Hellbent help
- Thread starter ranger
- Start date
cydwhit
Active member
They are hellbents, you are not going to charge on them. I am 6'1", 180 lbs and my 179's are more than enough floppy goodness. Hellbents are heavy, that extra weigh is not worth it, it's not like a few extra cm's are going to transform these into some kind of versatile charger anyway. Also, they seem to run long anyway, mine are near the length of my 185 atomic blogs. Don't get the bents if you aren't prepared for a major leg workout, fun ski, but a lot of work and really not versatile.
first off, how much do you weight? also, what do you plan on doing with them. If you are heavier and plan on hard charging, skiing fast, hitting big airs, I think the 189 might be a better fit. In the end, its all a personal preference, the 179 might be easier for you to maneuver around depending on the terrain you ski
rozboon
Active member
It depends quite a bit on your weight and how you ski.
I've had both. The 189 is a far superior ski for charging, going fast and general skiing. It has a lot more edge hold through some mystery of the universe. It is also considerably more chunky underfoot and this helps reduce the flap when you're going for it.
They are also exceptionally heavy and a bastard to spin, hence the 179 is more playful.
I mounted my 189's at centre (it's not as if you can sink them in pow, even that far forward) which helps to keep them balanced and easier to mess around on.
I've had both. The 189 is a far superior ski for charging, going fast and general skiing. It has a lot more edge hold through some mystery of the universe. It is also considerably more chunky underfoot and this helps reduce the flap when you're going for it.
They are also exceptionally heavy and a bastard to spin, hence the 179 is more playful.
I mounted my 189's at centre (it's not as if you can sink them in pow, even that far forward) which helps to keep them balanced and easier to mess around on.
snakerton
Active member
I'm 6' and have a 179 hellbent.
Now there are more versatile skis since the hellbent was made. It still serves it's purpose of being playful, jibby and deep pow oriented. There's no reason to get 189. If you want a charging ski, get something else but for what its worth get 179 hellbent
Now there are more versatile skis since the hellbent was made. It still serves it's purpose of being playful, jibby and deep pow oriented. There's no reason to get 189. If you want a charging ski, get something else but for what its worth get 179 hellbent
skier58284
Active member
They will be fine. K2 measures skis differently (after shaping) so 179 Hellbents are the equivilent of something like 184 from any other ski manufacturer. I am a little taller than you and I ride 179cm K2 Obsethed. I ski very aggressively, huck cliffs, etc, and they are perfect for me. If you want something that can handle everything, go with the 179s. If you have no interest in skiing trees, technical chutes, etc, then you could go longer.
Remember man that K2's easure up about five-six cm's. its how k2 has done it ever since they started making rocketed skis in an attempt to make them ski longer. Collin Collins skis a 179 for freestyle moves and the guy is like 6'3". my 189's are actually 2cms longer than my 194 new lifes. I would go for the 179's man they will suit you fine
skier58284
Active member
13056623:W.Fadeeff said:
Pretty sure it was even before they started making rockered skis, it's just a more significant difference now. The reason is because K2 measures their skis after shaping them, whereas other manufacturers measure their skis when they are still flat boards with no rocker, no camber, no tip, no tail.