Altai Kom skis

[lilcliffy]

I would like to hear what Nils has to say on Kom length....(hint, hint).

However- my perspective is always about context...

As a yo-yo mtn ski- on very steep terrain and/or dense cover- requiring aggressive, short-radius turns- GO SHORT.

As a mountain touring ski- with a desire to cover some distance as well as downhill performance- then GO LONG.

But- obviously even 175cm is not long- in a traditional K&G sense...

Maybe that should lead to the development of the next two Altai skis (hint, hint):
1) long-distance mtn touring ski (XCD)
2) long distance BC-XC ski (less downhill, more XC performance)

[kumachan]

How does one choose between the different lengths? This for me would have to be a try-before-I-buy ski, though I don't deny I'm very interested. I wonder how many lengths ORS will mount up. Almost worth a drive, if we get snow.

If you have time, Altai is doing a ski demo and Instruction in WA at the Sitzmark Ski Area Feb. 6. Check their website! Maybe Nils &/or Francois would consider doing one of those on the east coast of the continent, please?!

[MikeK]

Personally I would go by weight. It's a deep snow ski. I wouldn't think there'd be significant touring advantage to using a longer ski, but a significant disadvantage is it doesn't float your weight.

Just a SWAG:

Less than 130-140 lbs, go for the short version.

140-180 lbs, go for the original.

180+ lbs, go long.

I'm roughly using the Vector tables as a guide (pun not intended).

[MikeK]

PS moved KOM discussion from Hok review. Don't want to drift a review too much with a different product...

[MikeK]

PPS Goddamn it you guys.

I had it in my mind I wasn't going to want a ski like this... but the more TTalk it gets, the more curious I am...

[Woodserson]

YESSSSSS exactly. Me too! It sounds looks and feels legit, it would be a great ski for New England and NY, methinks.

[lilcliffy]

It's a deep snow ski. I wouldn't think there'd be significant touring advantage to using a longer ski

Disagree on this one- in my experience length = glide- always. The 175cm Kom should greatly offer better K&G performance than the 150cm. It's a single-cambered powder ski- even very light skiers should have no problem controlling the camber underfoot, in a downhill turn.

The shorter length is going to primarily effect turning radius and maneuverability.

But- if you want to cover some distance with it- the 175cm Kom should be more efficient in a XC context.

[lilcliffy]

Hey Mike- the posts to the Kom thread are also being posted here.

[MikeK]

Hey Mike- the posts to the Kom thread are also being posted here.

??

I moved the posts off the Hok review thread to this one. Once we get a Kom user review we can have comments there. I just didn't want the Hok to get buried by the Kom.

[lilcliffy]

No- I get it- makes sense.

But if I post here in the Kom thread- it's ending up in the Hok review as well.