i want someone's used skis

pizzamoose · Post by **pizzamoose** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:15

does anyone have old "rock skis" that are still in decent shape that they want to get rid of?

what i'm looking for

shaped
170cm give or take
bindings must be able to accomodate large boots
<=$100 or so..

thanks.

Snowjob · Post by **Snowjob** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:18

Hey Moose:

I have a great pair of Olin Mark IV's for sale!

twilkas · Post by **twilkas** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:20

cool, the orange ones? hows about any Hanson boots?

Snowjob · Post by **Snowjob** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:22

Nah, fuh-get the Hanson's. I've got a great pair of White Salomon rear entries. Purrrrr-fect!

pooka16 · Post by **pooka16** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:24

moose, i have a pair of k2 magic 3's size 170 if interested...

twilkas · Post by **twilkas** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:24

i had a grey pair of salaman rear entries... skied those marshmallows way way way too long, didnt realize how much they were holding me back until i got in a pair of real boots.
rear entries..... my god, just the name to say nothing of the worthlessness..... lol...

Snowjob · Post by **Snowjob** » Feb 27th, '05, 20:29

What's interesting about looking back on the rear entries is trends vs. fads. Seems like the latest trend is super short skis. I was skiing with a couple of guys on Saturday, and one had Atomic M2 Metro or something like that.

He looks about 6 feet tall and probably 190 pounds, and his skis were 160 cm or so.

XtremeJibber2001 · Post by **XtremeJibber2001** » Feb 27th, '05, 21:04

I have some K2 Black Magic's 183cm with marker bindings set for a 31.5

E

Post by **SkiDork** » Feb 28th, '05, 07:36

Snowjob wrote:What's interesting about looking back on the rear entries is trends vs. fads. Seems like the latest trend is super short skis. I was skiing with a couple of guys on Saturday, and one had Atomic M2 Metro or something like that.

He looks about 6 feet tall and probably 190 pounds, and his skis were 160 cm or so.

yer preachin to the choir...

andyzee · Post by **andyzee** » Feb 28th, '05, 07:54

SkiDork wrote:
Snowjob wrote:What's interesting about looking back on the rear entries is trends vs. fads. Seems like the latest trend is super short skis. I was skiing with a couple of guys on Saturday, and one had Atomic M2 Metro or something like that.

He looks about 6 feet tall and probably 190 pounds, and his skis were 160 cm or so.
yer preachin to the choir...

Dork, I'm sure the Metros have some meat to em, can't compare that to your skinny stix. Boy, you not normal!!!! But one hell of a skier

pizzamoose · Post by **pizzamoose** » Mar 2nd, '05, 14:09

can someone give me a bit of advice? I have no idea what these skis are..

thanks..

1. K2 Black Magic's 183cm with marker bindings set for a 31.5
2. k2 magic 3's size 170
3. Olin Mark IV's

borgy · Post by **borgy** » Mar 2nd, '05, 14:26

Snowjob wrote:What's interesting about looking back on the rear entries is trends vs. fads. Seems like the latest trend is super short skis. I was skiing with a couple of guys on Saturday, and one had Atomic M2 Metro or something like that.

He looks about 6 feet tall and probably 190 pounds, and his skis were 160 cm or so.

I have Atomic Metron M11's I'm 6'2" 220 and I' m on 172's. They are a blast to ride. What a change from my Blizzard Thermo 210's from years past

KBL Ed · Post by **KBL Ed** » Mar 2nd, '05, 14:32

moose wrote:3. Olin Mark IV's

I'm pretty sure this was a joke. The Olin's were the best skis available.... circa 1978. :)

pizzamoose · Post by **pizzamoose** » Mar 2nd, '05, 14:33

KBL Ed wrote:
moose wrote:3. Olin Mark IV's
I'm pretty sure this was a joke. The Olin's were the best skis available.... circa 1978. :)

hence my cry for help. (:
i don't know what these are.. BLING!!!! Where are you man??

Cityskier · Post by **Cityskier** » Mar 2nd, '05, 14:58

moose wrote:hence my cry for help. (:
i don't know what these are.. BLING!!!! Where are you man??

And if those don't work I have some Dynamic VR27s.