• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Individual Review Long-Term Review: 2018 Nordica Navigator 85

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,453
. I need a single ski for mostly on-piste and for building skills. Ended up buying a pair of iKonic 84ti in 2019.
Wow, that’s really the wrong ski for that. Glad you got the Navigators flattened out!
 

tball

Unzipped
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,362
Location
Denver, CO
After having them sit 1-1/2 years, I finally got out on my new Navigator 85s yesterday. The performance was pretty much as Phil (and everyone else) has described, very easy going, but with a nice finish at the tail if you want it. My first impression was the weight...compared to the old Fischers they will be replacing, they are quite light. Second impression was that they feel like they ski just a "bit" short, no doubt because my other skis are "traditional" in shape and camber. But I never felt they were too short. If I had the opportunity to try the next length back to back, maybe I would go longer...maybe. I did love how well they cranked short turns, and they skied effortlessly. Definitely one of my better equipment purchases.
Would you mind sharing the ski length and your approx stats? Curious as I have both short and long, and I like the short ones better.
 

johnnyvw

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Posts
1,665
Location
near RDU
I picked up a pair of these at the end of last season in 172 length. 2021/22 "CA" model with the Marker TP2 Light 11 FDT system binding.

Background: 5'11", 175lb, 67 yr old, 8-10 days-per-year intermediate skier with modest skills. Following a 25 year hiatus, I returned to skiing 5 seasons ago. I live in Phoenix and it is hard to demo skis, not much selection here and what was available was mostly fat skis. I need a single ski for mostly on-piste and for building skills. Ended up buying a pair of iKonic 84ti in 2019. These skis are fast and carvy but I was struggling a bit with slower speed maneuvering in moguls and on steeps. Rather than blaming my obviously lacking technique, I decided I should look for something more on the "finesse" side of the Pugski "Power" scale. Navigator 85 came to the top of the list based on reviews here and a hat tip to @mdf who skis these all over the mountain and likes them so much he has multiple pairs!

So, got the new Navigators in March last year and took them out one day. Not impressed. Another day in early January this season. Still not feeling the love. :(

OK, went up to Purgatory a couple weeks ago and took them along to give them one last chance. Decided to stop in the shop and have them check out the tune. The guy put a straightedge on them and said, "Hmm, a bit edge high." You could see light coming under the straightedge. Ok, "mini-tune" and fresh wax later, I skied them for two days and WOW. What a difference! After quickly gaining comfort on the groomers, I started exploring a bit of the ungroomed chop and some smaller moguls. I definitely felt like I could maneuver these effortlessly. Two days of glorious fun. "This is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
:daffy:

Interestingly, my pair was made in Ukraine. Perhaps that's how they achieve the lower price point. Wonder what's going on with that factory given the war situation?

And a shout out to @johnnyvw not only for bumping this thread, but for the VW Avatar. I had a green '68 (many years ago!)
That's pretty much why I stopped doing "demo" skis at resorts...the tunes were all over the place, some basically unskiable. And the few times I got onto a ski I liked, when I bought my own pair they didn't feel the same. The tune makes a huge difference...glad you like your skis now
I pretty much traded in a new set of Liberty V76 skis for these. Those felt "planky", and I couldnt get the tails to release as easily as I like a ski to do. I even had them retuned...same as before.

My pair was also made in Ukraine. When the s*** hit the fan over there, I was wondering if these skis were going to be unobtainable...that would be a shame.

My avatar is my current toy...hoping to have it fixed up the way I want it this year. Redoing the rear suspension with Porsche 944 torsion bars, adding disk brakes, and I have a couple of more powerful motors lined up. 69, btw. so close to what you had except mine has the IRS rear suspension instead of the swing axle (unless yours was an autostick)
 
Last edited:

johnnyvw

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Posts
1,665
Location
near RDU
Would you mind sharing the ski length and your approx stats? Curious as I have both short and long, and I like the short ones better.
I'm 5'8", about 190 lbs. Been skiing most of the last 46 years (I'm 68) I've always had to rely on technique over power. I got the 172, as it was in the "neighborhood" of every other ski I've had the last 20 years. If I was younger and skied faster, the 179 may have been better, but so far I'm really liking what I've got
 

zircon

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Posts
808
Location
I can’t believe it’s not England!
Timely bump to this thread. I'm going to derail it toward this ski's narrower cousin, I'm a known Navigator 80 evangelist. The original version before the system binding. After demoing a Navigator 80 several times back in the day, I fell completely in love with how they were easy and friendly but deceptively businesslike when pushed, cursed myself for not buying them, and spent the next couple seasons tracking down a pair. Finally found my very own pair of Navigator 80s (2020 version) and there they sat in my closet for the better part of a year.

Now, a confession. I've spent 8 ski days struggling to make friends with mine. Embarrassingly so. Thought I needed to go back and edit all my SkiTalk posts about it. First, I got them mounted in the spring straight out of the wrapper. They weren't anywhere near flat and I couldn't find the edges. Started this season with a fresh tune from a reputable shop. Aaand... could not dial in my fore-aft balance to save my life. Constantly felt like I was sitting on the tails. I could make them work with a lot of effort, but the easy button feeling was missing. On several occasions I hooked an outside edge on green groomers and almost ate it. Begin the second guessing. I'd waffled between a 158 and 165 and ended up with the 165 by necessity (no 158s left in the world at the time of purchase). Maybe I picked wrong? I had them mounted flat with Marker X-Cell bindings and all my other bindings are Tyrolia. Maybe I was more sensitive to bindings than I thought? I started conspiring to remount, researching how to plug overlapped holes, etc. Or maybe I've just forgotten how to ski.

Boring story more boring, like @teejaywhy I handed them over to the on-mountain shop at Sunday River. Let them upsell me to the full tune with hot wax, even though I was pretty sure I just needed edges touched up. Pleased to report, the magic is back. Tip them over to make big (relative term) angles? Check. Cranking out a million short radius turns? Check. The ice bumps I tend to avoid on the side of the groomers? Check. We are best friends now. Honestly, for an early intermediate through slower/lighter advanced skier, these are a whole lot of a good thing. Bendy, but will hold on hardpack as well as you can expect an all-mountain ski. Has a definite sense of humor about mistakes, with enough backbone to recover but not so much as to spank you. Really just all-around fun. I'm sad to see the Navigators dropped from the lineup. Best ski nobody ever buys, apparently.
 

zircon

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Posts
808
Location
I can’t believe it’s not England!
I guess the Enforcer 88 was supposed to replace the Navigator 90? I've not been on it, but it's a pretty different shape. And a burlier ski than the Nav. Don't know if there's a replacement for the 85/80 in the works.
 

teejaywhy

Retired Eccentric
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Posts
1,245
Location
AZ
I love thread revivals. Were the Navigators replaced by the Enforcers?
The Navigator can still be found on the Nordica web site; however, since last season:
- Offerings include 75, 80 and 85 underfoot. No more 90.
- The added moniker "CA," which means ?? Carbon? (No metal?) Canada? California? Some debate about this...
- Sold only with system binding, no flat skis.

https://www.nordica.com/usa/en/men/skis/all-mountain/navigator
 

johnnyvw

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Posts
1,665
Location
near RDU
From everything I've read, the Navigator is slotted below the Enforcer series in the line-up. An "easier" ski, and cheaper due to where it's built. I think most people let ego get in the way of enjoying a ski like this. As FairToMiddlin said, it's a good ski for 80% of skiers.
I guess I'm lucky that the bases on my skis are perfect out of the box. I was a little nervous going out on new skis for the first time, not knowing how they would work for me (in recent years I've purchased boots and skis that just didn't work for me, no matter how hard I tried). I just did a little tip and tail detune and put on some wax, and I had an absolute ball on them.
According to Nordica, the skis use a "hex bridge" construction, which apparently contains some metal. Maybe an "expanded" metal? Would be interesting if someone with insider info could enlighten us...

BTW, mine have the "system" bindings.
 

tball

Unzipped
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,362
Location
Denver, CO
I'm 5'8", about 190 lbs. Been skiing most of the last 46 years (I'm 68) I've always had to rely on technique over power. I got the 172, as it was in the "neighborhood" of every other ski I've had the last 20 years. If I was younger and skied faster, the 179 may have been better, but so far I'm really liking what I've got
Thanks. I also prefer the 172 at 5'10", 175-190lbs (I need to get back to 175!).

I have the old Navigator 80 and 90 with Ti, both in 172 and 179, and I like the shorter ski much better to the point I'm thinking I'll unload the longer ski. If anyone has a 172 Navigator Ti in any width, I'll buy them from you!

Question: Has anyone skied on the old Navigator Ti and the current Navigator CA and is willing to comment on the differences?
 

tball

Unzipped
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,362
Location
Denver, CO
- The added moniker "CA," which means ?? Carbon? (No metal?) Canada? California? Some debate about this...
My understanding from following this for a while is that CA is carbon without metal, whereas the old Ti skis had metal. There was a year or two when they sold both.

I guess the Enforcer 88 was supposed to replace the Navigator 90? I've not been on it, but it's a pretty different shape. And a burlier ski than the Nav. Don't know if there's a replacement for the 85/80 in the works.
I'm not sure of the current Enforcer, but back when I bought my Navigator 90 it was said to be the same ski as the Enforcer but with a squared-off tail.

For a little context, the Navigator Ti 90 is too burly for me in a 179, while I skied a Nordica Steadfast 179 for years.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,604
Location
PNW aka SEA
My understanding from following this for a while is that CA is carbon without metal, whereas the old Ti skis had metal. There was a year or two when they sold both.


I'm not sure of the current Enforcer, but back when I bought my Navigator 90 it was said to be the same ski as the Enforcer but with a squared-off tail.

For a little context, the Navigator Ti 90 is too burly for me in a 179, while I skied a Nordica Steadfast 179 for years.

The Navigators had one sheet of metal vs. 2 for the enforcers. The forebody, tip, AND tail were significantly different in rocker profile and shape as well.

I put the Nav 90 ti in a similar category as the old Head Rev 85 Pro... great skis that somehow got labeled as intermediate skis rather than stunningly versatile with great tip engagement.
 

jetwolverine

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Posts
22
Location
Virginia
Thanks. I also prefer the 172 at 5'10", 175-190lbs (I need to get back to 175!).

I have the old Navigator 80 and 90 with Ti, both in 172 and 179, and I like the shorter ski much better to the point I'm thinking I'll unload the longer ski. If anyone has a 172 Navigator Ti in any width, I'll buy them from you!

Question: Has anyone skied on the old Navigator Ti and the current Navigator CA and is willing to comment on the differences?
Are you still looking? Found a pair on Facebook.
Located in New Milford, CT
 

teejaywhy

Retired Eccentric
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Posts
1,245
Location
AZ
Well, I guess it's the end of the line for the Nordica Navigator. Coming in 23/24 is the Steadfast.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
Well, I guess it's the end of the line for the Nordica Navigator. Coming in 23/24 is the Steadfast.
Which is a completely different animal.
 

johnnyvw

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Dec 20, 2016
Posts
1,665
Location
near RDU
I wonder if the fact they are made in Ukraine had anything to do with it? Talk about supply chain issues...
 

Sponsor

Staff online

  • Dwight
    Practitioner of skiing, solid and liquid
Top