Member of the Month

BallClapper
September, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

It's not my fault Hellbents are confusing as fuck!

profile picture
Admiral
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10

Before you verbally lambaste me I have searchbared this a thousand times, and i have not found a direct answer to this: What length of a regular camber ski skis about the same as a 169 hellbent? I ski on 165 slalom ski for racing so I'm used to a small ski, I just wanna know if the hellbents ski about as long as those 165 sl skis or if it would be like skiing snowskates or something. The reason I want them so short is i plan to use them for the park alot and not just powder, so I want the lightest hellbent without it being rediculoulsy squirly. Thanks for having the stomach to open a thread containing the word Hellbent.

Jun 10 2008 5:45AM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Hellbents are not light. 169's are really like 175, but keep in mind that the actual length of the ski touching the snow is only a fraction of that.

Sorry for criticizing your choice of ski, but it seems illogical to me to get Hellbents if you're skiing park. I'd go with something like the Anthems or Bacons/EPs if you really want something wider.
Jun 10 2008 6:02AM
0 0
profile picture
ValPow
Posts: 1049 - Karma: 10
can someone please explain to me why you would want to ski hellbents in the park, apart from showing others the extent of your "gnarliness"
Jun 10 2008 6:29AM
0 0
profile picture
CFD
Posts: 1009 - Karma: 197
Can someone please explain to me why people have to criticize other peoples ski choices? He didn't ask if hellbents are right for him, he asked how long they ski. Even if he is only buying them to show others the extent of his gnarliness, why the fuck do you care? Don't be a cunt to him in his thread.

To the thread creator, I can't give you a direct answer because I havn't skied the 169s, but I can suggest that if you're used to riding short skis it shouldn't be too much of a problem. I'm prety big and I also like riding short skis, I quite enjoy the 179's even though everybody tells me to ride 189s. Its a matter of personal preference. I can't say too much more without knowing your size, weight etc..
Jun 10 2008 8:47AM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
they come out to be something like 174. but with the rocker only like 120 is realy touching the snow
Jun 10 2008 10:16AM
0 0
profile picture
blindside
Posts: 5619 - Karma: 1,199
how tall are you and how much do you weigh? I'm 6' and about 170 and I plan on getting the 179 hellbents for the park next winter.
Jun 10 2008 10:52AM
0 0
profile picture
denmarkskier
Posts: 65 - Karma: 26
why people buy k2 hellbent for park? it is stupid and poser only would do it. i will not try to stop you buying, regret will be punishment enough for you when realize it is too heavy and bad for popping jumps

Jun 10 2008 11:49AM
0 0
profile picture
Klick_2_klaim
Posts: 3396 - Karma: 25
Can someone please explain to me why anyone would want to do anything but show off their Gnarliness?
Jun 10 2008 2:01PM
0 0
profile picture
ESAND
Posts: 1607 - Karma: 744
even the 189 hellbents feel like snowlerblades.
Jun 10 2008 2:13PM
0 0
profile picture
phishfood
Posts: 2542 - Karma: 298
have you ever skied them?

haha i love the name of this thread
Jun 10 2008 2:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Admiral
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10

When I go up to the mountain on a powder day I like to ski natural features and charge around the mountain just as much as the next guy, but I never do that all day. I like to have a ski I can take to the park half-way through the day. That's what I like about the hellbents. Obviously I already have anthems for park, but I don't want to bring 2 pairs of skis up to the mountain just so I can have my choice of either park or pow. I HAVE demoed 179 Hellbents before and they were pretty gnarly in powder. But in the park they were just a bit heavy. I can take the heaviness, but I'm just wondering if I could ski the 169 cuz it will be lighter but also shorter. I'll just go with the 179 if it's too short. BTW Hellbents are really fun in the park particularly on rails. I'm 5'6 150 if anyone wants to know.

Jun 10 2008 3:28PM
0 0
profile picture
feedbacker
Posts: 543 - Karma: 14
Hellbents ski super short on groom hardpack stuff, but they ski true to length, but better, in powder..

Jun 10 2008 4:52PM
0 0
profile picture
K2skipunk
Posts: 2837 - Karma: 111
it is a ton of fun. i skiied mine every day this season, i used my invaders once or twice, but they arent nearly as fun. in the park, they lock onto rails and boxes, and jumps just feel flowy. and its just a personal preference, chill out bro.
Jun 10 2008 7:21PM
0 0
profile picture
CFD
Posts: 1009 - Karma: 197
if i'm not mistaken, the 189s have the same flat spot as the 179s (and possibly 169) but have longer rockered parts.. so really they should handle identical on  hard snow. but i could be wrong
Jun 10 2008 8:06PM
0 0
profile picture
MEGAZORD
Posts: 4531 - Karma: -7
are you kidding me?  Go 189.
Jun 10 2008 9:53PM
0 0
profile picture
Admiral
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10
This is my theory too, which would mean that the only difference between how the 169s, 179s, and 189s ski is the weight. So if I got the 169s it would just be taking off weight that would be on a part of the ski that isnt on the snow anyway... We may have had a breakthrough in the Hellbent case study. Can anyone confirm this theory?
Jun 11 2008 4:55AM
0 0
profile picture
yeahitsdave
Posts: 1315 - Karma: 10
according to k2, thats not true. however ive never skied them so i can neither confirm or disprove it. they measure the amount of rocker in it, ill unearth a catalog and let u kno the numbers
Jun 11 2008 12:42PM
0 0
profile picture
king.tubby
Posts: 2865 - Karma: 122
10 points for using the word lambast. you just dont hear that word everyday.
Jun 11 2008 3:09PM
0 0
profile picture
rocktheLPs
Posts: 2095 - Karma: 14
quality post.
Jun 11 2008 3:14PM
0 0
profile picture
blindside
Posts: 5619 - Karma: 1,199
really? cause I was planning on getting the 189 first, until my research (aka searchbaring) lead me to believe that the 189 was too much ski for just park use...This year I rode 184 urban punx and the length was perfect, could have gone a little longer even...I just wasn't sure what to expect with the hellbents as far as length goes....
Jun 11 2008 5:20PM
0 0
profile picture
timmmy
Posts: 654 - Karma: 25
WWSHD?


Jun 11 2008 5:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Admiral
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10
Not to be pushy or anything, but I kind of want to get this Hellbent mystery figured out quick cuz backcountry.com has 169 hellbents for $520 right now, and I want to get them before they sell out.
Speaking of deals has anyone seen any good ones on 08 Hellbents?
Jun 11 2008 8:20PM
0 0
profile picture
hoodSlayer
Posts: 900 - Karma: 7
I would just go with 179's
Jun 13 2008 1:02AM
0 0
profile picture
freeskimccoy
Posts: 736 - Karma: 14
if you ony want to use em for park def get the 169's i ski on the 179's all the time. and in the park they are a little much to spin sometimes, i can spin 7's but you need a big jump.  i would suggest the 169s especially if your used to a smaller ski. i hope this helps and dont listen to the haters. its deffinitly fun to ski on hellbents all the time, but you will notice a plateu on your park skills with the hellbents i think.  especially on box's and rails, its deffinitly hard to get techy with the bents. it took me for ever to get switch ups with them. andi wont do 27's on unless its a BIG lip and gap to a box.
Jun 13 2008 3:51PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
Stu would get the biggest jacket and pair of hellbents he can and slay powder/hoodrats.
Jun 14 2008 12:40AM
0 0
profile picture
Admiral
Posts: 118 - Karma: 10

Alright guys I bought the 169's on Thursday so they'll be here in a bit. Thanks everybody.

Jun 16 2008 8:09PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)