Ski: 2024-2025 K2 Reckoner 124, 189 cm
Available Lengths: 159, 169, 179, 189 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length (straight-tape pull): 188.3 cm
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 2423 & 2446 grams
Stated Dimensions: 150-124-148 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 149-123.5-147 mm
Stated Sidecut Radius (189 cm): 25 meters
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 85 mm / 68 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 3.5 mm
Core Materials: aspen + “spectral braid” + carbon stringers + fiberglass laminate
Base: sintered
Factory Recommended Mount Point: -5.3 cm from center; 88.8 cm from tail
[Editor’s Note: In the interest of getting you information sooner on some of the products we’re reviewing, we’re posting here some of our measured specs and manufacturer details, and will update in the future. Take a look, and let us know in the Comments Section below what questions you’d like us to answer.]
What K2 says about the Reckoner 124
“The Reckoner 124 is a dedicated powder twin-tip built to crush pillows, send cornices, and boost wind lips. A high and long rise in the tip and tail and its lightweight construction helps this ski float through the soft stuff. This versatile powder crusher will keep you spinning tricks from first chair to last.”
For much more information on the whole new 2024-2025 Reckoner series, plus K2’s other new skis and ski boots, check out our writeup on K2’s 2024-2025 collection.
Flex Pattern
Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Reckoner 124:
Tips: 6-6.5
Shovels: 6.5-7.5
In Front of Toe Piece: 8-10
Underfoot: 10
Behind the Heel Piece: 10-8
Tails: 7.5-6
The Reckoner 124 is a pretty soft ski in the grand scheme, and its flex pattern is fairly symmetrical overall. That said, of the 24/25 Reckoner skis, the Reckoner 124 is likely the stiffest of the bunch.
Stay Tuned…
We’ve started spending time on all the new Reckoner skis, including the Reckoner 124. Keep an eye out for updates, including a Flash Review in the future, and let us know of any questions you have.
K2 putting weight back in skis!
I’m sensing a shift…….
As I recall, these ski models last year liked a more upright stance, and were a bit soft to be chargers. The weight and stiffness underfoot of this ski,
with the softer tips and tails, made me wonder how it compares to the K2 powder/crud chargers of old. I look forward to your reviews of
this, especially if you review the 189 version. (You used to review the longest versions of powder/crud skis, but for the past few years
you have done this less often, with a number of wider skis, unfortunately. I suspect it depends a lot on what lengths the ski brands send you.)
“I suspect it depends a lot on what lengths the ski brands send you.”
Ah, the old “I suspect …” statement. I would really love to move to a world where, rather than people suspecting and speculating, they’d just ask. Since at least most of the “I suspect” statements I’ve seen out there about BLISTER have proven to be incorrect.
In 99% of cases, we request the lengths of skis we think it makes the most sense for our team to review. Sometimes, that is dictated by the length in a given model that the 1 or 2 reviewers here at Blister who will be taking the lead on the review of a particular ski would be choosing for themselves. Get whatever length actually matches the reviewer(s) who will be on it.
But in a case where we could go with a longer length, but where we could also reasonably drop down to a shorter length right below it and it wouldn’t feel like a pair of ski blades, we’re trying to go with the shorter lengths. Why?
Relevance.
Ask every manufacturer out there what percentage of skis they sell in the longest length of a given model. When we start moving into skis that are 190cms long – or longer – the answer in most cases is… in the ballpark of less than 1%.
Again, we do this on a case-by-case basis, so there are a lot of exceptions to that.
But as a generalization, we’re already – frequently – reviewing models in lengths longer than a lot of the public will buy for themselves. If we are always calling in skis in the longest lengths, all the time, we’ll be moving even further away from the vast majority of the purchasing public.
We do sometimes call in skis in multiple lengths. But we already review more skis (like, actually put real time on more skis) than any publication out there, so to start calling in multiple lengths in everything isn’t really feasible.
As we continue to build out our Community Reviews, that’s where we can have our community weighing in on multiple lengths of skis – from the shortest lengths to the longest lengths.