K2. The ARC Collection. Made in the USA

ski otter 2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,517
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Most of us thought the Pettitors were an improved iteration of the Obsethed, learning from that earlier Seth ski. But not all: it was more playful, though not as stable or stiff.

I own a pair of the first yellow MB 108s, after I loved the white ones from the next year, which I was told was the same except for graphics. They were almost unskiable at first. I've been tinkering with them all year (mount position, tuning, base flattening/fine shaping, etc.) and finally got them almost as good as the white ones, but not quite as damp. When right, for me they are a top ski.

From your description of mount points with the Obsetheds and Pettitors, I just have to think you are bigger and taller than I am, but not sure. Or something.

I learned from the horse's mouth, so to speak, where to mount them: Seth Morrison skis at Loveland, and told my buddy going up on the lift that he only skied the longest ones, not the shorter ones (at 160 - 165 lbs.or so, and fairly short - maybe 5 foot seven to eight inches?), and only forward - 4.5 inches forward of recommended line! We tried that, my buddy and I, and many others in the ski shop system my buddy works in, and it worked. Same with the Pettitors, same numbers, same mounts. For example, none of us could ski the 179s, fore-aft problems; all of us liked at least +2 forward on the longer one, the biggest skiers maybe +1.5, but no one I knew. Many of these guys are expert skiers, young and strong, but also expert and older. Some of them are reps or ambassadors for various brands, including K2 guys. Most were at +2.5 to +4.5. (I've detailed in other posts these positions and how they ski - in our experience, for at least a half dozen to a dozen guys, almost all in the biz. All different size guys.) But only the longest Obsethed and Pettitors. (I've used Schizos on all these, so have experienced mounts between -1 to +5. I stick on the Pettitors to +3 to +4.5, but +4.0 mostly. +3.5 next, then +4.5, what Seth used. But +2 to +4.5 are all common with the others.)

So I'm surprised you are talking about minus large amounts. The Pettitors, in particular, are really burly and directional at +2, seemingly for almost everybody, of whatever size, I recall, let alone farther back. For instance, for me, the Pettitors at +2 to -1 are an SG or even downhill ski - charging straight on them on fairly steep slopes feels like moderate speed on most more normal skis.
 

ski otter 2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,517
Location
Front Range, Colorado
P,S. I still have a pair of the 179 Pettitors, and use it only for skiing groomers and mild off piste, or light powder: fore-aft instability. But it skis groomers very well. Just charges, and does those Sean Pettit turns, the pro whose ski it was, and was designed for.

And I have two pairs, different years, of the Pettitors: the blue one with big mountain heli skiing scenes, and the mustard red ones, with an odd bear line drawing stamped on them: a drawing from Sean, I think I was told.

Some of my friends still have pairs of the longest, 116 Obsethed (its last year, I believe - the widest version), though mostly in poor condition, heavily used. My ski buddy, I think, has multiple pairs still, but at least a few, I gather. Not sure in what condition.

My shred 102s were probably the less tapered ones, not sure. I have never quite been able to get the tune, base shape, bevels just right for skiing them optimally for more than a day or two, seems like, oddly enough: some days have to hold them to more of a straight line on edge rather than let then drift, not so good that way.

I still have a pair of the Shred 102s that are from their first year, I think: it's the year with the retro stripes, green and orange, etc., running vertically, like K2 skis of old.

(My son had a pair of the 112s, with jumbled modern art, that he liked because they were forgiving and noodly. Too noodly for me - they got tossed.)
 
Last edited:

ski otter 2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,517
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Re-reading your posts, you were saying minus from true center, not from the recommended line. I don't know mount points for those from true center, only rec. line, so I may be talking past you, misinterpreting a bit of what you were saying about that. Guess I could go measure that way to try to compare, at some point, unless you happen to know the relationship there.

Also, it's no wonder the Fujas 102 version might not work for you, since they are little guys, designing that ski to mimmick the heavier Pettitors for their own reasons, when mounted way forward of the line. Once I can figure out the relationship of that rec. line to true center, maybe I can figure out more of why that ski didn't work for you. A question that might help: were you experiencing that Sean Pettit "turny thing" when you skied both the longer 102 and the longer pettitors? (Those were the words the National Rossi head of "hard goods development" used in a video interview with Blistergear, describing his own Black Ops (Pettitor type) skis? (the 118 and the burly Squad Sender 112). I'm sure he didn't want to say, "Sean Pettit turns," which is what they are.
 

AEV

Booting up
Skier
Joined
May 13, 2021
Posts
11
Location
Tahoe
I'm pretty sure the first marking on the mount point scale thing was not true center. If I recall correctly it was a little over 1cm back from true center, but it's been a long time.

Interesting to hear that the demo pair of MB108TIs worked so much better than the ones you bought. I've been in that boat many times, and it's frustrating. I'm sure you took them in for a full tune?

I'm a bigger guy, and still under 30 years old, for reference. When I was skiing on the 189cm 118mm underfoot Obsetheds, I was about 180lbs, 20-21 YO. Good times. I was on the furthest back point on the scale, or the -7 point on the scale, so -8.3ish maybe from True. This gets confusing lol, and I could be off a bit. As I got older, I started to mount all my skis based on self measurements from true center. That practice actually started with the shreditors.

Collin Collins was a larger framed dude, pro skier, skiing on the 179cm Pettitors, Shreditors, Obsetheds and Hellbents harder than most on their charger skis. This revolutionized my thoughts on sizing back in 2014-2015ish, and showed me how much balance really plays a role in freestyle skiing, and changed how I skied for the better. All these K2 skis helped me a ton too.

The new Reckoner series looks fun, but seems too light for me.
 

ski otter 2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,517
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Nice comments, again. I tried one of the Reckoners at a rep demo, not sure which width. But for me it was not dialed in enough, just meh (without having time to try different mount points). My K2 ambassador friend at first didn't like them much either, but now does.
Blistergear reviews confirmed parts of what I'd noticed.

Good choices in fat skis in one actually so young! Very good fortune! Understandable you would start choosing your own mount point with those pesky Shreditors. Most people never figured out there is a wide range of possibilities there, with very different outcomes on the same ski, however bad or good it may be at the recommended mount line.

Interesting experience you describe with those 179 Pettitors. They would respond well to elite happy feet, I figure.

I found out pretty quickly that for me, I had to move the mount back on those things rather than forward as with the longer versions, or I'd almost get tossed over the handlebars in bumps and powder bumps, more than once. I never did figure out how far back on those things might be best, but settled at -1.5 at the time, because that was as far back as my Schizo bindings would let me go, since I had not anticipated going back at all when I mounted them. Since then, I've remounted the Schizo bindings back, and then adjusted those to -2, though have yet to test them even farther back. (On groomers or mild off piste, it doesn't matter much: the 179s charge well and turn easily, just like Sean Pettit, who skied the 179s only himself, before he moved on, first to Pep Fujas freestyle skis, and then to snowboarding only, I was told!

But he was a small guy; it was Seth Morrison I imitated, who was a little bigger (but not much).

I tune skis myself, have on and off for many years. No need to "take them in." I've gotten good at it, even base flattening and shaping for different skis. Much better than a tune shop, almost any tune shop, and this allows a lot more individualized variation, depending who I'm tuning for, and what skis, and how I want them to ski.

Every half dozen years or so, maybe less, I break down and base flatten only at a few relatively good shops. But when I take the skis home, in spite of the things they do I can't, I notice the shortcomings, and notice that with some elbow grease, time and effort, I usually - almost always - do a better job. As I get older, at some point, I'll probably turn just the preliminary base flattening over to one shop in particular, and then fine tune or adjust that to suit right after, a finishing step or two.
 
Top