Monster 82 vs 88

[fat yeti]

I am thinking of adding one of these skis to my quiver next year for fimmer conditions. I have ridden the 88 and liked them but wonder if anyone has skied them both and could give a comparion on flex and ride. I am leaning towrds the 82 in a 183 I curently have k2 seths and a few other skis over 100 for powder days. I have used the search function on the 88 and ridden them but could not find any info on the 82s and am wondering what the consensus is on the 82.
Thanks
Fat Yeti

[jonski]

....I have done used the sear on the 88 and ridden them....

No idea what that means....

The the 82 is softer - torsionally and longitudually - when speaking to the rep

However, I've not ridden the 82 to get a feeeel of the difference. However if I recall there is more sidecut in the 82, so it must be heaps easy to turn than the 88

[nick > jesus]

ihave only skied them both a little bit, i did not find the 82 as stable, not huge differance, but at high speed on big radius turns it was noticable

[fat yeti]

jonski thanks for showing me my mistake. I was in a hurry sometimes my mind works faster than I type.

[BushwackerinPA]

Never riddne hte 82 but the 88 is great and I would buy a pair if the chance came up.

[justcuz]

I'm not sure how much you weigh, but I weight 190ish and couldn't imagine having less than a 186 in the IM 88, but note that I have never skied the 82. My 88 is also something I use in all conditions, and although I do have a pair of pow plus', I almost prefer the im88 for pow.....so IMO there would be some crossover should you choose the 88's. The 82 would likely be a bump, carve, light snow day (again, IMO). But the 88's kill it in this stuff, too. You can't go wrong either way

[marshalolson]

not been on the 82s, but can say the 88s friggen rip. sweet skis.

[fat yeti]

Thanks for the info I keep going back and forth on which one I want I realy liked the 88 but amd thinking the 82 might be what I am looking for. Any more info out there on the 82 would be great.

[tromano]

I demoed the 88 last winter and loved it. I would definately buy one if I had the chance. The 82 and 88 have the same construction but the differences in shape and length make the distinction between the two.

[raj]

Can't help you with 82 but I got the 88 late this year and it has become my everyday ski. Its awesome. The 82 and 88 haev the saem sandwich construction and "liquidmetal" (basically very damp). I don't think you are giving up anything on groomers or hardpack with the 88 but I am coming from a 100 mm ski as my everyday ski.

You might also look at the length to see what fits you best. For light guys like me (145 pounds) the 88 came in 175 while 82 was 172. Teh next size up for 88 is 186 which might be right if you live up to your name (weigh more than say 160).

[cinnepa]

sold my 82's in favor of 179 bro's, even though the bro's were wider i thought they were more user friendly than the head 82's. the 82's in a 183 were a bit much for me in eastcoast tight tree skiing - they definately needed some speed and room to shine. so i guess it really just depends on how and where you would be using them.

[skiing-in-jackson]

I've ridden them both. I like the M88 better as I like a fatter ski under the foot. It was stiffer as well.

But the problem with both of them is that they are very heavy skis. I'm in reasonably good shape, and I was tired after just a few longer runs.

They are a stout & heavy ski. Lots of pluses there- and minus.

[cinnepa]

[QUOTE=skiing-in-jackson;1318378]But the problem with both of them is that they are very heavy skis. I'm in reasonably good shape, and I was tired after just a few longer runs.

QUOTE]

....exactly.

[justcuz]

[QUOTE=cinnepa;1318472]

But the problem with both of them is that they are very heavy skis. I'm in reasonably good shape, and I was tired after just a few longer runs.

QUOTE]

....exactly.

I don't think they're that heavy at all. My gosh....I came from Stockli DP's and these things feel like feathers compared to those. I had 188 bros and sold the bros to get monster 88's, the bro's are not all that much lighter.....though bros are quite a bit bigger.

[raj]

But the problem with both of them is that they are very heavy skis. I'm in reasonably good shape, and I was tired after just a few longer runs.

They are a stout & heavy ski. Lots of pluses there- and minus.

Stop being a wuss Seriously, yes they are a bit on the heavy side but by no means one of teh heaviest skis out there. They feel slightly heavier than my explosivs adn about the same as my prophet 100s (which admittedly are wider). I have been on noticeably heavier skis than these. IMO, your boots (say flexon with thermo vs traditonal boots) or bindings (say heavy metal bindings vs. say Z12) will make a bigger difference in weight than skis.

The only time I cursed abotu the weight was a long bootpack (Wyeast face on Hood) that is about 5000 feet elevation gain. Head 88 + PX12 + Kryptons = heavyass combo. I was pretty tired at teh top even though I am in pretty good shape. So yes, there are better skis for lightweight touring but for resort skiing/ going fast, I think these are on par for weight.