Hi! I am debating between the Faction prodigy 2.0, prodigy 3.0 and the K2 poachers for this year. I am a very confident skier, can backflip and 360 already and am looking to improve in the park this year with a few rails, 540's and maybe a 720. However most my time is spent jamming in the resort on the side of slopes, dropping a few cliffs, turning in the trees... I know these skis hdon't have excellent powder performance (except the prodigy 3.0 that might be too wide for the park), but I love going in the pow if there is some, especially dropping cliffs in pow. Groomer performance is not paramount for me, but I do appreciate bombing down them from time to time. Anyway any recommendations would be appreciated! Earned a sub by the way.
I'd say Poacher or Prodigy 2.0 is the way to go. 3.0 does feel like it's getting a little too wide for what you're looking for. Just would be more challenging as you continue to progress in the park. Between the Prodigy and Poacher, Prodigy is going to feel lighter, quicker, more agile, while Poacher is going to feel heavier, stiffer, and stronger. Prodigy will feel a little better in the trees because of its weight and shape, and give you a touch more powder performance. Poacher would be better if you really want to maximize stability at speed and stability for big landings, but I can't help but think the lighter Prodigy might help promote progression in the park more, which sounds like a big focus for you. Hope that helps! Hope you have a great season, too. Dialing in those 5s and 7s can really open up a bunch of doors to new tricks and new confidence in the park!
Yes and no. Center mount means you can't drive a turn with the tip of the ski as much as on a directional ski, but you can still make really good carves. It's just that you start to initiate more laterally. I love the way the Poacher feels mounted true center and wouldn't want them any other way personally!
Hey thx for these ski tests - really helpful stuff. I've had my Line Chronics (since '12!) as my all-mountain / freestyle riders and am looking to try a different brand when replacing them. Are the Poachers notably heavier/stiffer than the Chronics? Wondering if this would be a hard change when riding park days, since my Chronics held up great in the park over the decade but still felt playful on rails.
Yes, the Poachers are notably stiffer than the Chronics. This definitely makes for a different ski experience, and it's all about the preference. Poacher is great for the skier who wants their park ski to have some extra burliness to it while the Chronic is the more playful and bendy option. Kind of depends on your style for sure.
@@Benji-uq1wi They’re beasts and charge any part of the mtn really well. But they are def a stiff ski. It was a few days to adjust to them in the park. Riding switch felt weird at first. Im 6’ and about 175lbs and ride the 177cm. I didn’t want a 182+ ski bc I like a shorter ski for park
@@petracleshey which skis hold up better at high speeds? I would assume the stiffer poachers but I read a newschoolers review online that made it sound like the chronics are more stable at top speeds
Hi! I have been doing a bit of research and I have found that the k2 poachers has what I am looking for in terms of skis and the more I read about them I really like them. The only problem is that I am a girl and these are mens skis. I am 5’4 intermediate skier. I enjoy doing all terrain and hit park occasionally but really enjoy speed as well, getting up to 62mph. I am also interested in skis that have full twin tips. The lowest this ski has is 163 cm. I was wondering if there are any skis relatively similar to these skis that might be a better option for me if I need a smaller size. Thank you!
Hello! First, I'll say that in theory, you don't need to completely rule out the 163 cm length. It sounds like you're a pretty aggressive skier, and my guess is that you'd be able to handle that size. It's just a tiny bit taller than you, but more like your height exactly. Long for some, yes, but not ridiculously long. That said, check out the K2 Sight and Midnight. No difference in construction between them, very similar to the Poacher overall, just a bit narrower. I'd also take a look at the new ARV/ARW 94 from Armada. They won't be available until later in the summer, but great skis.
They are pretty direct comparisons in terms of heft, build, and application. The main difference is in the rocker. Poacher is longer and lower while the Armada is more traditional in terms of twin tip splay and longer camber underfoot. This makes the Poacher a better floater while the ARV is more grippy and energetic in an on-trail format.
I would go Poacher if I were you. Still a great park ski (sits on top of podiums all the time), but I like the shape a little better as an all-mountain ski. Hope that helps!
I have the k2 sight, used it a few times and it is alredy have alot of small scratch marks, and some deeper where you can see into some yellow stuff on the ski. But the plastic still havent fell off. But perfectly fine underneath, does this affects the Skis?
Nothing on the topsheet should really affect how the ski works. If you're getting base, edge, or sidewall damage, then you may be able to see some differences, but nothing cosmetic.
how would these way up to the reckoner 102's? I'm getting too old for massive park jumps, but still like to mess around on the side slopen and catch a bit of air left and right.
The Reckoner is quite a bit lighter and more flexible. The Poacher uses a lot of fiberglass and that makes it pretty hefty. It's got better durability and stability than the Reckoner, but isn't quite as playful.
Hi! I am an intermediate park skier looking to get this ski. I mostly ski rails so i want a ski what can last the beating over time. I am 170cm but still growing. Im thinking if the 177cm ski would be too long for me? I would get a great deal for a lightly used pair.
I am hoping to ski some park this year as my friend is interested in that but at the same time I want to spend time on the mountain doing some powder runs. Does this perform well in powder or would you recommend another ski? I was thinking about the QST 102 from Salomon but would that one not perform as well in the park?
My poacher’s are definitely great all mountain. Though I will say obviously they’re not nearly as good in powder as a wider ski would be. Personally the difference between the poachers and what you get out of a 102 would not be enough to make it worth the fact that QST’s aren’t park skis. If you’re looking for one that can do both better than the poachers, potentially the ARV or ARW 106’s from Armada. Wider ski with true twin rocker. They’re also not as stiff
Just wondering i am 5’8” 135 and wanted to know if i should get the poachers in the 170 i’d say im a little above intermediate comfortable sending anything really
Hi I just purchased 170 Cm K2 poachers, I’m 5’7 190 pounds and was wondering where I should mount my bindings , I ride groomers and go into the trees but would also like to progress mostly in the park as well and think that’s where most of my focus will be this season , I was thinking -1 cm from true center please let me know what you think!
The factory line is roughly -4 from center depending on length, and for all-mountain skiing, it's pretty good--maybe a bit forward. -1 from true center is a lot more park-oriented.
@@alexanderprice4802 i am looking to buy these but i am scared they will be too stiff and heavy for me.. i am 177cm and 72 kilograms. What do you think ?
Hi mate looking at upgrading my old poachers I've had for the last five years. I'm stuck on either the bent 100s, chronic 101s or just sticking with another set of poachers??
The Chronic 101 is worth a look in my opinion. That one jumped off the snow at us this year, but it's still not as rugged or sturdy as the Poacher, especially in the tips and tails, where the Poacher is very strong. Bent is more playful and freeride-oriented, but again, not quite as strong.
Hello, I wanted to ask a question, I need to switch ski from my damaged Volk walls 08', I'm 6'1 for 185lbs, I was thinnking in between Poacher 177 and Sight 179. I'm a freestyle skier that skis between park and all mountain... Thanks in advance!
The Poacher has a better blend of park/all-mountain than the Sight, which we find to be more park-focused. If you're looking for something versatile, I'd go Poacher. have fun! SE
Where exactly is the factory mount line on these? Is it the midsole line ? I'm having a hard time figuring out where factory center is since there isn't a mark on the sidewall that denotes it. I was thinking maybe -2.5 from center, for mostly groomers and trees with some dabbling in the park, any advice?
There is a raised line at true center on the topsheet of the ski. The midsole mark is 5.6 cm behind the center line in the 177. Mounting at -2.5 from center makes sense if you're looking for a bit more park performance.
The Poacher is wider at 96 mm underfoot, and is flatter overall. The Sight, at 88 mm underfoot, has more camber and less rocker in addition to having a very dramatic twin tip shape. This makes Sight more appropriate for intermediate skiers in park and freestyle while Poacher is a better all-mountain and freeride ski that does great in park for advanced and expert skiers.
Hi guys, curious about these for a directional skier. They are very affordable and I'm thinking about grabbing a pair for banging around the west cascades early season, skiing slow and playful. I don't ski switch but love to ollie and hit natural features. Looking for something fun and durable and don't wanna bang up my nice skis while the rocks are still out. Are there multiple recommended mount points back from center for a non switch skier?
Great choice. They have a rugged and precise feel to them while staying pretty darn playful. There are more mount points than center, we found that a -6 to -8 from true center depending on length works pretty well for directional application.
It's harder than on something like Line Blend for sure--the Poacher is consistently one of the hardiest twin tips out there due to the amount of fiberglass and epoxy.
Hi! I am debating between the Faction prodigy 2.0, prodigy 3.0 and the K2 poachers for this year. I am a very confident skier, can backflip and 360 already and am looking to improve in the park this year with a few rails, 540's and maybe a 720. However most my time is spent jamming in the resort on the side of slopes, dropping a few cliffs, turning in the trees... I know these skis hdon't have excellent powder performance (except the prodigy 3.0 that might be too wide for the park), but I love going in the pow if there is some, especially dropping cliffs in pow. Groomer performance is not paramount for me, but I do appreciate bombing down them from time to time. Anyway any recommendations would be appreciated! Earned a sub by the way.
I'd say Poacher or Prodigy 2.0 is the way to go. 3.0 does feel like it's getting a little too wide for what you're looking for. Just would be more challenging as you continue to progress in the park. Between the Prodigy and Poacher, Prodigy is going to feel lighter, quicker, more agile, while Poacher is going to feel heavier, stiffer, and stronger. Prodigy will feel a little better in the trees because of its weight and shape, and give you a touch more powder performance. Poacher would be better if you really want to maximize stability at speed and stability for big landings, but I can't help but think the lighter Prodigy might help promote progression in the park more, which sounds like a big focus for you.
Hope that helps! Hope you have a great season, too. Dialing in those 5s and 7s can really open up a bunch of doors to new tricks and new confidence in the park!
Do you think center mounting these will take away from my carving abilities, heard these are really fun and come alive center mounted.
Yes and no. Center mount means you can't drive a turn with the tip of the ski as much as on a directional ski, but you can still make really good carves. It's just that you start to initiate more laterally. I love the way the Poacher feels mounted true center and wouldn't want them any other way personally!
Hey thx for these ski tests - really helpful stuff.
I've had my Line Chronics (since '12!) as my all-mountain / freestyle riders and am looking to try a different brand when replacing them. Are the Poachers notably heavier/stiffer than the Chronics? Wondering if this would be a hard change when riding park days, since my Chronics held up great in the park over the decade but still felt playful on rails.
Yes, the Poachers are notably stiffer than the Chronics. This definitely makes for a different ski experience, and it's all about the preference. Poacher is great for the skier who wants their park ski to have some extra burliness to it while the Chronic is the more playful and bendy option. Kind of depends on your style for sure.
@@SkiEssentials Went with the Poacher, thx for the help!
@@petracleshow is it
@@Benji-uq1wi They’re beasts and charge any part of the mtn really well. But they are def a stiff ski. It was a few days to adjust to them in the park. Riding switch felt weird at first.
Im 6’ and about 175lbs and ride the 177cm. I didn’t want a 182+ ski bc I like a shorter ski for park
@@petracleshey which skis hold up better at high speeds? I would assume the stiffer poachers but I read a newschoolers review online that made it sound like the chronics are more stable at top speeds
Hi! I have been doing a bit of research and I have found that the k2 poachers has what I am looking for in terms of skis and the more I read about them I really like them. The only problem is that I am a girl and these are mens skis. I am 5’4 intermediate skier. I enjoy doing all terrain and hit park occasionally but really enjoy speed as well, getting up to 62mph. I am also interested in skis that have full twin tips. The lowest this ski has is 163 cm. I was wondering if there are any skis relatively similar to these skis that might be a better option for me if I need a smaller size. Thank you!
Hello! First, I'll say that in theory, you don't need to completely rule out the 163 cm length. It sounds like you're a pretty aggressive skier, and my guess is that you'd be able to handle that size. It's just a tiny bit taller than you, but more like your height exactly. Long for some, yes, but not ridiculously long. That said, check out the K2 Sight and Midnight. No difference in construction between them, very similar to the Poacher overall, just a bit narrower. I'd also take a look at the new ARV/ARW 94 from Armada. They won't be available until later in the summer, but great skis.
Thank you so much for getting back to me!
Would love to know how these directly compare with the Armada ARV 96.
They are pretty direct comparisons in terms of heft, build, and application. The main difference is in the rocker. Poacher is longer and lower while the Armada is more traditional in terms of twin tip splay and longer camber underfoot. This makes the Poacher a better floater while the ARV is more grippy and energetic in an on-trail format.
Hey, I want top buy an Park Ski wich is a little Bit of an Allrounder. Whats the netter Option: Vökl Revolte 95 or the Poacher?
I would go Poacher if I were you. Still a great park ski (sits on top of podiums all the time), but I like the shape a little better as an all-mountain ski. Hope that helps!
What are those ski boots? They look really nice
Some type of Full Tilt--that skier was a K2 athlete joining us on a media day, so I can't quite get a specific.
I have the k2 sight, used it a few times and it is alredy have alot of small scratch marks, and some deeper where you can see into some yellow stuff on the ski. But the plastic still havent fell off. But perfectly fine underneath, does this affects the Skis?
Nothing on the topsheet should really affect how the ski works. If you're getting base, edge, or sidewall damage, then you may be able to see some differences, but nothing cosmetic.
how would these way up to the reckoner 102's? I'm getting too old for massive park jumps, but still like to mess around on the side slopen and catch a bit of air left and right.
The Reckoner is quite a bit lighter and more flexible. The Poacher uses a lot of fiberglass and that makes it pretty hefty. It's got better durability and stability than the Reckoner, but isn't quite as playful.
Hi! I am an intermediate park skier looking to get this ski. I mostly ski rails so i want a ski what can last the beating over time. I am 170cm but still growing. Im thinking if the 177cm ski would be too long for me? I would get a great deal for a lightly used pair.
I'd think it's a little long, but if you know you prefer longer skis AND can get it at a price, then go for it!
I am hoping to ski some park this year as my friend is interested in that but at the same time I want to spend time on the mountain doing some powder runs. Does this perform well in powder or would you recommend another ski? I was thinking about the QST 102 from Salomon but would that one not perform as well in the park?
The Poacher is a great blend of park and all-mountain. The QST is not really great at park.
My poacher’s are definitely great all mountain. Though I will say obviously they’re not nearly as good in powder as a wider ski would be. Personally the difference between the poachers and what you get out of a 102 would not be enough to make it worth the fact that QST’s aren’t park skis. If you’re looking for one that can do both better than the poachers, potentially the ARV or ARW 106’s from Armada. Wider ski with true twin rocker. They’re also not as stiff
Just wondering i am 5’8” 135 and wanted to know if i should get the poachers in the 170 i’d say im a little above intermediate comfortable sending anything really
I'd say that's right on--I'd fear the longer one would be too much ski for your stats and application. Have fun!
SE
Hi I just purchased 170 Cm K2 poachers, I’m 5’7 190 pounds and was wondering where I should mount my bindings , I ride groomers and go into the trees but would also like to progress mostly in the park as well and think that’s where most of my focus will be this season , I was thinking -1 cm from true center please let me know what you think!
mount those bad boys smack dab true center, thank me later
Hit u back in 4 months boi
The factory line is roughly -4 from center depending on length, and for all-mountain skiing, it's pretty good--maybe a bit forward. -1 from true center is a lot more park-oriented.
Center man, they are incredible, I'm on to my 3rd set
@@alexanderprice4802 i am looking to buy these but i am scared they will be too stiff and heavy for me.. i am 177cm and 72 kilograms. What do you think ?
Hi mate looking at upgrading my old poachers I've had for the last five years. I'm stuck on either the bent 100s, chronic 101s or just sticking with another set of poachers??
The Chronic 101 is worth a look in my opinion. That one jumped off the snow at us this year, but it's still not as rugged or sturdy as the Poacher, especially in the tips and tails, where the Poacher is very strong. Bent is more playful and freeride-oriented, but again, not quite as strong.
Hello, I wanted to ask a question, I need to switch ski from my damaged Volk walls 08', I'm 6'1 for 185lbs, I was thinnking in between Poacher 177 and Sight 179. I'm a freestyle skier that skis between park and all mountain... Thanks in advance!
The Poacher has a better blend of park/all-mountain than the Sight, which we find to be more park-focused. If you're looking for something versatile, I'd go Poacher. have fun!
SE
Where exactly is the factory mount line on these? Is it the midsole line ? I'm having a hard time figuring out where factory center is since there isn't a mark on the sidewall that denotes it. I was thinking maybe -2.5 from center, for mostly groomers and trees with some dabbling in the park, any advice?
There is a raised line at true center on the topsheet of the ski. The midsole mark is 5.6 cm behind the center line in the 177. Mounting at -2.5 from center makes sense if you're looking for a bit more park performance.
@@SkiEssentials you guys are amazing thanks
What is the different between sight and poacher?
The Poacher is wider at 96 mm underfoot, and is flatter overall. The Sight, at 88 mm underfoot, has more camber and less rocker in addition to having a very dramatic twin tip shape. This makes Sight more appropriate for intermediate skiers in park and freestyle while Poacher is a better all-mountain and freeride ski that does great in park for advanced and expert skiers.
Thank you for the answer, ended up buying the sight. Is the sight good in the powder snow/ off the trail?
@@str1l842 Yup! It'll work well off trail. Not as much float as Poacher, but still a very good shape for softer snow.
Are these skis center mounted in your video?
Hi Luka!
Factory line, not true center, likely was about 4 back from the middle. I found it to be pretty forward for my directional style.
SE
Hi guys, curious about these for a directional skier. They are very affordable and I'm thinking about grabbing a pair for banging around the west cascades early season, skiing slow and playful. I don't ski switch but love to ollie and hit natural features. Looking for something fun and durable and don't wanna bang up my nice skis while the rocks are still out. Are there multiple recommended mount points back from center for a non switch skier?
Great choice. They have a rugged and precise feel to them while staying pretty darn playful. There are more mount points than center, we found that a -6 to -8 from true center depending on length works pretty well for directional application.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks!
Hi,
how hard is it to butter these?
It's harder than on something like Line Blend for sure--the Poacher is consistently one of the hardiest twin tips out there due to the amount of fiberglass and epoxy.