Thanks! The 92 is more of a price point ski with a more simple build than the 102. Not sure what makes a good telemark ski. The 92 will be light, soft flexing, playful, and easy to turn. For a light weight skier I bet it would make a fun all mountain , versatile choice. The sale prices on the 92 are attractive as well.
Rustler 9 has metal so it's stiffer, better for hard carving and icy conditions. I prefer the Reckoner because it's more playful. It's a park ski designed for the whole mountain.
@@whoisthe1412 I think both skis suit an intermediate. It comes down to what kind of terrain and what style of skiing you prefer. I would call the Rustler 9 a playful all mountain ski and the K2 Reckoner a playful all mountain freestyle ski. Rustler 9 will be better in powder and tree skiing. K2 Reckoner will be better for jumps and tricks. Both carve well but I'd say the Rustler is the better carver.
@@whoisthe1412 You could ski either of these skis anywhere on the mountain, park to powder, but the Reckoner feels more like a park ski and the Rustler feels more like a traditional ski. Are you looking for a one ski quiver? What's your priority, park/powder/carving/bumps/trees?
Yes I would. It's an all mountain freestyle ski. Works well all over the mountain, park to powder and everything in between. The one feature to be aware of with this ski is that the tip and tail are pretty soft. Great for playful skiing but for hard charging it can be a bit unstable in variable or heavy conditions. A light weight skier probably wouldn't notice this.
@@ttanke I'm 240lbs, so when skiing these skis off trail it's pretty easy to over flex the soft tips and get thrown. I'm guessing anyone under 180 lbs won't notice this.
The Reckoner 102 is pretty similar to the Line Blend. Very soft tip and tail compared to most skis. A good choice if you prioritise playful skiing but still want some all mountain capability.
102 is an all mountain ski and the 112 is a powder ski. At your height and weight both would work in the 170 cm length. If your skiing alot of powder go 112. If you skiing mostly park and groomers go 102. If your an advanced aggressive skier go for the 177 cm length.
@@pesodesigns731 No problem, glad to help. I'm not a big fan of the 112 graphic either. If your looking for a powder ski and want something playful and surfy you should also consider the Line Sir Francis Bacon, Atomic Bent 110, Dynastar M-free 99 or M-Free 108, Volkl Revolt 104.
Perfect day for progression!! Looking good buddy!!
Great Video. What do you think about the 92 model as an all mountain ski? I'll be putting telemark bindings on it.
Thanks! The 92 is more of a price point ski with a more simple build than the 102. Not sure what makes a good telemark ski. The 92 will be light, soft flexing, playful, and easy to turn. For a light weight skier I bet it would make a fun all mountain , versatile choice. The sale prices on the 92 are attractive as well.
What mounting point did you choose?
I used the "Team" mark.
Reckoner 102 vs Rustler 9 which one do you like better?
Rustler 9 has metal so it's stiffer, better for hard carving and icy conditions. I prefer the Reckoner because it's more playful. It's a park ski designed for the whole mountain.
@@hayhead92 between the Reckoner and Rustler which one would you recommend? I’m an intermediate.
@@whoisthe1412 I think both skis suit an intermediate. It comes down to what kind of terrain and what style of skiing you prefer. I would call the Rustler 9 a playful all mountain ski and the K2 Reckoner a playful all mountain freestyle ski. Rustler 9 will be better in powder and tree skiing. K2 Reckoner will be better for jumps and tricks. Both carve well but I'd say the Rustler is the better carver.
@@whoisthe1412 You could ski either of these skis anywhere on the mountain, park to powder, but the Reckoner feels more like a park ski and the Rustler feels more like a traditional ski. Are you looking for a one ski quiver? What's your priority, park/powder/carving/bumps/trees?
@@hayhead92 for me I like blues and green runs with occasional glades. Your recommendation?
Would you say this ski is good for everyday use?
Yes I would. It's an all mountain freestyle ski. Works well all over the mountain, park to powder and everything in between. The one feature to be aware of with this ski is that the tip and tail are pretty soft. Great for playful skiing but for hard charging it can be a bit unstable in variable or heavy conditions. A light weight skier probably wouldn't notice this.
@@hayhead92 what would you consider lightweight? I'm between 60-65 kg (around 136 lbs) 177cm (+- 5'10) and thinking on getting these :)
@@ttanke I'm 240lbs, so when skiing these skis off trail it's pretty easy to over flex the soft tips and get thrown. I'm guessing anyone under 180 lbs won't notice this.
The Reckoner 102 is pretty similar to the Line Blend. Very soft tip and tail compared to most skis. A good choice if you prioritise playful skiing but still want some all mountain capability.
@@hayhead92 thanks for the quick response!! I'll definitely take this info into consideration :)
How durable are these skis?
Holding up well for me so far but I'm not too hard on skis. The K2 Poacher is suppose to be pretty bomb proof if your planning on slamming rails etc.
102 or 112? What do you think? Im 1,71 tall and my weight is 77kg. Sorry for my Bad english:)
102 is an all mountain ski and the 112 is a powder ski. At your height and weight both would work in the 170 cm length. If your skiing alot of powder go 112. If you skiing mostly park and groomers go 102. If your an advanced aggressive skier go for the 177 cm length.
@@hayhead92 Thank you! Your my man. The only thing is I do not Like the 112 K2 Design 😩
@@pesodesigns731 No problem, glad to help. I'm not a big fan of the 112 graphic either. If your looking for a powder ski and want something playful and surfy you should also consider the Line Sir Francis Bacon, Atomic Bent 110, Dynastar M-free 99 or M-Free 108, Volkl Revolt 104.