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!
Fat-ypus I-Rock or Icelantic Gypsy, what makes the better switch& park ski
Posts: 1905
-
Karma: 8,638
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)
Posts: 1101
-
Karma: 2,094
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.
Posts: 1905
-
Karma: 8,638
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.
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 4:24AM
