Well. . . . in short, Yes. you could. mount them up with a pair of Dukes or O1. but this all depends what you are going for. this would be a tank, in good ways and bad.

these are more adjustable for length. a better way to go if you might ever change skis.

oh yea it will. this will be a great setup for some side country skiing. go enjoy the bounties of hiking.

I have skid the 182, and for a fat/midfat skis it rocks for the quicker moving skis. i am 5'8" and the length works for me. however if i was to get an early camber ski like the Justice i would go longer. you truly can't go wrong with this ski.

two super different skis. the coomba has a softer flex and will be a super fun ski, and if you like a softer ski it would be the way to go. However, the BD is my go to ski. the Verdict is killer for every type of snow. i love it in the Tahoe snow, and the Utah pow. so that said i like the BD over the K2.

I'll 3rd this. i just started tele skiing and the HH was my choice. it has been great. you can't go wrong with this binding.

if you are skiing on the 166 then i think you are on the right tract -- go with the 176. it will be a good match.

there is NO traditional scale. however this boot is along the lines of a 120ish for some companies.

I would at least go with the 178 (this will be the most versatile length, good for glades, and bowls, and hiking, and just about whatever you want). that will be a good all round length don't go with the 171 as i assure you if you are a strong skier you will be disappointed. if you want a big mountain ski go with something longer and wider.

BOTH great skis, however they are two TOTALLY different skis. it depends on your skiing style. the LINE will be a little more forgiving, the BD will be a little stiffer and harder charging (IMHO). though they both have wood cores the LINE macroblock vs the BD milled create a different flex pattern. SO i would say if you are looking for a little quicker ski that is a little more playful then go with the LINE, and if you want a Bulldozer that can take on anything you through at it and requires a little more power to get the good stuff from it then go with the BD.

YES, this will be a FUN ski, it will be quick and snappy, super responsive, and a jack of all trades. if you want a ski with a longer radius turn and a little stiffer look at the Verdict. but don't worry about the size, 185 will be plenty of ski for you.

I wouldn't switch. saty BIG. with the early rise it will dance like a shorter ski.

they should fit, but that's about it.

Nope, this is just for the NTN tele system -- the only ntn boots that will work with dynafit are the scarpas with the dynafit toe and heel.

Personally, i think this would be better. this ski is stiffer torsionally and will hold a better edge. but it is close to the Jill in size. you might want to think about getting a BIGGER ski, something with more waste width.

yea, no problem. you'll have fun!

NO, you can switch. But if you have an AT binding then just keep the AT sole on and pray for snow!

they can handle any ISO or AT sole. you don't need ANY Dynafit sole. but any boot with a Dynafit will work with any AT binding.

FT says it is a 100mm last.
Now REMEMBER -- with this liner it is quite adaptable.
I work at the only FT dealer in the Bay Area (California Ski Co.)
I have fit people with B/C/D width foot.
IF you have a narrow foot i would also check out the Dalbello IL Moro this has a 98mm last.

they will be OK, for what you are looking for i would look at something around 100mm, this will give you better float and more of an all round ski (depending on where you live). if you are our east you will have a blast, though you may like a stiffer ski. out west getting 100mm under foot isn't too much.

All this said, these are FUN skis, they are light and good for 75% of your days out there.

Look at the new Line Pandora -- you can get the 172, and with the early rise you will be in hog heaven.

So i would say GO BIG. i am about your size and i am skiing a 185 and a 188. and with this early rise there is no question. Go with the 185 you will be a Happy skier. I am on the Megawatts and the 188 is a perfect length for me.

So i would say GO BIG. i am about your size and i am skiing a 185 and a 188. and with this early rise there is no question. Go with the 185 you will be a Happy skier. I am on the Megawatts and the 188 is a perfect length for me.

They will be OK. . . . Just OK. they are super light. that said you will find this a little problematic on harder snow at higher speeds. IF you are going to spend most of your days in the resorts i would look at another ski. this is for people who go UP just as much as going DOWN.

you will love this ski. the Verdict will be a great step up for you. the boots will do just fine. a stiffer boot will give you more lateral control -- you could try putting a stiffer liner in your boots if you find you are mushing around.

I would go with the 183 all the way. it may be a bit big at first but as you get your ski legs you will be happy with it! it will be much stabler at high speeds and give you the float you will learn to demand.

it would work, they are soft, but not as soft as the PR. i would say go for it!

I am skiing on the old Scratch BC (black and red) (they are just about the same ski) i can take them anywhere. they carve with the best of them and they float like a champ.

I am skiing on the old Scratch BC (black and red) (they are just about the same ski) i can take them anywhere. they carve with the best of them and they float like a champ.

How tall are you? -- remember the effective edge is much shorter then the 175. they will ski much shorter than they are measured. you will have a total blast on these. they are truly one of the BEST skis out there. i would say GET THEM and enjoy this epic year!

GET IT! -- this is one of the best fat skis out there. i am skiing on the Megawatts and this is a smiler ski to that. As for the float, you will be happy. just don't be suprized if you stop skiing your K2s. BD is a superior ski.

i would go with the 175s and go with the Kilowatts. if you do that will be a sweet sweet setup. the 95mm underfoot will provide the float that you need, and the sidcut will allow you to carve the sweet turns down the slopes. IF you go with a shorter ski i don't think you will be happy at higher speeds.

you can go A frame, but you would block your gear loops

YES. the people who think that they need 18 din are compensating. your knees will thank you later.

I can say that i can fit two 100mm skis with freeride AT bindings in my bag. you may need to flip a set so the bindings don't line up. but it should work.

I have a 185cm bag from Dakine that fits my 185s just fine. so i would say if you are skiing 170 then get the 170. however, if there is a chance you will get a bigger ski in the future then buy up. you can always pack extra stuff in your ski bag.

with out a doubt, you will love the extra length. remember you are not dealing with any effective edge, you should go BIG! I am 5'8" and 150lbs and have used the 189 and i couldn't think of going smaller.

no, you need to go up to the 140 and trim it down. you won't get the purchase you need with that much base showing at the tip and tail.

With any ski that has a rocker i would go up, so the 174 would be a good size for you. my wife rides the Pandora and she is 5'3" and on the 172, so i know you would be loving life in the 174s

these are not at all the same
you are looking at a boot with a wider last
where as the pro is a 98mm race last

I have fount them to fit on the small size. though remember that it doesn't matter what number size they are, all that matter is the shell fit.

as a shop monkey i can say i would do it for a good bottle of whiskey -- some nice booze and a humble attitude goes a long way.

if you are doing accents you will love these skins. what ski binding setup are you using?

if I were you i would stay with the 167s if you are touring with a pack you will want the extra flotation. plus you already know you can handle it. why don't you use mount your Phat Loves with an AT binding and get a true powder ski.

was this a question? if you have a narrow foot and skinny ankles you are in the wrong boot. check out the new BD boots!

you should get the 130, but it doesn't look like they have any now. check out another brand. you want a skin that is about as big as the tip of the ski.

i see many reasons to go with the rapid transit over the mantra. first it is a better made ski. i think when volkl moved their operation from Germany they quality went down hill. next the RT side cut is better for tele turns. the RT flex is a more progressive flex, the mantra is more like a board the whole way down. i am sure you will be happy with the RT. enjoy!

you can use any x county binding. you might want to try a NNN binding.

Go with the 120mm -- i'm not sure what your tip is but i think this should do. b/c they are out of the 130s that will fit your skis.

Nope,

nope, this won't work and you could hurt yourself.

WOW this is a hard choice. i love both brands and ski both of them. I have the Kilowatt with dynafit and some g3 el hombres with freerides. the G3 tend to be a little stiffer and damp and the the BDs are livelier and quicker. you would be happy with either one. sorry this answer isn't too exact. but trust me you would be happy with either one.

I would change shops. what are the bindings you are trying to use? as long as they are not dynafit then you should be just fine.

you can, however it will weigh just about as much as the freeride. might as well just buy one of those.

I don't think they will be. my wife is the same size as you and she skis on a 165. enjoy! this is a great ski.

so dude, the break width has nothing to do with your boot size. this has to do with your waste width of your ski. so in short this will work with your size 10.5 shoe.

For you, I'd suggest a 177 in this ski.i have to say i would disagree, though it would depend on what length you have used in the past. the ski i had before i got the el hombre was a 176 and i thought it was too short, so i went with the 185, and i wouldn't go shorter. i am 5' 8" and 150. so i'll respectfully disagree with cory and say get the 185. now it is up to you.

this would depend on your weight and ski boot length. the freeride goes up to 12din and the explorer goes to 10din. it all depends on what you are looking for. the break adds extra weight so you can take them off either modal. don't forget leashes if you do this. it is the fact that the freeride comes with breaks and the explorer you must add them. this is the difference.

if i were you i would look at a BD or a G3 ski (i think k2s are to soft). as for boots go with a 4 buckle boot that fits your foot. if you are going to buy a boot from backcountry.com than i would take a 12 pack of good beer to your local shop and get fitted. having a boot that fits your foot is super important.

the two skis you picked are quite different. torsionally they are both quite stiff however i think the BD is a much snappier ski. however, i am sure you would be stoked with either setup. personaly i ski on a 185 havoc and i love em. for an groomer, crud, mank, anything but powder, it is a great ski.

it would depend on what kind of skiing you like to do, the 175 wold be quicker in trees, however i am the same build and liked the 185s better, remember it being a twin tip they ski shorter, so i found when i was laying out long fast turns the shorter ski seamed like i was skiing on a 170. i would go with the 185

I would take a case of beer to your local shop and ask for help.

nope, but 5cm is less than 2 inches, if you want a big mountain ski go big and if you want a more nimble ski go with the shorter one.

Well . . . . . . personaly i use the Freeride and i do a true 60/40 resort/backcountry and i use the Freeride. the barons are a BOMBER binding. they just don't have the touring capability. for such a bomber binding they have a weak climbing bail. I like the wider screw pattern of the markers and the pivot point. either binding you choose you will be happy. the markers are heavier but if you aren't a weight weenie and you don't tour much than you will be fine with the markers. if you want a tried and true burly AT binding go with the Freeride.

it wouldn't be a bad setup. this is only my 2 cents. if you were to have a one quiver ski i would go a little bigger, look at the Reverend, the saint, or the spitfire. these are a little wider. i would get a ski over 180cm. as the the bindings. i would try the bindings if you can, some people love the naxos other hate them. personally i wasn't a fan. i like the single pivot like the freerides. as for using your ice boots, i would be careful you could truly screw up your ankles.

yea i think the 176 is a good length for you, i am 5'8" and am skiing the 188 but i like a big ski. the 176 will give you versatility, put a pair of marker barrons and you will have a killer side county set of planks. back to the lenght, it would also depend on how much you weigh. if you are under 160 than the 176 would be good. if you are a little bigger you might want to think of a longer ski. i hope this helps. have a fun and safe time. remember if you are in the backcounty to ski with a buddy, beacon, probe, shovel, and take an avy class.

All ski boots are one shell, one liner, and a differnt footbed. (i would ALWAYS toss the footbed and get, at the minimum, a superfoot. i would recomend going to your local shop and bring a six pack and ask to be fitted.

Both skis are great skis. it would depend what you are looking for in a ski. for an allround ski the Aura is a better match. if you like a big stick or like to schmeere you way down than the Kiku is your ski. the question about a womans or mens ski would come down to your build. my wife is a super aggressive skiier but she is 115lbs and 5'3" so she isn't pushing as much mass as i am. she has a pair of Karhu Berthas (and loves them). between these two skis i would go with the Kiku, i like fat skis for all conditions. whatever you decide you will have a blast! enjoy the POWDER!

sure, you would just carry less of everything else. I have a 12L pack that i use 80% of the time and my 140mm skins fit just fine.

I would get the 120mm skins, the instructions are suber basic and you will beable to cut it down to your ski. Have fun and ski safe

Battery life: minimum 1 hour in search mode after 200 hours in transmit mode (approximately 250 hours in transmit only or 50 hours in search only)http://www.backcountryaccess.com/english/products/tracker_dts.php

Smitty, this will "play" with analog beacons as well. The people who build these beacons want you to be able to find your friends, so they build them to be compatible with all beacons. The difference is the way that the information is transmitted to the user. However, if you still have doubts, take you analog beacon to a shop and bring some batteries, turn them both on and see what happens.

This beacon actually detects small movements, such as your chest moving while breathing. It does not actually transmit any numerical vital signs such as heart rate. This is the only beacon on the market right now that does this. As a result, both the person buried and any searchers would have to have this beacon in order to receive such data.As far as Recco receivers go, they are currently only held by rescue squads. There is no small consumer unit currently available, whether standalone or intergrated with a traditional beacon.

Yep, i have it in mine. you can rock and talk.

If you are talking about the 3 buckle AT boot and not the Garmont Summit GTX hiking boot, then you have a match. this will work just fine.

I would go with the 60mm set, you can then trim it down to fit your skis exactly.

that depends on your boot size. if you boots length in mm (normally found on the heel) is between 265 and 320 then go with the small (it looks like all they have left is smalls, so you better hope you don't have a boot lager than a 28.5)

that depends on how you like to ski. personally i think the two sizes that are up for sale are either 2 big or 2 small. for an all round good size for you i would get something in a 165ish (little smaller, little bigger) the 153 is super short and you may only want if you are a total beginner, and the 174 would be a BIG ski for you. the best way to find out what size ski to get is to ski a bunch and find out what size you like, though i know you would be happy with a 165ish.

I don't think so, i have never seen any aftermarket kits. you might try calling smith.

well, you are in a quandary. the big difference with weight is the lac of breaks with these bindings. the biggest problem with this bindings is they sit high on the ski and have some lateral movement. also depending on your boot size you din may be close to 10. if you were to go with some Fritschis i would go with the Freeride (still lighter and tours WAY better than the marker). two disadvantages that the markers have are the lateral stability and wider screw pattern works better with FAT skis. I hope this information helps. -- G

you aren't the first, i know many people who have, and love em. they are on the heaver side for touring, but you will be thankful for the heft when you are ripping down.

you will love theses boots. they have a 98mm last (just about the narrowest last you can find) these are my go to boot for advanced skiers with narrow feet. this is the advanced boot, you will love it. it does have a different feel, a little softer forward flex, with a super stiff lateral stability. you are sure to love the ID liner. this liner cost about 250 on its own. it is one of the lightest and warmest (not too warm) liners on the market. have a good season!

well it looks like i am getting paid by G3 for all my props for the El Hombre. However i am not (though wouldn't turn it down) i would got with the Big Boy El Hombre. i ski the 185 and find it great for just about everything. a true one quiver ski. you will find that it excels in the steep and the deep, but don't be surprised when you reach for it when you are staying in bounds. it is truly a great ski. Go Big or Go Home!have fun this winter!

find out how wide your tip is, then get a skin to fit it.they will come with instructions on how to cut the skin to your ski.have fun, enjoy the hike.remember to skin with all the tools (beacon, probe, shovel, buddy)

well that depends. i am 5' 8" and would go with the 185. but i like a bigger, more stable ski for high speed descents. if you want something a little quicker to turn you might consider going down a size.

i don't have the exact comparisonhowever, they are beefy (i think around 9lbs for the 185)the atomics are lighter (though i don't know by how much)as for the icelantic i have no idea. however, going down i love these skis, and it makes the extra weight all worth it.

I would (with out question) go with the Rapid Transits. what you need is to ask yourself what you will be doing more of. If you are doing more touring and less lift access then the Spitfire would be the ones for you.however, if you want a ski that you can ski EVERYWHERE then i would go with the RT. they are truly sick sticks.