2016/2017 K2 Pinnacle 95 Review

Screen Shot 2015-06-17 at 1.07.15 PMBy Kurt Fehrenbach

A little about me, I’m 5’11” , 160 lbs. 51 years old.  I’m a full time PSIA Level 3 Instructor in Aspen. I am also a former PSIA National Demo team member (2004-2008). I received a pair of 184 cm K2 Pinnacle 95s in early February 2015 winter at the end of one of the longest dry stretches in the 30 years that I have been in Colorado, and the snow, for Colorado, was on the firm side.

The first couple of days I had them, I was skiing them on firm Colorado groomed and firm Colorado bumps, and the tune out of the box was spot on; outstanding. The feel of the ski was that perfect combination of sharpness and bevel angles which which make it effortless to get the ski to hook up and slice on command with the subtlest inward roll of your ankle and knee, and at the same time, you could float lightly on the edge so you could steer, schmear, or drift the ski at will. Which made the ski feel lively, accurate and playful.

Three days later, we had the biggest snowfall of the season here in Aspen, we got the snow that saved our season, and the next three days I had the chance to test the ski on Aspen Highlands steeps in a variety of perfect pow, chopped up crud, wind-blown, and in the Aspen Highlands bowls, steeps and trees. The lightness of K2’s new Konic construction was greatly appreciated when the skis were on the pack when hiking up to the summit of the Highlands Bowl, it was also noticeable when pivoting the ski in tight trees and bumps, while at the same time, the strength of the Konic construction was noticeable when charging through chopped up snow at high speed, with the ski’s ability to slice through the variable snow and not get deflected off the desired line.

I also had it one day racing in the NASTAR course with some clients for fun. I was very impressed with its performance in the race course for a ski that’s 95 underfoot with tip and tail rocker, in the environment it was least designed for! Many of these skis that have traditional side cut in the middle of the ski and traditional camber but reverse camber and reverse side cut at the ends, the ski encourages skiing in a nicely centered position.

One of the most playful, fun and versatile all mountain skis I’ve ever had! At 95 under foot with K2’s Powder tip and all-terrain rocker, it floats beautifully in the powder and crud, is stable at high speeds, easy and maneuverable at low speeds. While it may not be the peak of ski-engineering to make a mid-fat or fat ski fun in soft snow, what is exceptional is a ski that is 90mm or wider and can totally rip and still be fun and playful on harder snow. The Pinnacle 95 are very impressive for carving medium radius to long turns on harder snow. The torsional strength and edge grip is fantastic on harder, smooth snow. With the 17m turn radius, it is outstanding at high-speed, dynamic, medium-radius turns. I can’t wait to get a pair of the 105’s too!

-Kurt

photo

Advertisements

6 Responses to 2016/2017 K2 Pinnacle 95 Review

  1. Brent Cowitz says:

    Hello! Thank you for the review.
    I am interested in this ski and I’m very close to your size and demographic, other than your PSIA accreditations which adds value to your comments.

    You had mentioned that the ski performed well with the tune right out of the box – please tell me what that tune was. I have found over the years that I like a 0.5d base and 87d side bevel, but my ‘newest’ skis are K2 Aftershocks and the newer ski shape may work better with different bevel.

    Thanks!

    • HiBrent,
      The factory spec is 1 degree base, 2 side, I think thats the best for this ski, you could knife up the side to 3 if you want but you loose some durability/sharpness longevity and may be overkill for a ski thats designed for equal on-trail, off trail use. Hope that helps!
      -Clem

  2. Brent Cowitz says:

    Thanks for the input. That was fast!

  3. Nathan says:

    I have skiied the the Pinnacles my last two trips out west (Vail China Bowls, Beaver Creek, Breck, and Keystone). Both in 170cm length. I am 5’9″ 161lbs. I like to turn, carve on anything steep. But, give me a nice groomed blue and I am much faster, as I make larger turns especially on rolling slopes. I was wondering would I benefit from going up to the 177cm? What would be the major difference from the 170s?

    • Nathan,

      The 177 might be the ticket. You will get a slightly longer turn radius and a bit more stability and edge grip and better crud performance and float. The skis still have plenty of rocker so I think they would probably be very nimble for you as well on the steeps.
      -Clem

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s