Results 1 to 11 of 11
Thread: K2 Coomback
-
05-26-2011, 11:48 AM #1AF
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Sandy by the front
- Posts
- 2,345
K2 Coomback
Anybody know if K2 will have the Coomback in their 2011 -2012 line and if yes will they be the same as the 2010 model?
-
05-27-2011, 09:56 AM #2
Updated Coomback for Fall 2011. Dimensions/rocker stay the same, but a little more carbon in the tip/tail for stiffness. New graphics too (left ski here: http://www.skiersrealm.com/general/2...hment/img_2690)
-
05-27-2011, 12:14 PM #3
^^ Excellent news. More carbon + New graphix =
-
03-22-2012, 05:07 PM #4Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Idaho Falls, ID
- Posts
- 5
188 or 181?
I'm 6'3" 205 and I want to use them for touring. I have a pair of 191cm surface live lifes so I initially thought the 188 was the way to go. Holding the 181 up to the 191 live lifes, however, make me think otherwise (they are almost the same).
Any input?
-
03-22-2012, 05:29 PM #5
Last edited by DeathVan; 03-26-2012 at 01:35 PM.
-
03-23-2012, 08:58 AM #6Banned
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Location
- Sandy, Utah
- Posts
- 14,410
I am 6'3" and about 200-220 depending on week
I have the coomba (original no rocker) and ski the 188, which measures more like a 190+ easy..dont know what tape measure they use at K2 but somethings up as all their skis tend to measure long.
I enjoy the 188.
-
03-23-2012, 09:04 AM #7
Unless they are a whole lot stiffer than the Original Non-rockered version, I think you'll find the speed limit pretty quick with the 181's. That may be an appropriate trade-off for a little less weight on the uphill and a more maneuverable ski, but they are relatively light skis to begin with. I'm 5'8", 195lbs skiing the older 188's with Scarpa Spirit 4's as well as Telemark bindings and I don't ever feel like my Coomba's are too much ski.
-
03-25-2012, 12:39 AM #8
I'm 6'2" 165 lbs and ski 181 Coombacks. They're a great length for me for skiing. They're about as long as I would want to go for the skin up- 7 cm more would make kick turns on hard snow difficult.
They're a pretty soft ski and I don't think the "speed limit" is going to be changed a whole lot by length. I could probably be pretty happy with the 174s.that's all i can think of, but i'm sure there's something else...
-
03-25-2012, 06:30 AM #9
I'm 5'6 and have the 181...I find them quite stable at high speed and also do not find them a problem to kick turn what so ever. In regard to stability I only use them as a b.c. ski and haven't tried charging chop yet. However I have mached some groomers on them and didn't find them anything other than stable there and in back country snow.
-
03-25-2012, 10:36 AM #10
I'm a big boy (6'2", 240 lbs.) and tour on 181cm Coombacks. They are great. I'm a old guy and turn alot. They are great touring skis for a wide range of conditions. I tour on a light stiff ski (Trab) after the spring consolidation.
-
03-26-2012, 10:34 AM #11AF
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Sandy by the front
- Posts
- 2,345
I started this thread almost a year ago so I guess I can post again. I ended up buying the Coombacks in 181, mounted FRP's + 1 cm. Use them almost exclusively in the BC, intended to use them on powder days in bounds but other than early last week that has been a challenge this year. I have used them a few times at the resort and they ski well other than on real hard pack. 5'8" 165 lbs of old man.
Bookmarks