Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

K2 Domain Question !

profile picture
vinc7bed
Posts: 13 - Karma: 76

Hey i'm 5'11'' and I ride like 90% rails and 10% jumps.  I want to know if the 169 domain or the 179 domain would be the best for me.  Last year I had 181cm rossignol S4 2010 and I felt they were long and heavy, so I don't know if the 179 domain would be the same ? I want a ski to do a lot spin in and out the rails thanks !

Oct 29 2011 6:39PM
0 0
profile picture
buchanan.
Posts: 1911 - Karma: 156
get the 179s, centre mount, and get used to the length. they're gonna feel a more buttery on the snow compared to the 181s you had before because of the rocker/0 camber.
Oct 29 2011 6:43PM
0 0
profile picture
AdamBskii
Posts: 71 - Karma: 11
agreed ^^
Oct 29 2011 7:17PM
0 0
profile picture
vinc7bed
Posts: 13 - Karma: 76

but the 169 are like 173 and the 179 like 183 :O I just want to be sure i'll be able to do switch up easily etc. I wish they had 176 haha :P  Is the 176 Step Up could be good to or not like the domain ?

Oct 29 2011 7:33PM
0 0
profile picture
stickerman
Posts: 2043 - Karma: 147
domain is way better then the step up imo. plus the rocker in the domains will help with switch ups.
Oct 29 2011 8:50PM
0 0
profile picture
Jonny7
Posts: 3309 - Karma: 76
trying to figure out why you're talking about step ups but I just don't see
Oct 29 2011 8:52PM
0 0
profile picture
stickerman
Posts: 2043 - Karma: 147
Read the post above my original post
Oct 29 2011 9:01PM
0 0
profile picture
buchanan.
Posts: 1911 - Karma: 156
apparently the new K2s measure to length (179cm actually measures 179cm). But at 5'11", you should be skiing something around 179cm. The 169s would be a little easier to whip around on switch ups and quick spins, but on a softer ski with rocker your probably gonna want the extra support. It all depends on how you ski and what your gonna be skiing really.I'm 5'11" and I've been skiing 179 revivals for a while now, theres no way id go 169. how much do you weigh?
Oct 29 2011 9:42PM
0 0
profile picture
vinc7bed
Posts: 13 - Karma: 76
thanks man I'm 155 pounds :)
Oct 29 2011 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
stickerman
Posts: 2043 - Karma: 147
yeah go for the 179's you won't regret it.
Oct 29 2011 11:25PM
0 0
profile picture
forrest1
Posts: 88 - Karma: 18
don't buy K POO skiis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oct 30 2011 12:06AM
0 0
profile picture
Caleb.E
Posts: 3556 - Karma: 1,014

go with 179s. im 5' 8" and ride a 169(realy a 173) and love them..i came from a 159 disordly and wish i ahd gone wiht the longer size from the beginning.

there going to feal a shit tone more stable!

Oct 30 2011 12:00PM
0 0
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
i'm still on 159 disoderlys which measure like 163 or something (I haven't even seen my skis since like August). I'd get 169 domains if I was to get new ones, I'm 5'5" and like 120lbs and 19.
Oct 30 2011 12:24PM
0 0
profile picture
DGski
Posts: 3491 - Karma: 2,328
179, rocker and butteryness will make it ski shorter
Oct 30 2011 12:51PM
0 0
profile picture
Iridek2
Posts: 1 - Karma: 10
i got the 169 domain stepping up from a 164 extreme. i dont do a whole lot of rails im on exast coast and live on small kickers and jump a few moguls on steep drops therefore needed a shorter ski... love the domains tho they are easily butterable at 169; 179 will be sick to butter.
Oct 30 2011 3:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Black.Bird
Posts: 2566 - Karma: 684
Can anybody else confirm this?
Oct 30 2011 3:09PM
0 0
profile picture
vinc7bed
Posts: 13 - Karma: 76
I saw the 179 domain and they were taller than me and i'm like 179 cm haha :P I think they are 182-183
Oct 30 2011 4:05PM
0 0
profile picture
joshua
Posts: 5046 - Karma: 1,280
I'm pretty sure that only the powder skis are true to length now, my 174 recoils measure out to like 176.
Oct 30 2011 5:35PM
0 0
profile picture
miemiec
Posts: 400 - Karma: 55
friend has last years and this years domains, last years 179's measured to 183, this years meausre to 179 exactly.
Oct 30 2011 6:01PM
0 0
profile picture
joshua
Posts: 5046 - Karma: 1,280
Are you sure? B/c me and the shop tech measured a pair of 2011 169 domains in the shop and they came out to about 172?
Oct 30 2011 6:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Blake.P
Posts: 9894 - Karma: 3,585
my 179 recoils measure out the exact same as my 181 caylors, which rowen and scott have said are measured longer than other skis.

the 179 is more like 182/183

i dont know about the pow skis though. ill sometime soon about that
Oct 30 2011 6:34PM
0 0
profile picture
buchanan.
Posts: 1911 - Karma: 156
Yeah, i'm around 180cms tall and my revivals are definitely taller than i am. My '11 bents (189cm) are definitely shorter than the 189's from before they changed them.
Oct 30 2011 7:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Black.Bird
Posts: 2566 - Karma: 684
Alright thanks guys for clearing it up
Oct 30 2011 8:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Newschool_Pope
Posts: 2473 - Karma: 267
just measured my 179 domains. 181,5 exactly. tip to tail.

if i were you id go 179. theyre soft and hav early rise. youll want added stability through extra length.
Oct 31 2011 7:48AM
0 0
profile picture
Billek
Posts: 5665 - Karma: 98
I'm 5'9-5'10 and 155 pounds. I lap the park a lot but my heart lies in the rest of the mountain, if you know what I mean. I'm from NY.

I got the 169's last year, and they were great. I loved the ski, and I could make it do whatever I wanted to do. The one problem was this flatter section of the mountain during the springtime- I would struggle to keep my speed up in the slush because of the rocker being counter intuitive to the situation. Other than that, I was really happy with the skis. Their park abilities speak for them self, but these really shine on spring days because the BLAST through the slush without hesitation. Choppy snow too... these skis really kick ass in those types of conditions. Just know how to handle ice (if you have to) and you will be happy with this ski.

Now for the size, I plan on getting last years Domains again, because I had such a great season on the skis. But, I am going to get the 179's because even though I had an awesome time on the middle size, I can see the benefit in getting the larger size. The 169's noses cup my forehead like a good park ski should, but because of the design, a longer ski will help achieve even greater stability.

Sorry if I went too long, I just want to let you know how I feel about these skis. Bottom line is, if you were to get last years skis, get the 179's. I hear there's something different about the measurement this year, so I recommend getting whatever ski would measure like last years 179's.
Oct 31 2011 8:20AM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6336 - Karma: 57,070
This is true. 169 = 172, 179=182. There are rumours every year K2 has changed the way they measure but they never seem to actually be true...
Oct 31 2011 8:54AM
0 0
profile picture
joshua
Posts: 5046 - Karma: 1,280
I disagree, while they are a bit heavier and sluggish then some other brands, their durability is pretty much unmatched IMO.
Oct 31 2011 11:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Justo8484
Posts: 3905 - Karma: 204
domains measure longer than they are listed at. 179, as many others have said, measure out to 182. the mold didnt change from last year.
Oct 31 2011 1:00PM
0 0
profile picture
gigi.d
Posts: 1588 - Karma: 302
Can you tell the difference in weight? I am thinking about these skis and the last skis i had were the line masterminds which were light-ish. Would the weight difference be noticeable?
Nov 10 2011 8:54PM
0 0
profile picture
ParkisFun
Posts: 135 - Karma: 15
go with the 179. I rocked last years, and they are so amazing. 179 would be a good size for u. When i stand them up they re in the middle of my neck (im 6 3)
Nov 10 2011 9:16PM
0 0
profile picture
joshua
Posts: 5046 - Karma: 1,280
Well i will be going from the lightest park ski out there (nine life) so I might notice the difference. I haven't actually ridden them yet, but really unless a ski is like extremely heavy, then I think you won't really notice a whole lot of difference once you get used to them. People who whine about ski weight just need to man up thats all. I would way rather have a slightly heavier ski if it means I will get more use out of it.
Nov 10 2011 10:44PM
0 0
profile picture
gigi.d
Posts: 1588 - Karma: 302
Agreed. Thanks for the info.
Nov 11 2011 12:49AM
0 0
profile picture
CassiusClay
Posts: 1757 - Karma: 2
So you needed a shorter ski? Gotta get some strength down, reign some long bitches and you'll be wrecking the mountain. Soft flexy ski demands a longer length.
Nov 11 2011 12:56AM
0 0
profile picture
OMGHEDIDNT
Posts: 706 - Karma: 12
the domain is the same as last year, so no, no one can confirm this...
Nov 11 2011 5:04AM
0 0
profile picture
Jonny7
Posts: 3309 - Karma: 76
I've asked it in another thread but I feel that my question belongs more to this thread.. Does anybody know why the domains are so cheap compared to other skis like rossignol or armada..? Is it becore they're less durable? Or is it just that K2 has some badass prices?
Nov 15 2011 9:25PM
0 0
profile picture
scratchproteen
Posts: 5173 - Karma: 286
So I'm looking for an opinion here

my two options are the k2 domain vs. Liberty Antigen

I like the idea of the antigen with some camber under foot, vs. laying flat like the domain...but I think the bamboo core of the antigen is to light and would prefer the heavier feel of the domain.


i've never skied on a ski that lays flat, how much does it affect the riding?
Jan 18 2012 10:18PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)