Alil advice on news skis

GNARBARSTAR

GNARBARSTAR

Member
i'm looking to get my first pair of actual park skis in a long time. i'm 6ft 145lbs, expert skier, for the last 4 seasons i have been riding a pair of 2nd gen seths at plus 7 for the park. anyday i'm not in the park i'm on a pair of 09 185 motherships w. dukes and i ski um hard. i have a pair of ep's for b.c jibbing so i really am looking for a ski to add to my quiver but it doesn't have to cross over for anything other then park. the biggest jumps i generally hit are 60 ft. so something that can take the landings that aren't going to squib out on me. i hit lots of rails,like to butter/bonk/handdraggers so i'm looking for something alil more nimble but isn't a marsh mellow. so far i'm looking at the 181 moment rockers, 178 Anthem, 177 afterbang, 179 k2 dissorderly, 179 fujas(very similer to my 2nd gen seths in demensions). just looking for someone that has the same skiing style/height weight that has skied more park skis for a solid suggestion, and what i should expect. i can read and have visited all the websites, so if you haven't skied them i don't really need your comments, also i'm open to ideas so you can throw more options on there. i beat the shit out of my skis so please don't suggest rossi/dynastar/corupt/4frnt/volkyl/atomic. thanks alot
 
Out of those choices, I would say some Kung Fujas. I have not skied them, but they sound like they would suit you.

Or maybe some Blend's. Those are AMAZING.
 
the blends i think cross over alil to much, does anyone know how soft this years fujas ride, i skied last years without the rocker and they had a good constent flex
 
How did the 179 feel? Cause with the 5/40 rocker they will seem a bit shorter. And at your size, you could easily handle the 189. But then again, that is all preference.
 
with the way k2 measures there skis i think 189 would not be as fun in the park. if this was to be my all mountain ski(which it would never be due to the softness) i would go with 189. i can land my tricks and don't really need extra length to help. so i'm thinking 179 for rails would be alil more playful. they are the exact same height as i am pretty much which has been my general rule of thumb for a park ski. but as i said i haven't rode a real park ski in awhile. also i ski switch a majority of the time in the park, and prefer to land switch of of most things but never had a problem with taht in my 2nd gen seths.if that changes any opions.
 
No I see where you are coming from and agree that the 179 is a good length. Just making sure that you have thought of your options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top