Free 2-Day Shipping on orders over $50*
Memorial Day SaleMemorial Day Sale
Detail Pics

Description

Dropping in three, two, one.

You love your fat skis, but all that weight is hard to lug up the skin track. Get the next best thing with the K2 BackDrop Ski. This touring slayer features superlight construction, a fattened 112mm waist, and an increased shovel rocker so you're able to slash mad pow turns in the backcountry without the pain-in-the-arse excess weight of a heavy powder ski. This lightweight, durable ski also works well as a quick-and-nimble resort powder muncher or sidecountry gate crasher.

  • All-Terrain Rocker profile consists of an elevated tip for variable and soft snow performance and camber underfoot for power, energy, and edgehold in firmer conditions
  • PowderTip design pulls the widest point of the tip further down the ski, which retains float in soft snow and also minimizes deflection in adverse snow conditions
  • Lightweight core features a blend of aspen, paulownia, and maple, which results in a 15% weight savings over traditional cores
  • Unique core also decreases the carbon footprint of the ski, which reduces our impact on the winter world
  • Cap construction offers a lightweight ski with a low swing weight and smooth turn initiation
  • Trixial braided construction consists of braided fiberglass around a wood core that provides torsional rigidity for added control
  • Triaxial braided construction delivers a forgiving and extremely responsive ski
  • Carbon Web technology (webbed carbon overlay located on the tail and forebody of the ski) gives lightweight torsional rigidity, which increases edge grip especially when you skin up an icy sidehill
  • Snowphobic topsheet technology has a snow-repellent topsheet so snow doesn't collect and add excess weight while you climb
  • Applying wax to the topsheet also increases its snow-shedding performance
  • Tip and Tail hardware functions as attachment points for your K2 BackDrop Precut Skins (sold separately) and comes with a removable plug
  • Tip and Tail holes also allow you to build a rescue sled, construct various ski anchors, and carry less weight while increasing your safety margin

Share your thoughts

What do you think of the

K2 BackDrop Ski

? Share a...

No file chosen

Rather attach a photo from another website?

Rather attach a photo from your computer?

  • Product review:
  • Share a video
  • Share a photo

How familiar are you with the product?(optional)

Invalid filetype.

Save

Here's what others have to say...

5 5

Evan Stevens

Member since 
Groups:

I must start off by saying I was surprised at how well these skis performed. I was expecting a spineless and not too playful ski as I ride the sidestash and sideseth a ton, and I find the coombacks to have a speed limit and be a little boring on the high end comparatively. But for the weight and dimensions, I can't believe how fast and fun these skis are. k2 nailed a good balance between weight and performance, and the ski has enough backbone and spring in its step to work really well. Granted I have only used this ski in deep powder backcountry conditions, so I can't tell you how it performs on any other surface, but in those conditions it rocked. In reality though, with dimensions like this, I wouldn't really use it for much else.

5 5

Eric

Member since 
  • Gender: Male
  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I switched from the Dynafit Stokes to the K2 Backdrops this season, and could not be happier. The Backdrop is equally playful in fresh backcountry powder and cruisers back through the resort at the end of the day (although it certainly wasn't built for the latter). I found the Stokes to be lifeless, but the Backdrops are springy, and they float better. The All Terrain Rocker compensates for inadequacies in my form by keeping the tips on the surface even if I'm not perfectly balanced (which my friends say happens often). I've even skied these on steep, icy backcountry lines and was pleasantly surprised how well they held -- they will not be mistaken for a carving ski, but they held pretty well. This season, I've skied steeper and more narrow terrain than ever before and my confidence on this incredibly responsive ski is part of the reason. I use the Dynafit TLT Radical ST binding, the Dynafit Titan TF-X boot and the K2 trim-to-fit climbing skins.

I just purchased a pair of K2 BackDrop 174...

Thomas Laffont

Member since 
Posted on

I just purchased a pair of K2 BackDrop 174 cm. What is the best skin to pair them with?

Wally Phillips

Member since 
Groups:
Responded on

Hey Thomas Laffont,

Thanks for the question. The skin you'll pick to accompany your new K2 BackDrop Skis will depend on what kind of skinning you do. The Black Diamond Ascension STS skins work very well with their adjustable tip loops and tail clip. They come in 3 different materials: Nylon (best grip/durability, heaviest); Mohair (lightest and best glide, not very grippy/durable) or a mix of the two (decent grip, glide, durability and weight). So, pick the material that fits what you need most and be sure to pick the width that at least covers the waist width of the ski. Size off of the tip if more skin coverage is needed on the base of the ski.

Eric

Member since 
Responded on

I use the K2 Trim To Fit skins on my K2 Backdrops and I love them. They are a mohair blend and do a decent job gliding and gripping. They are not quite as grippy as the Black Diamond Ascensions, but they glide better.

5 5

Eric Plath

Member since 
Groups:
  • Gender: Male
  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

These ski's have great response and can get through anything!

4 5

grantdoug

Member since 
  • Gender: Male
  • Familiarity: I've used it once or twice and have initial impressions

Dec 2012, Skiied 181 cm K2 BackDrop Fat skis w Hammerhead bindings here in Colorado.. tried every surface at the resort: off-piste virgin powder, nasty tree runs, crusty crud, mogully black diamonds.. these skis impressed me. I was concerned about the ski performance on crusty resort snow, but the skis sailed through the crud with very nice stability. Even at 181 cm, they are light enough to stitch through moguls. For skiiers worried about the width of these skis for resort skiing, I suggest you demo them and decide - I certainly was won over.

Thanks for your response. I wasn't even...

rhap6552

Member since 
Posted on

Thanks for your response. I wasn't even considering the Backdrop until I read Arthur's review down below. So, if it's essentially a wider version of Coomback why not go with that? I am riding lifts primarily, and while I want something that can handle groomers, I also want something that will excel in power, crud ,etc. I want that one quiver ski. My only concern with the Backdrop is if it's too wide (i.e. more of a powder ski) as opposed to something you can really enjoy every day no matter what. That said, we are not talking Darkside or Pon2oon dimensions here, so maybe my concerns are misplaced?

Mark Parrett

Member since 
Groups:
Responded on

Yeah I don't think you'll be bummed about the width. But for resorts, I'd just pick between this and the Sidestash and let the guiding factor be your preference on stiffness. Good luck!

I'm debating between the K2 Sidestash,...

rhap6552

Member since 
Posted on

I'm debating between the K2 Sidestash, Coomback or Backdrop for use as a telemark ski in the Sierra and NW. Not sure which ski to go with or what size. Leaning toward a 181 but maybe a 174 in the Backdrop. Wondering if that would be too short? I'm about 6' and 180 lbs. with many years of tele skiing under my belt. I'm looking for an all mountain, all condition ski. Have some experience on the K2 Hardside from a few years back. Any thoughts/recommendations appreciated. Thanks, RA

Mark Parrett

Member since 
Groups:
Best Answer Responded on

Hi - I think that the Sidestash is just too heavy for my taste if you're going to be touring with it. That being said, for an all around PNW ski, it might be my choice is you are riding lifts primarily due to a bit of extra heft and stiffness. I like the coomback as a tele ski (mounted it alpine and hated it), but it is probably the softest of the three. For the rockies the Backdrop is the no-brainer, but where you are it will just depend on how fat you'd like to go. If you're skiing a bunch of crud and powder while hiking for turns, I'd still go for the backdrop. If you find that you ski groomers and spring corn often and want to carve a bit more in the resort, Sidestash. If you want one ski that can do everything from mountaineering on side ice to powder turns to groomer runs, the Coomback is the all-rounder. Whichever ski you choose, I'd go for the 181. I'm a pretty bad tele skier and I have no trouble with my 181 Coomback.

quiverquiz

Member since 
Responded on

What length would you recommend for someone 5'11" and around 140 lb. Do I need to size up for the rockered tip? Or at my weight, should I go for the 174, because of the flat tail and since the 181 is going to be at least 184 in K2 centimeters? I'd be using them mostly for touring around Tahoe.

I have the Voile Vector BC with Dyanfit...

dascmo

Member since 
Posted on

I have the Voile Vector BC with Dyanfit bindings as a light ski mountaineering ski, and want a fatter powder option for deep backcountry days. The backdrop looks great.

I am wondering how these compare to the Voile Charger for skiing feel and versatility. Looks like a more traditional design (less tip rocker) but similar otherwise. The other ski I am considering is the Volkl Nunataq.

Mark Parrett

Member since 
Groups:
Responded on

The Vector and Charger will be a more turny ski than the K2. I'd say this ski is more of a powder board that you can either make big GS turns on or break it loose in soft snow and slarve your way around. The Charger skis more like a "fun shape" ski to me while the K2 backcountry skis all trend towards a tradditional feel (largely due to the flat tails and lack of tip and tail taper). Since you have the Vector, this would be a cool addition to your quiver - the Charger overlaps the vector a ton and I've skied some deep powder on Vectors without disappointment so maybe add something new?

LTDinPNW

Member since 
Responded on

Mark, so I too am in the market for a similar kind of board. I've narrowed down what I think is the list to a 181 Backdrop, a 191 Charger and then a 187 District. Looking for something to round out my current barn = 195 Karhu XCD Guides w/X2 Switchbacks, and a 179 Jak Team w/HH. Thoughts on your comments above between the Charger and Backdrop, and how either would complement my existing?

Is there a longer version than the 181cm...

WallDiver7

Member since 
Posted on

Is there a longer version than the 181cm in this ski? I thought I saw a 188cm offered somewhere??

Steve Brain

Member since 
Responded on

According to K2's website they only have the 174cm and 181cm. K2 skis always used to run longer than advertised - my old 181cm Mt Baker's were the same length as my old Dynastar 188cm's. Curious if that's still the case here.

WallDiver7

Member since 
Responded on

Thanks Steve.. If that's true, then the 181 would be fine... but, wow, that's a big difference from a "normal" 181cm ski.

5 5

Arthur Debowski

Member since 
Groups:

These were touted by the rep as being the same weight as the Coomback but with 10mm extra in the waist and with nearly the same flex characteristics. I would say that was a spot on description of the ski and I found that it skied nearly identically to the Coomback but with extra float. At no weight penalty I do not see any reason why someone would not choose the Backdrop instead of the Coomback. Maybe if you didn?t need the float or the coverage I could see wanting the smaller ski. The other way you would get weight savings in the Coomback is that it will take a lighter ski (smaller surface area). If choosing between the two in the Wasatch (or anywhere in the west really), get the Backdrop.