Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Scott Crusade or K2 Obsethed? Opinions please.

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
I have inadvertently ended up with both in 179cm, I am 6' & 80kg, which do I keep?

I have skied the Scott Crusades & like them, great in powder, crud, on-piste, but I find I have to be quite physical with them in comparison to scott mission, which I tried last year and found week on-piste great otherwise. Crusade not so well suited in moguls. a bit sluggish.

I have not skied the K2 Obsethed as they have no bindings yet.

Both seem well rated in trials, but I have not found any trials comparing the two, so I am wondering which to sell on and which to keep Puzzled
snow conditions
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Their stats don't seem to be that close...

I'd venture that the Crusade is more the all-rounder and the Seth would be THE deep snow ski of the two Lugging the Seth around on hard-pack might be harder work and fruitless for days on end so if you think the Crusade is tiring then the Seth will be more so.

FWI, the Mission seems more for you..

The TT's are also a tad short IMV for a 6 footer at 179
snow conditions
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Thanks JT, but I am a bit Confused What are FWI, TT's, IMV?
I bought the Crusade thinking, good all-rounder, which they were in Val D'isere with 30cm pow, crud & piste. Just got back from Jackson Hole with criticisms; hard steep muguls, too long & heavy-slow turning. Then cat skiing in Targhee 50cm pow on shallow slopes, they sank, needed forcing to turn & really slow, every body flew past on wider skis. Or was it just that I had used them for 3 days since waxing? On steeper pow they were fine. Normally I don't bother with regular servicing, and usually ski fastest - if I feel 5% drop in speed I would service. The crusades felt like 30% slower that day.
Several on the trip recommended Heli-skiing, sod the cost approach.
Then I am given the Obsethed & think; maybe I keep them & get some shorter skis for moguls and less deep stuff.
Any ski has to be used in a variety of conditions on a given day-trip, so I am still a bit Puzzled
latest report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Get in 50cm of fresh on a shallow gradient and you pretty much need to strightline no matter what you're on. As JT said extra length might help but choosing between the 2 maybe ask where you're going to ski them most - If its Western N America or Japan then K2s might be the ones to keep , if its Euroland maybe the Scotts.
ski holidays
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
sahsah, sorry, typo...supposed to be FWIW..for what its worth..and IMV..= in my view

As Fatbob says... I think the Crusade is the better all-rounder for the alpes so it depends what you think you will ski most of the time.

I use a 92mm Gladiator as my all round ski in the alpes and it is great and stable in deep snow...which might not always be super-fluffy... and the Twin Tip works very well in deeper stuff. I really like them there and expect them to advance my skiing in that stuff. When I get them on glazed scraped hard pistes, I have to work much harder on my edge technique or they can get skiittish...
I also think I could do with a 188 TT ski as opposed to the 183 as this could help with fast speeds on piste. I feel the TT tail doesn't help stabilise the ski in effect it is about 5cms shorter or so...

Off-piste this isn't a problem as the tail still engages in deeper snow.

I think both skis have their good points it depends how often you can engage them ..and where..that would influence which you keep.

If you are thinking NA more often than not, I'd get the K2's, I think.
I have thought of trading my skis for Goliath Sluffs at 99mm......but then my compromises in Europe become bigger IMV... as the Sluff will not be better on hard snow, I think... and thaqt may be the crux of your problem.

If the Scott's sinking was not a one-off, then that would defo rule them out... and bares out my thinking of 179 not being enough for your stats..this would be negated by a bigger surface area on the K2's which come in at around 105mm waiste..

It is the perennial problem..where and what to ski .... and my thinking now is to go for the Sluffs for off-piste and get a faster grippier and thinner ski for hard park.. buth then 2 sets to carry... WTF...Laughing wink
latest report

Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy