Am I crazy to even consider this?

**vano** · 07-11-2007, 07:07 AM

I live on the EC and ski mostly in the tight trees and bumps when I can't make it out west. I used my 188 Bros all last season. When the conditions were soft and soft-ish the Bros rocked in the trees and bumps, but once the snow got hard and the trees got real tight I found myself wishing for something narrower and quicker.

So as I started looking for a ski that would be reasonably solid on the groomers and rip in the trees and bumps, something with some energy and pop. I settled on the 185 Karma based on all the positive reviews on TGR - especially the raves regaring their tree and bump abilities.

Now I can get myself a pretty sweet deal on a pair of 177 karmas - but I am 6'2" and 220lbs. Am I crazy to even consider them? I am thinking the 177s might sorta kinda work on hard EC snow and in trees and bumps... if its soft I have the 188 Bros and if it dumps (once every 3 years) I have the Pow Pluses.

Thoughts?

**Tuckerman** · 07-11-2007, 07:32 AM

I think that the 177 would be fine in the trees but out on the groomers on hard snow they will suck. Unless you like to go slow. Or try them and if you don't like them sell them.

**orlowskij** · 07-11-2007, 08:03 AM

I haven't skied any new Karmas, but when I demoed a pair of 05/06 Karmas in 177 they skied pretty similar to my 174 Public Enemies. A little bit burlier, but not much. With that said, I'd say you probably want to hold off for the 185. I'm 5'8" 160 lbs. and the 177 felt about right for me. I imagine with 60 more pounds you'll want the 185 if you're going to ski them hard out of the trees and bumps. Like Tuckerman said, if that's all you want to use them for, a 177 should work, but might not be enough ski elsewhere.

**Bluebird** · 07-11-2007, 08:55 AM

You should be fine. A buddy of mine is huge...6'4" ish and about 260lbs of solid muscle and skis the 177 Karma. They look incredibly small on him, but he loves them. He also skis fast, real fast.

**dre66** · 07-11-2007, 08:57 AM

if you already have a pow ski, and an all around ski for the softer EC days and need something for when the snow is hard and shitty why not buy more of a carving ski. It sounds like the missing part of your quiver isn't going to be filled by the 177 Karma, but that's just my opinion.

**Huckwheat** · 07-11-2007, 09:00 AM

If it trees and bumps are the focus I would think it would work......agree they might feel squirrely maching on groomers.

I am 6'4" 215 and ski 183s for my backcountry, and mid fat 180s for tele. In both cases I am more interested in saving energy and having fun, that going mach loony.

**Phall** · 07-11-2007, 09:23 AM

I'm 6 ft 200 and love my 177 karmas, they RIP on groomers and are dope in the woods.

**jeffmoore** · 07-11-2007, 10:01 AM

im looking to buy 177 karmas. if you dont end up getting them, id appreciate to hear about this deal.

**vano** · 07-12-2007, 07:31 AM

I guess my decision has been made easier - the deal I was getting on the 177s has passed me by. I realize the 177s are not ideal for my size, but the good price was very tempting.

Can anyone comment on how last year's B2s are? Hasn't been much discussion about them on this board recently. I know they are not wood core and will probably blow up within 40 days on the hill. I know they are noodly, but they are supposed to be very nice in the bumps and trees and a decent AM ski for EC.

**skiingsamurai** · 07-12-2007, 07:53 AM

im 5'10'' 170ish lbs. Im on the 169 karma and love em. Theyre quick, and tight turning in the trees. Ive got them center mounted and wish i had em back 1cm, jut for more tip and float. Keep in mind since its a twin it skis 4 or 5 cm shorter than it really is.

that said youll love them for EC trees and bumps

**s.p.c** · 07-16-2007, 04:05 PM

glad i read this thread....

i am thinking similar thoughts. i am rocking 185 karmas on the daily and 183 gotamas depening on how it is out.

i think a: the goats destroy bumps, i love the girth, the feel the float, and they are fun on groomers- but- what if i went with something that was like 95-100mm in the waist (i think the karmas feel a little narrow) and 170-175 long.

i think it is my dream. i am 6' about 170. ski.

something about those dimensions are awesome. maybe even 165. even on groomers on the EC, i don't really need to go mach looney- i just need to f around on the edge of trails, b/c i am there b/c the trees suck or there is no snow.

i told blatto and he laughed at first and then thought it was a decent idea. i want to develop a super smooth style of mini skiing. this is the dumbest shit i have ever posted about skiing, but i am passionate about it, and think i need some short fat-ish skis to do it; but i am not sure which skis or if they even exist.

of course, if it was big and deep i would go bigger, but.... then again maybe not. the flex needs to be really smooth throughout- and i have a pair of bindings waiting for the right ski. but one part of me thinks this is the worst idea ever, the second part of me says it is the best idea ever.

**Sutter** · 07-16-2007, 04:29 PM

only one way to find out......build your own ski and call it the Tuna Can, short and fat. The ultimate EC ski and big money and fame.

**SnowHot** · 07-16-2007, 05:29 PM

The Karma in a playfully short length is great fun if its not your only ski, which its not, so get it and have some fun!

**Phill** · 07-16-2007, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by s.p.c

glad i read this thread....

i am thinking similar thoughts. i am rocking 185 karmas on the daily and 183 gotamas depening on how it is out.

i think a: the goats destroy bumps, i love the girth, the feel the float, and they are fun on groomers- but- what if i went with something that was like 95-100mm in the waist (i think the karmas feel a little narrow) and 170-175 long.

i think it is my dream. i am 6' about 170. ski.

something about those dimensions are awesome. maybe even 165. even on groomers on the EC, i don't really need to go mach looney- i just need to f around on the edge of trails, b/c i am there b/c the trees suck or there is no snow.

i told blatto and he laughed at first and then thought it was a decent idea. i want to develop a super smooth style of mini skiing. this is the dumbest shit i have ever posted about skiing, but i am passionate about it, and think i need some short fat-ish skis to do it; but i am not sure which skis or if they even exist.

of course, if it was big and deep i would go bigger, but.... then again maybe not. the flex needs to be really smooth throughout- and i have a pair of bindings waiting for the right ski. but one part of me thinks this is the worst idea ever, the second part of me says it is the best idea ever.

Your welcome.

http://www.getboards.com/snow/twinti...elizabeth.html

**jonski** · 07-16-2007, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Phill

Your welcome.

http://www.getboards.com/snow/twinti...elizabeth.html

shouldn't it maybe be more like icelantic?

**Damian Sanders** · 07-17-2007, 05:51 AM

FYI......I'm about 6'1, 180lb, and would never even consider the 177 Karma. Only the 185. For an all around/bumps/tree ski in the east.

I decided to go with the 179 Public Enemy mounted at 0 instaid. It has a much shorter actual contact length, but very long tips and tails, and is heavy for it's size.

The karma has a much more conventional design than the PE, IMHO.

**Tuckerman** · 07-17-2007, 06:47 AM

I would roc the the 185 as well for a all around east ski. I'm 5'10.5" 178#s. Right now my all around ski is a 191 Bandit XX. But the 191 gets chewed up because I always stomping on them in tight spots.

**vano** · 07-17-2007, 07:00 AM

Ok. Based on the responses, I think the 177 Karmas are out. I went to the nearby store and held up a pair of 177s and they did seem way short to me.

The store had a pair of Legend 8000s for a pretty reasonable price that I might be able to negotiate down a bit more. There is virtually no comments on the board reagarding these (not surprisingly - they are only 79mm underfoot - laughable by TRG standandards but in the right range for an EC hard snow and bump ski). Anyone know anything about them? Worth a look in a 184cm length? Construction seemed pretty solid, sandwich + very light so it should swing easy.

**Tuckerman** · 07-17-2007, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by vano

the right range for an EC hard snow and bump ski.

If you are trying to put together a quiver you'll want a stiff ski for hard snow (Ice) and more of a softer ski for bumps. But the Legend 8000s will work as all around and do neither (bumps or hard snow) great.

**s.p.c** · 07-17-2007, 08:26 AM

i would even say go for legend 8800s over the 8000s, but that is me.

the elizabeth does look dope, as does mantra. icelantics look pretty ridiculous- anyone have any beta?

**Bluebird** · 07-17-2007, 08:31 AM

If you ever consider the 8800's, I have a pair of 188's. Mounted twice, but in otherwise great shape..

$150 plus shipping.

**sandflea** · 07-17-2007, 08:33 AM

The karma, pe's, legends are all good.... add the 184 scott p3's, you can get'em cheap.

**hemas** · 07-17-2007, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by vano

And 8000s for a pretty reasonable price that I might be able to negotiate down a bit more. There is virtually no comments on the board reagarding these.

I know lostinthetrees liked his, and the the earlier InBigr or what ever it was called was quite popular as well.