2018 Ski Reviews: single run, off-piste demoing!
Here is a link to the mashed potato snow conditions, skiing a steep pitch under the run.
Wade and I had a chance to ski 16 different skis at the recent Sierra-at-Tahoe demo. The conditions were “interesting”, as 3 feet of snow that had fallen 72 hours prior had since become quite heavy; temps were in the mid 40's when we arrived at 9am, and soon climbed into the low 50's. The testing was limited to a run on each ski, straight underneath the chair, which provides a nice steep liftline pitch approaching 40 degrees at the top, and some mid-angle (30-35 degree) bumps toward the bottom. The snow transitioned from easy, grippy hero snow in the first hour to mashed potatoes soon thereafter. Attached is a quick video clip of what the conditions looked like; the video was shot on a short, steep pitch near the top of the main Sierra-at-tahoe liftline.
About Wade and I: he is 5 foot 11, 162lbs, and I am 5 foot 9, 160lbs. He is a longtime L3, whereas I am a fairly adept technical skier, without a teaching background. Wade typically likes a rounder, brushed turn (low angle carve), whereas I am more direct in my line, looking for a ski with some rebound energy and feedback. If he were skiing bumps for example, it would be across the fall line, incorporating 2 or 3 into one turn, whereas I tend to stay in the fall line, often the zipper line for bumps. We agreed on the relative ranking for 75% of the skis: the other 25% that was the primary source of disagreement were likely due to the type of turn I like, the type of turn he likes, and the type of turn the ski likes. The best of these will handle multiple turn shapes and speeds; versatility sets them apart.
We primarily focused on off-piste skis, or those that would be taken off-piste. We didn't ski the product we personally own (FX95HP for example) as each of us have more than enough time on those skis to make a determination of how they perform.
Rather than try to rank each ski individually, I have grouped them by overall impression and letter grades
A (the standouts of the test): Stockli Stormrider 95, Scale Delta, Laser AX, Kastle MX84, MX89, Nordica Navigator 90
These A-rated skis all share one thing in common: they ski with more ease, more predictability, and will make a wider range of turn shapes vs the rest of the skis tested.
Stormrider 95 175cm: very, very nice ski. At Copper, it was the best ski tested, and among the top few here. A bit of rocker at the tip, enough to be surfy and not super aggressive when starting a new turn. The tail is solid and strong; it likes to be skied from the ball of the foot. Wider brushed turns, more aggressive turns in the fall line, quick edge to edge carved turns: it does it all. One of the easiest skis I have been on; buttery and damp, almost too damp. The 95 feels like an unfair advantage.
Scale Delta: Wade skied this, I didn't ski it for some reason. Length was 177cm, (Large). It was in his top 3; he was raving about the early rise, the bit thinner metal layup, the mount point, the overall feel of the ski, ease of turn initiation, stability. Basically, in his mind, a perfect ski for the less aggressive, technically adept skier looking for a true narrower all-mountain ski. I have skied the older model, which I loved. I found it to be a bit softer, more playful, slightly wider AX type of feel. It is a touch softer, has a different tip profile. Check it out for a versatile, easy to ski in mixed conditions type of ski for people who don't need a ski that has insane stability
Laser AX 175cm: I was the only person to demo the AX: Wade had skied it last year and liked it a lot, enough to buy a pair (before swapping to an MX74). My overall impressions are the same as always: a very technically-oriented all-mountain ski that holds it's own in sweeping groomer turns at speed. The AX is laughably forgiving and easy in junky snow; bumps; any turn shape you want to make. Another ski that somehow reads my mind. A very fun ski on groomers as well, technically superb, precise. It will make you a better skier and expose flaws, without punishing you for those flaws. Only drawback is the Stockli perhaps being a bit damp and low energy for some.
Kastle MX89 (172cm: )another one of our “top 3”. The tail on the MX89 is very forgiving, such an improvement over the MX88. The old tail had a fairy aggressive sidecut; the current tail releases well in junk snow and greatly enhances the versatility of the 98. I found this to be another ski in the top 5 overall of forgiveness: any turn shape, any line, any release. The MX89 does it all, but beyond that, it provides the skier with a ton of feedback, both positive and negative. Were you in balance, and did you nail that release? The MX89 is rewarding, and will put a smile on your face? Back seat, skiing poorly? The MX89 won't necessarily punish you, but will remind you to get your act together. A bit off topic, but this a big reason that so many people love Kastle, and some hate it. If you are coming from a new school, bounce around on the tail type of ski, the Kastle won't be a fun choice. Those from a race or technical background, or those who wish to ski well technically, will love the precision and feedback. Of course, not matter what ski you are on, backseat driving won't help you in the bumps: getting down the hill is not the same as ripping it, and that is why skis without a real tail may allow bad skiers to get away with remaining bad, it isn't the same as helping a skier to improve so they can ski that steep bump run or chute, smoothly and in control.
Kastle MX84 176cm: Wade had the 84 roughly 4th: it was my top ski of the day. I never fail to be amazed at how good the 84 is in junk snow and bumps, given the precision, sportiness, and top end of this ski. Wade commmented that it liked to be skied from edge to edge; it was the only ski he was carving the crud up on. Seeing his tracks from the chair leant legitimacy to that sensation; railroad tracks instead of the brushed scarves from earlier runs. The MX84 loves my style of skiing: snappy, looking for feedback, a bit higher edge angle, precision; for all of these characteristics, the MX84 was, for me, as easy to ski in the heavy crud as any ski we tried. Perhaps easier, as I was able to utilize rebound from the turn as release and direction into the new turn. It loved early edge angle, active feet: the 84 seems to ask for my best skiing, and is so rewarding yet forgiving that I trust it completely. It also goes without saying that the 84 will power any groomer like a race ski, although we didn't have it on groomers during this test. The 84 and 74 remain in my top 5 “all-time skis”.
Nordica Navigator 90 high 170's: the only non-premium ski to make the top group. It has early rise (but no significant taper), a perfect tip and tail flex, and great feel underfoot. A huge step up from the NRGY, which was mediocre, at best. The new Nordica also made any shape turn, any edge angle, and ease of use was above any of the “mass market” skis. We both loved it. It did feel a little more vague to me compared to the Kastle and Stockli product, but that may not be an issue for most skiers. I crave that feedback. Very competent in steeper, short swing turns: easy in bumps, nice forgiving feel at the tip. I didn't get groomer time on it, but am interested to see how it stacks up against the very well regarded Stockli and Kastle product here. As an off-piste ski however, it was right up there with the top skis in the land. It is the ski that the Enforcer 93 should be! Perfect ski-anywhere companion. If on a budget, I would definitely own it: reminds me of the old Fischer Motive 95 in terms of shape and versatility, and the Rossi 88HD in terms of turn shape adaptability.
B: solid efforts, worth examining further
Atomic Vantage CTI 100 180cm-ish: this was my “best of the rest” ski. The Vantage is titanium and carbon, a different layup for 2018, but not being an Atomic dealer, I don't know much more than that. On the steep pitch we tested, the Vantage was quite laterally stiff, perhaps a bit too “edgy” which cost it a position in the top group. It was a bit too laterally touchy at the tip, not as willing to adjust edge angle as the top skis. With that said, outside of the aggressive tip, the rest of the ski was balanced and easy. I felt the ski made a very round turn, in addition to a more aggressive L-shaped turn. Energy upon release was moderate, something I appreciate. It isn't a floppy ski, the top end is substantial, and I found it relatively easy to ski, although it would be on the more demanding side when compared to the skis listed here.
Salomon QST 92 178cm-ish: The 92 I knew literally nothing about: supposedly it is their “lighter and softer” QST, but it really held up. A great ski in junk snow, really balanced. Lacking edge bite and energy, but I knew exactly what to expect in mashed potato bumps. Very easy to tip in and ride the sidecut trough the turn. The ski could use a bit more aggressive tune: it did feel a bit spoony, due to lack of metal perhaps, and perhaps due to it being not an expert-level ski. I wouldn't necessarily buy it for my purposes, but it can make a whole lot of people happy.
Blizzard Rustler 10-180cm-ish: similar comments to the QST 92, but a wider version. Even though a 102 is typically out of my everyday, firmer snow range, I liked the quickness of this ski; it was light, held well, released very easily, and refused to take me for a ride. I was in total control on every turn on the 10. Downsides: a little soft for bigger turns and high speeds. It could use a bit of beef, something in between this flex and the Bonafide would be ideal for my weight and skiing style.
Blizzard Bonafide 180cm: The Bonafide (revised for 2018) had a much improved tail over the 2017; it also seems to ski softer than the old model, with a bit more energy. It liked a round, fairly deliberate turn, good stability, easy to release in steeps. With that said, it fought me when taking a more direct line, working steeps in a more fall-line, L-shaped pattern. It did not like this turn, felt overly aggressive at the tip when tipped into higher edge angles. I did get this ski on groomers, it was very good there. Wade really liked it, and he skis a bit lower energy, rounder turn than I do. Match your skiing style with this ski.
C or D grades: needs work, something is off with all of these models. Perhaps they just suck.
Volkl Ninety Eight 178cm ish: On paper, this is quite similar to the QST92. On snow, not so much. Wade and I both hated it. Spoony, almost edgeless, with an overly aggressive, almost laterally boosted tip. Very unpredictable, even in mashed potatoes, and it sucked on the groomer. It seemed like a ski designed for intermediates by expert skiers who think all intermediates are low skill and hopeless, rather than a ski designed to take intermediates off-piste and build confidence and skill. Not a fan.
Blizzard Brahma CA 180cm: wow, this ski was a handful. Edgy, aggressive, light, underdamped. It was hard to find a redeeming quality on the CA for either of us. I really like the new Brahma, and the CA should be a mellower version of that ski. If anything it was more demanding, almost like the reduction of metal reduced the balance of the ski. It was aggressive and had a mind of it's own. Normally, I would write this off as a potential tune issue, but I had similar reports out of the Copper demo from other testers. Definitely try before you buy.
Salomon XDR 88Ti 178cm-ish: A true Jekyll and Hyde ski. The tip and tail were not matched whatsoever. The tip has a shape reminiscent of the Nordica NRGy: friendly, rocker, not that much on-piste performance, likely geared toward upper intermediates, lower energy skiers. The tail is full-on, strongest of any ski in this test. The result is a total mis-mash of character. Is the ski a hard snow groomer ripper, or a soft off-piste ski? Lack of forgiveness in the tail suggest the latter. Soft tip, almost nothing in the way of a technical tip-in, suggests the former. Demanding yet low performance at the same time.
Incomplete: skis with a poor tune that deserve another chance.
Rossignol Experience 88 HD 178cm ish: I loved this ski last year. It reminded me of the new Nordica Navigator 90: relaxed, balanced, ready for any turn and any energy level. This year's experience was completely the opposite. Both Wade and I found it edgy, aggressive, laterally much too stiff and jerky. Did the 88 develop an addiction to meth? It has to be the tune, as the ski didn't change.
Kastle LX85 168cm: I only skied this off-piste, and amongst my reviews, I put it in my top 4. Buttery smooth, akin to the Stockli AX in terms of terrain adaptability Precise with the ability to read minds, and laughably easy to ski. Wade took a run on it, mostly groomers and bumps, and found it much too aggressive. Considering the LX is a softer, more relaxed version of the MX (which won our mutual admiration), I am chalking this up to a bad tune. Reports coming out of Copper were of the LX being amongst the best of the test; we both agreed that it was likely a tune issue.
Here is a link to the mashed potato snow conditions, skiing a steep pitch under the run.
Wade and I had a chance to ski 16 different skis at the recent Sierra-at-Tahoe demo. The conditions were “interesting”, as 3 feet of snow that had fallen 72 hours prior had since become quite heavy; temps were in the mid 40's when we arrived at 9am, and soon climbed into the low 50's. The testing was limited to a run on each ski, straight underneath the chair, which provides a nice steep liftline pitch approaching 40 degrees at the top, and some mid-angle (30-35 degree) bumps toward the bottom. The snow transitioned from easy, grippy hero snow in the first hour to mashed potatoes soon thereafter. Attached is a quick video clip of what the conditions looked like; the video was shot on a short, steep pitch near the top of the main Sierra-at-tahoe liftline.
About Wade and I: he is 5 foot 11, 162lbs, and I am 5 foot 9, 160lbs. He is a longtime L3, whereas I am a fairly adept technical skier, without a teaching background. Wade typically likes a rounder, brushed turn (low angle carve), whereas I am more direct in my line, looking for a ski with some rebound energy and feedback. If he were skiing bumps for example, it would be across the fall line, incorporating 2 or 3 into one turn, whereas I tend to stay in the fall line, often the zipper line for bumps. We agreed on the relative ranking for 75% of the skis: the other 25% that was the primary source of disagreement were likely due to the type of turn I like, the type of turn he likes, and the type of turn the ski likes. The best of these will handle multiple turn shapes and speeds; versatility sets them apart.
We primarily focused on off-piste skis, or those that would be taken off-piste. We didn't ski the product we personally own (FX95HP for example) as each of us have more than enough time on those skis to make a determination of how they perform.
Rather than try to rank each ski individually, I have grouped them by overall impression and letter grades
A (the standouts of the test): Stockli Stormrider 95, Scale Delta, Laser AX, Kastle MX84, MX89, Nordica Navigator 90
These A-rated skis all share one thing in common: they ski with more ease, more predictability, and will make a wider range of turn shapes vs the rest of the skis tested.
Stormrider 95 175cm: very, very nice ski. At Copper, it was the best ski tested, and among the top few here. A bit of rocker at the tip, enough to be surfy and not super aggressive when starting a new turn. The tail is solid and strong; it likes to be skied from the ball of the foot. Wider brushed turns, more aggressive turns in the fall line, quick edge to edge carved turns: it does it all. One of the easiest skis I have been on; buttery and damp, almost too damp. The 95 feels like an unfair advantage.
Scale Delta: Wade skied this, I didn't ski it for some reason. Length was 177cm, (Large). It was in his top 3; he was raving about the early rise, the bit thinner metal layup, the mount point, the overall feel of the ski, ease of turn initiation, stability. Basically, in his mind, a perfect ski for the less aggressive, technically adept skier looking for a true narrower all-mountain ski. I have skied the older model, which I loved. I found it to be a bit softer, more playful, slightly wider AX type of feel. It is a touch softer, has a different tip profile. Check it out for a versatile, easy to ski in mixed conditions type of ski for people who don't need a ski that has insane stability
Laser AX 175cm: I was the only person to demo the AX: Wade had skied it last year and liked it a lot, enough to buy a pair (before swapping to an MX74). My overall impressions are the same as always: a very technically-oriented all-mountain ski that holds it's own in sweeping groomer turns at speed. The AX is laughably forgiving and easy in junky snow; bumps; any turn shape you want to make. Another ski that somehow reads my mind. A very fun ski on groomers as well, technically superb, precise. It will make you a better skier and expose flaws, without punishing you for those flaws. Only drawback is the Stockli perhaps being a bit damp and low energy for some.
Kastle MX89 (172cm: )another one of our “top 3”. The tail on the MX89 is very forgiving, such an improvement over the MX88. The old tail had a fairy aggressive sidecut; the current tail releases well in junk snow and greatly enhances the versatility of the 98. I found this to be another ski in the top 5 overall of forgiveness: any turn shape, any line, any release. The MX89 does it all, but beyond that, it provides the skier with a ton of feedback, both positive and negative. Were you in balance, and did you nail that release? The MX89 is rewarding, and will put a smile on your face? Back seat, skiing poorly? The MX89 won't necessarily punish you, but will remind you to get your act together. A bit off topic, but this a big reason that so many people love Kastle, and some hate it. If you are coming from a new school, bounce around on the tail type of ski, the Kastle won't be a fun choice. Those from a race or technical background, or those who wish to ski well technically, will love the precision and feedback. Of course, not matter what ski you are on, backseat driving won't help you in the bumps: getting down the hill is not the same as ripping it, and that is why skis without a real tail may allow bad skiers to get away with remaining bad, it isn't the same as helping a skier to improve so they can ski that steep bump run or chute, smoothly and in control.
Kastle MX84 176cm: Wade had the 84 roughly 4th: it was my top ski of the day. I never fail to be amazed at how good the 84 is in junk snow and bumps, given the precision, sportiness, and top end of this ski. Wade commmented that it liked to be skied from edge to edge; it was the only ski he was carving the crud up on. Seeing his tracks from the chair leant legitimacy to that sensation; railroad tracks instead of the brushed scarves from earlier runs. The MX84 loves my style of skiing: snappy, looking for feedback, a bit higher edge angle, precision; for all of these characteristics, the MX84 was, for me, as easy to ski in the heavy crud as any ski we tried. Perhaps easier, as I was able to utilize rebound from the turn as release and direction into the new turn. It loved early edge angle, active feet: the 84 seems to ask for my best skiing, and is so rewarding yet forgiving that I trust it completely. It also goes without saying that the 84 will power any groomer like a race ski, although we didn't have it on groomers during this test. The 84 and 74 remain in my top 5 “all-time skis”.
Nordica Navigator 90 high 170's: the only non-premium ski to make the top group. It has early rise (but no significant taper), a perfect tip and tail flex, and great feel underfoot. A huge step up from the NRGY, which was mediocre, at best. The new Nordica also made any shape turn, any edge angle, and ease of use was above any of the “mass market” skis. We both loved it. It did feel a little more vague to me compared to the Kastle and Stockli product, but that may not be an issue for most skiers. I crave that feedback. Very competent in steeper, short swing turns: easy in bumps, nice forgiving feel at the tip. I didn't get groomer time on it, but am interested to see how it stacks up against the very well regarded Stockli and Kastle product here. As an off-piste ski however, it was right up there with the top skis in the land. It is the ski that the Enforcer 93 should be! Perfect ski-anywhere companion. If on a budget, I would definitely own it: reminds me of the old Fischer Motive 95 in terms of shape and versatility, and the Rossi 88HD in terms of turn shape adaptability.
B: solid efforts, worth examining further
Atomic Vantage CTI 100 180cm-ish: this was my “best of the rest” ski. The Vantage is titanium and carbon, a different layup for 2018, but not being an Atomic dealer, I don't know much more than that. On the steep pitch we tested, the Vantage was quite laterally stiff, perhaps a bit too “edgy” which cost it a position in the top group. It was a bit too laterally touchy at the tip, not as willing to adjust edge angle as the top skis. With that said, outside of the aggressive tip, the rest of the ski was balanced and easy. I felt the ski made a very round turn, in addition to a more aggressive L-shaped turn. Energy upon release was moderate, something I appreciate. It isn't a floppy ski, the top end is substantial, and I found it relatively easy to ski, although it would be on the more demanding side when compared to the skis listed here.
Salomon QST 92 178cm-ish: The 92 I knew literally nothing about: supposedly it is their “lighter and softer” QST, but it really held up. A great ski in junk snow, really balanced. Lacking edge bite and energy, but I knew exactly what to expect in mashed potato bumps. Very easy to tip in and ride the sidecut trough the turn. The ski could use a bit more aggressive tune: it did feel a bit spoony, due to lack of metal perhaps, and perhaps due to it being not an expert-level ski. I wouldn't necessarily buy it for my purposes, but it can make a whole lot of people happy.
Blizzard Rustler 10-180cm-ish: similar comments to the QST 92, but a wider version. Even though a 102 is typically out of my everyday, firmer snow range, I liked the quickness of this ski; it was light, held well, released very easily, and refused to take me for a ride. I was in total control on every turn on the 10. Downsides: a little soft for bigger turns and high speeds. It could use a bit of beef, something in between this flex and the Bonafide would be ideal for my weight and skiing style.
Blizzard Bonafide 180cm: The Bonafide (revised for 2018) had a much improved tail over the 2017; it also seems to ski softer than the old model, with a bit more energy. It liked a round, fairly deliberate turn, good stability, easy to release in steeps. With that said, it fought me when taking a more direct line, working steeps in a more fall-line, L-shaped pattern. It did not like this turn, felt overly aggressive at the tip when tipped into higher edge angles. I did get this ski on groomers, it was very good there. Wade really liked it, and he skis a bit lower energy, rounder turn than I do. Match your skiing style with this ski.
C or D grades: needs work, something is off with all of these models. Perhaps they just suck.
Volkl Ninety Eight 178cm ish: On paper, this is quite similar to the QST92. On snow, not so much. Wade and I both hated it. Spoony, almost edgeless, with an overly aggressive, almost laterally boosted tip. Very unpredictable, even in mashed potatoes, and it sucked on the groomer. It seemed like a ski designed for intermediates by expert skiers who think all intermediates are low skill and hopeless, rather than a ski designed to take intermediates off-piste and build confidence and skill. Not a fan.
Blizzard Brahma CA 180cm: wow, this ski was a handful. Edgy, aggressive, light, underdamped. It was hard to find a redeeming quality on the CA for either of us. I really like the new Brahma, and the CA should be a mellower version of that ski. If anything it was more demanding, almost like the reduction of metal reduced the balance of the ski. It was aggressive and had a mind of it's own. Normally, I would write this off as a potential tune issue, but I had similar reports out of the Copper demo from other testers. Definitely try before you buy.
Salomon XDR 88Ti 178cm-ish: A true Jekyll and Hyde ski. The tip and tail were not matched whatsoever. The tip has a shape reminiscent of the Nordica NRGy: friendly, rocker, not that much on-piste performance, likely geared toward upper intermediates, lower energy skiers. The tail is full-on, strongest of any ski in this test. The result is a total mis-mash of character. Is the ski a hard snow groomer ripper, or a soft off-piste ski? Lack of forgiveness in the tail suggest the latter. Soft tip, almost nothing in the way of a technical tip-in, suggests the former. Demanding yet low performance at the same time.
Incomplete: skis with a poor tune that deserve another chance.
Rossignol Experience 88 HD 178cm ish: I loved this ski last year. It reminded me of the new Nordica Navigator 90: relaxed, balanced, ready for any turn and any energy level. This year's experience was completely the opposite. Both Wade and I found it edgy, aggressive, laterally much too stiff and jerky. Did the 88 develop an addiction to meth? It has to be the tune, as the ski didn't change.
Kastle LX85 168cm: I only skied this off-piste, and amongst my reviews, I put it in my top 4. Buttery smooth, akin to the Stockli AX in terms of terrain adaptability Precise with the ability to read minds, and laughably easy to ski. Wade took a run on it, mostly groomers and bumps, and found it much too aggressive. Considering the LX is a softer, more relaxed version of the MX (which won our mutual admiration), I am chalking this up to a bad tune. Reports coming out of Copper were of the LX being amongst the best of the test; we both agreed that it was likely a tune issue.
Last edited:
