K2 Reckoner 112 size

What skis have you used in the past, which lengths, and did any of them feel particularly long or short to you? I think I'd lean 184 since it's a pretty light and easy ski, but that'd depend on your thoughts on your previous skis.

patagonialukeWhat skis have you used in the past, which lengths, and did any of them feel particularly long or short to you? I think I'd lean 184 since it's a pretty light and easy ski, but that'd depend on your thoughts on your previous skis.

I had before the Volkl Two 176 and since i mounted them pretty centered and due to its full rocker it felt kinda short. But the reckoner has less rocker but since i want them in team line it's pretty close from center too.

theo1897nsI had before the Volkl Two 176 and since i mounted them pretty centered and due to its full rocker it felt kinda short. But the reckoner has less rocker but since i want them in team line it's pretty close from center too.

I think both will be fine. If your not spinning off jumps get the longer.

theo1897nsI had before the Volkl Two 176 and since i mounted them pretty centered and due to its full rocker it felt kinda short. But the reckoner has less rocker but since i want them in team line it's pretty close from center too.

Cool, I’d go 184. While it’s not reverse camber like the Two, the Reckoner is a lot lighter and I think the shorter length would feel similarly short like the Two.

I've been on a fatypus d sender 194 for the past 2 years. Would the reckoners in a 191 be a burly enough ski to handle some straightline stuff in addition to the fun jibby stuff? Just wondering about your 2 cents.

patagonialukeWhat skis have you used in the past, which lengths, and did any of them feel particularly long or short to you? I think I'd lean 184 since it's a pretty light and easy ski, but that'd depend on your thoughts on your previous skis.

BigPurpleSkiSuitI've been on a fatypus d sender 194 for the past 2 years. Would the reckoners in a 191 be a burly enough ski to handle some straightline stuff in addition to the fun jibby stuff? Just wondering about your 2 cents.

Hmm, I've never seen a D'Sender in person but I think the 191 Reckoner (any of the widths) would feel shorter. If the stated weights on Fatypus' site are accurate, I think they'd come in at similar weights (though just looking at their construction, I have a hard time believing a 184 D'Sender weighs under 2000g / ski?). But regardless of weight, the Reckoner's effective edge and running length are notably shorter, so I think the 191 would feel notably shorter than your 194. That said, if you wanted to add a more playful ski to the quiver, then it could be a good option.

I dont like quivers, I like skiing one ski the whole season, and yeah the ski is very light for its size, pretty playful in the tip, tail is pretty stiff. I just wanted to make sure I reckoner wasn't as buttery as something like the jskis vacation

patagonialukeHmm, I've never seen a D'Sender in person but I think the 191 Reckoner (any of the widths) would feel shorter. If the stated weights on Fatypus' site are accurate, I think they'd come in at similar weights (though just looking at their construction, I have a hard time believing a 184 D'Sender weighs under 2000g / ski?). But regardless of weight, the Reckoner's effective edge and running length are notably shorter, so I think the 191 would feel notably shorter than your 194. That said, if you wanted to add a more playful ski to the quiver, then it could be a good option.

BigPurpleSkiSuitI dont like quivers, I like skiing one ski the whole season, and yeah the ski is very light for its size, pretty playful in the tip, tail is pretty stiff. I just wanted to make sure I reckoner wasn't as buttery as something like the jskis vacation

Gotcha, yeah I haven't skied the Vacation but I've flexed it (the current 104mm-wide one) and its flex pattern isn't super far off from the Reckoner 112. The Reckoner's shovels might actually be a touch softer but it's stiffer around the bindings. Cy will be skiing the Reckoner next season so he'll be able to compare to the Vacation, but that won't be happening for a while, unfortunately.

Overall, I'm pretty confident the Reckoner will be less stable, mostly due to its more tapered shape and your note about the D'Sender's tail being stiff (the Reckoner's tail is not stiff). If you ski with a very neutral / centered stance, you can ski the Reckoner hard, it's just one of those skis where most of the stability is around the middle of the ski, rather than minimally tapered skis like the D'Sender where (I imagine) you can drive and engage the shovels.

FWIW, if you go to around 1:05 in this video you can kinda see what I mean in terms of skiing style.

D senders shovels aren't uber stiff like the tail, and I've been wanting a more playful ski, so the reckoner seems like an awesome choice. Itll probably just take some getting used to is all, but I love being able to poing the noses over rollers and butter so I like the idea of slightly softer with length on it. Your reviews are top notch over at blister so thanks for doing that!!

patagonialukeGotcha, yeah I haven't skied the Vacation but I've flexed it (the current 104mm-wide one) and its flex pattern isn't super far off from the Reckoner 112. The Reckoner's shovels might actually be a touch softer but it's stiffer around the bindings. Cy will be skiing the Reckoner next season so he'll be able to compare to the Vacation, but that won't be happening for a while, unfortunately.

Overall, I'm pretty confident the Reckoner will be less stable, mostly due to its more tapered shape and your note about the D'Sender's tail being stiff (the Reckoner's tail is not stiff). If you ski with a very neutral / centered stance, you can ski the Reckoner hard, it's just one of those skis where most of the stability is around the middle of the ski, rather than minimally tapered skis like the D'Sender where (I imagine) you can drive and engage the shovels.

FWIW, if you go to around 1:05 in this video you can kinda see what I mean in terms of skiing style.