Restless — An Alex Hall Portrait (Full Film) | Faction Skis

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!

K2 Shreditor 102

profile picture
waveydavey
Posts: 44 - Karma: 125
I found a good deal for these skis and was wondering how they preform in the park and when the groomers are icy. I ski about 33% park, 33% trees, and 33% groomers. I live on the east coast so I'm not exactly sure if these skis would be ideal for me. Also, I am about 5'6 and about 130 lbs. I would appreciate feedback from anyone who has skied on these. If there are other skis you guys think that would be ideal for me, let me know. Thanks!
Sep 28 2014 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
NigelStein
Posts: 466 - Karma: 455
We got them in the shop I'm working at this winter and they seem pretty great. Buttery, but not overly flexy and I'm looking forward to trying them this winter. I got Kartel 106s in the mail, I'll tell you how those go over in VT this winter as well. I'd go for something like the Rossi Slat if you were looking for something else as well
Sep 29 2014 8:23PM
0 0
profile picture
waveydavey
Posts: 44 - Karma: 125
NigelSteinWe got them in the shop I'm working at this winter and they seem pretty great. Buttery, but not overly flexy and I'm looking forward to trying them this winter. I got Kartel 106s in the mail, I'll tell you how those go over in VT this winter as well. I'd go for something like the Rossi Slat if you were looking for something else as well

The Slats look like they would be a good option. I looked em up but I didn't really see many reviews on them. Do you know how they ski?
Oct 1 2014 4:26PM
0 0
profile picture
NigelStein
Posts: 466 - Karma: 455
I haven't gotten to ski them before, one of the guys I went to camp with had them and loved them. Sorry i can't be of more help but at $290 from TheHouse.com you can't really go wrong.
Oct 1 2014 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
bdowning
Posts: 1630 - Karma: 243
Do we have an actual size on the new 177 Shreditor 102? I know k2 measures length after shaping so I'm deciding between the 177 and 184. I'm 5'8, 165 lbs here.
Oct 10 2014 4:22PM
0 0
profile picture
M.M
Posts: 1696 - Karma: 4,494
bdowningDo we have an actual size on the new 177 Shreditor 102? I know k2 measures length after shaping so I'm deciding between the 177 and 184. I'm 5'8, 165 lbs here.


i am about 5'10-11'' not really sure hah and i have this years 184's and they are still a good 2-3 inches taller than me. im not home right now but i could measure the ski exactly once i get home
Oct 10 2014 8:46PM
0 0
profile picture
NigelStein
Posts: 466 - Karma: 455
I'm 5'7" and 168 and ordered 181 (ON3P though). The K2s run 3-4cm longer than advertised so I'd do the 177.
Oct 11 2014 8:18AM
0 0
profile picture
BirtDike
Posts: 1258 - Karma: 514
Idk if this helps, but last years 179 measures 182.5cm...
Oct 11 2014 3:23PM
0 0
profile picture
starsky_hucks
Posts: 394 - Karma: 62
I have a pair of the 184s, rode them in nz this year.


First impressions - loved them, very playful

NZ powder - amazing!!! dont need anything wider in this hemisphere 9/10

groomers - carve well 7/10

icey groomers - Terrrirble, but hey who wants to ski those 3/10

chop - once again amazing - the long sofl shovel bounced over anything and absorbed most of the impact. 8/10

park - OK, but obviously not a park ski. 6/10


Impression after 3 weeks.

love these skis, very playful and I just wanted to launch off every little bump and ramp, butter all around the mountain and slash everywhere. on steeper technical chutes I did feel like I wanted a stiffer ski to charge but hey you cant have it all.

Love them.
Oct 12 2014 7:05AM
0 0
profile picture
waveydavey
Posts: 44 - Karma: 125
starsky_hucksI have a pair of the 184s, rode them in nz this year.


First impressions - loved them, very playful

NZ powder - amazing!!! dont need anything wider in this hemisphere 9/10

groomers - carve well 7/10

icey groomers - Terrrirble, but hey who wants to ski those 3/10

chop - once again amazing - the long sofl shovel bounced over anything and absorbed most of the impact. 8/10

park - OK, but obviously not a park ski. 6/10


Impression after 3 weeks.

love these skis, very playful and I just wanted to launch off every little bump and ramp, butter all around the mountain and slash everywhere. on steeper technical chutes I did feel like I wanted a stiffer ski to charge but hey you cant have it all.

Love them.


I ski on the east coast (a lot of icy groomers) so I think I'm going to need something with a narrower waist. I was thinking maybe the Chronic or Infamous. Any experience or thoughts with these skis?
Oct 12 2014 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
ghosthop
Posts: 631 - Karma: 1,027
I spent some time on the shreditor 102 last february, went into it not expecting much because I am not a big fan of k2 and was pleasantly surprised. They are definitely more of an all mountain freestyle oriented ski than a park ski. They were noticeable heavier than a lot of skis of that size. They also have a stout enough flex that carrying speed through chop and hitting drops is fun, but not something that I would be thrilled hitting rails on a regular basis with.

Def would do chronic over infamous.

Just as an aside, I'm from the east coast and ski a rossi s6(sickle for you youngins) which is 106 underfoot and was always happy with it on groomers. You notice the width if you're really trying to get in a bunch of carves, but I'm not a dad. Really appreciate a bit of extra width when popping off bumps or hitting the trees when all the snow has been skied and is chopped up.
Oct 13 2014 2:23AM
0 0
profile picture
waveydavey
Posts: 44 - Karma: 125
ghosthopI spent some time on the shreditor 102 last february, went into it not expecting much because I am not a big fan of k2 and was pleasantly surprised. They are definitely more of an all mountain freestyle oriented ski than a park ski. They were noticeable heavier than a lot of skis of that size. They also have a stout enough flex that carrying speed through chop and hitting drops is fun, but not something that I would be thrilled hitting rails on a regular basis with.

Def would do chronic over infamous.

Just as an aside, I'm from the east coast and ski a rossi s6(sickle for you youngins) which is 106 underfoot and was always happy with it on groomers. You notice the width if you're really trying to get in a bunch of carves, but I'm not a dad. Really appreciate a bit of extra width when popping off bumps or hitting the trees when all the snow has been skied and is chopped up.


Thanks for the feedback! I also forgot to mention that I was looking at the Rossignol storms and the slats. Any experience with these?
Oct 13 2014 10:42AM
0 0
profile picture
starsky_hucks
Posts: 394 - Karma: 62
waveydaveyI ski on the east coast (a lot of icy groomers) so I think I'm going to need something with a narrower waist. I was thinking maybe the Chronic or Infamous. Any experience or thoughts with these skis?


I actually have 178cm chronic crps. They are a park ski and the k2s are an AM Freestyle ski. They ski very different. The k2s are heavier, softer, and charge better.

I ski 80/20 AM/PARK btw
Oct 18 2014 6:41AM
0 0
profile picture
BirtDike
Posts: 1258 - Karma: 514
Has anyone skied this years version and last years?
Oct 18 2014 9:43AM
0 0
profile picture
bdowning
Posts: 1630 - Karma: 243
I ended up purchasing the 2015 Shreditor 102's in size 184. They have a significant rocker so although I'm 5'8 I'm more then confident these will suit me well for a ski I can enjoy all over the mountain in most weather conditions. With my park skis being the uncambered 4Frnt Switchblade and at 176 and my pow skis being a 183 Bent Chetler, the 184 rockered Shreditor 102 will now be my "one ski quiver" when I'm doing the majority of skiing in VT. Growing up in Jersey the majority of my life, can't help but come from a park background, but with my recent move to New England and a first time pass holder to Killington, I'm pumped to ride a wider ski the majority of the season. Mounted them at -2.5 back from truth center. I'll let you guys know how I like them in variable snow conditions.
Dec 3 2014 4:46PM
0 0
profile picture
awesam
Posts: 14 - Karma: 35
bdowningMounted them at -2.5 back from truth center. I'll let you guys know how I like them in variable snow conditions.


Was this -2.5 from true center or the marked core center?

How are they mounted at this point?

(Context: I'm trying to decide where to mount mine and deciding between -2.5 to -3.5 from core center for 50% park/50% all-mountain-jib-ski)
Apr 29 2015 8:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Swandog7
Posts: 4955 - Karma: 9,021
Don't forget about the Shreditor 92 as well. Obviously a narrower waist but is very similar to the 102. It handles better on ice but still charges. I ski in Minnesota which is pretty much pure ice with about 2 inches of snow over it at most. It can grip it fairly well but since we have tiny ass hills I hot lap the park usually.
Apr 29 2015 10:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Carl_the_Llama
Posts: 504 - Karma: 1,295
awesamWas this -2.5 from true center or the marked core center?

How are they mounted at this point?

(Context: I'm trying to decide where to mount mine and deciding between -2.5 to -3.5 from core center for 50% park/50% all-mountain-jib-ski)


Have mine at -1.5 and I love em. Rip every where. I probably use them 70% park, 30% all-mountain. They're pretty symmetrical, so keep that in mind...
Apr 30 2015 3:20AM
0 0
profile picture
Level9Sports
Posts: 60 - Karma: 51
waveydaveyThe Slats look like they would be a good option. I looked em up but I didn't really see many reviews on them. Do you know how they ski?


I've had them for the past two seasons and they're one of the better skis I've ridden. You can butter them fairly easily but I'd classify them as a true all mountain offering because they still have good support underfoot with a touch of camber. The only downside is that they're heavier than most skis but it wasn't that noticeable in terms of swing weight. I only spent about 10-12 days on rails with them as I mainly use them for everything else so I can't speak to how they hold up over time but they're still in great condition.

Rossi says its one of the better skis they've made but because it didn't sell well, they're not bringing it back for the 16-17 season :( Pick up a pair if you have a chance because they're incredible.

The Shreditor 102 is very sick as well and have had a lot of fun on them. They're light with some support underfoot despite the buttery-ness so they may not be the best for bigger jumps but not complete noodles like the Afterbangs. Collin Collins rips them in the park so what other proof do you need? ;)
Apr 30 2015 7:10PM
0 0
profile picture
Level9Sports
Posts: 60 - Karma: 51
PentHausIdk if this helps, but last years 179 measures 182.5cm...


It depends if they measure pre or post rocker. More often than not, skis are not the exact length or dimensions they're sold as. Thankfully 3 mm's is an unnoticeable difference so its not concerning.
Apr 30 2015 7:13PM
0 0
profile picture
randymeetsworld
Posts: 185 - Karma: 248
I skied my brother's Shreditor 102s and they were ideal for anything and everything. They were pretty snappy in the trees and it was a blast on some light-powder days. Highly recommended as an all-mountain ripper or go-to ski.
May 1 2015 11:06PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)