Long and heavy charger skis

[silverback]

Unless you are a really big guy, these are your skis. I skied them the back in the day, they take no prisoners. They will go over or thru anything you point them at at any speed. They have no speed limit. Just like now, not enough buyers to keep making this kind of ski. Rossignol Experience 98.

Item 764118 - Rossignol Experience 98 Skis 180 cm - Alpine Ski

www.geartrade.com

I demoed a pair of E98s back in it’s day. They were 188cm and the tune was questionable but I could not make them work for me. They were like 2x4s. Conditions were firm—a little icy in spots. I was around 165lbs, so there is that, but I regularly skied 190cm Stormrider Pros back then. They were soft like butter in comparison. That 188cm E98 should have a label on it saying it’s for skiers 200lbs and up.

 

[ski otter 2]

Unless you are a really big guy, these are your skis. I skied them the back in the day, they take no prisoners. They will go over or thru anything you point them at at any speed. They have no speed limit. Just like now, not enough buyers to keep making this kind of ski. Rossignol Experience 98.

Item 764118 - Rossignol Experience 98 Skis 180 cm - Alpine Ski

www.geartrade.com

Hi, having owned this ski and having used it as my main ski DD for some years, and beyond that for maybe half a dozen years plus total, I sort of agree (on groomers) and sort of disagree (on rough uneven and new snow, etc.), I guess. One caveat, I had the second longest version (@ 150 lbs/5' 10"), not the longest: the longest might have been more big charger.

The Experience 98 handles like a very aggressive, heavy, grabby-carve and stable fat GS sort of ski, with a bit shorter turn to it. Man, it really grabs the turn carve after initiating, and is a lot of fun; very stable, on groomers or rough groomers. But this ski has limits, in terms of versatility. It does not do well in variable/uneven off piste; it is heavy and awkward there and in bumps. A lot of work. Not a crud ski. Not a powder ski, unless there is little enough for things to not get uneven or rough, for it to bash through (and it does not do this at the level of a true charger, only some camparison). Not a tree ski either - just so heavy and awkward there.

(The Sender Squad also has this problem a bit, but partly makes up for that with its super stability realm otherwise - just too heavy and wide for big-tight bump/trees or lotsa demanding bumps one can't hero carve through, though the Sender Squad is better in off piste uneven, moguls and crud by a lot than the Experience 98 - if one can hero carve at speed (not straight line/jump, as the Faction CT 3.0 194 wants to do). Also, to eliminate the skis' heaviness, the Rossi management recommends moving this ski's mount point forward, as I've explained elsewhere. The ski gets mucho "turny" then.)

(The Black Ops 118 moved forward - I accidentally left out the "118" in my last post that mentioned this ski as a charger - does not have the same problem - not tending towards cumbersome. It is only 186, if that, and thus is fast but not like the Sender Squad 112. The 118 does charge, though, and is not troubled by almost any level of chop/crud on a powder day (for a lighter to mid sized skier, at least), in that way bombproof as any big time charger - again, except for the probable skier size limits. At the same time, the 118 is a true finesse ski also: it can finesse feather a turn, any turn, tight or long, just so fun for the right skier profiles.)

For me, at the time of the Exp 98, I was relieved to move on, to a combo of the Atomic Crimson TI 88/179 for old snow and the Atomic Ritual 102/182 for soft snow. Both those skis are sort of outdated now also, but at the time they shined, relatively speaking, for me. They were each a step better, in their respective realms, than my much-used Experience 98s.

 

[ski otter 2]

I demoed a pair of E98s back in it’s day. They were 188cm and the tune was questionable but I could not make them work for me. They were like 2x4s. Conditions were firm—a little icy in spots. I was around 165lbs, so there is that, but I regularly skied 190cm Stormrider Pros back then. They were soft like butter in comparison. That 188cm E98 should have a label on it saying it’s for skiers 200lbs and up.

Having owned this ski as my DDriver, and being only 150 lbs., I have to say the problem must have been the tune. In rough off piste, tight trees or big bumps, yes - like 2x4s a bit; though doable, not optimal. But on groomers or close (with a lot more tolerance for variable than a race ski), these skis were a stand out even for lighter weight skiers, and were a hit - sold well with unchanged design for quite a while for Rossi - for many, a baseline top ski for fat carver on edge, fast or slow. Made by one of the top race ski makers in the world.

 

[chris_the_wrench]

I picked up a new set of Blizzard Bonafides late spring on a warranty/credit deal. I usually ski just one ski(alpine) a year, this year I might do a two ski quiver. Ive never skied the cochise, and thought that would be my next ski(before the bonafides came into my life). I was just about to order some cochises when a doubt came into my mind. Trying to decide if the 97 bonafide and the 106 cochise are too close/similar. I would of preferred a brahma/cochise combo, but that didn’t work out.

 

[Tom K.]

I picked up a new set of Blizzard Bonafides late spring on a warranty/credit deal. I usually ski just one ski(alpine) a year, this year I might do a two ski quiver. Ive never skied the cochise, and thought that would be my next ski(before the bonafides came into my life). I was just about to order some cochises when a doubt came into my mind. Trying to decide if the 97 bonafide and the 106 cochise are too close/similar. I would of preferred a brahma/cochise combo, but that didn’t work out.

Bodacious? Too wide for our conditions? @markojp loves his.

 

[chris_the_wrench]

Bodacious? Too wide for our conditions? @markojp loves his.

118 is pretty wide, not sure how many days I would of used those over the last couple of years here... maybe 4-6??? For me, that's a pretty big investment with small percentage of use. 115 for the enforcer pro, looking at those again too.. but Im thinking 108-110, so maybe something like the commander 108. I keep coming back to the Cochise at 106, those 102's were plenty of float for 98% of the days last year.

 

[GregK]

I’d lean towards the new MPro 108 if you wanted a more traditional mounted ski that I bet would be more exciting on piste than the Cochise and similar off piste.

Of any Nordica, the new 191cm Unleashed 108 is less than 2 ounces less than an Enforcer Pro and 1m less turning radius but with less taper and much more effective edge. Should be a competent carver on soft groomers and hear it’s a riot off piste and in bumps. Won’t haul as hard as a charger but I bet it will still be respectable especially with some beefy bindings attached.
I’ll have overlap with it and still pondering snagging a pair myself.

 

[Tom K.]

118 is pretty wide, not sure how many days I would of used those over the last couple of years here... maybe 4-6??? For me, that's a pretty big investment with small percentage of use. 115 for the enforcer pro, looking at those again too.. but Im thinking 108-110, so maybe something like the commander 108. I keep coming back to the Cochise at 106, those 102's were plenty of float for 98% of the days last year.

Agree on the width thing. I've owned a couple pair of 116+ skis and they were too wide for me once things got cut up in a resort environment. Old knees is part of that.

FWIW I notice a distinct difference in float and general character when I switch from Enforcer 100s to Mindbender 108s, so I don't think the jump from a 97 Bonafide to a 106 Cochise is at all out of line, esp if they have a bit different character to go along with the width difference.

 

[JWMN]

Hi, having owned this ski and having used it as my main ski DD for some years, and beyond that for maybe half a dozen years plus total, I sort of agree (on groomers) and sort of disagree (on rough uneven and new snow, etc.), I guess. One caveat, I had the second longest version (@ 150 lbs/5' 10"), not the longest: the longest might have been more big charger.

The Experience 98 handles like a very aggressive, heavy, grabby-carve and stable fat GS sort of ski, with a bit shorter turn to it. Man, it really grabs the turn carve after initiating, and is a lot of fun; very stable, on groomers or rough groomers. But this ski has limits, in terms of versatility. It does not do well in variable/uneven off piste; it is heavy and awkward there and in bumps. A lot of work. Not a crud ski. Not a powder ski, unless there is little enough for things to not get uneven or rough, for it to bash through (and it does not do this at the level of a true charger, only some camparison). Not a tree ski either - just so heavy and awkward there.

(The Sender Squad also has this problem a bit, but partly makes up for that with its super stability realm otherwise - just too heavy and wide for big-tight bump/trees or lotsa demanding bumps one can't hero carve through, though the Sender Squad is better in off piste uneven, moguls and crud by a lot than the Experience 98 - if one can hero carve at speed (not straight line/jump, as the Faction CT 3.0 194 wants to do). Also, to eliminate the skis' heaviness, the Rossi management recommends moving this ski's mount point forward, as I've explained elsewhere. The ski gets mucho "turny" then.)

(The Black Ops 118 moved forward - I accidentally left out the "118" in my last post that mentioned this ski as a charger - does not have the same problem - not tending towards cumbersome. It is only 186, if that, and thus is fast but not like the Sender Squad 112. The 118 does charge, though, and is not troubled by almost any level of chop/crud on a powder day (for a lighter to mid sized skier, at least), in that way bombproof as any big time charger - again, except for the probable skier size limits. At the same time, the 118 is a true finesse ski also: it can finesse feather a turn, any turn, tight or long, just so fun for the right skier profiles.)

For me, at the time of the Exp 98, I was relieved to move on, to a combo of the Atomic Crimson TI 88/179 for old snow and the Atomic Ritual 102/182 for soft snow. Both those skis are sort of outdated now also, but at the time they shined, relatively speaking, for me. They were each a step better, in their respective realms, than my much-used Experience 98s.

Interesting take on the ski, as I bought it because for me it was a fantastic crud ski. It would go thru anything like it wasn't there. I had knee issues at the time and the E98 was a blessing for leveling out the crud after a snowfall. I agree they would have been a handful for a lighter skier. I was about 200 lbs at the time. However, I went to the E100 when it came out. It had all the strength of the 98 but was much easier to ski and easier on the knees. A former colligate racer I knew said it was the most powerful ski he had ever been on!
I am on the E86ti now, the best ski I have ever been on. Don't know how Rossi keeps making them better, but they do.

 

[Tom K.]

I am on the E86ti now, the best ski I have ever been on.

Also loving the E86ti, but we digress from the "charger" discussion...

 

[ski otter 2]

Interesting take on the ski, as I bought it because for me it was a fantastic crud ski. It would go thru anything like it wasn't there. I had knee issues at the time and the E98 was a blessing for leveling out the crud after a snowfall. I agree they would have been a handful for a lighter skier. I was about 200 lbs at the time. However, I went to the E100 when it came out. It had all the strength of the 98 but was much easier to ski and easier on the knees. A former colligate racer I knew said it was the most powerful ski he had ever been on!
I am on the E86ti now, the best ski I have ever been on. Don't know how Rossi keeps making them better, but they do.

The weight thing may be the difference between our Experiences - hah!, or that you may have had the longer ones, dunno.

For me, the Experience 98/184(?) had no speed limit on old snow groomers, even roughed up - skied on edge carving like a race ski; but it did have a definite speed limit in routine rough chopped crud (over 4-5") for my profile and in deeper chop/crud of all types, and it dove in powder over c. 4", and hooked in rough or deep powder/chop/crud unpredictably, had to ski it defensively.
To me, it was a poor soft snow ski.

For my profile, it was a revelation when I got the Atomic Rituals 102 at how much better these were at both powder and chop/crud.

And then a few years later, it was a revelation again how much better the Volkl V-Werks Katana was in really uneven, rough and deep chop/crud, as well as powder - so much more stable and bombproof than the Rituals even. (And thus the Exp 98s went bye-bye, since on just groomers, I found, once again, that I'd rather use race or near race skis.)

There have been even more solid chop/crud and off piste skis I've discovered since, lots of them these days, including some real tanks. I use the Katanas some still, but not as much, really. (And the Rituals went bye-bye also. )

 

[chris_the_wrench]

Chargery touring ski??

Im set for resort skis for this coming year with some Bonafides and Cochises. Thinking about swapping out my backcountry skis, for the right price. My current BC/Touring skis are black crows atris(about 2100 grams), that I didn't love as a lift served daily driver so they got relegated to my bc/touring ski. They are setup with Pivots/Cast system. They work pretty good, for me, in the soft snow, but Id prefer something with more stiffness for variable conditions. They are abit too 'turny' and 'surfy' for my taste. I want to stay in the mid 100 width. What stiff touring ski I should look at? Weight isn't my main concern, I want something that is fun to descend on and not an anchor on the uphill, but I'd prefer downhill performance to weight savings. I ski these with my hawx xtd 130s.

Volkl Katana Vwerks have been on my radar for awhile, but I never found them at a price I was willing to pay. Anyone put much time on the zero g 105? Other ideas?

 

[slow-line-fast]

Chargery touring ski??

Anyone put much time on the zero g 105? Other ideas?

Yes, it’s a good contender for a category that is hard to pull off, and is substantially lighter than what you currently have. Can be twitchy on hardpack without just-so detuning, but great in softer snow and generally surprisingly powerful for its weight.

 

[ski otter 2]

Chargery touring ski??

Im set for resort skis for this coming year with some Bonafides and Cochises. Thinking about swapping out my backcountry skis, for the right price. My current BC/Touring skis are black crows atris(about 2100 grams), that I didn't love as a lift served daily driver so they got relegated to my bc/touring ski. They are setup with Pivots/Cast system. They work pretty good, for me, in the soft snow, but Id prefer something with more stiffness for variable conditions. They are abit too 'turny' and 'surfy' for my taste. I want to stay in the mid 100 width. What stiff touring ski I should look at? Weight isn't my main concern, I want something that is fun to descend on and not an anchor on the uphill, but I'd prefer downhill performance to weight savings. I ski these with my hawx xtd 130s.

Volkl Katana Vwerks have been on my radar for awhile, but I never found them at a price I was willing to pay. Anyone put much time on the zero g 105? Other ideas?

I have a pair of 184 V-Werks Katanas I want to sell, because I have two other pairs, 184 & 191. Never drilled, in the wrapper new. Inexpensive, maybe $400 plus shipping extra (or Colorado pickup). (With a very few all time favorite skis, I've gotten backups, which I may or may not ever use.)

It's lightweight (c. 1950 gms) and skis really well in off piste, variable, powder and crud. Quick turning in soft bumps and trees, but also stable at longer turns and charging. (It also carves groomers well.) Good for lighter and mid-weight skiers, rather than really big or heavy guys, at this length, seems like. (The Blistergear reviews of these are accurate and high praise; the biggest difference for me is they work at lower speeds also, once one gets even a bit used to them.)
(Mine are the second graphics, mostly white ones with some black and some red. Maybe five years old or so. Unchanged since it came out in 14/15, except for graphics.)
(I turn out to use the longer 191s more often, and have another pair of the 184s.)

 

[chris_the_wrench]

I have a pair of 184 V-Werks Katanas I want to sell,

Dang, 191’s for me.

 

[GregK]

Moment Commander Tour would be perfect. Still has metal dampening of the regular version but a lighter core so it’s just below 2000gr in the 188cm length.

Was never a fan of the Atris either.

 

[ScottB]

I have the zero g 108 and it skis like a lightweight Cochise, do on the charger class and very light

 

[BmbrMcGnrly]

Read through the thread but could use some thoughts.

Looking for a ski for steep and technical terrain, as well as something that blasts through crud. Stability and composure at speed are my priorities - I want confidence when things get fast. Thinking I’ll bust it out when I go through chutes at back bowls, and when things on-piste are chopped up but I still want to get some speed. For the above reasons, heavy ski with long turning radius seems to be the ticket.

Debating a Blizzard Cochise 106 @ 192 (found a good deal on a new one) vs Pro-Rider (friend of a friends has found an ex-demo one… I’ll know for sure in a month)

Do I pull the trigger on the cochise now, or wait until I can grab that pro-rider… if it really exists!

 

[Rod9301]

I have a pair of 184 V-Werks Katanas I want to sell, because I have two other pairs, 184 & 191. Never drilled, in the wrapper new. Inexpensive, maybe $400 plus shipping extra (or Colorado pickup). (With a very few all time favorite skis, I've gotten backups, which I may or may not ever use.)

It's lightweight (c. 1950 gms) and skis really well in off piste, variable, powder and crud. Quick turning in soft bumps and trees, but also stable at longer turns and charging. (It also carves groomers well.) Good for lighter and mid-weight skiers, rather than really big or heavy guys, at this length, seems like. (The Blistergear reviews of these are accurate and high praise; the biggest difference for me is they work at lower speeds also, once one gets even a bit used to them.)
(Mine are the second graphics, mostly white ones with some black and some red. Maybe five years old or so. Unchanged since it came out in 14/15, except for graphics.)
(I turn out to use the longer 191s more often, and have another pair of the 184s.)

Great ski

 

[chris_the_wrench]

Read through the thread but could use some thoughts.

Looking for a ski for steep and technical terrain, as well as something that blasts through crud. Stability and composure at speed are my priorities - I want confidence when things get fast. Thinking I’ll bust it out when I go through chutes at back bowls, and when things on-piste are chopped up but I still want to get some speed. For the above reasons, heavy ski with long turning radius seems to be the ticket.

Debating a Blizzard Cochise 106 @ 192 (found a good deal on a new one) vs Pro-Rider (friend of a friends has found an ex-demo one… I’ll know for sure in a month)

Do I pull the trigger on the cochise now, or wait until I can grab that pro-rider… if it really exists!

I looked for a couple of months but I never found a new set of pro-riders or whatever they are being called now days so I bought the 192 Cochise. Haven' t skied them yet, but Im REALLY looking forward to trying them out.