• Forums
  • Gear Talk
  • "New" Skier wants advice: Atomic Backland vs. K2 pinnacle

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!

"New" Skier wants advice: Atomic Backland vs. K2 pinnacle

profile picture
Judderd
Posts: 3 - Karma: 11
So to start off im switching from Snowboarding to Skiing. I skied when up until i was 10 then switched to Snowboarding. Im 26 and want to switch back. Im deciding between the K2 pinnacle 95 and Backland fr 102 at a length of around 188. Im 5'11 and 185 lbs. I want a versatile ski that is good in pow and alright in less ideal snow. A ski that allows creativity is a must since I enjoyed "freeriding" while snowboarding. And a ski that can handle some charging. Thoughts or different reccomendations?
Oct 8 2017 11:59PM
1 0
profile picture
rohara
Posts: 146 - Karma: 366
Something like the Backland 102 is going to be an easier transfer from snowboarding and offer more options for creativity because it's nowhere near as directional as something like the Pinnacle series. The FR102 is designed for freeride so it'll easily tackle some pow, mixed conditions etc as well as being able to ride switch and offer the maneuverability and fun of a twin tip. I'd go backland for sure!
Oct 9 2017 5:32AM
0 0
profile picture
Judderd
Posts: 3 - Karma: 11
Sweet I was leaning towards the backland. Thanks for the advice
Oct 9 2017 1:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Casey
Posts: 7785 - Karma: 23,466
I have the 118, but conceptually they are somewhat similar. The pinnacle does well in pow because of the rocker. It's damp, pretty stiff, and overall a fast charging ski that doesn't fuck around. Not so much a snowboard mentality type ski, but a good one to have if you have a more symmetrical ski that's soft and Poppy. I haven't idea about the backlands.
Oct 10 2017 11:48PM
2 0
profile picture
fasa
Posts: 37 - Karma: 61
As someone who came over to skiing after snowboarding for 10+ years, I'll say that having a ski with a lil more tail rocker goes a long way in helping the transition and allowing you to bring a lot of your style over from snowboarding. I'd look into something like the Moment PB&J, Line Sir Francis Bacon, or Nordica Soul Rider. Having a little more tail rocker let's you loosen things up and gives you a more similar feel to your snowboard.
Oct 11 2017 1:44AM
3 0
profile picture
Judderd
Posts: 3 - Karma: 11
Fasa have you looked or heard about the backland fr 102? I think it might be pretty similiar to what you suggested. Thanks for the advice
Oct 11 2017 6:34PM
0 0
profile picture
fasa
Posts: 37 - Karma: 61
JudderdFasa have you looked or heard about the backland fr 102? I think it might be pretty similiar to what you suggested. Thanks for the advice

Judderd, Backland 102 will do just fine, great place to start, you could also look at the Salomon QST 99 or 106, similar ski, similar price range. A tad more tail rocker in the 106 than in the backland. (if you'd like another option). Good luck
Nov 29 2017 12:23AM
0 0
profile picture
HuckNorris44
Posts: 1025 - Karma: 2,392
The Backland doesnt ski great like some of the other skis people have listed, like the PB& J or QST 106 or Pinnicle 105. Its a cap ski meant for touring in the backcountry, not a great resort ski.
Nov 29 2017 1:29AM
0 0
profile picture
fasa
Posts: 37 - Karma: 61
GnarcoThe Backland doesnt ski great like some of the other skis people have listed, like the PB& J or QST 106 or Pinnicle 105. Its a cap ski meant for touring in the backcountry, not a great resort ski.


Great point, it's not a bad place to start especially given the price but you'll do a lot better on the others recommended previously. QST being the most similar in price. Go for those if you can.
Nov 29 2017 1:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Zypher
Posts: 2336 - Karma: 2,268
GnarcoIts a cap ski meant for touring in the backcountry, not a great resort ski.


Mmmm yes and no. The backland series is a direct replica of the Automatic series. Yes, they were designed for backcountry free ride but by no means does that mean they dont perform. Having ridden the backland 109s i can vouch that they are fully capable of resort ripping and whatever else you want to throw at them. If you dont have experience on some sticks, don't go around saying they cant perform. The only real difference between the backlands and automatics is that the backlands have a lighter layup and the new HRZN or whatever tech in the tips and tails. Not enough performance sacrifice to be noticed, especially in a longer length.
Nov 29 2017 3:23AM
0 0
profile picture
HuckNorris44
Posts: 1025 - Karma: 2,392
ZypherMmmm yes and no. The backland series is a direct replica of the Automatic series. Yes, they were designed for backcountry free ride but by no means does that mean they dont perform. Having ridden the backland 109s i can vouch that they are fully capable of resort ripping and whatever else you want to throw at them. If you dont have experience on some sticks, don't go around saying they cant perform. The only real difference between the backlands and automatics is that the backlands have a lighter layup and the new HRZN or whatever tech in the tips and tails. Not enough performance sacrifice to be noticed, especially in a longer length.


I'm referring to the 102FR, not the 109s

**This post was edited on Nov 29th 2017 at 3:26:57am
Nov 29 2017 3:26AM
0 0
profile picture
HuckNorris44
Posts: 1025 - Karma: 2,392
ZypherMmmm yes and no. The backland series is a direct replica of the Automatic series. Yes, they were designed for backcountry free ride but by no means does that mean they dont perform. Having ridden the backland 109s i can vouch that they are fully capable of resort ripping and whatever else you want to throw at them. If you dont have experience on some sticks, don't go around saying they cant perform. The only real difference between the backlands and automatics is that the backlands have a lighter layup and the new HRZN or whatever tech in the tips and tails. Not enough performance sacrifice to be noticed, especially in a longer length.


Someone transitioning from snowboarding doesn't need to be on a 109 waisted ski to start off as their e everyday ski
Nov 29 2017 3:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Zypher
Posts: 2336 - Karma: 2,268
GnarcoI'm referring to the 102FR, not the 109s

**This post was edited on Nov 29th 2017 at 3:26:57am


same ski line, different widths. the differences are the same dude. i rode the automatic series as well as the backland series. both do well in resort setting and the backlands are by no means a touring only ski
Nov 29 2017 3:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Zypher
Posts: 2336 - Karma: 2,268
GnarcoSomeone transitioning from snowboarding doesn't need to be on a 109 waisted ski to start off as their e everyday ski


and i get hes looking at the 102s, i just said that i had the chance to ride the 109s and they performed just as good as any other ski for resort. That reflects on the whole backland series, not just the 109s.
Nov 29 2017 3:31AM
0 0
profile picture
HuckNorris44
Posts: 1025 - Karma: 2,392
Zyphersame ski line, different widths. the differences are the same dude. i rode the automatic series as well as the backland series. both do well in resort setting and the backlands are by no means a touring only ski


But the 102 is a full cap ski, the 109 is not. They ski differently than each other because they have different construction, not just different widths.
Nov 29 2017 4:25AM
1 0
profile picture
Zypher
Posts: 2336 - Karma: 2,268
GnarcoBut the 102 is a full cap ski, the 109 is not. They ski differently than each other because they have different construction, not just different widths.


the main difference between cap and sidewall is that cap will make the ski feel more nimble at the cost of having less torsional rigidity at high speeds. In OP's case, coming off a board, he's not going to be mobbing through the slopes at mach 10 right off the bat so having a full cap ski could prove to be useful in his case. As well, sidewall is weaker to damage from crossing skis and stuff like that which is a high possibility in OP's case as well. Sage, the athlete behind the backland series, rips them in resort just fine so I think that if OP has his mind set on these skis they'd be a great option for him.
Nov 29 2017 11:13AM
1 0
profile picture
HuckNorris44
Posts: 1025 - Karma: 2,392
Zypherthe main difference between cap and sidewall is that cap will make the ski feel more nimble at the cost of having less torsional rigidity at high speeds. In OP's case, coming off a board, he's not going to be mobbing through the slopes at mach 10 right off the bat so having a full cap ski could prove to be useful in his case. As well, sidewall is weaker to damage from crossing skis and stuff like that which is a high possibility in OP's case as well. Sage, the athlete behind the backland series, rips them in resort just fine so I think that if OP has his mind set on these skis they'd be a great option for him.

You are correct about the feel of riding a cap ski. Durability of the sidewall is not a reason for someone to buy a cap ski though. For someone coming off a snowboard, there are 10 other skis that would be better suited. Not aruguing the Backland isn't a good line of skis, but in context to the thread, OP shouldnt buy a cap ski as his only ski right now. That's all I'm saying.
Nov 29 2017 2:17PM
1 0
All times are Eastern (-4)