can be ridden more centered, driving the tip, whatever. Very fun good ski. The extra width underfoot helps as well. Mostly though I think its a construction / feel thing. I just like wood core, sidewall/sandwich construction skis and the 88 has a very nice feel as long as one isn't looking for an uber stiff ski. my $.02He who has the most fun wins!
07-23-2007, 06:59 PM #12Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
Head IM 88 vs 82 vs 85
I'm trying to decide between a 179 '05 IM 85 for $300, a 175 IM 88 for $400, and a 172 or 183 IM 82 for $360, all new. I'm replacing volkl G4's in a 178. I Loved them to death (literally), but wouldn't mind having a bit more ability to vary turn shape on the groomed and navigate tight spots/bumps, as long as I don't loose stability at speed, or crudbusting. I"m an ex racer who weight 175, and will be skiing mostly powder/crud, but need the ski to be fun on groomed.
07-23-2007, 11:44 PM #13Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
no, but i commend you on being able to searchPreserving farness, nearness presences nearness in nearing that farness
07-24-2007, 10:10 AM #14
I still have the im85, no changes to my review above. I also still haven't tried the 88 or the 82.
I tried a friend's im70 (or whatever it's called -- the 70mm waist version), in a 170-something length, and it was completely different from the im85. I didn't like it much. It was a lot softer flexing, the snappy responsiveness of the im85 was nearly all gone.
skelonas -- is this going to be your powder ski, or a crud/hardpack ski? I wouldn't pick any of these for a pow-specific ski (70, 85, 88, 82mm, etc); there are a lot better (floatier) choices out there.