Scary

Scary

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • #20328of 19798

Stephanie 's Bio

Scary

Scary wrote a review of on July 13, 2011

Great for small faces
5 5

I always have a hard time finding sunglasses to fit my very narrow face - but these do! I was previously very loyal to Maui Jim (and even dropped $200 like it was nothing to buy a replacement pair when mine fell out of my purse on a plane). These are cheaper, darker, still polarized, fit my face better, and are more stylish. Sorry MJ, I do still love you! I wore these skiing and didn't tear up from too much wind. They also held up extremely well at the beach (I hesitantly wore them in the water). You can't tell in the pic, but I have the brown tortoise color.

Bottom line - small faces rejoice!

(1)

 

0 Comments

Scary

Scary wrote a review of on February 18, 2011

2 5

I was excited to see these on sale, as I've had my eye on them for skiing but the regular price was a bit steep. They came very quickly and I immediately tried them on in my kitchen before I even got my jacket off!! I was SHOCKED at how small they were. I'm 5'1" 95lbs and I wear size 00P or 25 pants and the XS was FAR too tight. I knew that they were supposed to be snug but I couldn't wear these for more than a few minutes. Had to return them :( I'm bummed Backcountry doesn't have any size smalls right now.

My advice, order a size up.

(0)

 

Scary

Scary wrote an answer about on September 14, 2010

Yes, these will accommodate small feet with big calves - the "leg" part of the boot is quite roomy because it's simply foam going straight up from the foot. There's no shape to the boot (which is why they look so fabulous). You can make it tighter by tightening the strings. I would say, that as much as I LOOOOVE my moon boots (mostly for style), they can be a little tricky to move around in at times. I have to walk a little wider because the boot is "thick" and I have slipped on packed snow before, so for shoveling, there may be better (more functional) boot options. For style - these win, hands down!

(0)

 

Scary

Scary wrote a review of on September 3, 2010

5 5

The skis are amazing. I'm 5'1, 95 lbs and have the 156. I'm an expert skier, grew up skiing the ice in New England and now live in Colorado. These are my first powder skis and were an upgrade from my 8 year old (gasp!) beloved Volkl Carver Motions. I thought the jump from my 149 parabolics to the 156s would be noticeable but in fact, the Aura felt shorter than the old parabolics!

I ski FAST - easily keep up with the boys and blow by many of em. I was afraid a powder ski wouldn't be able to rip GS turns on the groomers, but this thing can! On the first couple of runs I learned to keep forward a bit more to reduce any semblance of tip chatter (I should have been forward anyway)! Powder and trees are SO much more fun now! I will say that since these are so wide, they're tougher on the bumps. I used my old Volkls for the Beaver Creek Talons Challenge last year and will keep them around for the Challenge in the future.

My one and only complaint is with the graphic material - the silver scratches very easily and after only 1 season, the tails are all scratched up (mostly from bump runs, which I know these aren't made for). It's just cosmetic, but I wish they didn't scratch so easily.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Scary

Scary wrote an answer about on January 12, 2010

I'm 5'1" just under 100 lbs expert skier and I have the 156. I bought these after skiing on 8 yr old volkls (!) with a parabolic sidecut - 149 length. Compared to my old skis, these ski short but I know that's the difference in sidecut. I think you'd probably be fine with the 163s.

(0)

 

0 Comments