Altai Kom skis

[Woodserson]

I got to fondle a pair of 174 KOM's last week. They are really nicely made-- I guess by that I mean they don't look like junk. The rocker seems proportional to the ski (not crazy, but not tiny "nordic rocker") and the flex was firm and consistent through the length of the ski-- not a soft shovel and the tail doesn't wash out. With the straighter dimensions and less sidecut it's a big ski, there's a lot to it. Big ol' nose too.

I'm still tempted by the 174's but the possibilities of the 162 are still intriguing.

Edited for clarity

[Lo-Fi]

I got to fondle a pair of 174 KOM's last week. They are really nicely made-- I guess by that I mean they don't look like junk. The rocker seems proportional to the ski (not crazy, but not tiny "nordic rocker") and the flex was firm and consistent through the length of the ski-- not a soft shovel and the tail doesn't wash out. With the straighter dimensions and less sidecut it's a big ski, there's a lot to it. Big ol' nose too.

I'm still tempted by the 174's but the possibilities of the 162 are still intriguing.

Edited for clarity

Yeah, it's a burlier ski, no doubt. The Vector BCs (N.B. which I would happily accept a donation of!) are probably the superior soft snow ski, as Connyro points out, but I wonder how they would fair in this kind of hard refrozen granular crud (sorry, old video):



It seemed like the Kom's particular blend of shorter length, modest rocker & sidecut, and burliness, served well in these kind of sketchy conditions.

If I had bigger mountains and larger-scale spaces to play in, I'd probably want the 174cm Kom (if not 180cm Vectors), but for what I have locally, the bigger Koms might seem like a lot of ski and the 164s are working well.

.

[Woodserson]

How did you figure out your mount point, LoFi?

[MikeK]

Pretty sure the KOM comes pre-drilled with inserts.

[connyro]

Pretty sure the KOM comes pre-drilled with inserts.

KOMs do NOT come with inserts. I mounted a pair with 3-pin line at just slightly ahead if the balance point.

[MikeK]

Oops - I guess they aren't like the Hoks... thought I saw a picture with inserts, but I guess I'm wrong.

So does that mean you bought a pair, or was this for a friend?

[connyro]

Oops - I guess they aren't like the Hoks... thought I saw a picture with inserts, but I guess I'm wrong.

So does that mean you bought a pair, or was this for a friend?

For a ski buddy. They were too short for his style of skiing. He's replaced them with longer V6 BCs. He's keeping the KOMs for loaning out to other ski friends who want to get into the BC. KOMs are really great skis but not exactly a perfect fit for our specific terrain and touring.

[connyro]

... as Connyro points out, but I wonder how they would fair in this kind of hard refrozen granular crud...

I get the impression that Lo-Fi could make ANY BC ski turn on pretty much any snow conditions, based on the skiing in that vid! Talk about charging...

[fisheater]

... as Connyro points out, but I wonder how they would fair in this kind of hard refrozen granular crud...

I get the impression that Lo-Fi could make ANY BC ski turn on pretty much any snow conditions, based on the skiing in that vid! Talk about charging...

Connyro, that is exactly what I was thinking. If I bought skis based on some of the videos posted by some of the skiers here, I would be flat broke.

[phoenix]

What's the camber like on the Kom's? Big issue for me,as I weigh in at 125 lbs. Really don't like a BC ski with "nordic" camber; I lose grip on the uphills, and it makes for strange turning behavior. I'm looking at the 162's.
As a comparison, I find the 179 Boundless has a little too much camber for my taste (and a bit stiffer flex than I like), the Annums are about right.
Your experience with the Kom's, regarding camber?