J Greeve

J Greeve

J Greeve

J Greeve wrote a question about on November 5, 2009

I'm 5'4" 130, and I just made the pickup...

I'm 5'4" 130, and I just made the pickup of the Pandoras in a 172. I am STILL debating whether I should have gotten the 162 or 172. I'm a pretty aggressive skier, I do most of my skiing in the trees at The Bird on powder days or in Tahoe or the NW on a good powder day. I want to try and ski more in the fall line this year, but I also want something that will be quick in the trees. Most recently I've skied on the Volkl Karma in a 161. What do you think... Pandora in a 162 or 172?

(0)

 

J Greeve

J Greeve wrote a question about on September 17, 2009

I've been going back and forth since mid-season 2009 on whether to get the Kiku or the Pandora. I demo'ed the Pandora on a deeeeep day at The Bird, where after a serious malfunction on my part I had a big crash in the trees and lost one of the skis in the pow. Before this happened, I was loving them. They were so bouncy, fun, easy to turn. Alas, I've been a Volkl girl for many, many years now. I ski the Karma, and I'm ready to invest in something fatter for more dreamy days at The Bird, Tahoe and Jackson. I saw on the 2009 Kiku page some comments on Pandora v. Kiku, but any more contributions would be so helpful. My concern with the Kiku is that I'll wish that I had more width underfoot or that it was ever so slightly more forgiving (or that it's too similar to my Karmas) But my concern with the Pandora is that it might be a little too soft for me.

(0)