Fat-ypus I-Rock or Icelantic Gypsy, what makes the better switch& park ski

Posts: 1728 - Karma: 7,224

Jul 11 2014 5:25AM

Ok I know mentioning "park" in a powder ski is ridiculous, but just saying for the sake of switch skiing and mounting closer to center.

On the off chance, can anyone give comparison to these? I-rocks have more rocker, slight camber underfoot and are apparently almost a pound lighter. On the downside, the shape of the ski is less symmetrical, with a 158 tip and 148 tail while the Gypsy is more symmetrical with 152 tip and 148 waist.

At this point, I'm leaning towards the I-Rocks, but can anybody chime in?

Also, I think I want to buy the A-lotta's, just because... for $290 right now you can't go wrong (except finding brakes big enough)

1 1

MartianMan

Posts: 1101 - Karma: 2,098

Jul 11 2014 8:53AM

So when the dimensions are as large as 158 and 148, a 10mm difference will feel much less directional than a 10mm difference on a ski like the AR7. The Irocks will feel more symmetrical than you expect. Same goes for the Gypsy. They will feel like a almost fully symmetrical ski. Both quality products, I would just lean towards the one that you have a better deal on. I was a big fan of the Gypsy's. but I've never ridden a Fatypus.

1 1

iH8pow

Posts: 1728 - Karma: 7,224

Jul 11 2014 9:21PM

I-rocks are about $40 cheaper, and not to mention green look pivot bindings (on sale for $250) will look better on them than the Gypsys. Why do FKS never go on sale? Must be a Rossignol thing, and I don't feel like paying $150 more so I can have orange bindings to match the Gypsys.

And Gypsys are reverse camber. Wasn't it decided a while ago that reverse camber is a cool concept but pretty whack for all mountain?

Thanks for the input, after reading reviews online it sounds like people really like both skis, but I sense a little more stoke on the I-Rocks than the Gypsys.

1 1