Hi, I hope you can help me with choosing my next setup. So, I have two backcountry setups right now.
1. Blizzard Zero G 85, Dynafit Radical bindings, Dynafit TLT6 carbon boots.
2. Rossi Sky 7 (97mm underfoot), Shift bindings, Atomic Hawk Ultra XTD 130 boots.
The second setup is more of a resort setup. It works with touring boots too. The first lightweight setup is what I bring to battles. I.e. when I am skiing a big volcano with 5000'+ elevation gain. It skis OK, but definitely not as fun as the second setup. After lugging (and cursing) my heavy setup to the top of Mt Baker for 7500' vert yesterday, but having a blast on the way down, I decided to get a dedicated backcountry *fun* setup, similar to the Sky 7, to pair with the Atomic Hawk boots. I already have a pair of old Kingpin bindings. So I just need the skis.
So what I am really looking for is a pair of downhill skis with no compromises. Would Wayback 98 be a good choice? I am also considering DPS Pagoda 100. But I'm open to any suggestions. This setup will be strictly for backcountry, mostly in Pacific Northwest where the snow is heavy.
Thanks.
K2 Wayback 98 Ski
The Wayback 98 inhabits a rare space at Skimo Co. That is, it is a ski that almost all of our staff can agree on, no matter what “flavor” of skier they are. Looking at the specs, it's not hard to see why. With a versatile 98mm waist width, the Wayback 98 is equally at home in mid-winter powder as it is harvesting corn during the Spring. The long tip and tail rocker helps the Wayback 98 float to the top in deep snow and also lends itself to maneuverability, allowing you to wiggle through tight places with poise and dignity. The long sidecut is predictable, meaning the ski won’t feel “hooky” in variable snow conditions or sketchy exits. The Wayback 98 also features K2’s Ti Spyne, which adds a high level of dampness to the ski as well as helps with binding retention. The Wayback 98 is predictable, maneuverable, and just downright fun. We quite like it, and are sure you will too.
- Ti Spyne insert helps dampen out variable snow and increases binding retention.
- Carbon Overdrive integrates carbon into the layup of the ski, making it light, responsive, and fun.
- Snophobic Topsheet is resilient to the build-up of snow on the top sheet, meaning your light skis stay light.
- All-Terrain Rocker is long in the tip and tail, helping with flotation and maneuverability in tight places.
- An all-around ski that is just downright pleasant to be on.
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 165, 172, 179, 186 |
|
Weight |
1240g [165] 1295g [172] 1360g [179] |
| Weight (pair) | 2480g [165] 2590g [172] 2720g [179] |
|
|
126-98-114 |
|
Turn |
22.1 [179] |
|
Skin |
Z-Clip tip and tail holes, flat notched tail |
| Specs Verified | Yes |
| Design | |
|
|
All-terrain rocker, camber underfoot |
|
|
Square-ish, tapered tip and friendly, medium radius |
|
|
Titanal Ti-Spyne laminate with abs sidewall construction, full metal edges |
|
|
Paulownia |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | Powder, corn, and everything in between |
| Notes | Long tip and tail rocker makes the ski intuitive in variable terrain |
| Bottom Line | Great ski for a great price |
| Compare to other High-fat Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
6/9/2025
6/10/2025
Hey Deling,
While the K2 Wayback 98 is well reviewed, it is still on the lighter side of touring skis, and may not provide the downhill like feel you are looking for. The DPS Pagoda 100 hits the "sweet spot" of 1500g for great downhill and reasonable weight, and is one of the most damp/alpine like touring skis I have been on. A quick search shows the Rossi Sky 7 at over 1800g and an 18m turn radius. The K2 has a longer (22m) turn radius, so a bit different turn shape than the Rossi you like. The DPS will have a 15m, so a bit closer to the Sky 7, making initiating turns a little easier. Just a thought, the Kingpin is a pretty heavy binding, and you could cut a lot of weight there, putting those weight savings into the ski for the feel you are looking for. Check out the on sale DPS, for not much more than the K2.
While the K2 Wayback 98 is well reviewed, it is still on the lighter side of touring skis, and may not provide the downhill like feel you are looking for. The DPS Pagoda 100 hits the "sweet spot" of 1500g for great downhill and reasonable weight, and is one of the most damp/alpine like touring skis I have been on. A quick search shows the Rossi Sky 7 at over 1800g and an 18m turn radius. The K2 has a longer (22m) turn radius, so a bit different turn shape than the Rossi you like. The DPS will have a 15m, so a bit closer to the Sky 7, making initiating turns a little easier. Just a thought, the Kingpin is a pretty heavy binding, and you could cut a lot of weight there, putting those weight savings into the ski for the feel you are looking for. Check out the on sale DPS, for not much more than the K2.
6/10/2025
Thanks for the response! A shorter turning radius sounds awesome for a ski that will never see a groomer :).
Regarding the bindings, yes Kingpin is on the heavy side compared with tech bindings. In addition to kingpin, I have skied Dynafit radicals and atomic Shifts, but not on the same skis. I’m optimizing the performance, not the weight. But I also don’t need unnecessary weight. Would you say a pair of tech bindings like Radicals would give me similar performance as Shift or Kingpin? I’m a decent skier, but not an expert skier. So I probably won’t notice the subtlest difference.
Thanks!
Regarding the bindings, yes Kingpin is on the heavy side compared with tech bindings. In addition to kingpin, I have skied Dynafit radicals and atomic Shifts, but not on the same skis. I’m optimizing the performance, not the weight. But I also don’t need unnecessary weight. Would you say a pair of tech bindings like Radicals would give me similar performance as Shift or Kingpin? I’m a decent skier, but not an expert skier. So I probably won’t notice the subtlest difference.
Thanks!
6/10/2025
I have skied all three of those bindings, and the "ski feel" is the same. The Shift and Kingpin will add some elasticity, but that doesn't really come into play until pushing really hard, or leaving the ground. I have come to the conclusion that alpine style elasticity isn't worth the weight. I much prefer light weight pins for dedicated touring.
Answer this question:
4/8/2025
I have the Wayback 106 (186) which has been predictable and reliable for years in most conditions- not great in firm, but in just about everything else. I used to have the Wayback 96 which were 'jumpy' and had a more traditional shape - not much rocker turned longer than 106 (effective edge). Looks like this updated mid 90s waist has a more 106-style rocker profile- I'm guessing more playful and 106 like than earlier 96? I'm also looking at the Black Crowes Camox Freebird. I tried the Dynafit Radical 97 (188) and got tossed around - - jumpy. I'm 6'1 and 190, looking for a more Spring ski that I can use mid winter for Sierra corn/firm/vario. How do the Camox and these stack up? What length do you think? I noticed the Camox has a much forward mount point. Also looking at Backlands in mid 90s but everyone says it's a different ski- lighter and stiffer tail. I'm looking to salvage fun in junky couloirs and breakable-verio. Thoughts?
4/10/2025
Hi Aaron,
The Wayback 98 skis very similar to the Wayback 106 - if you like your 106 and just want something a bit narrower, they'd be a great option.
The Camox is a bit different - damper and more progressive as you mentioned. They're a bit heavier, which will help a lot with crud and variable snow.
The different Backland models/widths all ski very differently. The 95 is a great ski for all sorts of conditions, but nothing like the old 100 or the 85.
Shoot us an email at help@skimo.co and we can go more in-depth!
The Wayback 98 skis very similar to the Wayback 106 - if you like your 106 and just want something a bit narrower, they'd be a great option.
The Camox is a bit different - damper and more progressive as you mentioned. They're a bit heavier, which will help a lot with crud and variable snow.
The different Backland models/widths all ski very differently. The 95 is a great ski for all sorts of conditions, but nothing like the old 100 or the 85.
Shoot us an email at help@skimo.co and we can go more in-depth!
Answer this question:
3/1/2025
Hi,
For the 165 and 172 lengths, do you know the difference (construction) between Wayback 98 and 98w aside from graphics? Do these skis “ski short”? Replacing 167cm original Coombacks. This is for my wife,
110lbs, who tours in PNW and AK. Thx, Alex
Al
For the 165 and 172 lengths, do you know the difference (construction) between Wayback 98 and 98w aside from graphics? Do these skis “ski short”? Replacing 167cm original Coombacks. This is for my wife,
110lbs, who tours in PNW and AK. Thx, Alex
Al
3/3/2025
Hi Alex, K2 does not call out any construction differences between the 98 and 98 W models. Seems to be just the graphics and that the 98 W comes in shorter lengths. The Wayback 98 has a pretty long tip and tail rocker profile, so I'd say they would ski bit shorter than a lot of other skis and are pretty maneuverable, length for length.
Answer this question:
10/24/2024
Think this is too much ski for a pair of Scarpa F1s (o.g.) to drive? If not, do you have a lightish binding reccomendation?
10/25/2024
Cody, The OG F1 boot skis very well. This would be a perfect match.
For bindings, fill this out and we can better suggest one for you.
Binding finder
For bindings, fill this out and we can better suggest one for you.
Binding finder
Answer this question:
These skis have been great for me. First of all, they are good in a variety of snow types. Not the absolute best edge hold on steep icy terrain, but not bad, and predictable, thanks to the shallow side cut and stiffness. Similarly, although they are not fat powder boards, they do quite well in deep snow, thanks to a long rocker in tip and tail, and some taper too.
Unlike the Backland 100 that I replaced with these, these are much more forgiving if I make a mistake and end up back seat.
Du to their fairly low weight and tapered shape, they are not good at plowing through rough snow.
Definitely would recommend as a quiver of one, or, like me the allround option in a larger quiver, even for a skier with bad technique like me. For the size, they are fairly light, and the width is a nice middle of the road option too.
I can not comment on high speed skiing with them, but at slow speeds they carve smoothly on firm snow, and are forgiving and easy to ski in powder, even breakable crust I felt like I had a fighting chance.
I am 6’5”, 175lbs (plus kit), and have the 186 cm size.
Unlike the Backland 100 that I replaced with these, these are much more forgiving if I make a mistake and end up back seat.
Du to their fairly low weight and tapered shape, they are not good at plowing through rough snow.
Definitely would recommend as a quiver of one, or, like me the allround option in a larger quiver, even for a skier with bad technique like me. For the size, they are fairly light, and the width is a nice middle of the road option too.
I can not comment on high speed skiing with them, but at slow speeds they carve smoothly on firm snow, and are forgiving and easy to ski in powder, even breakable crust I felt like I had a fighting chance.
I am 6’5”, 175lbs (plus kit), and have the 186 cm size.
Comment on this review:
3/4/2024
Hey guys! What ski would you recommend for someone who resembles goofy going down the mountain? Short of working on my form (probably never going to improve at this point), whats the best all around ski for skiing in really shitty conditions for someone who is really a terrible skier?
I'm always bumping my way down icy, bumpy mtn sides long after everyone else enjoyed the powder. I've currently got some bd helio carbon 88s that seem to work ok, but lately I've been thinking I need a little bit more ski under my foot. I love my helios on the uphill, but whats gonna help me look a little less out of control on the downhill (again, short of actually just becoming a better skier...)
I've been looking at these K2s for quite awhile. Will the extra weight of the skis and width help me feel a little more in control in comparison to my helio carbon 88s? Or is that not how it works at all? Should I be looking at a completely different ski? I'm 5'8" and 165lbs. Thanks!
I'm always bumping my way down icy, bumpy mtn sides long after everyone else enjoyed the powder. I've currently got some bd helio carbon 88s that seem to work ok, but lately I've been thinking I need a little bit more ski under my foot. I love my helios on the uphill, but whats gonna help me look a little less out of control on the downhill (again, short of actually just becoming a better skier...)
I've been looking at these K2s for quite awhile. Will the extra weight of the skis and width help me feel a little more in control in comparison to my helio carbon 88s? Or is that not how it works at all? Should I be looking at a completely different ski? I'm 5'8" and 165lbs. Thanks!
3/4/2024
Hi Jim,
A beefier, slightly wider ski will help in variable conditions - it will mute out some of the vibrations and imperfections in the snow a little better. However, I'm not sure this particular ski is your best bet if you want something forgiving. The Wayback is pretty stiff. I would look at the Salomon MTN Carbon 96for a touring ski that is still light on the uphill, but forgiving and damp on the downhill. It's a very nicely balanced all-around touring ski.
A beefier, slightly wider ski will help in variable conditions - it will mute out some of the vibrations and imperfections in the snow a little better. However, I'm not sure this particular ski is your best bet if you want something forgiving. The Wayback is pretty stiff. I would look at the Salomon MTN Carbon 96for a touring ski that is still light on the uphill, but forgiving and damp on the downhill. It's a very nicely balanced all-around touring ski.
Answer this question:
2/26/2024
How do these ski's perform on steep tight technical terrain with harder snow like a couloir?
2/27/2024
Thomas,
In general these will be well suited to steep skiing. They're stiff, and while the tips are fairly early rise, the rocker is mostly subtle. That said, they won't have the same edge hold as a ski with a longer effective edge like the Blizzard Zero G. Feel free to shoot us an email at help@skimo.co and we can get you more personalized suggestions!
In general these will be well suited to steep skiing. They're stiff, and while the tips are fairly early rise, the rocker is mostly subtle. That said, they won't have the same edge hold as a ski with a longer effective edge like the Blizzard Zero G. Feel free to shoot us an email at help@skimo.co and we can get you more personalized suggestions!
Answer this question:
12/16/2023
Hi,
how do you compare them to the Atomic backland 95. I am deciding between the two. I am 185 cm and 85 kg and I ski in every terrain, including the resort 80%/20%. I ski on the aggressive side and plan to pair them with the ATK raider 13evo. So far I've skied Black crows orb freebird but I didn't like them very much. Those skis felt soft to me and vibrated on a hard surface. K2 have a TI plate under the binding, is it an important detail? What length of ski would you recommend? Thank you for your advice
how do you compare them to the Atomic backland 95. I am deciding between the two. I am 185 cm and 85 kg and I ski in every terrain, including the resort 80%/20%. I ski on the aggressive side and plan to pair them with the ATK raider 13evo. So far I've skied Black crows orb freebird but I didn't like them very much. Those skis felt soft to me and vibrated on a hard surface. K2 have a TI plate under the binding, is it an important detail? What length of ski would you recommend? Thank you for your advice
12/16/2023
Hi Lubo,
Both the Backland and the Wayback will be stronger and damper skis than the Orb. The current Backland 95 received a significant refresh which made it a bit stiffer and more rockered than the previous ski. It is slightly stiffer to hand-flex than the K2, but both are pretty strong.
The biggest difference in skiing them I think will be the camber and turning radius. The Atomic is more cambered and has a tighter radius. It will want to make tighter turns when you put it on edge, and will provide more energy out of the turn when you push into it. The K2 will be happy making longer turns, and will have a more consistent and damp feel (rather than energetic) when pushed.
As for the titanal used in the Wayback 98, it extends a little past the bindings and should help with dampening as well as binding retention. It isn't uncommon for skis to have titanal reinforcement around the bindings, but this is a bit more than just a binding plate.
Both the Backland and the Wayback will be stronger and damper skis than the Orb. The current Backland 95 received a significant refresh which made it a bit stiffer and more rockered than the previous ski. It is slightly stiffer to hand-flex than the K2, but both are pretty strong.
The biggest difference in skiing them I think will be the camber and turning radius. The Atomic is more cambered and has a tighter radius. It will want to make tighter turns when you put it on edge, and will provide more energy out of the turn when you push into it. The K2 will be happy making longer turns, and will have a more consistent and damp feel (rather than energetic) when pushed.
As for the titanal used in the Wayback 98, it extends a little past the bindings and should help with dampening as well as binding retention. It isn't uncommon for skis to have titanal reinforcement around the bindings, but this is a bit more than just a binding plate.
12/17/2023
Hi Carlos,
Thank you for your response. I really appreciated it. As for binging retention, will it be equally strong in both skis or does the K2 have an advantage? I'm a bit leaning towards the new Backland (more playful and maybe better application in the resort), but I feel safer to have the titanal under the binding. Should titanal be decisive?
Thank you for your response. I really appreciated it. As for binging retention, will it be equally strong in both skis or does the K2 have an advantage? I'm a bit leaning towards the new Backland (more playful and maybe better application in the resort), but I feel safer to have the titanal under the binding. Should titanal be decisive?
12/17/2023
Hi Lubo,
If you are leaning towards the Backland, I would go with it! Binding pull-out is very rare with alpine touring bindings if the bindings are installed correctly, and the Backland is a sturdy ski. I would not hesitate to go with the Backland if it sounds like the more exciting ski for you!
If you are leaning towards the Backland, I would go with it! Binding pull-out is very rare with alpine touring bindings if the bindings are installed correctly, and the Backland is a sturdy ski. I would not hesitate to go with the Backland if it sounds like the more exciting ski for you!
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
