2017 Nordica Enforcer 93 Ski Review: Powerful, Versatile, Skiable // Ski Reviews
As you probably already know, last season Nordica announced a redesigned version of their Enforcer skis. The redesigned ski is a 100mm waist all mountain ski that has been met with rave reviews from practically every gear review and ski publication on the planet, including the highest praise and the title of 2016 Ski of the Year from Skiing Magazine. Here at the SkiEssentials.com offices we have multiple staff members who jumped on the chance to pick up a 2016 Enforcer and all of them have been absolutely loving the new ski. In fact, the Enforcer has been so popular this season Nordica sold out well before Christmas.
With the impressive success of the 2016 Enforcer and it's unbelievable performance on snow, Nordica has given us another ski to be excited about for 2017, the Enforcer 93. A quick glance at the Enforcer 93 suggests it's very similar to its bigger brother, and that's because it is. You'll notice the same overall shape: camber under foot with a low rise rockered tip and tail that are blunted at the nose. Sidecut dimensions are also essentially the same, although obviously narrower across the board. Turn radii are identical to the wider Enforcer (possibly to be referred to as the Enforcer 100 in the future? Hint, hint, we may see another addition to this line) across the four length options. As soon as Nordica announced the new ski there was serious buzz in the ski industry with everyone anxiously waiting to try a pair. We are lucky enough to have a few demos of the new 2017 Enforcer 93 available at our physical store in Stowe, VT, Pinnacle Ski and Sports. The SkiEssentials.com crew snagged a couple pairs and went out for some product testing at Stowe Mountain Resort this week and are excited to share our experiences.
From a distance the new Nordica Enforcer 93 Ski looks like it might as well be a regular Enforcer, but the 7mm difference in width makes a bigger difference than your eyes lead you to believe. But first, before we talk about the major differences, let's look at some more similarities. The Enforcer 93 really does retain a lot of the characteristics that have made the wider Enforcer so popular. It's has an incredible combination of power, dampness, and playfulness and is an unbelievably versatile ski. We had received about 2 inches of heavy snow overnight when we took out the Enforcer 93 and were able to put it to the test both on and off-piste. In variable off-piste terrain the Enforcer 93 acts a lot like the wider Enforcer. It's smooth and damp, yet has a nice even, supple flex and is exceptionally forgiving for a ski with two sheets of metal in its construction. Despite having very minimal tail rocker, it's incredibly easy to release your edges and get the ski to make a pivoting, "slarvy" turn. There really aren't many other skis that have such a playful nature with this much metal in the ski. Nordica accomplished an impressive feat once again with the Enforcer 93 as it doesn't even feel like it has metal until you actually need it.
In the two inches of fresh snow we were skiing, none of us felt like we needed to be on the wider Enforcer. In fact, most of us were having so much fun on the Enforcer 93 it sparked the never ending conversation of, "maybe we're all skiing skis too wide?" The 93mm width provides plenty of float for typical east coast "powder" days. Sure, if we got 6-8 inches or more, we'd probably want something wider, but in that situation most of our staff is reaching for skis in the 110mm+ waist category anyways. If you're thinking about picking up one of the Enforcers, but are hesitant about the 93's ability in soft snow, don't be. The blunt tip shape (also found on the Enforcer 100) is supple and catch-free and really allows for smooth, controlled skiing in soft snow, even if you're sinking in a little.
Despite having two layers of metal, the 2017 Nordica Enforcer 93 can be an incredibly playful ski.
Ok, so how does the 2017 Nordica Enforcer 93 do on-piste? Well, you're in for a treat. It's awesome. We don't want to take anything away from how well this ski performs off-piste, but we were all psyched about its high performance on firm snow. The Enforcer 100 skis groomers very well for a ski its width and can carve some powerful turns, but if we were to make any critique towards its performance on-piste it would be that it's not exceptionally quick edge to edge. Even though the 93mm waist is really not that much narrower, it makes a big difference in the skis performance on firm snow. We immediately noticed the Enforcer 93 is much quicker edge to edge resulting in a much snappier, responsive feel. For some reason, even though the turn radius is identical to the wider ski, we felt like we were all making shorter, tighter carving turns than on the Enforcer 100.
We also need to mention once again how great the tip design is on these Enforcer 93. The blunt tip shape and low rise tip rocker make for super easy turn initiation. It's almost too easy, but no, that's impossible. All you really have to do to get the Enforcer 93 to initiate a carving turn is just roll your ankles over. The tip progressively starts initiating a turn based on how steep your edge angle is. It's really a pretty incredible feeling. None of us can remember skiing something that's so easy to ski, but still performs like an expert ski. It's really quite impressive. It's like having an automatic Hyundai that happens to drive like a Ferrari. It initiates turns so easily at first some of our testers felt like it was going to be kind of mellow on groomers, but the harder you push the Enforcer 93, the harder it pushes back.
What's our overall impression of the Enforcer 93? It's an awesome addition to the Nordica line. Some might say it's too close to the Enforcer 100, but we disagree. For east coast skiers we think the Enforcer 93 is going to be the go-to daily driver in the Nordica lineup. Even for western skiers who spend most of their time on groomed terrain, the Enforcer 93 is more appropriate than its bigger brother. If you're the type of skier that's constantly seeking out soft snow and off-piste terrain, stick with the Enforcer 100, but if you want something that's a little snappier and more responsive on the groomers, go with the Enforcer 93. Because it's relatively easy to ski if you happen to be in between sizes, go with the longer length. Our main testers on the Enforcer 93 were 5'10" 150 lbs and 6'5" 200 lbs and both of them have decided they would prefer the 185 and 193cm length respectively.
Nordica did a mid-season release of the Nordica Enforcer 93 and SkiEssentials.com already has them available for purchase. As mentioned above, if you're in the Stowe area, we also have demos available at our physical store, Pinnacle Ski and Sports. Okay, now grab a pair of Nordica Enforcer 93s, get out there, and start Enforcing!
I just wanted to say I'm looking to replace my 87 underfoot Kenjas and my 95 underfoot Atomic Elysians with something in between and OMG I think this ski is it......... I am going to find this ski on ski essentials and put it on my wish list. I am very excited about this ski.................
Just got back from skiing Lake Tahoe, CA. I am a 150 Lbs senior citizen that skied 203cm skis when younger. I demo'd the enforcer 100, 177cm, and was very impressed of its stability in morning crust, noon time crud and late afternoon wet snow and now seriously thinking there is yet more skiing still in my future :)) I am presently reviewing my future options and thinking perhaps purchasing a169cm might be a better lasting choice while able to still enjoy this sport? Needless to say, most of time presently, are on groomed snow and in avoiding its obstacles . Therefore my questions are in 2 parts, (1) stability and (2) maneuverability between the enforcer 100 vs. 93? BTW... I liked the feel of the low profile using the Tyrolia Active 13 combo on the enforcer 🙂 Your opinion/advice would be greatly appreciated!
Hey Duane!
I think we can help. 1. One of the great things about the new Enforcer 93 is it's almost as stable as the Enforcer 100. We think more of the stability in these skis come from the rocker/camber profile and overall construction, not necessarily from the width. The 93 held up well in anything we threw it towards, and most of our testers were skiing on a shorter length than we would've preferred. 2. There is a noticeable difference in maneuverability. The 93 is definitely quicker edge to edge and a little easier to throw around in tight situations, even though the 100 is quite maneuverable for a ski in its width with that much metal. As far as length, I don't think you'd have trouble skiing the E93 in the 177cm length. The 169 will be VERY quick, but I think would be on the short side during any kind of higher speed skiing. Hopefully that helps. Feel free to ask away if you have any additional questions.
You can also always reach out to our customer service team at 877-812-6710. They are all extremely experienced, knowledgeable skiers.
SE
If the Enforcer 93 is a "Go to driver for the east coast", what about west coast? I'm looking for an everyday one quiver ski for California conditions. We don't get the light powder of Utah or Colorado on a consistent basis, but there are occasions after a dump where skiing ungroomed Sierra snow is the norm. I am age 68 (advanced intermediate) and ski mostly front side groomers but need a little for versatility than my current Volkl's (118/76/104) offer for those powder days. I ski mostly at Mammoth, but make trips to Colorado etc., too. I had been looking at the Enforcer 100 or the Blizzard Bonafide, but the Enforcer 93 seems like a good fit. Any thoughts or suggestions? Thanks for your help
Hi Thomas!
I think for a daily driver for Mammoth terrain and conditions the Enforcer 100 or Bonafide, as you mentioned, are going to be a little more appropriate. It does, however, really come down to how much time you devote to on-piste skiing vs off-piste skiing. On a 6 inch powder day, are you typically skiing terrain that was hit with a groomer over night, or are you seeking out the untouched snow? The Enforcer 93 is definitely a little more responsive and rewarding on groomers, but doesn't have quite the same float or stability in soft or variable conditions. The Enforcer 93 would still be a world of difference from your Volkls in soft snow, and sometimes making the jump from a ski that narrow to something around 100mm underfoot can be a little overwhelming, so I also wouldn't completely rule out the E93.
Hope that helps!
Jeff
I'm stuck between the Nordica enforcer 93's and the Salomon QST 99's. I live in southern Idaho and ski a lot of mixed conditions, and I am looking for a do it all ski. Any help would be appreciated!
Hey Marc!
Both the E93 and QST99 are great all mountain skis. For the sake of covering all our bases, I think it's important to put the E100 in this conversation as well. Both the Enforcers use more "traditional" construction (i.e. two sheets of metal) which give them a very damp, smooth feel. For high speed skiing I'd give them the edge over the QST, as well as on groomers, but only slightly. Also, the E93 does feel much more responsive on groomers than the E100, so if on-piste performance is a priority I'd go with the E93. The QST 99 is kind of a different animal than the two Enforcers. Although it's in the same category, it performs differently and has a different feel. The swing weight is noticeably lighter than the Enforcer making them more maneuverable, something that's further supported by the tip shape and rocker profile. They have a much more surfy, playful feel than the Enforcers, although do have a little less power when you're really charging and aren't quick as snappy on groomers.
Hope that helps. If you haven't seen it, check out our QST review:
http://www.skiessentials.com/Chairlift-Chat/2017-Salomon-QST-99-Ski-Review/
You can, of course, always give us a call at 877-812-6710 to chat more about ski choices!
SE
Has anyone here skied these on telemark gear?
Joe,
None of our staff has been on a tele setup Enforcer 93. I'll reach out to see if anyone in our network has. I'm guessing once we're a month or so into this season we'll start to get some tele specific reviews on the E93. Even though it was an early release last winter, not too many people have skied them still.
SE
Thank you for the response Re; telemark set up. I bought a pair and will give my $.02 when I get a chance to ski them.
Scott, I agree I think the Enforcer 93 would be a great addition to your quiver of skis. The Enforcer 100 and the Soul 7 are pretty different skis, with the Enforcer being a little stiffer, heavier, etc. There is some cross over in their intended terrain, however, which is why I agree the 93 would be a better choice for you. If you don't find your Stocklis to be heavy, you won't think the Enforcer 93 is heavy by any means. In fact, for a ski with two sheets of metal it's pretty forgiving and feels easy to maneuver. If you're curious about length I'd recommend going with the 185cm.
Joe, Sounds good! Anxious to hear your report.
I have a pair of Rossignal Soul 7 180cm that I really enjoy skiing out west. I am 5-8, 190 lbs. I am looking for something more for skiing Frontside and little hills in Wisconsin. I have a older pair of atomic theory 170 cm 95 mm which have become to short for my skiing ability. I have been looking around for something in the 90mm - 100 mm under waste. Would do you think of the enforcer 93 177 cm? Or should I look at the look at the enforcer 100? I hav ealso has some interest in the Solomon Quest 92. Any recommendations?
Hi Joe!
I think you're on the right track here. Between the Enforcer 93 and the 100, if you're focusing on frontside performance, I would stick with the Enforcer 93. The 100 still does quite well on firm snow, but it's not quite as quick edge to edge. I also think you hit the nail on the head in terms of length. The 185 cm would be a lot of ski for you, while the 169 would feel on the short side, like your Atomics. The Quest 92, although a great all mountain ski, doesn't have the same torsional stiffness or edge grip as the Enforcer 93. So, to reiterate, it seems as though you're on the right track with the Enforcer 93 in a 177 cm length.
Hope that helps!
SE
I ski Rossy soul 7s 188 (108 under boot) as well as stockil storm riders xxl 178 80 under boot. thinking the 177 Nordica 93s might be a good addition. The 100s I think may just duplicate the soul 7s which i love in the powder and trees as it turns on a dime but not much of a harder groomer. Im 6' 190 ski mammoth 70 days and annual trip to steamboat and snowbird. The soul7s are great travel skis as they are 4 lbs lighter than anything else. hearing the enforcers tend to be heavy. thoughts?
Trying to decide between the 2017 Enforcer 93 vs the 2017 Blizzard Brahma for East Coast skiing (Killington, Okemo, Sugarloaf, Wachusett). I'm 5'9" 235lbs and spend most of my time ripping GS turns on the groomers. Thoughts?
Hey Bob!
We compare and contrast those two skis a lot. Both very high performing skis, both some of our favorite skis on the market right now. That being said, since you mentioned you spend most of your time ripping GS turns on groomers, I might point you towards the Brahma. Although very similar in their performance, I would give the nod towards the Brahma in terms of performance on firm snow, while giving the nod to the Enforcer 93 for use in off-piste, soft snow scenarios. We're kind of splitting hairs here, as they both will absolutely get the job done, but since you asked, that's where we'd point you. Even if just comparing the waist widths, you'll be slightly quicker edge to edge on the Brahma, although will sacrifice some versatility.
SE
My height is 178cm, and I am looking for a replacement fron Nordica Steadfast 178cm, what would be your reccomendation for Enforcer 93 lenght and why many thanks in advance and best regards
I'm an Int-Adv to Adv skier in Seattle and looking to upgrade from my previous 2014 Atomic Panic 181s (87mm). I have been looking at the new QST series and the Enforcer line and am trying to figure whether or not I should go for 92-93mm or 99-100mm and which ski to pick. Conditions are always mixed and the snow can be heavy and choppy and I wanted to know your thoughts. Thanks Aaron (186cm tall)
Hi Mike!
I think you'll be happiest with the 185 cm length. I am about your size and definitely prefer the 185 cm length. I also consider myself fairly aggressive and typically ski pretty fast. In that open terrain you have in Mammoth the 185 cm is going to give you a lot more stability. Also, considering how much rocker the Enforcer 93 has compared to your current skis (which have none) going up to 185 cm isn't actually going to be a longer effective edge unless you're in soft snow or really have the ski laid over in a carving turn. Also, when your kids become little rippers and try to ski faster than you, you'll have the right tool to make sure that doesn't happen 😉
Hope that helps!
SE
I've been skiing for 10 years in north Idaho and ski 40-50 days a year and consider myself an intermediate skier. I'm 5'10" 200lbs and 43 years old. I ski a 185 armada jj in on powder days and an old k2 mt baker in 180 on groomers. Both are setup for AT skiing. I'm considering an all mountain front side ski for light snow days and especially groomer days. If it's a powder day I will grab the JJ's. I'm leaning towards the Nordica enforcer 93 to fit that groomer/light snow day. Would this be a good choice and could you recommend a length? Thanks! Shawn
Hi Shawn!
The Enforcer 93 is definitely a great groomer/light powder ski and would be a nice compliment to your JJs for sure. You do have a decision to make regarding length. I would say out of everyone I know around your size they're split about 50/50 between the 177 and 185. If you're relatively aggressive and like skiing at speed I'd go with the 185 cm. If you're looking for more maneuverability I'd go with the 177 cm. The Enforcer 93 (and 100) is relatively forgiving considering its two sheets of metal. I personally am your height and prefer the 185 cm, although I've skied both and find them both perfectly suitable. I just like having the extra stability over the extra maneuverability.
Hope that helps
SE
I ski the icy slopes of Wildcat and Attitash in NH. I noticed that the Enforcer 93 starts at a 169 but some people say it skiis shorter. My Volkls are 165. I am 5'7 , 188lbs and an intermediate-advanced skiier. Will the 169 be too big?
Hi Rick!
We do find that the Enforcer skis a little bit short, or rather it's just quite forgiving for a ski with two sheets of metal. I certainly don't think the 169 cm will be too big for you. Some might even recommend that you ski the 177 cm length, although considering you're coming off a 165 cm Volkl I think the 169 cm is a safe choice.
SE
Looking for some guideance. 42 yrs old, solid upper intermediate skier. 5'11" 220 lbs. 60+% on piste. Usually not a hard charger at all, like to make shorter turns but sometimes need to keep up with friends!. Ski Tahoe exclusively. Torn between E93 and E100, and between 177cm and 185cm. Been skiing Sockli SR88 in 177 (widest ski I've ever skied) and really liked them but maybe a tad too stiff (but bent a tail getting backseated on Silverado @ Squaw). If you were me, what route would you go on the Enforcer line? Also been considering the Line SN100 or SN92 and would appreciate your thoughts on those as well. Thanks so much!
Thomas
Hi Thomas!
Since you worded it this way, I'm going to answer this way. If I were you (your size and skied Tahoe) I would ski the Enforcer 100 in the 185 cm.
A couple of thoughts, however. Are you planning on keeping your Stocklis? I think the Enforcer 100 is a much better compliment to those skis than the Enforcer 93 would be (i.e. too similar in construction and waist width). Have you been on a 185 cm length ski before? I would say this is the one possible issue. The 185 cm Enforcer 100 is a lot of ski in the sense that it's relatively long and has two sheets of metal (somewhat heavy). On the other hand, we find the Enforcer 100 to be more forgiving than any other ski in that category with two sheets of metal, and some say it skis short, which is why I would choose that length if I were you.
Both skis will have a softer tail than your SR 88, that's for sure.
Hope that helps and please feel free to ask any follow up questions you may have.
SE
SE,
Appreciate the response. The Stocklis are borrowed so I'm not trying to compliment them, just looking for my one set of skis I'll ski in most conditions on most days. I have skied on 185's when I was younger but that was a LONG time ago. So given the construction, my skiing style and the terrain I'll ski in mostly, maybe E93 in 185? Seems like the 93 is a good all-around waits width, no? Luckily I'll get to demo both at Heavenly in 3 weeks! Thanks again.
Thomas
Hi again Thomas!
Yes, I agree. If you don't have the SR88 in your quiver I think the Enforcer 93 would make for a more versatile ski with a more even mix of performance characteristics. Demoing is always great; have fun!
SE
Hi,
I really like the reviews on this site and used them to narrow my search for a first pair of skis.
But now I'm stuck in choosing between the enforcer 93 and 100 and choosing the lengths.
I'm 26y/o, 5'10 and between 181 and 187 pounds. I ski in the Alps, since I'm from Europe, and concider myself an advanced skier. I can do every piste that I came across
and like to ski pretty fast, monguls, trees if I find any and like to venture to the side country if I can convince my mates. Say 60-65% piste, 40-35% off...
I'm looking for a ski to grow into and I hope I can do a little more off piste and want to try to advance in little tricks like a 360 etc.
As I said it would be my first pair of ski's so I'm comming of rental skis that were most often on the short side.
So I'm edging towards the Enforcer 93 for its slightly better on piste performance. But since I often read that you should go up, I can't decide between 177cm and 185cm.
I hope you have a tip or two for me 🙂
Kind regards,
Thomas
Hi Thomas!
I think the Enforcer 93 is probably the way to go. You're right that it's slightly better on groomed slopes, and I also think it's going to be an easier adjustment for you coming off rental skis and going to the Enforcer 93 compared to the 100. The 100 is just that much wider, so requires a higher edge angle and a little more skier input. What's the longest length rental ski you've been on? The Enforcer 93 is likely going to have much more rocker than what you've skied in the past, but it's also likely heavier due to the two sheets of metal. I think the 185 cm might be a little much for you to start, but if you've had experience of rental skis around the 177 cm length, chances are you could bump up to the 185 because there's so much more rocker than traditional rentals.
Let us know! Hope that helps.
SE
Hi!
I'm a 34 yo, 5'9", 143 lbs, advanced-ish skier getting back into skiing after being away for 15+ years. "Getting back," for me means probably 10-15 days (at most) a season in Mammoth and the Rockies, so I can't really justify more than one pair of skis. I can get down most anything with decent pace and I make up for my relatively poor technique with aggression and athleticism. I love bombing down groomers, but also spend plenty of time on the bumps, in the trees, in mixed off piste, plus the occasional pure powder shot. I just returned from a four day trip in Utah. Three of those days were spent demo-ing the Mantra, but I decided in the end I just didn't have the weight and/or power to flex the ski the way I wanted to. It felt super stable but quick turn initiation felt sluggish to me. So on the last day I switched to a Kendo and loved it. The pop out of my turns was night and day compared to the Mantra and I loved the nimbleness over all. The bumps were fun instead of a chore. I'm a little concerned about stability at speed through mixed snow. The ride feels like a very tight suspension on a sports car, which I could imagine getting pretty scary on steep pitches when the snow is a little tracked out. That said, I think I would be perfectly happy with the Kendo as my only pair, but I'd like to check out the E93 and maybe the E100 as well. I understand the E100 will float me better in Western powder, but I'm a little trepidatious that I'm too light for the ski (like I felt with the Mantra). With regard to the E93, I guess my question is: I'm sure I'll love in on the groomers and moguls (like I love the Kendo), but will it float me better when I catch a powder day?
Thanks for any help!
Question regarding the recommended mount/stance. Where would you recommend I mount Marker Griffon bindings? I am an expert level aggressive skier who dabbles in everything from bumps and steeps to glades and jumps. 5'10" 160lbs. I'm currently riding a center mounted park ski but am transitioning into more freeriding.
Thanks!
Dan
HI Dan!
I'm about your size and have a similar background. I (Jeff) generally ski a lot of center mounted park skis. The Enforcers ski great on the recommended line. That's where I've skied them and I've never really felt like I should move the mount forward. That being said, if you really like the "center of the ski" feel, you could go +2 mm for your mount, although I wouldn't recommend going any further than that as you're going to start moving away from the center of the sidecut, center of the camber, etc.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Ricardo!
Can you tell us a little more about you as a skier? Favorite terrain, level of aggressiveness, that kind of stuff? I would say both the 177 cm and the 185 cm could work for you, but one will be more appropriate depending on how you like to ski. The Enforcer 93 is a little bit more forgiving and arguably skis a little shorter than the Steadfast thanks to the subtle tail rocker. I'm about your size and prefer the 185 cm if I'm looking to ski fast and aggressively, but the 177 cm is a little more maneuverable especially in moguls and tight trees.
Hope that helps, I'd be happy to go into more details with you.
SE
Hi,
Great review. I'm also seriously looking at the Enforcer 93's and am a bit unsure on length. I'm an advanced skier, late 40's, 6'6" and 230 lbs. I'm skiing almost entirely resorts in the South Island of New Zealand (so I guess similar to East Coast US?). I like to get off piste at any opportunity, but given the conditions we have, that ihardly ever means decent amounts of powder. Also, I get stuck on piste with my kids a bit. I'm guessing for my height/weight the 193's would be the answer for me. However, while I do like a bit of open space speed, my real work-on is getting down narrow steeps and bumps. So chutes and steep moguls etc. Does that mean I should maybe consider the 185's for maneuverability, or will I still be good on the 193's? Also, anything else that I should be seriously considering? I had thought about maybe the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI's.
Thanks, Paul
Hi Paul!
I think your best bet is to stick with the 193 cm. It's going to give you the best stability at your size, and is still shorter than you by a slight margin, so shouldn't feel overwhelming. The Enforcer 93 is relatively forgiving, and some say it skis short, so I would worry the 185 cm would feel too small for you. I think you'll find the 193 cm is still plenty maneuverable for what you're trying to do. Typically with the Enforcer series if someone is in between sizes it's better to go with the longer length, with less aggressive skiers possibly being an exception.
The Enforcer 93 is a great ski and super versatile, so it's hard to recommend another ski over it without really getting to know your ski style, etc. I think you'll actually appreciate the weight of the Enforcer 93 compared to the Vantage 90 CTI. The Vantage is awesome, but the Carbon Tank Mesh is much lighter than metal, and while it increases maneuverability, it subsequently decreases stability.
Hope that helps! Let us know if you have any other questions.
SE
Im an advanced-intermediate / advanced Northeast skier thinking about the 2017 Enforcer 93 (169cm - 5'8" / 155) as a quality all-mountain ski. I can do just about anything on & off-piste, spend a lot of time at Sugarloaf & Loon. Does anyone know what the best bindings for these skiis and all-mountain would be that are reasonably priced. I've seen many packages with Marker Griffon & STH2 WTR 13.
Thanks!
Hi Tim!
You can't really go wrong with any of the all mountain bindings from the major manufacturers. We have the Enforcer 93 packaged with the Tyrolia Attack 13, which is a popular combination. The Griffon and Salomon STH2 would both be good options as well. On a flat ski like this is really comes down to personal preference with your binding selection. You'll typically find the Attack 13 slightly cheaper than the Griffon or STH2, although only by a slight margin, but the performance is comparable across the tree.
Hope that helps!
SE
I am considering buying my son a pair of nordica enforcers 100 and would like advise as to which length. He is 6'4" tall and weighs 100kg so should I go for the 185cm or the 193cm?
Hi Catherine!
How aggressive is he? Is he a relatively advanced skier? I would say if he is pretty aggressive and is skiing at a high level he might get more out of the 193 cm. We have some similar size staff who ski the Enforcer 100 in the 193 cm and find it to be the right length for them.
How long were his previous skis? Sometimes it can be a big adjustment if you're making a significant jump up in length.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello,
I'm very interested in the Nordica Enforcer 93 as my all mountain ski. I'm a 5'11 225 LBS hard charging tele skier. Being 53 years old, I don't ski the bumps as aggressively as I once did but enjoy them nonetheless. Also enjoy faster cruisers. I'm torn between the 177cm and the 185cm and looking for guidance. Thank you
Hi Mitch!
I think considering your size and that you describe yourself as hard charging you're going to benefit from the increases stability of the 185 cm Enforcer 93. It's a relatively forgiving ski for having two sheets of metal and I think you'll find it plenty maneuverable in the bumps. I would worry that the 177 cm would feel a touch unstable for those high speed groomer runs, especially if there's any amount of fresh or variable snow conditions.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi ,i am interested for the enforcer 93. I am 5.6 and 140 lbs. I am advanced -expert skier. I was interested to know how the shorter versions do ski?? I mean because of the constraction maybe there are to stiff? Which size you would recomend? Or you think this is not a good choice for light skiers?
Thanks
Giorgos
Hi Rokas!
In our testing the Enforcer 93 has performed well at all lengths! For a ski with two sheets of metal they are surprisingly user-friendly, while still providing the stability and power that we look for out of skis with metal. I (Jeff) am pretty close to your weight, albeit a bit taller, and find the 185 cm ski to be absolutely perfect. I think considering you're 3-4 inches shorter and 10-15 pounds lighter you'd be better off on the 177 cm ski and could even justify going down to 169 cm if you're not a high speed skier. I think at the advanced/expert level you'd be able to handle the 177 cm ski, but it would be a bit taller than you, which some skiers find somewhat intimidating.
The type of terrain you like to ski also plays into the length choice here. Wide open terrain at high speeds? Go longer. Tight terrain at slow speeds? Go shorter.
Let us know if that helps and if you have any other questions!
SE
Besides the graphics, has Nordica made any changes in the 2018 Enforcer 93's?
Hi Marc!
Nope, the shape and construction of the Enforcer 93 stays the same for 2018!
SE
I am looking at Enforcer 93 and debating lengths of 185 or 193 cm, last 4 years on a MX88-188 cm and looking for newer tech. I am 6'-225#, expert skier at 60 yr old, 15 days a year and still ski fairly aggressive but endurance has dropped off. Ski 70 -30 on piste, love chopped up-crud, avoid major bumps and like having a strong hard snow grip. Suggestions Also, have you done a review on the Head Core and how does it compare to Enforcer 93?
Thx, Steve
Hi Steve!
I would say a 193 cm Enforcer 93 is going to be similarly manageable to your 188 cm MX 88. The Enforcer 93 has much more pronounced rocker, especially in the tip, so definitely feels like it skis shorter and is more maneuverable than the MX 88. If you really want to mellow things out a little bit, in response to your endurance dropping off a bit, I do think the 185 cm could work for you, but it will definitely feel significantly shorter than your 188 cm MX 88. Something to consider.
The Kore 93 and the Enforcer 93 have become a really popular comparison. The Enforcer feels "smoother" due to the two sheets of metal, while the Kore feels more "energetic" due to the its innovative construction. The Kore is also significantly lighter, but does get bucked around a little bit more in variable snow conditions, especially at high speeds. Smoothness vs Energy is a pretty good way to compare the two skis, however.
Hope that helps! Happy to chat more about it.
SE
Hi there!
Great review. I interest in the Nordica Enforcer 93 as my all mountain ski. I am 5'9 175lbs and an advanced to expert level skier. I am looking for something that I can use here on the east coast that can handle on the mountains, trees and bumps. I can't decide between the 177 or the 185. What would you recommend?
Hi J!
You're not alone, lots of skiers find themselves choosing between sizes with the Enforcer 93. The 185 cm seems really big on paper, but remember the Enforcer 93 does ski relatively short. That being said, I think it's still a toss up. Do you consider yourself relatively aggressive? Like to ski fast? If your answer is a resounding "Yes!" then go with the 185 cm. Do you consider yourself a little less aggressive? Prefer making lots of short radius turns at slower speeds? If that answer is yes, 177 cm may be the way to go. Whichever one you lean more towards, let that be a guide for the right length.
Hope that helps!
SE
I am interested in buying the Nordica Enforcer 93s but trying to figure out what size would be best. I am 5'11 175 pounds. I am an expert skier. Any suggestions?
Hi Jason!
Most expert skiers around your size choose the 185 cm Enforcer 93. I think that's the way to go unless you specifically like skiing at slower speeds and making lots of short radius turns.
Hope that helps!
SE
I need suggestions on my next ski. Reluctantly I must give up my head titans 177. I'm looking for an easy rider that will still hold and be adaptive to east coast conditions. I'm 72 yrs old, 6'0" 230lb and ski season ave. 30 days at Bristol Mt ny. Any suggestions on what skis I should consider?
Hi Dski!
Are you considering a ski like the Enforcer 93? I think that would be a great way to go: a ski with metal in its construction to give you some stability, but with more rocker and a little wider than your Titans. On a ski like the Enforcer 93 you don't have to constantly drive the tip of the ski like you do on the Titan. You can relax a little bit without the ski bucking you. The K2 Pinnacle 88 or 95 is another one that comes to mind; smooth ski, good damping from the metal, but relatively relaxed. The Pinnacle uses less metal than the Enforcer 93, so a little less fatiguing over a long day of skiing. Even though it doesn't have metal, the new Head Kore 93 could work really well too.
What do you think? Hope that helps!
SE
Question on sizing....I am 5'5" 145lbs. skiing at advanced/expert mostly around Tahoe. I am coming off Volante T3 Powers and looking at enforcer 93s, pinnacle 88s, and Rossi Experience 88s or 100s. Still pretty aggressive though the bumps are getting tougher. Any suggestions for length?
Hi Peter!
The skis you've listed are somewhat different from one another, especially the Experience 100. It uses mostly camber, two sheets of metal, and doesn't have any early taper, so is a pretty demanding ski. I think there's going to be some variety in what length you'd choose based off what ski you end up going with. The Enforcer 93, for example, is relatively forgiving despite having two sheets of metal as well. Much more rocker and early taper than the Experience 100, so skis shorter. If you're really ripping at high speeds you'd probably want the 177 cm Enforcer 93 even though it's a bit taller than you. I'm your weight and prefer the 185 cm length, although I am about 5 inches taller. The Experience 88 and 100 both don't use much early taper or rocker. The 100 is a pretty demanding ski and I think 174 cm would be a bit much, although it's kind of a toss up. If you can really drive a ski then 174 cm might work, but 166 cm seems better for the Experience 100. The E88 is definitely easier to handle. In that ski I don't think 172 cm would be unreasonable. The Pinnacle 88 is more similar to the Enforcer in terms of forgiveness. 170 or 177 cm could likely both work, depending on how fast you ski and how stable you want it to be. I think the 169 cm Enforcer 93 would work too, but again I'm basing these recommendations of your description of being an advanced to expert skier that skis through moguls aggressively, which makes me lean towards the longer lengths.
Hope that helps
SE
Hey There,
Trying to figure out what length Enforcer 93 I should go with, and would love guidance. I am an intermediate-advanced skier that has progressed quickly in just my 3rd season. Purchased the Volkl 90eight 177cm last year, but have already found that they aren't precise enough at top speeds for me, and feel a bit light/soft when I'm charging down anything with a decent pitch. I am 6' 3'', 215lbs and 31 years old, pretty athletic overall. I demoed the Enforcer 100 and 93, both in 177cm and LOVED each of them, but I was wondering if I should possibly buy the 93 in 185cm length. Most of my skiing is out west- home mountain is Mammoth, but will also be skiing Jackson next month and Tahoe occasionally. Should I stick with the 177cm or move up to the 185cm? Thank you!
Hi Adam!
I think considering your young, athletic, and progressing relatively quickly you could certainly justify moving up to the 185 cm Enforcer (either 93 or 100) at your size. I would worry that if you picked up a 177 cm you might find the same issues as your 90Eight as you start to ski faster, more aggressively, etc. Of course the Enforcer is a more stable ski than the 90Eight, but that's my thought. I think the 185 cm should be perfectly manageable for you to start and will give you a more appropriate ski to grow with. I also used to live in Mammoth so am very familiar with how chopped up the conditions can get there on busy powder days. The longer length will feel a little better when you're ripping over those bumpier conditions.
Hope that helps! Have a great season,
SE
Thanks for great reviews. I am an intermediate-advanced skier returning to the sport after a 6 year absence. Starting again this year as my son is now 5 and is really getting into skiing. I am 6ft ,175lbs and I ski mostly groomers in Lake Tahoe CA. I am looking for a ski that would work right now but also provide some versitality for the future when both me and my son progress in our skills and want to explore other terrain. My current ski is a Völkl AC20, 170 length, 78mm underfoot. Would the Enforcer 93 be a good option for me? I was thinking of the 177 length as jumping from 170 to 185 seems substantial but this is of course a very different type of ski.
Hi Robert!
Yeah, I think the Enforcer 93 would be a great choice for you! I used to live in the Mammoth area, so pretty familiar with the terrain and snow conditions in Tahoe. The Enforcer 93 is a great ski for that area. Narrow enough that it's pretty quick edge to edge and responsive on groomers, but wide and stable enough to ski ungroomed terrain, softer snow conditions, etc. It does a good job staying stable and quiet when skiing through chopped up Sierra snow too. I think you'll be fine on the 177 cm length, and I agree that jumping from 170 to 185 cm would be quite an adjustment, especially considering you haven't been skiing in recent years. It should work really nicely for you.
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for the response, very helpful. I managed to find your excellent overview of the 90mm skies and got lots of useful information. I am now thinking that something with less metal might be a good fit as well as I am not overly aggressive and fairly light. Atomic Vantage 90 CTI, the K2 Pinnacle 88, Salomon 88 XDR Ti and Rossignol Expereince 88 HD all peaked my interest. It would be great to be able to demo some of them for comparison but I am not sure I will be able to find them available. Any tips on these for mainly use on grommers in Tahoe?
Thanks,
Robert
Hi again Robert!
I still think picking a ski with some soft snow performance makes sense considering the conditions you get out in Tahoe. Even groomers can be kinda soft sometimes from my experience. The Experience 88's shape focuses a little more on firm snow performance than soft snow. The other three skis you listed could all definitely work and are all relatively similar in the sense that they all use partial metal laminates (the Experience 88 HD doesn't). Pinnacle 88 is probably the smoothest and easier, Salomon XDR 88 Ti feels the most playful (nice soft tips and tails), and the Vantage 90 CTI probably has the best edge grip out of those three, but it's a pretty darn close comparison.
Is there a certain pair you're leaning towards after reading our 90 mm comparison?
SE
After spending some more time reading through the excellent reviews and comparisons I really like how the K2 Pinnacle 88 is being described. Smooth, relaxing, fun and versatile sounds like a good combination. I do not consider myself to be overly aggressive and I clock in at below 160 lbs so it does seem to be enough ski for me at the moment? If I won´t be able to demo some of these and change my mind, I am leaning towards the Pinnacle. The 177cm seems appropriate. Big thanks for the replies and guidance, it´s very helpful!
Hey Robert,
I think the Pinnacle 88 will be plenty of ski for you, yeah. It really is a fun ski and one that for some reason is often overlooked when people are choosing their all mountain ski. I agree 177 cm is the way to go. Going with a longer length for yourself would negate some of the benefits of going with the Pinnacle 88 in the first place if that makes sense.
Happy to help!
SE
Small update, I toured the local ski shops and was able to look at the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI. I also got the Blizzard Brahma SP (or RTL) recommended locally. Both were last years models with good discounts so I might pick up one of these. No K2s available here locally. Any thoughts on choosing between these two? The Brahma SP jumps from 173cm to 180cm so I am assuming the 180cm in that. The Atomic has a 176cm which seems perfect.
Hi Robert!
So, there's no metal at all in the Brahma SP. it's more or less the same ski as the Brahma CA, with some minor tweaks to construction. Judging by your other comment you've already bought the Brahma RTL?
SE
I did purchase the Brahma SP (RTL) in the 180cm but the same shop had the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI in 176cm so I can still swap them for the Atomics. Wanted some last input between these two before I mount some bindings and actually plan a trip to get to some skiing done 🙂 The next few trips will be to Bear Valley which is family friendly but has very limited selection of skis to demo or purchase which is why I am buying locally in the Bay Area.
Immensely thankful for all the input.
Hi Robert,
So the first thing that came to mind is that the Brahma SP or RTL doesn't use any metal at all. Since we started our conversation talking about a ski with two sheets of metal, then went to skis with partial sheets of metal, I found it surprising that you ended up buying a ski with no metal at all. You're going to lose a little bit of power, vibration damping, and stability going with the Brahma RTL over the Vantage CTI. It's a marginal difference, but it's noticeable. To me that's the biggest difference. The Vantage arguably has a more versatile shape too: some slight early taper in the tips and tails makes it pretty maneuverable in variable snow, while the Brahma has a shape that leans a little bit more towards firm snow thanks to less early taper, thus a longer effective edge. We sold a lot of Brahma SPs this season and never had anyone come back saying they were disappointed, so it's definitely a good ski, but that's where I see the differences.
SE
Thanks for the awesome review. I'm really interested in the 93s. Like most people, kind of torn between sizes. I like to ski a little bit of everything. I'd consider myself advanced and fairly aggressive. I'm 5' 7-8ish, 165lbs. So wondering if I would be fine with 177? Or if I need to go down to 169? Thanks!
Hey Jeff,
First off, this week at Whistler I jumped on a bunch of skis you've talked about and your descriptions are spot on - keep it up.
I'm 5'7 150 aggressive/expert and ski mostly Tahoe while preferring more north and CO. I'm the type of skier you mention - always seeking soft snow in the tightest trees. From your enforcer 110 article "which for me was very confidence inspiring as it meant I could ski a more direct line and quickly dump speed here and there to retain control" - is exactly how I ski in these trees (which is why I'm surprised you like the 100eight so much but never mind that)
I'll have a hard time demo-ing the 93, 100, 110, never mind on the same day, never mind a day with new snow. I accidentally got on the enforcer 93 thinking it was 100 and absolutely loved it, especially the quickness and tails. I plan on getting a Bentchetler or maybe Armada 116 JJ for a designated powder ski...
So my questions for you:
93 or 100 for my "less than 6" snow" ski? Is the 100 losing too much quickness? Does it gain or lose "slarvability"? Do I put 110 in the mix with the two wide skis I mentioned? Or K2 catamaran?
Can you compare K2 marksman or the 98/108 Fischer ranger ti's to the enforcers? (I don't ever care to ski switch)
Thanks!!
Hi Robert
Many people have characterized the Enforcers as a no brainer, but I'm hoping for some advice.
I've just come back from my 3rd day of skiing in my life at Platekill Mtn in NY. Never had a lesson and love figuring things out on my own. Really have the desire to commit to improving my skills. I spent my entire 3rd day with a pair of rentals on intermediate runs, 90% groomed. Was able to string together 5 or 6 clean runs including a couple of light mogul runs.
I'm a bigger guy, 6' 3" and 230 lbs. With so little reference, I'm having a difficult time deciding which skis would be the best to help me keep getting better. I plan to ski in the east.
My question is, do you think I'm ready for these skis? Given my height, weight, and lack of experience/preference, which ski length would suit me best?
Regards,
Charlie
Hi Johnny!
You should be just fine on the 177 cm Enforcer 93. I don't think that's unnecessarily long by any means. It should be pretty perfect considering your size and ski ability.
Have a great season!
SE
Hey Jeff!
The 100Eight is a pretty unique ski. I was somewhat surprised I liked it and found myself skiing at slower speeds than I normally do, but with a big smile on my face. But anyways, back to the topic at hand:
The 93 is definitely quicker edge to edge, but it's a marginal difference. Overall those skis feel very similar. I do think you gain a little bit of slarvability in the 100 just because of the extra surface area. It feels slightly more comfortable when making lateral movements while keeping the ski relatively flat. The 93 doesn't smear and skid quite as consistently, although again it's not a drastic difference.
If it were me I would probably be going with the 100 as a daily driver ski (as you put it the 6" or less ski) then one of the more dedicated powder skis you mentioned (JJs, Bentchetlers, etc.) I wouldn't put the Enforcer 110 in that consideration because I feel it would be too close to your Enforcer 100. It is a much different shape in the tail, but still a relatively similar feel. I think it will be more beneficial to have a slightly wider, lighter, more powder-specific ski to compliment the 100. If you wanted to lean narrower you could go 93 and Ranger 108 or Marksman, but I'm kind of leaning towards the wider options.
Marksman vs Ranger 108 vs Enforcer 110 is a pretty interesting comparison. The Marksman is by far the most playful of the bunch. It's super maneuverable, loves to butter and jump and smear turns, but lacks a little bit of stability, power, stiffness, etc for more aggressive skiers. You can probably imagine what an Enforcer 110 feels like. Take the 93, make it wider, give it more tail rocker, you basically have the 110 (there are some other differences, but it's basically that simple). The Ranger 108 in my opinion sits kind of between the two. It's lighter and feels more maneuverable than the 110, but isn't so smeary, buttery, playful, freestyle-inspired as the Marksman.
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for the quick answer - called and found your sale today doesnt apply to enforcers anyways so i'll wait to demo the enforcer comparison, marksman, pass on the ranger 108.
A few final questions you might be able to help rule out more skis with:
1) After trying all the 2017 ~100 waist skis last year i could get my hands on (no enforcers or armadas), i went with mantras over bonafides because they both are beasts but mantras better of the two for me in tight stuff.
This year I had much more fun skiing the metal underfoot/cambered/softer tips and tails enforcer 93 and invictus 96, especially in the trees where i almost always am. They were so much more manuevrable, playful, poppy, and smeary but could still adequately handle chop and groomers. They left me knowing i need to add to (or sadly replace if i end up just not taking them anymore) my stiff tail, heavy, exhausting but bomber Mantras...(and i'll get a 115+ powder ski)
...so the question is: does that by default rule out the Mantra M5 and 2018 bonafide as the replacement for me? Something tells me regardless i should hop on those before buying a ski...
2) I rode the 2017 100eights - fun and light and floaty and the cool volkl full rocker carvyness like mantras, but less total bomber and similar tails. Not as fun or quick/jumpy/smeary as enforcers/invictus for me. Are the 2018's so much improved in any way that i just Need to get on them?
3) Any quick input on the fischer ranger ti 98 vs enforcer 100? (and bonafides/M5's i guess?)
4) this one might be impossible to answer but have any of you worn the salmonon qst pro 130 boot?
If so could its weird softer rear calf area be the thing screwing up my kind of weight-slightly-back-heel-riding-smearing tree technique that i find difficult with stiff tail mantras? Havent had properly fit decent alpine boots in 7+ years so have no concept of if my semi-hybrid-AT-ish? boots are the whole problem.
Thanks again!
Hi again Jeff!
Sorry for taking a little longer to reply, we've been down in Stratton testing skis.
1. I don't think it rules out the M5 Mantra by any means. We were impressed at how stable and powerful it felt, yet it let you flex the ski quite a bit under foot and really manipulate carving turn shape easily. Probably does rule out the Bonafide, as that ski, even in the newer versions, is still quite demanding.
2. There's not a drastic difference between the 17 and 18 100Eight. They essentially just added more fiberglass. Part of the reason why they did it was to boost the ski's durability, and along with that came a little bit of extra stability and power, but it's a pretty small difference between the two years.
3. Ranger 98 Ti definitely feels lighter and quicker than those three others. It's definitely a ski worth trying if you're trying to get a good sense of the differences within this category. Somewhat unique in the sense that it feels light, but still has good damping and good stability.
4. I've skied that boot, and no, I don't think it's coming from the boot. It's more likely just the fact that the Mantra's tail, as you've noted, is quite still. The key is also maintaining forward lean into your boots while still pushing your heel through a turn like that, which requires your knees to be bent quite a bit. That's something I think about in my own skiing quite a bit. If I start to feel like it's hard to make those slarvy, heel-pushing turns, I probably need to bend my knees more.
-Jeff (SE)
Hi Jeff,
Getting back into skiing after a couple years away. Doing all my runs in the East, and I'd call myself advanced (between int. and expt) looking to push and grow. If all goes as planned, I'll be getting 10-20 days a season. I like to ski fast, about 70/30 on/off-piste, getting into trees, crud, bumps and moderate powder (12ish"). I think the 93s will be better for me than the 100s, but not sure on length. I'm 5'9", 140, and from what I can tell it seems like a tossup. I'd be coming off my first-ever pair of skis, bought when I was a beginner (159cm, 108/68/97), so obviously anything will be an upgrade, but I want something I can both grow into and advance with. In the end that might mean spending more time off-piste or looking for powder. Any thoughts appreciated!
Thanks
Ian
Hi Ian!
Even though it's quite a bit longer than what you're coming off of I really feel like the 177 cm is the right length for you. 169 cm could work, but I feel like it's a bit short for your size, especially considering you like to ski fast. The Enforcer 93 is known to "ski short" because of the relatively long tip rocker. There might be a bit of an adjustment period, but once you get used to it I think you'll be happy you got the 177 cm.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hey Jeff,
I'm looking to buy my first pair of skis but have some questions about sizing. I'm 6'1" and about 170-180lbs and I'm currently on some 2012 or so 168cm Salomon XDrive seasonal rental skis, and have found myself increasingly unhappy with them as I start skiing blacks and double blacks consistently, not to mention those skis are short for me. However, I'm having a lot of trouble finding the 177cm online. Do you think that I'd be happy with the 185 or should I keep looking?
Thanks,
Romano
Hi Romano!
Hmm... if you follow the "Shop Now" link at the bottom of this page, or search our site for the Enforcer 93, you'll find we have the 177 cm length available in both the 2018 and 2019 version (different graphics, same ski). That being said, I do think you could probably ski the 185 cm length, although it might be a bit of an adjustment coming off much shorter skis.
Either way we definitely have the Enforcer 93 available in the 177 cm length.
Let me know if you want to talk more about length,
SE