It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
razors-chazasymmetrical skis are nothing really new, while not NS first stop when it comes to looking for skis, Elan have been doing it for years in most of their line. Any idea if theyve done it with an asymmetric rocker like they do with elans?
I don't think Elan has been doing asymmetric sidecut. They have been doing full camber on the inside edge and early ride in the tip and tail on the outside edge; I'm pretty sure the sidecut was the same on each side of the ski.
LemuelI don't think Elan has been doing asymmetric sidecut. They have been doing full camber on the inside edge and early ride in the tip and tail on the outside edge; I'm pretty sure the sidecut was the same on each side of the ski.
Definitely want to check out the Marksman.
Yeah the marksman is differnt from what Elan do. The best way to think of it is two skis put together. You hav the pinnacle on the outside with the long tapered tip. This shapes tracks really well throughout up snow. The inside uses the shreditor shape. This shape with the widest point closer to the tip is more playfull and easier to butter. Put them together though and you get a ski which will be as playfull as any ski but track as well as the best freeride skis.
tomPietrowskiYeah the marksman is differnt from what Elan do. The best way to think of it is two skis put together. You hav the pinnacle on the outside with the long tapered tip. This shapes tracks really well throughout up snow. The inside uses the shreditor shape. This shape with the widest point closer to the tip is more playfull and easier to butter. Put them together though and you get a ski which will be as playfull as any ski but track as well as the best freeride skis.
well, this is embarrasing, i just figured they would have changed the sidecut to match the rocker profile, clearly i was wrong, surely elan, as the leaders of asymmetry they will have tried this before k2?
razors-chazwell, this is embarrasing, i just figured they would have changed the sidecut to match the rocker profile, clearly i was wrong, surely elan, as the leaders of asymmetry they will have tried this before k2?
If they have I don't know of it. It's a cool concept and even if it has been tired elsewhere hopefully this is the ski which makes it work, and with pep behind it, I'm very hopefully. Hopefully getting mine this week so I'll let you guys know more soon.
I currently ski the shreditor 112 as a daily driver/park ski. It rips everything I can throw at it and really feels like a "man's" ski. Word is that this new Pep pro ski will replace both the 102 and 112? Really? So if I want a wider park ski from K2 this dick shaped, girl colors ski is gonna be my only choice? Pretty disappointing from the same company that used to give us the Enemy and the Hellbent.
teamdummyI currently ski the shreditor 112 as a daily driver/park ski. It rips everything I can throw at it and really feels like a "man's" ski. Word is that this new Pep pro ski will replace both the 102 and 112? Really? So if I want a wider park ski from K2 this dick shaped, girl colors ski is gonna be my only choice? Pretty disappointing from the same company that used to give us the Enemy and the Hellbent.
I'm more surprised considering that by having an asymmetrical "park" ski you are effectively lessening the edge life by half since you probably can't swap them too well (idk how they ski, maybe swapping them just lengthens the turn radius, or they could just catch edge way easier). I think it would be much better if K2 kept the 102
Ahaha, totally forgot about those. Inb4 a TBK2 collab.
Admittedly I almost dabbled in the asymmetrical sidecut game last year. I built up a template for a ski I was going to call the Eleanor as in 'L&R'. It was asymmetrical side to side, but symmetrical tip to tail. Here's the template:
(Lets just take a moment to admire how dick like that thing looks...) Aside from that I never pursed building it into a ski because I did a terrible job cutting out the template, and I felt my time was far better spent on other ideas (that may just surface sometime later this winter...?). My biggest worry with the design was how it would track, but I was going to offset the mount to the left or right so that the surface areas would be equal side to side to somehow make the tracking better. That was really just a random idea, ha, I'm sure a crooked mount probably isn't a new thing either anyways.
I'm sure the Marksman will work just fine. I guess I'd have to ride them and other like skis a LOT though to decided whether the asymmetry is a performance gain or not, however.
w_skierI'm more surprised considering that by having an asymmetrical "park" ski you are effectively lessening the edge life by half since you probably can't swap them too well (idk how they ski, maybe swapping them just lengthens the turn radius, or they could just catch edge way easier). I think it would be much better if K2 kept the 102
The marks man is not really a park ski that is the poacher. The marksman is really your freeride ski and for park you have the poacher, domain or sight. For pow there is still the powabunga and the pepitor. Personally I think 96 and 102 are close enough so I'm not too worried about loosing the shreditor 102 and the marksman is a big improvement over the 112 in my opinion.
tomPietrowskiThe marks man is not really a park ski that is the poacher. The marksman is really your freeride ski and for park you have the poacher, domain or sight. For pow there is still the powabunga and the pepitor. Personally I think 96 and 102 are close enough so I'm not too worried about loosing the shreditor 102 and the marksman is a big improvement over the 112 in my opinion.
Since the 189cm 112 is my favorite ski of all time I'm interested to see how this thing actually performs!
tomPietrowskiThe marks man is not really a park ski that is the poacher. The marksman is really your freeride ski and for park you have the poacher, domain or sight. For pow there is still the powabunga and the pepitor. Personally I think 96 and 102 are close enough so I'm not too worried about loosing the shreditor 102 and the marksman is a big improvement over the 112 in my opinion.
Well that's good. Have you got a chance to ride them yet?
Carl_the_LlamaWhat's the fit like compared to this year's pinnacles? Volume wise, I found the old ones ridiculously tight...
There are a few differences I found. In the standard pinnacle I found quite a bit of pressure on the instep and had to move the instep buckle. Wit the new pro I actually found I had to add heel lifts to better fit the instep. I feel as though the shell is similar but the new liner has less volume over the old one. I'm certainly proffering the fit of the new boot.
tomPietrowskiThere are a few differences I found. In the standard pinnacle I found quite a bit of pressure on the instep and had to move the instep buckle. Wit the new pro I actually found I had to add heel lifts to better fit the instep. I feel as though the shell is similar but the new liner has less volume over the old one. I'm certainly proffering the fit of the new boot.
Wally got a pro model (Think we all knew that was gonna happen), as well as the Sick Day graphic is godly, also some crazy new pow ski, ill let you all wait for. Also Honey Badger don't give a S*it.
ICaryWally got a pro model (Think we all knew that was gonna happen), as well as the Sick Day graphic is godly, also some crazy new pow ski, ill let you all wait for. Also Honey Badger don't give a S*it.
By crazy pow ski you mean the split tail one called the Pescado...that's not quite a new concept?
j.w.vSaw the new goggle a while back, looked to be an O2 XL shape with a Prizm lense. Haven't heard about the touring gear though, sounds kind of weird...
Not the goggle I saw. The other product is more so a product that could be utilized for touring rather then perhaps being built directly for it.
