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

profile picture
qcSkier123
Posts: 172 - Karma: 14
Hi NS, im wondering if 159 k2 domain are too short for me. im 5.9 130 pounds and i ski 80% rails and 20% jumps. i know that k2 skis are always longer than they say. thanks
Jul 12 2012 9:50PM
0 0
profile picture
DaveJ
Posts: 315 - Karma: 1,096
Yea they are I'm 5"6 and got 169 got them two days ago, also how much you looking to pay for them
Jul 12 2012 10:11PM
0 0
profile picture
jaredmdub
Posts: 2229 - Karma: 564
If I were you I would def go bigger unless you feel more comfortable on smaller skis. At your height, I was skiing a 169 and I felt like I wanted more. Look at the 169 and possibly the 174 depending on your personal preference. Just for reference, how old are you though?
Jul 12 2012 10:14PM
0 0
profile picture
qcSkier123
Posts: 172 - Karma: 14
They are like 350$ and im 17 years old
Jul 12 2012 10:30PM
0 0
profile picture
jaredmdub
Posts: 2229 - Karma: 564
I think you could def handle a 174. Your decision though.
Jul 12 2012 10:31PM
0 0
profile picture
Paul.Marik
Posts: 1114 - Karma: 1,831
K2 doesnt make the domain in 174 so 169 will be the best for you. id say 159 is way too short, unless you like really short skis
Jul 12 2012 10:33PM
0 0
profile picture
jaredmdub
Posts: 2229 - Karma: 564
http://www.evo.com/skis/k2-domain.aspx
Jul 12 2012 10:35PM
0 0
profile picture
qcSkier123
Posts: 172 - Karma: 14
But there is only the 159 left but the shop has a 174 k2 recoil. do you think this ski will be fine for me?i know that the recoil is more all mountain. im 90% of time in park
Jul 12 2012 10:35PM
0 0
profile picture
Paul.Marik
Posts: 1114 - Karma: 1,831
oh nice i didnt know they were starting to do 174 this year. the past two years they didnt have 174. ^and recoils are really good skis as well, depends mostly on if you do jumps or rails more
Jul 12 2012 10:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Paul.Marik
Posts: 1114 - Karma: 1,831
nvm.... but id still get the recoils over the domians just because of the size difference. 159 would be short for you
Jul 12 2012 10:39PM
0 0
profile picture
jaredmdub
Posts: 2229 - Karma: 564
I'm sure the recoils would be just fine.
Jul 12 2012 10:49PM
0 0
profile picture
DaveJ
Posts: 315 - Karma: 1,096
Try visiting Coloradoskishop.com I believe there selling them for 250 I got mine with bindings for 360 so check that out
Jul 12 2012 11:32PM
0 0
profile picture
ColinB
Posts: 1452 - Karma: 2,236
definitely get at least 169. im 5'7" and had 174 extremes when i was like 5'5" and loved them, now i have 169 sights and im kind of wishing i'd gotten something longer.

Also K2 skis aren't any longer than they say they are, they just measure running length, not tip-to-tail
Jul 13 2012 12:14AM
0 0
profile picture
ColinB
Posts: 1452 - Karma: 2,236
definitely get at least 169. im 5'7" and had 174 extremes when i was like 5'5" and loved them, now i have 169 sights and im kind of wishing i'd gotten something longer.

Also K2 skis aren't any longer than they say they are, they just measure running length, not tip-to-tail
Jul 13 2012 12:14AM
0 0
profile picture
TheWakes.
Posts: 685 - Karma: 235
get the 174.
Jul 13 2012 2:31AM
0 0
profile picture
Squeenerd
Posts: 731 - Karma: 186
159? are you kidding me? You will go so slow with that length of ski
Jul 13 2012 4:31PM
0 0
profile picture
@tlas
Posts: 1625 - Karma: 68
does anyone know if the domains have pop, Ive heard they feel life-less. Also how is the swing weight
Jul 14 2012 6:29PM
0 0
profile picture
k-fred
Posts: 5363 - Karma: 1,598
dude my 169 2012 domains are 3 cm taller than my 169 2011... and my 2012 domains are almost as tall(1-2cm less than his) as my friends 177 4frnts clicks... so yeah they're definitely bigger than others skis(I know that the fact that they're some rockers makes them a bit bigger too)
Jul 14 2012 9:43PM
0 0
profile picture
KillaSteeze
Posts: 3329 - Karma: 351
ive got the 169 domain and it measures out too a 173, it does have abit of pop and the swing weight is decently low, alround an awesome ski
Jul 15 2012 12:10AM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
If you think you're an advanced skier, I'd go for the 179. At least go for the 174. I would hesitate to go with anything shorter than that at 5'9. I'm 5'11" and also about to be 17, 140 lbs, and I'm on 181 pipe cleaners and they fit me perfectly.
Jul 15 2012 12:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Caleb.E
Posts: 3556 - Karma: 1,014
get the 169s. im 5'9 and love mine, there super stable at 169 i have a pare of 159 disordlys (almost same ski) and there way to small
Jul 15 2012 1:06PM
0 0
profile picture
HamFaceGirl
Posts: 5242 - Karma: 2,679
159 is way too short for you. 169 or the 174 recoil would be perfect
Jul 15 2012 1:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6335 - Karma: 57,048
i have a pair of 169s and i'm you're height/weight, the size feels right. I've only had a day on them (today in fact) and they're nice to butter. It remains to be seen if I can get used to narrow skis having only really liked fatties in the park before.
Jul 15 2012 2:05PM
0 0
profile picture
qcSkier123
Posts: 172 - Karma: 14
thanks you all for the responses. i finally took a pair of 174 k2 recoil
Jul 16 2012 10:13PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)