Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 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!

Versatility of the Opus?

profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Hey everyone,

I'm 5'10", 163lbs, aggressive skier. I ski a 2007 K2 AK Enemy 179: they're awesome, but a bit heavy, no good for the park or backcountry booters. I want a versatile ski that'll do everything: pow, park, groomers, crud. I tested the Salomon Rocker 2's, and I liked them, but I also found them too forgiving. Is the Opus at 178 the ski for me?
Nov 6 2011 3:46PM
0 0
profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Also, I teach in Ontario, both groomers and park, but I travel to Whislter for my ski vacations. That's why I need a ski that'll do everything.
Nov 6 2011 3:48PM
0 0
profile picture
SkiYaker2
Posts: 250 - Karma: 105
i would go with the sir francis bacon if u live in ontario well i guess it depends on how often u go on vacations but yea the bacon will be better for where u live
Nov 6 2011 4:07PM
0 0
profile picture
armada7792
Posts: 77 - Karma: 11
for ur size, u'd wanna get the opus in a 185 but i agree that the bacon is probably better for you
Nov 6 2011 4:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
mountainviper, take it away.
Nov 6 2011 7:25PM
0 0
profile picture
DGski
Posts: 3491 - Karma: 2,328
haha
Nov 6 2011 7:29PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
What? Who said my name?
Nov 6 2011 7:42PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
But for real. The bacons would be obviously more versatile but as far as strictly freestyle pow skis go, it doesn't get more versatile than the opus. You'd have to prefer a wider ski though when it comes to groomers but yeah, for a ski that wide it's super versatile.
Nov 6 2011 7:45PM
0 0
profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Well my current ski is 137/108/127, so I'm used to a wide ski on the groomers. The Bacon is closer to those specs in terms of size than the Opus, but how well does the bacon perform as a powder ski?
Nov 6 2011 10:39PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
IMO it's super badass on everything but you know how it is. You may think it sucks. But that's why they make chocolate and vanilla
Nov 6 2011 10:50PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
Oh wait I misread that. I was talkin bout the opus. Yeah I haven't ridden the new bacons yet. I got em. Haven't gotten a chance to ride em though but I hear they're badass and float fine. As far as the opus though it's pretty damn stable on groomers. If you rode last years bacons it's real similar to those but better. Jus wide and takes some getting used to on the hardpack. Holds an edge great though.
Nov 6 2011 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Damn, now I want both. SFB for Ontario and Opus for BC. What about length for my size? 178?
Nov 7 2011 4:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
I would say 185 at your height and weight.
Nov 7 2011 6:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6407 - Karma: 60,032
unless you want to be doing tech stuff on rails, in which case you are probably going to need 2 skis anyway because no ski is that versatile with ruined edges, I'd get the 184 Bacon.
Nov 7 2011 7:43PM
0 0
profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Yeah, I just checked the specs... the running surface on the 184 is 152, and I'm guessing my old skis at 179 have an even longer running surface than that since they don't have an early rise.
Nov 7 2011 8:39PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
Yeah but on edge both the opus and the bacons feel true to length and in any fresh over an inch or so it'll have a true to length running surface as well. But yeah I'm 6'1" and 185-190 and I'm rockin the opus at 185 and the bacons at 178 for general jibbyness.
Nov 7 2011 9:32PM
0 0
profile picture
MrChevyCelebrity
Posts: 509 - Karma: 406
how can a ski be "too forgiving"? Isn't that a good thing? Do you mean too soft?
Nov 7 2011 9:37PM
0 0
profile picture
andersao
Posts: 13 - Karma: 10
Fair enough mountainviper, but you're 3 inches taller and 20 pounds heavier than me. If they feel true to their length, I think I'd go 178 on both, and especially on the bacons for jibbyness.
Nov 7 2011 9:49PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
I actually think the opus in 178 would be super fun. Wouldn't be so great for monster cliffs but jus playin in the pow, even at my height I think it'd be a fun fat length.
Nov 7 2011 10:11PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)