Member of the Month

Biffbarf
February, 2025

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!

Shreditor 102

profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Hello fellas, didn't really had the time to introduce myself, so here I am, a freeskier from Tetova, Macedonia, it is in South Eastern Europe, and I happen to live nearby a ski center, maybe the best in my country "Kodra e Diellit/ Popova Shapka" (You might want to check it, just search those names, hope to have some of you there this season), not something special as a ski center but really nice mountain.

I'm about to get the Shreditor 102s, and did saw some posts related, but no one actually that had tested or is already using them.

So I would like to hear if anyone has something to share, different from the things that are known on the web about the skies.

Thanks and hope to meet some friends to ride together this season why not.
Nov 17 2013 12:14PM
35 2
profile picture
shr@gler
Posts: 1233 - Karma: 912
I havent had a chance to ski them yet but are my all round ski this year. I will point out that the flex is super soft! that combined with the rocker I think will make for a nice playful ski. I personally really like these dimensions for park and cant wait to go or a shred on them.

Nov 17 2013 4:48PM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
Here's some user reviews of the kung fujas (same ski, just a year earlier with a different name) http://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/k2-kung-fujas.aspx#image=57516.Size.LengthCM_169_Image.jpg
I picked up a pair of kung fujas at the end of last year, super fun and playful. Solid all-mountain ski
Nov 17 2013 11:38PM
1 0
profile picture
AK-Pow29
Posts: 157 - Karma: 215
I've skied the Kung Fujas (same thing as the Shreditor 102) for the past 2 years and they are the best skis EVER! PM me if you have any questions. I would get them!
Nov 18 2013 1:55AM
3 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Some reviews say they are a bit heavy?
Nov 18 2013 8:35AM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
So no one that already tried the 102?
Nov 19 2013 8:28AM
0 0
profile picture
shreditor
Posts: 51 - Karma: 37
Yep! Ski them last year! I ski kung fujas for about 4 seasons and for my point of view they are one of the best skis out here! I try the shredditor and guess what....my skis for this season! You're really gonna like it! As much fun as my Kung-fu!
Nov 19 2013 2:33PM
2 0
profile picture
AJizzle
Posts: 1882 - Karma: 522
I would like to point out that the 102 has a completely different rocker profile than the fujas. They have a ton of tip rocker for a 102 underfoot ski.
Nov 19 2013 3:20PM
4 0
profile picture
HungryHypocrite
Posts: 765 - Karma: 939
theyre gonna be the same skis as last years fujas, the ski that apparently Pep fujas perfected to his all mountain-pow needs, camber under foot, rocker and super soft flex.
I ski last years fujas and i love them, get them, you can basically decide by the graphic and price between the shredittor and the fujas, so if you can get the older fujas for cheaper, same ski, awesome ski.
Nov 19 2013 3:23PM
2 0
profile picture
RubberSoul
Posts: 11249 - Karma: 14,642
hold the phone im confused

i havent paid much attention recently but have been checking out the pettitors a little recently.. and on the site it has the shreditor 112 (or so), and then then shreditor 120ish, next to which in parentheses it says pettitor

so the shreditor 102 is the kung fujas? but the 122 is the pettitor (which i thought i heard was nice and stiff), and the middle one is what??
Nov 19 2013 4:56PM
0 0
profile picture
teamdummy
Posts: 1189 - Karma: 2,607
There are three skis in the shreditor line. The 102, the 112, and the 120. The 102 is basically a reskinned kung fujas from last year. The 112 is an all new ski. And the 120 is the Sean Pettit pro model......the pettitor.
Nov 19 2013 9:34PM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
yes and yes. The 2012-2013 kung fujas is the same ski as the shreditor 102, the shreditor 120 is similar to the 2012-2013 pettitor, just a little softer underfoot
Nov 19 2013 11:48PM
1 0
profile picture
RubberSoul
Posts: 11249 - Karma: 14,642
alright thanks guys. so is the 112 good and stiff or is it really soft like the fujas are/have been?
Nov 20 2013 11:30AM
0 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
its similar to the fujas
Nov 20 2013 5:28PM
1 0
profile picture
RubberSoul
Posts: 11249 - Karma: 14,642
okay, glad i asked haha

thanks a lot man!
Nov 20 2013 5:33PM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Hey, I also noticed that the "Fujas" are built by Rocker Type: Rocker/Camber/Rocker and
102s Rocker Type: Rocker/Camber, from this reference on evo:


Nov 22 2013 4:58AM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
:DD Decisions, decisions...

Thnx everyone, really helping here.

Would love to hear anyone that has something to share on the issue/
Nov 22 2013 5:01AM
0 0
profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
I skied them today and had an absolute blast. the tips can be a bit chattery at higher speeds but it's not that noticeable. I didn't ski them In the park because that's not really my area of expertise but I'm sure they will be fine with there swing weight.
Nov 24 2013 7:33PM
1 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Well that kind of tips are always a bit chattery at high speeds, its not their destination. Thnx for sharing.
Nov 25 2013 4:52AM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
In the meantime anyone else tried these?
Dec 19 2013 11:19AM
0 0
profile picture
shr@gler
Posts: 1233 - Karma: 912
You havent bought them yet?
Dec 19 2013 4:20PM
1 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Not, we dont have enough snow yet, so I postponed it.

BTW

Im about 172 cm, should I take 169cm or the 179cm?
Dec 22 2013 11:37AM
0 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
I'd go 179, especially if you're still growing
Dec 22 2013 2:58PM
1 1
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
No Im not, Im 24, I think 169 would be better.
Dec 27 2013 3:56PM
0 0
profile picture
AJizzle
Posts: 1882 - Karma: 522
Don't be a pussy, it has a ton of rocker and will ski like a 140. Get the 179.
Dec 27 2013 4:04PM
2 1
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7271 - Karma: 18,576
179 would be pretty big for you. K2 come up short so that 179 will e more like a 184. Even with rocker that is a big ski for someone your height especially in a all mnt ski. But really try to demo and see what you like.
Dec 27 2013 4:23PM
2 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
haha okeej
Dec 27 2013 4:28PM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Thats the problem, but if the size is exact, then what do you say should I kick them 179?
Dec 27 2013 4:32PM
0 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7271 - Karma: 18,576
Well I'm 5'11 and 180 lbs and a strong skier. I ride the 179 if I ride a k2. So really I would think you will be ok on the shorter but it depends what you want to get out of the ski. Where do you ski and what do you want to do on them?
Dec 27 2013 4:34PM
2 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Is that 152cm height?  or you meant 6'11?
Dec 27 2013 4:41PM
0 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7271 - Karma: 18,576
^ not sure where you got 6'11 from. I'm 181 cm tall so about 5'11.
Dec 27 2013 4:45PM
3 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Great, than for me that paralel would be 169s.

Well I do skiing allover the mountain, some tricks, jumps, groomer sometimes.
Dec 27 2013 4:51PM
0 0
profile picture
tomPietrowski
Posts: 7271 - Karma: 18,576
Yeah exactly for a guy your size I would think 169 would be good. I ski the same things your after fine on a 179 so you being lighter then me and about 10 cm shorter the 169 should be good.

Hope you get some snow and can enjoy the skis.
Dec 27 2013 4:56PM
2 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Thnx my good man, it started snowing yesterday on the mountains, hopefully the weekend can be the start.

Hope you are already having fun 
Dec 27 2013 5:09PM
0 0
profile picture
GANGBANG420
Posts: 263 - Karma: 879
I love the fujases. They are super fun for almost everything, and can handle powder pretty well. I don't think k2 has changed their design for 5 years though, so you should probably just get whichever one you can find for the cheapest
Jan 2 2014 12:47AM
1 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
2011 was when they widened it
Jan 2 2014 5:03PM
0 0
profile picture
eg-nj
Posts: 5 - Karma: 15
Has anyone skied both the Kung Fujas (102mm underfoot) and Sir Francis Bacon?  If so, a side-by-side comparison of your impressions in hardpack/ice, bumps, trees and powder would be most appreciated.

Even if you've only skied the Kung Fujas, a quick but detailed review including your specs (height/weight, ski length, ability, terrain preference, aggressiveness) and pros/cons would be very helpful.

I bought the KF (169cm) and SFB (172cm) on sale and am trying to decide which pair to keep or sell/return.  I'm only 5'8" and 145 pounds with a preference for quick slalom turns in the bumps and trees, but am fairly conservative when it comes to speed. 

I'll primarily ski these on trips out west, but all too frequently end up in conditions similar to back east (tight icy bumped up tree runs, boilerplate, etc.) so I want something that works great all-mountain, not just a powder-biased ski.  Both these models sound like they fit the bill, so I need a tie-breaker.  Thanks.
Jan 2 2014 5:27PM
0 0
profile picture
p-fo
Posts: 9372 - Karma: 6,156
Just looked at these at Evo today actually for shits and giggles. The rocker pattern is pretty close to symmetrical, actually, despite what is published. They look fun for park actually. I'd get them if they came in 174.
Jan 2 2014 8:16PM
0 0
profile picture
soupcan
Posts: 364 - Karma: 562
I'm about 5'8 145lbs and I own the sfb (178)and demoed the fujas (shreditor 169) I ski pretty hard all over the mountain and they are pretty similar. I found the fujas better on cliffs but that's the only spot. I found the bacons are more lively and had a better swing weight. in powder it was close but I have to give it to the bacons probably because they are a bit bigger even with them mounted on Eric's choice compared to back mounted fujas. Groomers were pretty tight both chatter In the tips and have maybe a bit of a speed limit but I have come close to 65km an hour on the bacons (didn't try the fujas). Tight trees I like the bacon just cause they are a bit more lively. Overall they are very similar and both a ton of fun but personally I'm totally in love with my bacons.
Jan 2 2014 9:44PM
0 0
profile picture
eg-nj
Posts: 5 - Karma: 15
That's very helpful, thanks.  Since we're the same weight and height I assume the 172cm SFB will have a little lower speed limit and stability than the 169cm KF, but I could live with that. 
Jan 3 2014 1:05AM
0 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
If anyone is wondering, I got them 179cm, and I'm about to try them tomorrow hopefully, than share my impresssions. :DDD
Jan 17 2014 12:39PM
0 0
profile picture
AJizzle
Posts: 1882 - Karma: 522
Yes!!!!! I think you'll love them, and they will last longer.
Jan 17 2014 11:20PM
1 0
profile picture
Nikolic
Posts: 219 - Karma: 1,915
Noobinstein , konacno neko iz regiona. Mislim da nisi pogresio sto si uzeo duzi model, zato sto bi ti zbog roker profila 169 bilo prekratko. Skiju nisam licno vozio ali sve sto sam cuo o njoj je zvucalo savrseno.
Srecno u voznji :)
Jan 18 2014 5:59AM
1 0
profile picture
Noobinstein
Posts: 27 - Karma: 53
Just took the virginity of my Shreditor 102s, today. I must say they are really great. Took them allover the mountain, groomers, doing well on some low powder, cause we still don't have much snow here.

Definitely, not to be used on icy terrain, or bad snow conditions.

But really fun and playful ski for every need on the mountain.
Jan 18 2014 1:01PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)