2019 Nordica Enforcer 100 Ski Review: // Ski Reviews
The Nordica Enforcer 100 has positioned itself as one of the most popular skis on the market, hands down. It keeps racking up awards from all sorts of publications and ski tests. For 2019 it remains completely unchanged so we thought we would take some time to look closer at the Enforcer 100 and what makes it such a popular choice among a wide range of skiers. You've probably seen our reviews of the Enforcer 93 and most recently the Enforcer 110, but the 100 was the ski that started it all.
A common wish among skiers is to combine performance characteristics that are basically on opposite ends of the performance spectrum from one another. Everyone wants that magic ski that will carve turns on groomers, but float in powder. Skiers want a ski that's stable and quiet for high speed skiing, but quick and snappy for slower speeds and tighter terrain. There is arguably nothing out there that blends these characteristics better than the Enforcer 100. Sure, there are skis that outperform it when you focus on each individual performance characteristic, but it's the combination of them that makes this ski so special.
Before we talk more about the ski's performance in different terrain and snow conditions let's talk about its design and construction. The Enforcer 100 is (somewhat obviously) 100 mm under foot, has a rocker/camber/rocker profile with quite prominent tip rocker, and has a shorter-than-most turn radius of 18.5 m at the 185 cm length. The Blunt Nose shape has become synonymous with the entire Enforcer line, now carried across all 4 models. The Enforcer 100 is constructed using a poplar and beech wood core that's sandwiched by Prepreg Carbon Fiber and two sheets of 0.4 mm Titanal metal. On paper that's a pretty aggressive construction style, and it can be if you're that type of skier, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.
One of the aspects of the Enforcer 100 that has made it so popular is the ski's ability to adapt to who is skiing it. No, nothing is actually changing depending on who is on it, but it kind of feels that way. The Enforcer 100 is often described as a very intuitive ski. It's uniquely approachable for different ability levels and different levels of aggressiveness. It really feels like it knows how you want to ski and reacts accordingly. It's easy to look at the ski's specifications and construction breakdown and think, "that's a hard-charging, expert ski," and you wouldn't necessarily be wrong, but it can be more (or less) than that too.
Let's think about how the ski performs on firm, groomed snow. A full wood core, carbon fiber, and two sheets of metal suggests you can ski it pretty darn fast without the ski feeling unstable, and you most certainly can. As long as they're on a long enough length even the most aggressive skiers likely won't push the Enforcer 100 past its limits. In fact, in our testing, it doesn't really have much of a speed limit. The tail isn't super stiff and there is quite a bit of rocker back there, so you do have to stay relatively balanced if you're really charging on it, but it's plenty of ski. Let your weight fall back and you'll feel the tips move around a bit as you can get too far into the tail rocker, but as long as you're staying balanced and forward it's all there.
On the other hand, you don't have to be a hard charging skier to enjoy it on groomers. Because of that tail rocker and the fact that the overall flex of the ski isn't ridiculously stiff it's surprisingly easy to release the tail edge when you want to. This is one of the reasons it's appropriate for such a wide range of skiers. If you can link high speed carving turns like a GS racer you can do it on the Enforcer 100. If you can't, no worries, you don't have to. There are other skis in this category with stiffer tails that don't like to pivot, smear, and skid turns on groomers, but the Enforcer 100 doesn't mind at all. It also has a nice amount of energy and rebound out of a carving turn, which is again something that feels like its tailored to who's skiing it. If you're comfortable really flexing a ski you're going to fully engage the wood core and the carbon fiber and you get a nice, responsive, energetic feel linking turns. If you're still working on giving a ski more input you're not going to get bucked by an overly stiff, too-responsive ski.
Images Courtesy of Evan Williams
And that's a good transition to the ski's performance in ungroomed terrain. Let's talk about tight terrain like trees and moguls. The ski's ability to pivot and smear a turn again come into play, giving it a really confidence inspiring feel. Even though it has two sheets of metal you can get the ski sideways really quickly and pretty darn easily. It doesn't feel heavy or sluggish when you need to make quick movements in tight terrain, rather does it with a distinctly smooth and buttery feel. In fact, those are good adjectives to describe the Enforcer 100 in basically any terrain: smooth and buttery. But it's also powerful and can handle aggressive skiers⦠It's like a savory scone⦠smooth, buttery, but there's some substance in there too.
When you're not in tight terrain and you just want to open it up and ski straight down the fall line with big, sweeping turns you really start to realize that substance. It's all there. You can kind of get tricked by the Enforcer 100 because it is so approachable. It's seems almost too good to be true, and going back to skier's demands of combining performance characteristics that seem to contradict each other this is probably the ski that we use those contradictions to describe more than any other. It really is maneuverable and forgiving, but you can still get up on it and charge. After all, what's the point of a ski with two sheets of metal if you can't do that? Some skiers have described getting a little bit of tip flop in the Enforcer 100 over bumpy terrain at high speeds. We think that's a good point, but would also like to mention that basically happens with any ski with this much rocker. You're going to see movement in your tips when they rise that far and that long off the snow. It's not tip chatter, it doesn't make the ski feel unstable, you just get a little bit of movement.
Of course, then there are those days when Mother Nature treats us to the deep stuff. Sure, it might not happen often, but when there's a foot of fresh snow on the slopes the powder day frenzy is upon us and you don't want to feel unprepared on skis that aren't capable in deep snow. The Blunt Nose profile of the Enforcer 100 really gives it a great feel in deep snow. Sure, it's not powder-ski-width by today's standards, but it floats really nicely for a ski of this width and when you start to sink in a little bit the tips don't feel grabby or catchy, they feel smooth, consistent, and really give the ski solid performance in powder. The shorter turn radius also helps give you the ability to control speed, especially when combined with the rounded, rockered shape of the tail. It cuts through powder effortlessly, allowing you to swing and wash your tails around really easily even when they're under a foot or more of snow.
Image Courtesy of Evan Williams
We get a lot of questions regarding what length to choose after skier's have decided they want an Enforcer 100. We understand why as it's fairly easy to find yourself in between sizes. We don't think there's an end-all, tell-all answer to whether you should size up or size down if you think you fall into this category. It all comes down to how you like to ski, how aggressive you are, the terrain you like to ski, etc. We will say that most people who find themselves between sizes end up going with the longer of the two as the Enforcer 100 does ski a little bit "short," but again it's not that cut and dry. If you're having trouble deciding what length is right for you don't hesitate to leave a comment on this article or reach out to us directly. We're happy to help.
To summarize, what makes the Enforcer 100 so popular is its blend of performance for different terrain and snow conditions, the fact that it can be an appropriate choice for a wide range of ability levels and skier types, and its smooth, buttery, intuitive feel. This will be the 4th season for the Enforcer 100 without any changes to shape or construction, and why not? If it ain't broke, why fix it? The Enforcer 100 is definitely not broken⦠not even in the slightest sense.
I have gone through two pairs of Volkl Mantra's & 2 pairs of Blizzard Bonafides over the last 8 or ten years. I was really impressed with both of these skis especially the Bonafides.
I have to say that the Nordica Enforcer 100 is just as stable at speed & carves as well as these two skis but is much easier to ski in bumps & in soft snow & steep terrain. Not to mention less demanding & more forgiving!
I am 6 ft. tall & 185 lbs. & demoed both the 177 length & the 185 length.
I ended up buying the 185 length as it felt more stable at speed but not significantly harder to make short turns on.
This is the most versatile ski I have ever owned & I can see why it got top of the category reviews.
My friends who have also demoed my Nordica's were also wowed!
Way to go Nordica!
Has Nordica released the graphics for the Enforcer 93? I've been looking to buy a pair and it seems like the only difference between 18 and 19 models will be graphics, so I'd like to be able to know whether I should buy sooner or later.
Please help with my decision. I have Rossi Experience 83(176cm) and Faction ct3.0(182cm). I want to add one more ski to my quiver. I want something I can use for all conditions and to travel with. E83 is good for carving but not good for anything deep, and ct3.0 is good on powder but not fun on icy snow. I'm torn between Enforcer 93/100, Head Kore 93/99(next year model), and Sky 7 HD. What waist width should I get for my 3 ski quiver? How does Sky 7 HD compare to the other two? I'm advanced intermediate, 5'10", 185lbs w/o gear. I don't ski very fast, top speed 50mph. I ski in bound most of time and sometimes side country. I like ski trees and moguls. I ski mostly in Whistler BC, so snow conditions change a lot even on the same day at different elevation. Also, what length would you recommend? Do you ship the ski with binding mounted? Thanks!!
Hi Romano!
Yup! Did you watch the video on this article? The 2019 Enforcer 93 is right there next to the 100. No difference in construction or shape on any Enforcers from 2018 to 2019, so might as well buy sooner! We will actually have the 2019 online in just a couple days available for purchase if you want that graphic, it will just be a couple days most likely.
SE
Hi Bing!
I think something around 100 mm under foot would be a good third ski for your quiver. In my opinion that's going to give you a nice mix of performance characteristics for different snow conditions. Not much use going narrower considering you already have your Experience 83, and the shapes of all the skis you listed are much more versatile than your 3.0s, so I think will work really well as that middle ski. The Sky 7 HD is definitely lighter and more maneuverable than the other two, although the Kore 99 is also pretty lightweight. Enforcer 100 has the best stability at speed, with the Kore 99 2nd, and the Sky 7 HD 3rd for stability. You could say the opposite in terms of playfulness and maneuverability, although the Enforcer 100 isn't on the end of that spectrum by any means, it's still quite maneuverable considering those two sheets of metal. So, whether you value maneuverability or stability more in theory should help you make your decision.
For length I would stick close to 180 cm. Even if you go with the light Sky 7 HD I don't think you need to size up to the longer length.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello from Norway.
Im wondering is this is the ski for me, so I wondered If you could clarify my uncertanty.
I want a ski for 70% in the tracks/slopes/hard snow and 30% of pist/soft snow.
I dont need super speed.
I want a fun ski with pretty easy handling.
Is it possible to ride backwards at lower speeds (in the tracks)?
I like som small jumping and the ability to takes om quick turns and have a lot of fun.
Im now going from snowboard ti skiiing, is this an ok shift, or is it the wrong skl to start with, is so, what ski is the "best" for me?
Im 182cm high (and ca 75kg weight), so what lenght should i buy?
What boots do you recommend for mye points above and these skiis?
Thank you for great reviews on youtube!
Best regards from Norway!
Hi Even!
Although we talk about the Enforcer 100 being pretty forgiving a lot, it might be a little bit too much ski for you if you're just switching to skiing from snowboarding. From your description of your skiing (I dont need super speed. I want a fun ski with pretty easy handling. Is it possible to ride backwards at lower speeds (in the tracks)?) the first thing that came to mind was the Nordica Soul Rider 97. I ski one pretty frequently, and although it's not as hard-charging as the Enforcer 100 it's still a very high performance ski that's just a lot of fun. You don't need to ski fast to unlock its performance, it's an easier ski than the Enforcer 100, and you can definitely ski it switch. The Enforcer 100 will go backwards, but it doesn't ski switch particularly well because it's a directional shape.
Hope that helps!
SE
Please help with my Enforcer conundrum!
Me: 45yrs old, 6' tall, 180lbs.
Northeast skier, Jay Peak, Sugarloaf, Cannon, etc...
I ski everything, from on trail to trees to side country. Looking for one ski quiver. What I'm struggling with is whether to go with the 93 or 100 width, and whether to go with 177 or 185 length. I've demoed the 93 in 177, and the 100 in 185. I'm leaning towards the 100 in 177, but am not sure. Any advice you could provide to assist in this dilemma?
Hi SB!
Follow your instincts. Having tried both the Enforcer 93 and the 100 and both the 177 cm and 185 cm lengths you should have a good idea of what's going to work best for you. Really the only thing I would add here is that a lot of skiers your size end up going with the 185 cm length. Not everyone, but a fair amount. That being said, if you skied the 177 cm length and didn't think it felt short, I think that's a perfectly appropriate size. The length factor really only comes into play at really high speeds or in really tight terrain. The 185 cm is a little more stable, the 177 cm is a little more maneuverable, but it's a marginal difference in my opinion.
What do you think?
SE
Great review guys , I am also looking for advice on length , I'm 174cm tall 154Ibs , advanced skier like going off trail 177cm or 185cm? Whats the skis pow depth limit ? like over a foot would I need something wider or can it handle more ? thanks in advance
Hi Kevin!
I think 177 cm is plenty of ski for you, although if you really like skiing longer lengths the 185 cm is pretty manageable for a lot of skiers your size, as long as you're at least an advanced skier. The Enforcer 100 does really well in powder. I would say a foot is about the cutoff to where you might want a wider ski. The tip shape does really well in deep snow despite it not being the widest ski out there. You'll also get a little more float out of the 185 cm, but that length does require more skier input to maneuver.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello. I am hoping for some advice on sizing. I ski in the Pacific Northwest, 5'-11" and 175lbs, on 13 year old twintip park skis, 169cm @ 85 underfoot. I am overdue for an upgrade, and the Nordica Enforcer seems like the best fit.
I am debating between the 100 or 110, 177cm or 185cm. I spend about half the time on piste making turns and going fast, and half the time off-piste going slower in the trees or goofing around in the crud. I can rarely time getting to the mountains on a powder day, so the 100 makes more sense over the 110. Does the 100 still get you on top of wet, 6"-12" snow, or would I need the 110 to be stable up on the higher terrain at Whistler? I am leaning towards the 177 just because I'm used to a short centermounted ski, but your advice favors going for the 185 for similar skiers. Would I wreck with a 185 in the trees? Is it worth demo'ing a Head Kore 105 or Soul7 to compare with the Enforcer? Thanks for your help.
Hi Steve!
If you're spending half of your time on groomed slopes I would stick with the 100. It definitely outperforms the 110 on firmer snow conditions, is a little quicker edge to edge, holds an edge better, etc. It still does really well in soft snow too. I would have no issue with skiing it off-piste in Whistler terrain. Sure there are some days out there where I'd prefer the 110 if it was really deep, but for the most part the 100 will perform great. I kind of agree that 177 cm is probably more appropriate considering you're coming off of shorter, lighter, center mounted skis. 185 cm might feel like a lot of ski to you.
If you have the means it would be interesting for you to try the Soul or Kore compared to the Enforcer. I would guess you'd prefer the Kore over the Soul, but maybe not. If you decide not to demo any other skis I don't think you'll be disappointed with a 177 cm Enforcer 100 by any means, but it's always fun to try more skis.
SE
Hi SE,
I was wondering if I could get your input on picking the second ski to replace both my QSTs for soft snow conditions? I currently have two pairs of Salomon QSTs, the 99s (181cm) and 118s (185cm), but while I find them confidence inspiring I find that I am aggravating several old knee and middle back injuries that I haven't noticed my previous pairs of skis (2016 Rossignol Soul 7s 188cm, 2015 Experience 88s 180cm, 2014 Atomic Automatic 109s 189cm ). So far I have attributed it to the stiff tail on the 99s sticking in deep chop and steep bumps. Whereas on the 118s I think its the combination of the abrurt rocker profile and stiff camber underfoot providing less suspension when the snow gets tracked out. It has gotten so bad that I can only ski about 2-3 hours on these skis, any longer and I am putting ice packs on for several hours after.
That said, I recently demoed the Nordica Enforcer 93 (177cm) and I had zero issues skiing a full day in the variable snow, ranging from heavy chop to refrozen chunder. Currently I am looking for a second ski to pair with a Blizzard Brahma (180cm), which I plan on using for speed days and have narrowed the options down to the: Nordica Enforcer 100 and 110 ( 185cm), Rossignol Soul 7 HD (188 cm) and the Armada Tracers 98 and 108 (180cm). So my question for you is: do you consider either of the Nordica Enforcer 100s or the 110s, the best options if I am looking for a playful ski with a good suspension that can still be pushed fairly hard?
I am 5'11", ~ 160lbs and live in the Southern BC interior, where on powder days I tend to gravitate to a mix of playing the cedar glades and surfing down the big rollers. For reference, I found the 2016 bonafide (180cm) to be a great ski but too much ski to enjoy skiing the glades if I was off my A game that day.The 2016 Soul 7 (188cm) was great for these, expect its lack of dampening and edge I found nerve-wracking when I the snow packed out or dealing with dust over crust.
Apologies for the lengthy read, I don't get the opportunity to demo many skis at our hill ( Silver Star).
Cheers
Alex
Hi Alex!
My first impression on your comment is that if you like the feel of the Enforcer 93 you can probably rule out the Soul 7 and the Tracers. Those skis just don't have the stability and vibration damping of the Enforcer, and it sounds like that's part of what you really like about that ski.
I think the Enforcer 110 could be a really nice compliment to your Brahma. The 100 would work too, but the 110 with its slightly lighter core and more tail rocker really hits your description of a playful ski that can be pushed hard. That's pretty much exactly how I would describe the 110. I personally ski it a lot and find its shape is quite playful, but its construction allows for aggressive skiing and really has a smooth, stable feel.
What do you think?
SE
Sorry for the late reply! That's interesting hearing your comments about the Enforcer 110. One of the local shops described them as rolling tanks in comparison to the enforcer 93 and sadly didn't bring them in. I broke down and purchased the Enforcer 93s in 177cm, from the same shop, and really fell in love with them the last few days of the season. For me, the enforcer 93s really hit that sweet spot of being forgiving, lively and stable in the variable conditions this spring. Though I definitely found that on a few surprise powder days I was wishing for a longer version with more tail rocker to handle the deep chop (20-50cm) a bit better after things got tracked out.
Despite being a great deal, the Brahmas turned out to be too stiff in the 180cm at my size (150 lbs), so I am going to be moving them on the cover the costs of the Enforcer 93s.
Before the season's end I also had a chance to demo this year's Soul 7s (188cm) and the Volkl 100eight (181cm) and like you guessed about the souls, they just weren't for me. I found Volkls to be too bi-polar in skiing style, likely due to full rocker and the Soul 7s to be too one dimensional for my tastes. From your desciption, the Enforcer 110s in 185cm seem to fit the bill of being a wider, longer and more playful version of the enforcer 93s. I'll definitely have to keep an eye open for a pair.
Thanks again for the awesome feedback and reviews! We don't get a chance to demo many ski's out here and I really appreciate Ski Essential's video reviews for their honesty and the amount of information you provide.
Cheers
Alex
Hi again Alex!
The Enforcer 110 definitely doesn't feel like a rolling tank in my opinion. The Pro, maybe, but not the 110. It has a softer flex than what I would describe as a "tank." Lighter weight wood core than the 93 and 100 too. They're really fun. Relatively quick and playful for a ski that wide with two sheets of metal, but still plenty of stability for skiing fast and aggressively. They really did a good job with the subtle changes to the 110 in construction and rocker profile compared to the 93 and 100.
We're all sold out of the 2018 Enforcer 110, but we do have the 2019 graphic available if you're itching to pick up a pair.
SE
Hi SE!
Thanks for great review. I'm currently deciding between Enforcer 100 and K2 Pinnacle 105.
From reviews both seems to be pretty versatile skis which is what I'm looking for. I'd like to have a ski which is stable in powder and chopped snow but also easy to turn in tight trees and when skiing moguls. Could you advice which one of these two holds an edge in such conditions? I'm less concerned about performance on groomers though.
I'm 179cm and 82kg and looking at 177cm version of both skis but may be I should go one size up? I'm advanced to expert on-piste skier and now progressing quickly off the piste and have a slight preference to maneuverability and playfulness.
Cheers
Dzmitry
Great review! Am considering the Enforcer 100 and the Atomic Vantage 100, but looking for a bit of advice. I am an "expert" level, aggressive and occasionally sloppy skier. I am 6'4 and 215 lbs so I need a decently stiff ski. Half my time is spent in the east on groomers and half my time is spent in the west hunting powder, trees and bumps. Both skis seem to fit my needs. I have demo'd the Vantage but not the Enforcer. It seems the Enforcer might be a bit softer and have a bit more rocker? It looks like the Enforcer is unchanged for 2019, but the Vantage is getting a revamp. So... should I pull the trigger on the 2018 Vantage, or wait till the fall for the 2019 Vantage or Enforcer?
Hi Dzmitry!
I was a little bit on the fence about which ski to point you towards until I got to your very last comment, that you have a slight preference for playfulness and maneuverability. The Enforcer 100 and the Pinnacle 105 are both fantastic skis. We actually have a couple staff members who have gone back and forth between the two so to speak. I think both skis could potentially work for you, but the Pinnacle 105 is a little easier to throw around because it's a little bit lighter. Still has plenty of stability for choppy conditions, but leans more towards playfulness and maneuverability than the Enforcer. I think a 177 cm Pinnacle 105 would be a lot of fun for you and should help you to continue to progress quickly off piste.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Graham!
I wouldn't necessarily say the Enforcer 100 has a softer flex than the Vantage. It does feel different, however. The Enforcer 100 has really good vibration damping and a very smooth feel. The Vantage is a little more responsive, energetic, but doesn't quite have the same super-damp feel as the Enforcer 100. The Vantage changes quite a bit for 2019. If you enjoyed the Vantage 100 and can find a good deal on one I would say that's a pretty good choice. You know you like it, you know you won't be surprised, etc. We're anxious to do a little more testing on the 2019 Vantage, and will have an opportunity next week to really put it to the test. I can't yet claim to be able to compare the new version to the Enforcer 100. Soon though!
SE
Hi, thanks for the review. I am 5'9" 165lbs very aggressive skier who likes to carve high speed GS turns on groomers but also wants to be able to ski light pow in the rockies. I currently have the Brahma 180cm which is an awesome ski. However, I find that it's not very versatile...It holds like nothing else on groomers and ice but is not quick enough in bumps and doesn't have much float or playfulness in trees.
I'm considering swapping them for the Enforcer 100's, which I demoed and found to hold almost as well but be much more versatile. How do you think these two skis compare and what length should I look at. I demoed the 177's but they felt slightly short. 185 sounds long as well though...wish they had something in between...
Hey Matt!
The shape of the Enforcer 100 (and 93 for that matter) gives it a much more versatile feel in my opinion. Much easier to release the tail edge and get the ski to pivot, which allows for a quicker feel in bumps and trees. To me they have about the same overall level of stability and vibration damping. There is less rocker in the Brahma, so a longer effective edge which translates to the better edge grip you're feeling, but the Enforcer 100 does darn well considering how much rocker it has.
I can understand why you feel like you're in between sizes as I'm about your size exactly, however I feel right at home on the 185 cm length. I have said in the past that anyone who can handle a 180 cm Brahma can definitely handle a 185 cm Enforcer 100.
Hope that helps!
SE
Have some really old ski's (Rossi S3's, 98 underfoot). Love these ski's for their ability to tackle alot of terrain but am looking for a "technology upgrade" Demo'd Enforcer 93, Armada invictus, Rossi, Soul7, Mantra's, etc. Enforcer 93 was the best on that day. Primarily east cost skier, 10-15 days at Vail/BeaverCreek/Breck. Really like the Enforcer. Should I go for the 100 given I'm skiing 98 underfoot today? What length? I think my Rossi's are 178. I'm 5'11 170, 57 yrs old.
Thoughts appreciated.
Hi, I currently ski the Brahma 180 and really like it. It feels a bit long at times (trees/bumps) and I tried the Enforcer 100 and loved them. Looking for some ability to ski powder, primarily in Colorado.
Do you recommend the 177 or 185? I am 5'9 168 with a racing background/ski style. I really like high speed gs style turns when on smooth terrain but go in the trees and off trail a fair amount also. I'm wondering how the rocker compares to the Brahma so I can decide if 177 will be enough ski for me. Thanks
Thanks! Really appreciate the advice (I am Matt who has the 180cm Brahmas). Think you are right. Brahma's feel slightly long and I don't think 3cm makes much of a difference so will appreciate the additional rocker probably. Brahma's in 180cm have never been even close to unstable at speed - very much like being on GS skis so can probably sacrifice some on that aspect.
David,
Keep in mind that the difference is a mere 8 centimeters. That's four in the tip and four in the tail. If you're on the 177, you will probably wish for the longer pair more often than not. The rocker profile makes them ski a bit short, and given your height, weight, and skier ability, I'd advise the longer pair. You may find them to be a handful in the tight trees from time to time, but overall you'll probably appreciate the stability. Have fun!
SE
Hi,
I mainly ski my 165cm kastle fx 95 hp's. I love them, but they're a bit unforgiving, and I find they really require some effort to ski well. Some days I just want to ski something a bit softer and more playful. I'm considering the enforcer 100 for this purpose. Would they be a good fit? Also, I'm on the smaller side (5'8" and 140lbs). Do you think 169cm would be too much ski?
Thanks,
Matt
Hi Matt!
The Enforcer 100 might be a little more playful than the FX 95 HP, and the flex pattern is a little bit softer, but it's not drastically different. The Enforcers, like your Kastles, also require a fair amount of skier input and effort. What about something a little lighter and even softer-flexing like the QST 99 from Salomon? That ski takes playfulness to the next level, and feels like it could be a good choice considering you already have the Kastle. In other words, I'm not convinced another ski with two sheets of metal is the best compliment to your existing skis with two sheets of metal.
Check it out and let us know if you think something like the QST 99 is up your alley or not.
SE
Hey thanks for the review. I am an advanced skier on the east coast. Get in about 20 days a year in NY/VT plus a week out West. I am 5'9" and 175. I currently ski on a 2017 Atomic Vantage 90 CTI in a 176, and while I like it for its versatility, I don't LOVE it. I think it can get a bit nervous at speed and is a bit narrow for anything more than 4-6 inches of powder. The 176 length, however, feels about right with its mild tip and tail rocker. I am looking to change it up next season. I am looking at skis around 95-100mm in the waist. I am primarily looking at the M5 Mantra in a 177, the Bonafide in 180 (demoed the 173 and it felt short), and the Enforcer 100 (leaning toward 185, but feel between sizes).
I like to ski a bit of everything. Mostly groomers with my family, and mostly off piste with my friends. I love steeps, trees, and moguls. Understanding that you are VT-based - if you're familiar with the Castlerock chair at Sugarbush - that is the kind of terrain I love. I am worried the Bonafide might be too much work for a full day in that kind of technical terrain, and in trees. The M5 sounds interesting, but without 2 sheets of metal, I am afraid I would be signing up for another Vantage 90. The Enforcer 100 sounds like it might be perfect, but I am worried about its performance on eastern ice and which size to get. Can you comment on the Enforcer 100's grip on ice?
Could you also help me figure out which of these sounds right for me, and which size? If you think I am neglecting any other skis, feel free to let me know. Appreciate the help!
Hey Alex!
I think you'll probably love an Enforcer 100. I know what you mean about the Vantage 90 getting a little nervous at high speeds. It's a great ski, but just doesn't quite have that stability and vibration damping some skiers are looking for.
I'm familiar with Castlerock terrain for sure. I do think the Bonafide is kind of challenging in that terrain. Just a little bit hard to maneuver and unforgiving. The M5 could work, but just based off the description of your skiing and your past experience on the Vantage I think you'll prefer the Enforcer 100. It has this unique ability to make a skier feel comfortable and confident in a variety of terrain and different situations, which is one of my favorite things about it, and I think a performance characteristic that's important when skiing terrain like Castlerock. On firm snow I think you'll be happy with their edge grip. If anything I think a 185 cm Enforcer will grip slightly better than your Atomics even.
I am about your size (5'10 and 150 lbs) and the 185 cm feels perfectly manageable for me. I'm relatively aggressive, but it sounds like you're a pretty advanced skier so I don't think you'll have any issue on that size. I often mention that I think a 185 cm Enforcer 100 skis shorter than a 180 cm Bonafide, so if 173 cm Bonafide felt short I would guess 177 cm Enforcer 100 would also feel short.
Hope that helps!
SE
SE
Hi SE,
Great review. I've settled on the Enforcer 100 but am wondering what size I should go.
I am 5'10" and 180 lbs. I am an aggressive skier who likes to go fast, carve, and can occasionally get a little sloppy if the ski isn't damp enough through some chop. On-piste I'm an expert. I am progressing off-piste and need a ski for it. I demoed the 173 Bonafides, and thought it was a bit too much ski, the tail would get stuck on me from time to time through bumps. Should I go 177 or 169 in the Enforcer? At this point 177's are becoming hard to find. Do you think the 169 will provide me with enough float off-piste?
Thanks,
Tom
Hi Tom!
At your size I think you should at least get the 177 cm Enforcer 100. At your size and ability level I think the 169 cm would feel short. The Enforcer definitely skis shorter than the Bonafide. The tail is much easier to swing around especially. Some skiers your size actually go with the 185 cm length, but I think 177 cm would probably be plenty of ski for you. We have the 177 cm available right now if you want to pick one up!
SE
Hey guys, great review. I am yet another skier in between sizes and am hoping for your advice. 5'-11", 175lbs, expert on piste, advanced off piste. Ski in Washington state on wet snow, 30% groomers, 50% chop crud pow, 20% bumps and trees. Prefer speed and stability over playful and surfy. Demo Rustler 10 @188 was too big without fresh snow, demo QST 99 @ 181 felt good but too light for hardpack and got bounced around on the icy chop. The great debate...177cm or 185cm? Or make a blind leap of faith and snag a Mindbender 99 @184? Thank you!
Hi Tom!
My guess is if you found a 188 cm Rustler 10 to be a little too much ski, you'd probably find the 185 cm Enforcer 100 to be too much ski too. Maybe not, but that's my instinct. The Enforcer 100 uses a little less tail rocker than the Rustler, and feels heavier in terms of swing weight. In my opinion a 188 cm Rustler 10 and a 185 cm Enforcer 100 are similar in how demanding/forgiving they are. 184 cm Mindbender 99 Ti could be that Goldilocks ski/length. Lighter swing weight than the Enforcer, still absolutely rips when you want it to... Definitely a contender!
What do you think?
SE
Hi SE,
Thanks for the review. I'm definitely sold on the Enforcer 100, but I'm stuck on which length to go with. Could you give a suggestion?
I'm 5'8" and 155 lbs. I have a strong ski racing background (expert skier), so a skis' ability to handle speed is always a plus (leaning towards a 185 for this), but I'm wondering if that is too long for something like tight trees based on my weight (hence the debate between the 185 and the 177). I'm looking for a ski to mostly take off the groomers because I do hold on to a pair of GS skis for that instead, but I want something that will hold up well in the powder almost everywhere.
Everyone I've talked to about the Enforcer has said to go for the longer 185 over the 177, but I'm not 100% sure yet. What would you guys suggest?
Appreciate the help!
Hi Zach!
So, I'll start by saying that I'm 5'10" and 150 lbs and prefer the 185 cm length. I've got a couple inches on you, sure, but I'm really not that much bigger. Considering your skiing background I think you'll be just fine on the 185 cm. I wouldn't make that recommendation to everyone your size, that's for sure, but as an expert skier who likes to ski fast I think you'll prefer the longer length. You'll lose a little bit of maneuverability in tight terrain, but as long as you're comfortable with that I say go for it. I have fun skiing both lengths (177 and 185), but I prefer the 185 cm for charging and don't mind the little bit of extra effort it takes to maneuver them.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi,
Thanks for the great reviews. I'm in the market for a 30/70 touring/resort (40% piste 30% off piste 30% touring) ski that I'll mount with the shift bindings. I'll ski about 50% east 50% west cost. I'm 185cm 78kg, off piste I'm an intermediate and still struggle when the conditions are difficult. Therefore, I'm looking for a ski that is a bit more forgiving. Maybe something like enforcer 100, qst 99, sky 7 or the 90 eight. Which one would you recommend? (I'm open to other suggestions as well:)
Cheers,
Gadi
Hi Gadi!
In my opinion the Enforcer 100 is a bit heavy to be used as a touring ski. There are people that do it, that's for sure, but it's on the heavier side. I think a QST 99 with a Shift could be really cool. You're matching brands, which really doesn't matter, but in my opinion Salomon essentially designed the Shift specifically for a ski like the QST 99. I also feel like that ski has a really nice blend of performance to be used as a 70/30 touring/resort ski. Sky 7 and 90Eight could work too. Sky 7 is lighter and uses a ton of rocker and early taper. Exceptionally maneuverable, but at the cost of some stability. The 90Eight is somewhat similar to the QST 99, although it feels a little bit more precise, while not quite as playful or forgiving. The QST 99 is quite forgiving for still being a high performance ski. I really think that would be a great setup for you.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi SE,
Thank you for the fast response.
Which length would you suggest for the qst 99 181 or 188?
The 188 might be better for my height, however, I was considering the 181 to allow for better maneuverability while skiing and lighter weight and easier kick turns in touring. What do you think?!!
Cheers,
Gadi
Hi again Gadi!
I think you'd be just fine on the 181 cm length, and I agree it would be a little more maneuverable and would be a little more efficient while touring. I'm a little smaller than you, but in testing the QST 99 I found the 181 cm to be surprisingly stable. I'm often tempted to go with longer lengths, but I was very comfortable on the 181 cm length and I think it would work well for what you're looking to do.
SE
Hi. Just wanted to ask I am currently in between the 169 and 177 and don't know what to go for. I am an aggressive skier probably going off piste and ski a little big mountain.
Thank you.
Hi Marc!
What's your height and weight? My guess would be you can bump up to the 177 cm length. Most times when an aggressive skier feels like they are between lengths on the Enforcer 100 it's worth going with the longer length, but let me know and I'll see if it changes my opinion.
SE
I'm East Coast skier and am starting to ski more out West. I'm looking that'll cut through crud and ski powder better than my Elan Amphibio 76 176.
So Nordica Enforcer 100 or Elan Ripstick 106.
Sounds like the Enforcer might cut through crud a little better.
I'm 5'10" 205.
Sounds like I'd want the 185 in the Enforcer and maybe 181 in Ripstick.
Thoughts?
Dave
Hi Dave!
In our testing, yes, the Enforcer 100 does cut through crud a little bit better than the Elans. It's more stable through choppy snow conditions and has better vibration damping. It's also heavier, although most people find it quite user-friendly despite its two full sheets of metal. The Ripstick 106, in my opinion, is a better powder ski, but only because it's a little wider and lighter. That said, the Enforcer 100 is no slouch in powder by any means. If you're really valuing that cut-through-crud performance I think the Enforcer is the way to go. Also, yes, at your weight and ability level I would go with the 185 cm length.
Hope that helps!
SE
What bindings would you recommend? I'm seeing Tyrolia Attack2 13 and Marker Griffon ID 13. In fact, your site has the Attack's mounted on some Enforcers. Both of these are 110 wide. I guess that's not too wide for 100 width skis?
Thanks
Dave
I am in the market for new skis this year. I ski in the midwest and take an occasional trip out west. I currently ski the Blizzard Bonafide's. I am trying to decide between the Rustler 9, or Enforcer 93,100. I like the Bonafide but felt like I needed a softer ski for powder days and bumps. Also I am 5'9" 190 and an advanced expert skier.
Thanks,
Mike
Hi Dave!
The 110 mm brakes fit nicely around a 100 mm ski. That's only 5 mm of extra width on each side, so won't hit the snow even if you're at a really high edge angle.
Binding choice is somewhat subjective, although we do mount a lot of Attack2 13s and Griffons on the Enforcers. People like the wider platform, and they have proven performance and safety over the years. There's some personal preference between the two, mostly focused around how the heel piece feels when you click in, but they're both great bindings.
SE
Hi Mike!
The Rustler 9 and the Enforcer are both awesome. The Rustler 9 essentially retains the feel of the Bonafide underfoot, but the tips and tails are lighter, softer, and use more pronounced rocker. On firm snow you still get a very precise, pretty powerful ski, but then the tips and tails allow for much easier maneuvering in softer snow conditions. The Enforcers, on the other hand, have a very even flex profile from tip to tail. They are exceptionally smooth thanks to the two sheets of metal, but because it's thinner metal than what's in your Bonafides they have a softer overall flex and are a little more forgiving. They don't feel quite as quick as the Rustler 9, but are also quite easy to maneuver. They just have more of a smearing preference than the Rustler 9.
Obviously the Rustler 9 and Enforcer 93 are pretty close in width. If you want to bump up to the 100 mm width range you should be considering the Rustler 10 against the Enforcer 100; that's a more even comparison.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Ski Essentials - Love your site, and have a question on the Enforcer 100's. I currently have a pair of Vokyl Kendo 170's that I use in New England most of the time, and also have a pair of Atomic Vantage 100's that I use for powder days here in the East, and also when I go out West to Utah in the winter. I am looking for a ski that will turn a little easier in the trees when I am at Alta, but something that I can use back East, thus the 100 width. I really like the Vantage 100's, but they seem on the stiff side in the trees. I am 5'10", 205 lbs, age 58, advanced / expert level skier. I was planning on purchasing the Enforcer 100, but I feel like I am between a 177, and a 185. I am also looking at the Rustler 10, but after reading your review on the 9, I am also considering that as well. What do you recommend for an East Coast ski that will work out West as well. I usually travel to Utah every winter, but home base is the East. Love your site, thanks !
Hi Matt!
The Enforcers will definitely be an upgrade from your S3s! In my opinion if you're looking for similar versatility in your new skis I would go with the Enforcer 100. It performs similarly to the 93, but gives you slightly better performance in soft snow, un-groomed terrain, etc.
For length you could either go with 177 cm or 185. I am, however, leaning towards 177 cm. The Enforcer 100 is a much more stable ski than your S3, so I don't think you need to size up to the 185 cm. That 177 cm will be easier to maneuver than the 185 in tight terrain. The S3 also uses a lot of tip and tail rocker, so skis a bit short, and I think bumping up to that 185 cm length would be an unnecessary adjustment.
What do you think? Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Matt (the one who skis Brahmas),
I'd say it's a bit of a toss up on length for you. The Enforcer 100 has much longer rocker, especially in the tip, compared to the Brahma. So, while it does ski a little "shorter" and is a more forgiving flex pattern, that 185 cm length is probably going to feel about as challenging in tight terrain as your Brahma. Perhaps a little easier just do to the slightly softer flex, but actually increased swing weight, so not exactly easy to throw around. So, the important question here, in my opinion, is whether the 177 cm would feel unstable at speed when you're railing GS turns. At your height and weight my instinct is to say no, I don't think it would feel unstable, so I'm leaning towards 177 cm. I just feel like you'll appreciate the quickness in tight terrain of the 177 cm, it's not like that's an exceptionally short length, and the Enforcer 100 uses two sheets of metal, so my instinct is 177 cm is more appropriate.
What do you think?
SE
Hi Mike!
I think a 177 cm Enforcer 100 or 180 cm Rustler 10 is probably the way to go for you. My first thought was that a 185 cm Enforcer 100 will not turn more easily in trees compared to your 170 cm Kendo. That extra 15 cm in length essentially negates the softer flex and more maneuverable shape. More swing weight, and just a much longer ski to manage. The 177 cm Enforcer 100, on the other hand, should be easier to maneuver than your Kendos through the trees, moguls, etc.
The Rustler 10 provides an interesting option as the tips and tails are lighter, use more rocker, and are softer flexing than the Enforcer 100. Both skis fall into that "will work on east, but also out west" category, but I think the Rustler 10 is the better performing ski in true powder conditions. You mention that you use your Vantage 100 as a powder ski, so maybe that's not a huge concern, but I thought it was worth bringing up. I also think the 180 cm Rustler 10 performs similarly to the 177 cm Enforcer 100 in terms of how demanding/forgiving they are. Rustler 9 is quicker edge to edge, and a great east coast ski, but not quite as capable in deep snow conditions. If you wanted to focus more on east coast performance, however, the 9 would be the way to go. It would still be a lot of fun out west, and you'd have your Vantage 100 as your wider, more powder-oriented ski. You could make an argument that the 9 is a better compliment to your existing skis (Vantage 100) too.
Let us know what you think, happy to chat more about it.
SE
HI
I'm having trouble deciding on a size for the Nordica Enforcer 100. Currently I ski the Rossignol Experience 84 in a 178cm.
I'm 6ft and 170lbs,pretty aggressive and technically sound. Especially on the groomers as i can carve pretty good. Carving
is my favorite thing to do, but I do venture all over. I mainly ski at Mt. Baker WA and looking to get a little wider ski, I love how my
Rossignols carve. One other ski I was looking at is the Volkl 90Eight, what are your thoughts on these two skis.
Thank you
Michael
Hi Michael!
A lot of skiers around your size who consider themselves relatively aggressive opt for the 185 cm length. Based off that and your experience on a 178 cm Experience 84 I think you'll be fine. It's a heavier ski than the Experience, but the actual effective edge on firm snow will be about the same as the Enforcer uses much more rocker.
The 90Eight is kind of a different animal. Much, much lighter with the 3D.Ridge construction. Not as stable as speed, doesn't have the same level of vibration damping, but it is very quick, agile, and versatile. It definitely has a very different feel, however.
Hope that helps!
SE
Currently skiing on 16/17 Blizzard Bonafide 188's. I'm 6'4", 240 lbs. Ski fast and aggressive. Like groomers, powder, not many bumps. Thinking of going to the 193's in the Enforcer 100. Thoughts? How do the Bonafide and Enforcer differ?
Thanks, Mark
Hi Mark!
You'll find the Enforcer 100 has an overall more freeride-oriented or playful feel than the Bonafide. It's a little bit softer flexing (the metal is thinner), but still nice and stable at speed. If, say, you were looking for a ski that's a little more maneuverable and more forgiving in softer snow conditions, but still rips groomers, the Enforcer 100 will be pretty perfect for you. More pronounced rocker in the Enforcer 100 allows you to pivot and smear the ski much more easily. You're on the right track with length, if you can handle a 187 cm Bonafide, you'll have no problem on the 193 Enforcer 100.
Let me know if you have any other questions!
SE
Hi there, thanks for the great reviews and information.
I have been skiing for 2 seasons now and luckily have picked it up pretty quick and I am now skiing my Volkl RTM84s @ 171cm comfortably on all groomers and most off trail terrain (except deep powder), although I still need to slow it down a bit on the steeper off trail stuff, chucking some more tighter turns in. I have definitely outgrown these skis and am looking to upgrade to a bigger better ski that will let me continue to progress all over the mountain. I am 5'11" and 90kgs and like to ski fast and aggressively on the groomers and off trail, except for some of the steeper stuff, as noted. I mostly ski in New Zealand and occasionally Europe. I see myself skiing 60/40 off trail / groomer, going forward, with more off trail and back country, as I progress.
With the upgrade in mind, I got the chance to try some skis at a recent demo day. I tired the 2019 Nordica Enforcer 100s in 177cm and 185cm length. I also tried the 2019 Blizzard Rustler 10s in 180cm. I tired the 177 enforcers first and really enjoyed them. I felt i could ski them in my normal style, with the edges gripping well and turns linking easily. I liked the stiffness of the ski and the responsiveness of it and the stability over some of the crud. The 185 enforcers I also really liked and enjoyed the added stability over the 177s and the ability to charge even harder. I did definitely notice the extra work to ski them and didn't feel I could quite jump on and ski them similar to my own RTMs the same way I felt about the 177s.
The Rustler 10s I only had 1 run on but I absolutely loved. They were great fun, really great on the groomers and left me with a big smile. I went hard on them and felt so at home, even more so than my own skis. I did notice the softer flex than the enforcers and one downside was the added movement when travelling over some of the crud. Loved this ski but concerned that I can already ski them straight off the bat in one run. I would like something I can grow with and learn from.
So, as much as I loved the Rustlers, I am leaning towards the Enforcers as I also really enjoyed them and could feel they have more to give as I progress. I gather that there is performance in the ski for the expert but that the ski is pretty forgiving in letting me get there. Would really appreciate your thoughts on whether you think this is the right choice. Would also love your thoughts on whether I should be looking at the 177 or the 185? Would the 185 just be too much ski for me and push the step up one step too far?
Thanks for all the information above, hope to hear from you soon!
Hi Adam!
I replied to your comment on the Enforcer 100 Ski Test page. Did you see my response? I've copied and pasted below:
Hi Adam!
Definitely sounds like you're picking things up pretty quickly, awesome!!
Both the Enforcer 100 and Rustler 10 are awesome skis. Thanks for providing so much detail in describing your experience on each ski, it really helps.
I think the Rustler 10 is the way to go here for you. I like that length for your size and current ability level, and I think that ski has a nice feel and nice level of performance for someone like yourself. I definitely think you'll be able to continue to progress on them, I certainly wouldn't worry about that. In fact, because you feel comfortable on them I think you'll progress more quickly than on the Enforcers. It doesn't have to feel challenging to mean you're getting better at skiing. The Rustler 10 will allow you to play around with different skiing techniques and different turn shapes more easily than the Enforcers. Also, keep in mind the Rustler 10 does use metal and is still a very high performing ski. Some of our staff members are aggressive, expert skiers around your size and skied the Rustler 10 quite a bit this past season. It has a great mix of being relatively forgiving and playful, but still plenty stable, holds an edge well, etc.
The Enforcer 100 is a great ski, but I think there would definitely be a choice to make whether to go with the 177 cm or 185 cm length, while the Rustler 10 at 180 cm feels just right. I also think the extra weight of the Enforcer and the stiffer tips and tails would make it a bit more challenging for you to continue to progress.
Let me know what you think! Perfectly happy to chat more about it.
SE
I'm about 5'6" 160 lbs and an advanced skier. I ski mostly in Tahoe but do an annual cat trip in BC. I have been skiing on scotts for a while and just destroyed my punisher 110s (173) which I liked quite a bit. so I have to (get to) do some ski shopping. I also have a pair of JJs for powder days so I'm looking for my everyday ski. I'm deciding between the mantra and the enforcers although leaning towards the enforcer 100s. Any suggestions between the two (or others I should consider) and if I go with enforcers whether the 169 or 177? Thanks much.
Adam
Great article. Have narrowed it down between these, mantra, camox, and dameaon. Mainly east cost skier, with advanced abilities.
Thoughts on the differences? Mainly think black crows can hold their own out east?
Hi David!
In terms of all-mountain performance, it's pretty tough to beat the Enforcer 100. For comparisons, the Mantra has more of a hard snow pedigree than the Enforcer, and the Black Crow skis are better suited to soft snow. The Enforcer sits right in the middle. If you're a lighter-weight skier, the Black Crows could be a nice choice, especially if you spend time in the moguls and tighter trees. Overall, the Enforcer 100 is pretty much a fantastic do-it-all ski with more of a freeride nature. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi! Looking for advice on sizing on the Enforcer 100. 6' 220lb advanced skiier, spend 60% of my time on groomers, the rest of the time seeking out trees and slopping through moguls. I've demo'd the Enforcers 100's in 177 and enjoyed them in all conditions, tried the Enforcer 93's in 185 and felt a tad much in the moguls and trees. Looking to buy the 100's - am I cutting myself short in buying 177 instead of 185? Thanks!
I am considering the Enforcer 100 as a 2nd ski. Last season I was on the RTM 84 (177), which was great for ripping as much vertical on the groomers as possible before picking up the kids from ski school. This season I'm going to have the good fortune to ski 50+ days at Stowe with much more leeway. I'm basically looking for a ski to do "everything else", which for me means preforming in soft snow on the odd powder day, eating the slop and crud, and taking me off trail for the first time in awhile. The only thing I don't care too much about is bumps.
What say you? AM I barking up the right tree with the Enforcer 100? Are there other options I should consider? Do the Enforcer 100 and RTM 84 make an optimal 2 ski quiver for northern VT? As of now, I am planning on keeping the Volkl for all those hard pack days.
Of course I will be deciding between the 177 and 185 is I do go with the Enforcer. I am 5'11", 185, advanced skier with 40+ seasons under my belt. Normally I'd opt for the longer ski as you suggest in the review, however I am weighing that with my desire to get back off the trail a bit where I would benefit from some easier maneuverability.
Thanks in advance for your advice, I will definitely be purchasing through you guys and look forward to seeing you on the mountain this season. Your reviews and site in general are very informative and much appreciated.
Hi Henry!
First of all, let's go skiing together! We're based in Stowe and at least someone from our staff is at the mountain every day. Let us know next winter when you're up this way and we'll come spin some laps with you!
To answer your question, you're barking up an awesome tree. That should be a fantastic two ski quiver for you. There are other skis in the Enforcer 100 category that are slightly easier in bumps, but since that's not a big concern for you I think you'll absolutely love them. Pretty much perfect for what you're looking for: "soft snow on the odd powder day, eating the slop and crud, and taking me off trail for the first time in awhile."
It's always a bit of a toss up when choosing ski length, but I think in the long run you'll be happier with the 185 cm. You've skied it, you know you like it, and the more days you have on it the more you'll get to know its overall feel, which will make maneuvering in tight terrain that much easier. You'll get a little better float in deep snow with the 185 cm, more stability as you felt for yourself, and it sounds like you'll be able to maneuver them just fine. It might take a little time to adjust to the longer length, but I do think you'll appreciate having it in the long run.
Hope that helps. Let's go skiing!
SE
Hi SE!
Just wrapped up a pretty good season and am looking to replace my Brahma 173cm skis with something wider that can handle everything. Have heard really amazing things about the Enforcer 100.
I'd consider myself advanced/expert on-piste and intermediate/advanced off-piste. I do ski really fast on my Brahmas, but need something that can handle the powder/crud conditions better (happy to sacrifice some speed since I'm not a spring chicken anymore). I'm 5'8 and weigh around 160.
Kind of leaning towards the 169cm length, but am worried that I'd be giving up TOO MUCH since I read Enforcer 100's ski a bit short already.
Thoughts? Or should I really be looking at something like Rustler 10?
Thanks!
Hi Henry!
A bunch of us have backtracked a bit in regards to the Enforcer skiing a bit short. At first, I think we were all very impressed as to how quick and agile the ski was given the construction, shape, and profile, and as a result, we called it "short." A few years down the road now, and we're all realizing that it's also extremely stable, so the 169 can ski above its length. It's a nod to the versatility and overall impression of the ski, so I don't look at our initial reaction as a bad thing, just a learning curve. If you like the stability of the Brahma, I think it'd be difficult to go to the Rustler 10 because you'd be giving up quite a bit in terms of power. The Rustler is more of a finesse ski while the Enforcer is more of a battering ram. That said, you'll get better float and powder performance out of the Rustler, just not quite the same crud/broken snow abilities. Also check out the 2020 Enforcer 104 Free which is basically a wider Enforcer with a more playful tail as well as a stiffer Rustler 10. Perhaps a good fit? Have fun!
SE
I'm a 65 yr old , 60 yr+ yrs of experience.
I want a second ski. I'm a technical skier; no longer very aggressive. I'm 5'7"...with new knees I don't ski bumps...well a little bit...
My carver is an Atomic Vantage 83 cti...great groomer/hard snow ski..I ski 50 + days per yr; mostly at Beaver Creek/ Vail....
The Enforcer 100 in a 169 sounds like the ticket.....thoughts?....anything else I should consider?
Hi Seth!
How much do you weigh and how long are your Vantage X 83s? I think the Enforcer 100 is a fantastic choice to compliment your existing skis and will be really fun for you in that Beaver Creek/Vail terrain. I'm asking about your weight because a lot of skiers your height end up going with the 177 cm Enforcer 100. If that's significantly longer than what you've been skiing it might make more sense to go with the 169 cm. Let me know and I'll let you know what I think about the length of the Enforcer 100 or if there are any other skis I think would work better, knowing weight and what you're used to will really help.
SE
Good Article. I currently ski a 178 Volkl Mantra from 2008 (no rocker) and have legit skied everything on them. I have my old GS and Slalom skis for hard pack groomer days. I have found myself wishing for some more float when I score a powder day out west. I've kind of narrowed my search down to the (185) Nordica Enforcer 100 or maybe 110, (184) Black Crows Atris, or the (184) DPS Wailer Alchemist 112. Would love to hear your opinion. The only time hard pack and edge hold comes into play is the skied off entry points to big mountain lines to get the goods!
Hi Ryan!
How much additional float are you looking for? You might not find the Enforcer 100 has significantly more float than what you've been skiing on. Definitely a little bit, but it's not a drastically wider ski. The Enforcer 110 could be a really cool option. Way more float, but still some of that stable, powerful, damp feel that you're likely used to coming off race skis and a Mantra. It uses two sheets of metal, but it's relatively thin metal so not super heavy. I've spent quite a bit of time on them and they're super confidence-inspiring in tricky big mountain terrain. The Wailer 112 and the Black Crows Atris are both awesome skis, but don't have the same stability as the Enforcer 110. Just a guess that you'd appreciate that feel based on what you've skied in the past. Both the DPS and Black Crows also use more early taper, so a slightly different feel overall, more focus on quick pivoting maneuverability.
Hope that helps!
SE
I am coming off Dynastar Cham 97's that have finally just seen too much action. I loved these skis and I'm looking to replace them with either: enforcer 93, enforcer 100 or Brahmas. I'm 5'8" 200, aggressive VT skier. I ski everything on the mountain but in the end I'm an eastern mountain skier-- I was leaning towards the 93's but the 100's seem like I'd get maximum float and not really need to swap out unless it gets really really deep.
Questions are these: Edge grip on the 100 vs 93? I am quite fine with setting an edge with my cham 97s, How's are the 100's at laying a good edge in?
Top end: I was thinking about going 93 so that I could get some more top end (Cham's are not great on the top end).
Brahmas: would I find these just too narrow to enjoy the same versatility that I'd found in the chams? On the Cham 97 you can pound through crud and ski off slop like it isn't even there....
Will be going with 177-180cm length.
Thanks
Am 5'8 and 165 pound advanced/expert skier who skis mainly in the east but am able to head west two weeks each year and tries to jump around to many different places but Snowbird is my favorite. Usually head west in mid to late March and will even stay into early April. Am looking to round out my three ski quiver.
Own an Elan SLX 165 length
Head Kore 93 in a 171
And am looking to replace the original Rossignol Soul 7 in a 180 and thinking the Enforcer 100 in a 177 might be ideal.
How will it compare to the original Soul 7 and your thoughts on that as a three ski quiver?
When I head West, I take the two bigger skis.
Hello,
I'm 5'11" and weigh 160. Aggressively ski on current model slalom race skis the majority of the time. When skiing off piste, there are usually trees involved, rather than big open bowls. Which size would you recommend in the Nordica Enforcer 100?
Thanks!
~Bruce~
Hi Drew!
Torsional stiffness and edge grip is really similar between the 100 and the 93. The 93 is a little quicker when transitioning from edge to edge and arguably initiates quicker, but realistically there's not a huge difference between the two. If you're happy on your Cham 97 with its on-trail performance, you most certainly won't be disappointed by the Enforcer 100. Top end performance is about the same between the two to be honest. In fact, if you're talking variable snow conditions, I would prefer to be skiing fast on the 100 just because it will stay more stable over bumpy snow conditions. Just about the same overall feel in terms of stability at speed.
Brahmas. You might find them too narrow, but I think it's really the stiffness and the camber/rocker profile that is more important here. Because the Brahma is quite stiff, and because it uses a lot of camber, it's pretty demanding and fairly difficult to ski in tight terrain and soft snow conditions. It's a beast on firm snow and absolutely rips, but can be a handful in tight terrain. Rustler 9 would likely be more appropriate.
Overall I'm leaning toward the Enforcer 100 for you, especially if you're concerned about float and soft snow performance. As you mention, you're gaining some performance in that terrain, and you're not really giving up much at all.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi CWH!
The Enforcer 100 is definitely a more powerful, more stable ski than the Soul 7. It's a blast to ski in off-piste terrain and soft snow conditions, but be aware that it's a bit heavier than your Soul 7s. It is, however, impressively forgiving considering its power, stability, and vibration damping. It's not exceptionally demanding. In direct comparison to the Soul 7, you'll lose a little bit of float in real powder conditions, but the Enforcer 100 is a more versatile ski overall and should be a blast for places like Snowbird.
Sounds like a pretty fun 3-ski quiver to me! In theory you could get a wider ski as your third ski, closer to Soul 7 width, but you don't necessarily need to. The Enforcer 100 is perfectly capable in soft snow and I think you'd enjoy the way it handles a variety of terrain. In fact, if I was taking a trip to Snowbird and had those three skis in my quiver, I'd probably just bring the Enforcer 100 and leave the narrower skis at home. If you went with a wider, more powder-oriented ski, I'd want to bring the Kore 93 too for those days when there isn't much soft snow.
Does that make sense? Hope it helps!
SE
Hi Bruce!
Somewhat of a toss up for skiers our size (I'm about 5'10" 150 lbs). Your mention of off-piste skiing involving trees more often than bowls, however, makes me lean towards the 177 cm length. That length is just barely shorter than you, which isn't exceptionally short or unusually short by any means. It should provide the necessary stability for some aggressive, high speed skiing, but will maneuver more easily through the trees. Again, it's a bit of a toss up, but I'd probably go for the maneuverability of the 177 cm over the extra stability of the 185 cm if I were you. That said, plenty of skiers your size go with the 185 cm. it's basically personal preference, how fast you ski, the terrain you ski, and how much extra effort you're willing to put in in tighter terrain if you went with the longer length.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi - I am currently skiing the bonafides in a 180 and love the ski for stability and speed but feel like they are a lot of work in the tight trees ,im 6 feet 168lbs and cant decide between the 177s and 185 in the enforcers - want to go fast but the next ski i buy has to be more friendly in the trees also - any thoughts?? Thanks Frank
Hi Frank!
The Bonafide can definitely be a lot of work in the trees. It's relatively stiff and doesn't use a lot of rocker or early taper. It's also fairly heavy because of the two sheets of metal. Now, while the Enforcer 100 also uses two sheets of metal, they are thinner. That makes it a touch lighter and a little softer flexing, but still has really good stability at speed. Because it uses much longer, more pronounced rocker than the Bonafide, it skis a bit shorter. Overall it's more maneuverable and more forgiving. Because of those differences, I think you're relatively safe going with the 185 cm length. I've often said a 185 cm Enforcer 100 is easier to ski than a 180 cm Bonafide, even though it's longer.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hey guys. I am a skier from Brazil, most of the time I ski in chile and argentina. I am 181cm and 75kg. I ski 80% of the time on piste, but when there is fresh pow, I have fun.. Normally we do not get deep stuff down here. Right now I ski a BBR 8.9 166cm and an Elan GSX WAVEFLEX 182cm. All with titanuim... As you have noticed I like stiff skis and I am a carve enthusiast...as fast as my technique allows...rs Unfortnatelly LATAM airlines just lost my double skibag with my two skis, leaving me with only my atomic temper TI 174. Ihave decided that I will buy only one ski, and basically would live to get another BBR. But cannot find them anymore, unfortunatelly.... Iam trying to find a new "wide carver" that handles speed (south american ski speed...rs) and can take out on fresh snow... Researching on some models on internet reviews I found some skis ( nordica enforcer, elan ripstick, salomon qst, atomic vantage). What would you recomnend me if I told you that my BBR 8.9 were the best ski I ever skied, and would like to get a new ski that is pretty much like BBR or even better. Thank you guys
Hi Daniel!
My instincts are that you'd really like the Enforcer 93. Part of that is because it uses two sheets of metal in its construction, and it sounds like you prefer having a substantial amount of metal in your skis. Also, the BBR is a unique ski in its ability to carve, but also handle soft snow really well. While the Enforcer 93 is a bit of a different animal (doesn't have that giant tip shape, tough to find that shape anymore), the resulting performance is comparable. I would say the Ripstick, QST, and Vantage might not have the feel (mostly in terms of vibration damping and stability) that you're looking for. The Blizzard Rustler 9 also comes to mind. Great carvability, really good in soft snow too. Overall, however, I'm leaning towards the Enforcer 93. It feels more like a modern BBR than anything else we're talking about in the sense that it achieves a similarly wide range of performance characteristics and performance. Also, I would probably get the 177 cm length, kind of split the difference between your old skis (it uses a fair amount of rocker too).
Hope that helps!
SE
Great review...thank you! Had a chance to demo many 2019 90-100's last spring with the Mantra 177 a narrow margin winner. I got a chance to ski the E93 in 177 (the 185 unavailable) and really liked it, the 180 Brahma and appreciated the stability but not the maneuverability. I'm 5' 11" 205 lb and really have my heart set on the Enforcer 100 in a 185 for the following reasons...
-Mantra was really maneuverable and carved nicely, but didn't have the fore/aft balance or damp feel of the Brahma.
-The Enforcer had that ultra damp feel and smeary feel that I like, but was a bit short for me to really open up with.
I like to think the E100 in 185 would be "my ski" for here in the east provided it comes close to the maneuvering ability and carvability as the Mantra in 177, just with the damper feel? Would the swing weight be significant?
Thank you!!!!!
Hi Donny!
I think you're on the right track here. At your size the 185 cm Enforcer 100 is going to be the more appropriate length. I can understand why you didn't feel confident to really open it up on the 177 cm length, but I don't think you'll feel that way on the 185. That length compared to the 177 cm M5 Mantra I think you'll find they hold an edge similarly well on firm snow when linking carving turns. I think a 185 cm Enforcer 100 is also arguably more maneuverable than a 177 cm M5 just because of the different shape. A little more rocker and a little more early taper goes a long way for maneuverability.
Swing weight between the 177 cm and 185 cm isn't going to be drastically noticeable. Is it heavier? Yes, but it's a marginal difference and I wouldn't worry about that if I were you. In my opinion, I agree, 185 cm Enforcer 100 is your ski.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello,
I just bought a pair of these and was considering putting a pair of King Pin bindings on them to use in the resort and in the back country. I probably split time 70/30. I know the ski is versatile, but do you think this set up will cover all my needs?
Thanks!
I am wondering what the difference is between the Nordica Enforcer 100 2018 vs 2019 ski.
Hi Alan!
To me the Kingpin is more of a 30/70 Resort/Touring binding, rather than the other way around. I would take a look at the new Salomon/Atomic Shift. You'll get better, safer performance as an alpine binding with the Shift. It is heavier than the Kingpin, but in my opinion it's worth it for the downhill performance.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi James!
No changes from 2018 to 2019, just a new topsheet graphic.
SE
Hi, thanks for the great content. Am also looking for advice on size for Enforcer 100. Maybe 193? I'm 6'4", 175 lbs. Ski fast and aggressive on groomers but am more measured in bumps/trees, etc. Love ripping groomers, and I don't want the ski to limit my speed. Can and do ski anywhere on the mountain. Sierras mostly. Currently quiver is Volkl 100Eight in 189 cm and Experience 88HD in 180 cm. Two very different skis, as you know. Want something that combines both, of course! Also considering Mantra M5 btw, but I lean Nordica. Any advice is helpful. Thanks!
Hi Ken!
How do you feel about the length of your 100Eights? If you feel perfectly fine on the 189 cm length you should be able to ski the 193 cm Enforcer 100. It is quite a bit of ski, but you describe yourself as a pretty aggressive guy and that you don't want a ski to limit your speed, so you should be just fine on that length. It's always a bit of a toss up when choosing length for the Enforcer, but I usually recommend the longer of two lengths for anyone who is in that upper-echelon in terms of level of aggressiveness. Of course it will be a touch more challenging in moguls and trees, but if you're willing to work a little harder for the stability and power of the 193 cm, go for it!
Hope that helps,
SE
Currently skiing the Sierras on Salomon shoguns 182 length and weigh 217 and am 6'4 and an advanced intermediate. Looking at Nordicas 100's and trying to figure out length. Am 68 and looking to get better in the bumps with most of my skiing being in the front side. Thoughts on length and applicability of the e 100 as well as blizzard Bonafide ? Thanks
Hi Jeff!
Based on your height and weight, I'd steer you towards the 185. The Enforcer 100 has a good amount of tip rocker which makes them very maneuverable for their size. The 193 would be a handful, and the 177 would probably be too short. In terms of the Bonafide, the 180 would most likely be your appropriate size. Unlike the Enforcer, the Bonafide skis on the other side of "true to size." The Bonafide in a 187 is a pretty serious ski, and in the bumps, it likes to take even advanced and expert skiers for a ride. From an applicability standpoint, if you're spending your time on the front side and want to ski moguls, the Nordica Enforcer 93 is the same as the 100, just 7 mm narrower, and therefore better in moguls, just for thoughts. At the end of the day, the Enforcer 100 is a fantastic ski and has very few, if any, limitations. Happy skiing!
SE
Great review! Been watching a bunch of them and love how in depth they are. Could def use some advice. I am 45 and in good shape (5'10" 170 lbs). I
take a few trips out west every year and always demo whatever ski is best suited for the conditions. This is always based on what the person at demo center recommends as I am out of the loop with skis these days. However, I have 2 girls that I plan to take skiing a lot this winter and winter. They are 9 years old so will be basic groomers (I may peel off for a section to hit some bumps here and there). I live in CT so will be local trips and maybe occasional trip to VT with a couple of guys if possible. So now it makes sense to buy something. When out west I ski 30% of time in moguls/ 50% off piste steeps/ 20% carving on groomers. Is there a ski you would recommend? Is the enforcer 100 good in moguls? Any views on the Faction Candide 2.0? Or any recommendations in general would be very appreciated. Thanks again!
I sure like your site and really appreciate your technical reviews and insight on equipment. I now live in the Pacific NW and ski about 40 days a season. I am 6'3" and about 215 lbs......and almost 70 yrs old. I have been skiing since high school....about 50+ years (wow- time flies) but got sidelined in the Midwest for about 30 years and only made it to Colorado for 4-5 days of skiing each year. I am an advanced skier, fairly aggressive and ski most everything but like linking quick turns at moderate speeds versus all out cruising. With good snow I spend my time skiing trees and the powder bowls. Get into the bumps at times but more so the tracks and cuts between the trees. I have been a Volkl fan for years and currently have RTM 84 (177) and 108 (181) along with some Solomon Q98 (180) which I am thinking of replacing. I find that I am skiing the 108s most of the season, especially last year with lots of good snow in north Idaho. They are great in crud, chopped up slopes and of course powder but feel a bit handicapped on turn radius especially for the trees. I do like the rocker and the way you can skid turns. I am considering the Enforcer 100 to fit into my 3 ski quiver (actually a locker at the mtn.) I think it will be a versatile all-mountain ski and a good fit with my Volkls....more so than the Q98 which seemed too soft to me and not as versatile. Your thoughts? Other considerations? I also want some input on size. I was inclined to go with the 177 but most of your comments stress going up in size. I like the short turning radius of the 177 but don't want to give up stability and all-mountain capability. Your thoughts please. Thanks for your insight.
Thanks Stefano!
You're asking a lot out of one pair of skis, but fortunately companies are answering the call these days. I wouldn't necessarily say that the Enforcer 100 is "good" in moguls compared to softer, narrower skis, but for what it is meant for and how it is built, it's amazingly "adept" at moguls. You're in the right ballpark as far as ski choice is concerned. Nordica also makes the Enforcer 93 that is narrower and therefore "better" in moguls, so there's another option in the same category. Overall, the Enforcer 100 is an amazing all-mountain ski that performs fantastically in all conditions, and is more maneuverable than its competitors. We haven't had a chance to get on the Faction skis yet, but I'd imagine if they're good enough for Candide...
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks Steve!
The Enforcer 100 is an awesome ski and will round out your quiver quite nicely. It also comes in a 7mm narrower version called the Enforcer 93, so if you're looking to split the difference of your other two pairs, that's another consideration. In terms of sizing, go ahead and fire up the 185. I believe you'd find the 177 a bit short. They're pretty maneuverable so you most likely won't be hindered. Good luck and have a great winter!
SE
My main skis are the 184cm Black Crow Atris' which I love on deep and steep powder days! I just purchased the Nordica Enforcer 100's to ride when the days aren't so fluffy. I ended up getting the the 177 length and am just wanting to make sure that I'm not running too short and undercutting stability at speed. I tend to prefer playful but also don't want to be held back from letting loose and charging at will.
Off the top of my head, my ideal length would probably be a 180 but the jump to 185 sounded long on this ski profile. I'm 6ft, 175lbs. I'm probably an aggressive intermediate skier after switching over from snowboarding 4 years ago.
Thoughts?
Hi D L!
I think you'll be just fine. You already have that longer Atris, so I think it makes sense to have a shorter option in your quiver. You don't really need the extra float of the 185 cm because of that, and I think the 177 cm will be stable enough for you. The 185 cm feels like a bit much for an intermediate level skier too, even an aggressive one. Heavier swing weight, more ski to keep track of, etc. I think your 177 cm Enforcer 100 will let you rip around the mountain pretty much as fast as you want, and will be a little quicker, more forgiving, etc or you.
Hope that helps!
SE
Helloooo!
I'm having a bit of an issue here. I'm 23 years, 5'5" and 130 lbs, quite a small adult you might say. I found the nordica enforcer S (junior model) at 160cm and 97 under foot. I'm an intermediate to advanced skier with over 10 years of solid piste experience and 2 years of off piste and i'm looking for having fun on the powder as well as the occasional race down a groomer. Because it is the junior model, could affect the skis performance? Colud you recommend me something else os is it good to go?
Any advice is helpful. Thank you veery much! 😀
I'm 5'7" and 150 lbs and looking at the Enforcer 100. Should I purchase the 169 or the 177?
Hi Razvan,
Because it doesn't use any metal, and for some other reasons, the Enforcer S is a very different ski than the adult Enforcer. Could it work? It could, but it might leave you wishing for a little more ski, so to speak. Are you familiar with the Kore 93? It's a very similar shape to the Enforcer collection, but much lighter, and also comes in shorter lengths. A 162 cm Kore 93, for example, feels much more appropriate than the junior Enforcer.
Let me know what you think. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Todd!
Do you consider yourself an aggressive skier? Do you like to ski fast? If the answers are yes and yes, you can go with the 177 cm length. If your answers are no and no, or even somewhere in the "I'm not sure" range, 169 cm would probably be more appropriate. It's just a matter of whether you really need the extra stability of the 177 cm length. Of course, what comes along with that, is extra swing weight and more ski to keep track of. If you're an aggressive skier, that likely won't bother you.
Hope that helps!
SE
Morning! I'm an eastern 6' 170 lb skier who enjoys ripping the front five at my home mountain, Cannon, in NH. We also have lots of woods and occasional dumps. I want a ski to do it all and I'm quite sure the 100 is it. But length... I spent last year on 185 Hell and Backs from 2012 and loved them. Do you think the 2018 Enforcer 100 in 185 would ski longer or shorter? No tail rocker on the H&Bs so always felt very secure at speed, but in tight trees, I wish they felt a bit shorter. Thanks!
Hi Greg!
The rocker profile in the Enforcer does make them ski a bit short. I'd go with the 185 since that's what you're used to. They are phenomenally versatile, and if you liked the Hell and Backs, you'll love the Enforcer 100's. They're nimble and maneuverable, so the tree performance is fantastic. Have fun!
SE
Hi There,
I'm an X 80 point East Coast racer, competitive athletic 5' 93/4" 169lbs. My current all mtn ski is a 184 Volkl Mantra and I carve on a 174 Rossi Z9. I'm interested in the Enforcer 100 for a Western PoW ski and well you know how that goes........I'll be carving in chudar after 3-4 runs. Should I go with the 184 or the 177. My thought was the 184.
Thanks for your insight, I appreciate it!
You guys do a great job!
Greg
Hi Greg!
I think you mean the 185, which I would still recommend given your experience. They ski a bit on the short side due to the rocker profile. If you're on the 184 Mantra, and feel it's the right size, then the Enforcer will feel fairly similar. Have fun!
SE
Hi there,
I'm soon 16 years, 173cm high and 61kg. And i think the Enforcer 100 should be a good ski for me. I ve been riding skis since i was 4 so im a advanced and also aggressiv skier. I think 177 should be the right size for me. But my question is which bindings are good for this ski. And are there any other possibilitys for the Enforcer 100 which have similar characteristics? Sorry for my bad english.
Best regards from Germany 🙂
Hi Niklas!
If you're advanced and aggressive, the 177 will work fine. We have them paired with either Marker Griffon 13, or Tyrolia Attack 13 bindings, and have found that both work great. Other options are the Head Kore 99, Volkl Mantra, and Blizzard Bonafide. All are similar in terms of construction and control but with small performance differences along the way. The Kore is on the lighter side, while the Bonafide is on the heavier side. Have fun and happy skiing!
SE
Hi,
I'm wavering back and forth between the Enforcer 100 @ 177 v 185. I'm 6'0 175lb. I ski in Colorado and typically stick to groomed runs as I get more comfortable in powder (only a couple years of skiing). I'm not overly aggressive, I'd also like to have something I can grow into a little. I'm not sure if the 185 would be too much or if the 177 would be too short.
Thank you
I am close to pulling the trigger on the Enforcer 100 but I'm on the fence about sizes. I'm 6'1" and 165bs. I ski primarily in Tahoe. I enjoy a wide array of terrain but probably spend the majority of my time on non-grommed black trails. I'd consider myself an advanced but non-expert skiing. I ski somewhat aggressively and I generally make quicker turners.
In the past I've skied the following:
-2015 Mantra-184s. I found them too heavy and difficult to maneuver.
-Soul 7 HD-180. Felt unstable at times and a bit short (insufficient edge length)
-K2 Pinnacle 95 & 105- both 177. Found these skis to be okay. Never felt unstable. Looking for a bit more playfulness.
What do you think? Would the 177 or 185 better suit me?
Thanks!
Hi Andy!
Considering your size, your experience as a skier, and that you're still working on improving your ability, I would go with the 177 cm length. You're not exceptionally heavy, so I don't expect you'll find it too unstable. On the other hand, it will be more forgiving and a little easier to control, which should help you work on your technique and improve as a skier.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Kevin!
Based off your size, description of your skiing, and your experience on all those skis, I'm leaning towards 177 cm. To start, you're not super heavy. Next, the swing weight of a 185 cm is going to feel pretty similar to the swing weight of a 184 cm M5 Mantra. Thirdly, the rocker profile of an Enforcer 100 is quite similar to that of the Pinnacle series. So, if the 177 cm length in the Pinnacle 95 and 105 felt good to you, I would assume the 177 cm Enforcer 100 is going to also feel pretty good. What's nice in this situation is you're getting an overall more stable ski out of the Enforcer 100 compared to the Pinnacle series. A little more metal gives it better vibration damping and stability at speed, so I'm really not worried about that length feeling too short for you.
Also, your preference for quicker turns aligns a little better with the 177 cm length than the 185.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi, I really love the excellent content the SE team creates. I'm 42, started skiing 4 years ago after snowboarding for 20 years. I'm 5"11" 185 and am currently on a pair of Blizzard RCti 172. I would consider me to be an intermediate to advanced intermediate and I would like to pick up a ski that allows me to explore the whole mountain. I think the Enforcer 100 could be a ski that allow me to grow into it. Thinking a 185 might be best? What do y'all think? I live in CA and only ski west coast.
Hi Josh!
I'd agree with the E100 over the Mantra--it's got a more freeride mentality. The Enforcer will seem like a stiff Public Enemy, still fun, but with a lot more feedback. I agree with the 185 size. I wouldn't overthink it--the E100 is pretty versatile and sweet. Have fun!
SE
Thanks Kevin!
Sounds like you are on the right track! You'll love the all-mountain versatility and the high-performance ceiling of the E100. If you're west coast specific, I think the 185 is the right length. Have fun!
SE
I am an aggressive skier that leans towards short turns. While I ski groomers, my preference is steep, chutes, bumps, trees (not necessarily in that order). I am 5' 8" & 150 lbs. I have a pair of 2009 174cm K2 Hard Sides that I use for early season. I feel very stable on these and ski them in all snow conditions. I purchased a pair of 177 E100s in 2016. I had them mounted standard. I find that I continually fight the feeling of skiing on the tails - especially in the trees. I am open to moving to a different size ski or having the mounting changed. I am looking for suggestions, as I do like the overall versatility of the E100s.
Thanks,
Kevin
Hi Kevin!
Do you mean that you're finding the tail too stiff, or that you're in the backseat too often? Or both? I don't know if a different mount point would make a huge difference for you. Sounds like you might prefer a ski with more tail rocker, maybe something like the Rustler 10 from Blizzard? I don't think sizing down to the 169 cm makes much sense either, that length feels too short for your size as an aggressive skier.
What do you think? Do you think a softer tail with more rocker would solve your issues?
SE
In clarification - I find that I am in "the backseat too often". I am not sure if more tail rocker would be the answer for me, but would head that way if the feeling is it would help. I should mention that I come from a racer background (skied 205 SL and 207-210 GS for years) and have historically enjoy the feeling of a ski that rebounds. Most of my skiing is done on the off piste "crud" of the NW, but enjoy the rare times of powder we can get.
I appreciate the insight and guidance.
Any idea when you'll have a chance to review the Mindbender 99ti? I was dead set on the E100 but from what I've heard, the M99 might be a worthy choice. I'm really curious on the head to head for a west coaster.
Im 62yo 220lb female. I ski Colorado/Utah advanced, wouldnt call myself expert. I have a knee replacement which doesnt give me any issues. I currently ski on Völkl Kendo 170's
Ive demoed the Nordic enforcer last year, also the mantras and soul7 and a few others (cant remember name)
I ski mostly groomed blacks/dble blacks, I like to ski fast. Occasionally ski powder blacks.
What siize would you put me on in the enforcer? Do you think this would be the best ski for me?
Hi Gina!
The Enforcers are great for what you are describing! If you are comfortable on the 170 Kendo, the Enforcer comes in a 169 and a 177, so I'd recommend either of those sizes depending on your level of aggressiveness. Hope that helps!
SE
SE
Hi length question. I haven't skied the last 4 years due to a bad leg break. Previously was on chochise 185 as my every day ski and loved them. Skied mainly Baker and Steven's Pass. At that time was a pretty aggressive skier. Now in Utah and I expect to tone things down significantly due to age (56) and I'll admit being somewhat timid after the leg break. No more warp drive or jumps for sure. Me 5'8" 170 lbs. Thinking 177 is plenty what say you?
Hi Mark!
I know how it goes. I myself had a bad leg break a few years ago and can definitely relate to slowing down a little bit after an injury like that. Yes, I think a 177 cm Enforcer 100 is a fantastic choice for you. That will feel nice and manageable for you without needing to ski fast and hard all the time, but it will also be stable enough that you CAN ski fast and hard if you want to. You might find you get your confidence back quicker than you think, and even then I think the Enforcer 100 in the 177 cm length would be a lot of fun for you.
Hope that helps, and I hope you have a fantastic season!
SE
First let me thank you for pointing me in the direction of the Enforcer 100 in the Bonafide thread. At your suggestion I went with the 185 enforcer and man they are fun! They in fact do feel much shorter than their 185 would indicate. Super easy to throw around in mixed snow, bumps and groomers. I pushed them quite hard and even when I was going down, they were quick to bail me out! On ice they slide a bit but I'm thinking that may just be because it was my first day on the snow this season. Can't wait for the trees to open up and really get to test them out.
For the record I'm 58 OLD! 6'5" 210lbs and an expert skier. I highly suggest those in the fence take the Enforcer 100 for a spin. I decided to pick up last years at a hefty discount, worth every penny at MSRP! The 185 really feels like your on a 177 or so....
Hi Mark!
Thanks so much for sharing! We're psyched you're loving your Enforcer 100s.
Have a great season!
SE
Hi SE,
I am 5'7" tall and 150 lbs. I have skied the East Coast since I was a little kid and would call myself advanced. I am starting to ski more out west now but I still go to school in Maine so I ski there during the winter a bunch (are the 100's too wide for majority of skiing East Coast?). I am curious as to your thoughts on getting the 169cm vs the 177cm. I like to ski everything but especially the glades. Would the larger size (177) effect me in trees?
Also do you have any other suggestions for skis that fit my description, I was thinking about the Blizzard Bonafide 173cm, but am leaning towards the Enforcer.
Thanks!
Hi James!
I grew up in Maine, so have a lot of experience with that type of terrain. The Enforcer 100 definitely isn't too wide for daily use. Holds an edge really well on firm snow, and it's wide enough to take into the trees, even on a deep powder day. I think you'll probably prefer the 177 cm length. I'm just barely bigger than you and go back and forth between the 177 and 185 cm lengths in the Enforcer 100, so I feel pretty confident pushing you towards the 177 cm. I don't think you'll find it too challenging to maneuver in the trees. The rocker profile and overall shape allows you to pivot the ski pretty darn easily.
Hope that helps!
SE
I'm 6-1 and weigh 190... I'm 72 years old. I've been using the enforcer 100 at 185 length for a couple years. I'm an intermediate to advanced intermediate. I'm not an aggressive skier. At my age, I now stay on blue runs... but on days when there is a lot of cut up snow and bumps I'm having problems controlling the length... so tthinking of buying another pair at 177 length...
for better control...
Good idea? I assume the enforcer 100 at the 177 length would be ok in powder at my age and skill level?
Hi James!
Yeah, I think that's a good idea. The difference between the 177 and 185 cm Enforcer 100 is fairly significant. You won't feel like you have to fight the extra length of the ski nearly as much, and it will still be plenty stable for your size and the way you ski. You really shouldn't feel a significant difference in float, either. A little bit, sure, but not so much that it will perform drastically different in deep snow.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Guys. Need some advice on Sizing Enforcer 100s and how they compare to Bonafide (180 cm). I am 45, 5'10 and 175 lbs and lifelong skier. Ski in New England and make it out West for a trip once a year or twice if super lucky. I am a former racer and have worked with race programs and been known to run some gates but my competition days are LONG over. But it means I ski aggressively, with a solid technique, and appreciate a good turn. I love carving high speed arcs and also like short quick burst turns. I definitely like to hit the woods if conditions are good but if not I will stick to the trails / groomers and play around on the sides, faces etc. I like bumps but don't specifically search out bump runs and so I am not a bump addict. I've ski older Bonafides at 180cm. Good fast skis but a bit challenging in crud. I regularly ski Rossi Experiemce 88 in 180 and like them but need to change up after a few years. I also ski Rossi Hero 183 for GS arcs but solely for those smooth icy days.
Bottom line I am Looking to replace the Rossi Experience with a wider versatile ski. I am looking for that 100wide or close to it. I want good performance on groomer, crud , powder and want to drive a good turn. Which Enforcer size would be best 177 or 185? I ask because I hear they ski short. It just seems that a 100 wide 185cm might be tough to handle in tight spaces. And finally what is the advice on Nordica Enforcer vs Blizzard Bonafide @180cm.
Thanx and ski fast!
Chris
Hello
I've just ordered a pair of enforcer 100 193s. Now I'm wondering if they might be a bit to long. I am 187cm long and weigh around 95kg, 33years old and been skiing since I was 3. I usually ski 70%pist and 30%off. I would say I'm an advanced pretty aggressive skier. Will the 193 be to long?
Best regards Linus
Hi Chris!
That's a relatively common question, comparing the Bonafide to the Enforcer 100. Something I've said plenty of times before is in my opinion a 185 cm Enforcer 100 actually feels more forgiving than a 180 cm Bonafide. That said, it's still a lot of ski.
The Enforcer 100 will undoubtedly satisfy your desires out of a ski. It rips on groomers, but is versatile enough that it's still a lot of fun and not exceptionally challenging (like the Bonafide) in off-piste terrain. So, what length would be best? It depends. Are you willing to work a little harder for the increased stability of the 185 cm? A lot of people answer yes, and in that case, the 185 cm is probably best. On the other hand, if you refer to James' comment below, at times the longer lengths can be a bit much. Did you find your Experience 88 was relatively easy to maneuver in ungroomed terrain? That ski uses mostly camber, so the 180 cm is actually a similar effective edge to the 185 cm Enforcer 100. It's lighter overall, but if you didn't have any trouble maneuvering your 180 cm Experience, I'm betting you could handle a 185 cm Enforcer 100.
What do you think? Let me know if you have any more questions, happy to chat more about it.
SE
Hi Linus!
It depends on what you want out of it. If you're looking for a powerful, super-stable all mountain ski, you'll probably enjoy the 193 cm. As you can see in my response to Chris, it really comes down to what performance you value most when choosing size in the Enforcer. One of our employees, Bob, is about your size and skis a 193 cm Enforcer 100 fairly regularly. He doesn't have too much trouble maneuvering them in tight terrain, but he does admit they take quite a bit of work sometimes.
So, I wouldn't necessarily say it's too long, but you should be ready for a relatively demanding ski.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi all. Thanks for all your efforts. I'm 44, 6'2" and 240# (currently shrinking). I picked up a pair of 185 Enforcer 100s and am currently fretting over the mounting point. There are a few forum posts discussing this topic but they're not conclusive. Im inclined to mount on the line but I'd like to get your feedback first. I'm an advanced skier who likes to charge most everything. That being said, I went for these in order to have a more playful and versatile ski. Something that will be more pleasure (less work) in the trees and bumps. I'm coming from Line Influence 105s. If there's a dump, I've got other skis for that. On bullet proof days I'll pull out the old Super Bro 195s. The Enforcers, I anticipate, will be my go to daily drivers. Thanks in advance!
Hi Ski Essentials
Appreciate the feedback on Enforcer 100's 177cm v 185 and Bonafides. I haven't had any issues with the size of my Experience 88's at 180 except on those days with a a real bad cut up mix of snow, crud, bumps, etc. My concern with the 177 is that they might feel a bit short given the rocker and effective edge and so they will feel much shorter than what I am use to. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but it becomes one more thing I need to adapt to. I am very much leaning toward the 185 and as you can probably tell almost sold on Enforcers. They seem a bit more user friendly.
Thank You,
-Chris
Hey Ewok!
Unless you have a legitimate personal preference about mount points, I recommend the line. I'd imagine you're looking to go forward for the playfulness, and if you do go that route, I wouldn't go very far, maybe +2 at most? Hope that helps!
SE
Hi cgrippo!
Over the Bonafide, the Enforcer is a bit more user-friendly. It has the longer tip and tail rocker, and that does make the ski act a bit on the short side. If you're on an E88 in a 180, I don't see a problem with the 185 Enforcer 100. If you were to go Bonafide, I'd recommend the 180. Happy skiing!
SE
I have a question about mounting points on the Nordica E100s. I am super stoked to get my new E100s @185cm mounted with FKSs. Mucho thanx for the advice on sizing. Can you provide any recommendation on where to mount? I know the factory recommended mounting point is -8.2 cm from ski center (approx 83.9 cm from tail). I have heard comments about moving -1 or +1 from factory recommendation and by doing so will change how the ski feels / responds, rides, etc. Forward is more pivot and smearing, back is more drive and hold. Will moving for or aft of *factory recommended* really matter? Prior to the Enforcers my daily driver has been Rossi 88 @~180cm and never bothered to have them mounted other than at the factory recommended mounting point. They run fast and fine. I mentioned in a previous comment that i like driving turns / like to drive the ski vs let them wander a bit. I am not really a jibber nor mogul skier, but will play around. I prefer good driving turns on soft snow, groomers, sweeping turns in pow. I like glade skiing but dont like to get stuck in between trees (so I will just stay out of tight confining spaces LOL.(.also keeps my skis from getting all beat up some some of my friend's skis). I am definitely not a park person. Any advice / recommendations as to mounting points are certainly appreciated.
Thanx!
Hi Chris!
In our experience the Enforcer 100 skis really well on the recommended line. Moving the bindings forward or back would, in theory, make the differences in performance that you're identifying, but realistically those are super subtle differences in performance. In other words, a skiers ability to manipulate turn shape and how a ski reacts should far outweigh the difference in performance from where you mount the bindings. Does that make sense? In my opinion, the ski feels the most balanced at the factory recommended spot. You're in the middle of the camber, sidecut, etc. If I were you I would go right on the recommended line.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi, I'm 5'8" 190 lbs, agressive all-mountain skier including groomers, moguls, powder, trees, chutes primarily in Colorado and Utah. I'm currently on 177 Hell n Backs and enjoy that length primarily in the trees and clearance in the moguls. I'm wondering if the double rocker on the 100 enforcers may make the 177s feel too short or if I'll enjoy them just fine? How does the stability compare? I suppose I could just demo both the 177s and 185s and see, but I appreciate your opinion nonetheless.
In addition, I'm a big fan of Look Pivot bindings which come with either 95 or 115 brakes. Which do you recommend on these 100s?
Thanks for all your time and thoughtful replies to everyone!
Chris
Hi SE!
Thanks for the superb reviews on skis, the videos and testers' comments. Highly appreciated!
I used to ski for 10+ winters as a youngster, before the carving era. I then changed to snowboarding, started with a race board, charging hard and fast, but converted to a wider, soft binding board to have more versatility and off-piste possibilities. Now at aged 40+ I'm looking to change back to skis. I've tried some random rental gear every now and then, and picked up carving quite easily. I'm thinking of buying some skis in the end of the season and was wondering if you guys would want to pitch in with your opinion as I entertain myself with different possibilities.
As so many others, I'm after a versatile one ski quiver. I expect to ski mostly groomers and whenever the possibility arises, forests around the groomers and proper off-piste as well. With my board I handle it all, powder, moguls, (not too tight) forest, groomers, and uncle-man level park jumping. I'm looking for all-mountain versatility that enables me to handle all things groomed and ungroomed. Also light touring is in the plans. I plan on binding the skis with Salomon Shifts and maybe acquire some Salomon Quest Pro boots that have interchangeable alpine and touring soles.
Altough I'm no expert skier by no means in the current state, I expect to pick up skills rather fast, so I would like the skis to support me for multiple years. I want to be able to charge on groomers, slash through evening bumps and wet spring snow, not suffer on icier surfaces and be able to go off-piste if there's new or tracked snow. I'm not a park enthusiast, altough I'd like them to have a playful element, also not expecting too much very deep pow days. If needed, I'll add lighter and narrower groomer/park skis and deep snow skis later on. Now I'm looking for a well balanced all-rounder.
I've had my eyes on Enforcer 100, Rustler 9 (10 might be too off-piste specific), and Kore 99 (not perhaps handling the bumpy stuff?). I've read about the Pinnacle 95 and Salomon QST skis, but I'm not too enthusiastic about those. I'm most interested in the Enforcer 100. Any others you might recommend for me to check out? I'm 203 cm tall and weigh 215 lbs, so tips on size are very welcome!
Thanks again!
Toni
Thanks for the informative review, SE...wish I would have found you in my earlier searches. I have been in my own torture chamber since the end of last season, trying to select between the Blizzard Brahma or Bonafide, or Enforcer 93 or 100 for the best All Mtn ski for me. I've demoed all but the Enforcer 93. I think I'm ready to buy the Enforcer 100 but wondering about length--185 or 193--especially given the Enforcer's additional rocker. Maybe you have some perspective that will help. I am an Advanced skier that typically skis Tahoe and Mt Bachelor, Oregon conditions. I am 6'1"" and 190 lbs, physically fit and strong, but in my 50s...damn it. I can and do definitely "push it" on groomed runs. But I like to ski everything--groomed, bumps, pow, crud--all on piste. I demoed 185cm Enforcer 100's last spring. They "killed" the slushy untracked crud...impressive. They also seemed to hold their edge pretty well on "spring corduroy," when I could find it. But I'm wondering about holding an edge with my weight and aggressive carving on colder groomed runs in true winter conditions, thus the question about length. If not for their tip and tail rocker, I would not hesitate to buy the 185's (when I demoed 187cm Brahma's in true winter conditions, they were perfect for me on groomed runs).
Thanks in advance!
Pablo
Hi Adam!
You get a little more soft snow versatility out of the Enforcer 100, which considering where you ski, I think you would like having. Both great skis, but the Enforcer 100 feels more appropriate for both Tahoe and BC terrain. For length, the 169 cm should be plenty. That's a little bit taller than you, which is usually a perfect choice for advanced/expert skiers on the Enforcers.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Toni!
So, I'll preface this by saying that if you're looking to buy at the end of the season, you might find that the skis on your list are sold out. You've narrowed it down to some popular skis, which have historically sold out by the end of the season in most lengths. Just a heads up.
Second, what lengths were you on when you were renting? You're a pretty big guy, and could probably ski the longest length in all of the skis you listed, but I want to make sure that's not a big jump in length from what you're used to. It can feel like a major adjustment going from, say, a 170 to a 190.
So, that said, I think you'd find the Enforcer 100 checks all your boxes better than any of the other skis you're considering. First, it's construction is nice and stable, but also not too stiff. It should support your size nicely and it is a very versatile ski. Holds an edge on firm snow, carves very well, yet is also relatively playful and has really good soft snow performance. It's a little heavy for a traditional touring ski, but it will definitely still work for you, especially for light touring. A lighter weight touring ski also probably wouldn't provide the necessary stability for your size.
So, then it comes down to length. 193 cm is probably the way to go. Considering you're 203 cm tall, I don't expect you'll have any trouble on that length. It can be a lot of ski for lighter weight or just smaller skiers in general, but you should be able to handle it. That said, I do want to make sure that's not a big jump up in length from what you're used to when you were renting, so let me know if you remember.
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for the answer! The rental gear has mostly been 180 +/- some centimeters, mostly full camber profile, on-piste specific skis. I've been off-piste only with a snowboard so far. I'm still pondering between Enforcer 93 and 100 and waiting to get on skis a few times more before pulling the trigger. I'm thinking would 93 be more appropriate for my estimated use, although I think I would appreciate the added float of the 100, although groomers would be the majority of the use. The 100 seems to be lighter as well. What other aspects should I consider between the two, especially in terms of forgiveness and quickness in tight spots/moguls?
Toni
Hi SE,
Question on sizing. I am 5'11", around 200lbs, and a fairly aggressive skier. (I like to relax every now and then, but for the most of it, I charge.) I'd say that I am a high intermediate to advance skier. (Can do most black runs no problem, learning how to navigate the deep stuff; though not yet comfortable with that.)
My last skis are 2010 K2 Extremes in a 169. I ran them short because it was fun to be able to turn super quick, and it just gave me more confidence. Now that I am better, I am curious if I should have gone with 185s over a 177 in the Enforcer 100.
I say "should have gone" because I actually just picked up a pair of Enforcers in a 177, and already had Marker Griffon bindings mounted, so I am going about this a bit backwards. (I demoed this size over the weekend, and they felt good; but, I am starting to think that I should have tried the 185s as well.)
If you do suggest a 185, is eBay the best place to try to sell my current skis? Literally just picked them up and realized that, damn, maybe I should have gone a bit bigger. And, I highly doubt the place I purchased them would let me return since they already mounted bindings.
Thanks in advance!
How do these compare to the Hell N Back's? If I love the H&B's in 185, any reason to go to 193 in the Enforcers?
Hi Pablo!
I would go with the 185 cm length. the 193 cm Enforcer 100 starts to turn into a lot of ski, even for bigger skiers like yourself. You really lose some of the maneuverability and forgiveness that makes the Enforcer 100 the ski it is. We typically only recommend the 193 cm for really large skiers. We have some staff members around your size who have experimented with both lengths, and they all have come back to the 185 cm as the way to go. Toni, as you'll see below, is a good example of the size we're looking for when recommending the 193 cm.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Toni!
Cool, if you've been on 180+ rental skis I think you'll be okay on the 193 cm. Again, you're a big guy. We don't recommend the 193 to many people, but you're an exception.
Between the 93 and 100 it's really a question of quicker edge to edge performance or a little more float and stability in soft snow. The 100 isn't lighter than the 93. They use the same construction, and the 100 is wider, thus the 100 is actually a little heavier. That said, the weights are so similar I wouldn't let it affect your decision. If you're just going to have one pair of skis and like to ski a variety of terrain, I'd go 100. It's a little more versatile, especially for soft snow conditions. Handles powder really well, where the 93 can get a little bogged down.
Hope that helps,
SE
Hi Ethan!
First, did you buy them from us? If yes, and you do decide to go bigger, we can talk about ways to make the situation less painful.
Let's not worry about that just yet, however. So, back to length. It really depends where you are in the development and progression of your skiing. Do you need the 185 cm? Maybe, but I'm not 100% convinced. It sounds like you're still progressing your technique and learning to ski new terrain. The question is, would a 185 cm help this progression or slow it down? Realistically, it would only help in deep snow conditions and when you're skiing fast. So, ask yourself, how often are you in those situations? If it's a lot, maybe it's worth sizing up. Remember, however, the 185 cm will be about 5 cm taller than you, which can be a lot for someone still working on your technique. As you already know from demoing, the 177 cm doesn't necessarily feel unstable, right? And the benefit of the shorter length is it's more maneuverable, more forgiving, and less fatiguing. Those are important factors in this situation.
So, all that said, I think you could probably keep the 177 cm, ski them through this season, then maybe sell them at the end of the season. It's not like that's a drastically short length for your size. You're heavier than me, but I'd venture a guess that I'm more aggressive, and I have a lot of fun skiing the 177 cm.
Let me know what you think. Happy to chat more about it! Either way, whichever length you choose, you're going to have a lot of fun this season, so don't worry too much.
SE
Hi Steven!
Overall, more metal and more rocker. That's the simplest way to describe it. No, I wouldn't size up from the Hell and Back. The Enforcer is a little heavier and an overall more stable ski, so no need to size up.
SE
Thanks for the informative review. I'm a late bloomer who didn't start skiing until after moving to California in my late 30's. (I'm 42 now). I've been renting for a few years and now finally looking to buy some skis. Ski mostly in the Tahoe area. I'm 6' 4", 210 lb intermediate skier. Mostly skidded turns, still working on using more of the edges. I'm comfortable on any blue runs and some blacks. Still working on technique in bumps and real steep terrain. I have primarily been an on-piste skier but have recently begun to explore more off-piste and and tree skiing and have really enjoyed it. Last week I demo'd a K2 Pinnacle 95Ti and found them a lot of fun to ski. I'd previously only ever skied narrower width skis (eg. Rossi Exp 84) and was never able to really enjoy venturing off into the deeper snow. I'm intrigued by Enforcer 100's. Sounds like a great 1 quiver ski. Just wondering if it's going to be too demanding of a ski for where I'm at and hinder my development. Appreciate any feedback. Thanks,
Sean
Hi Sean!
At your size, the Enforcer 100 shouldn't be too much ski for you. If you were a smaller, lighter weight skier, I probably wouldn't be recommending it, but bigger, heavier skier have an easier time on the Enforcer 100 than smaller guys. It's a little bit more ski than the Pinnacle 95 you tried, but not drastically more demanding. It might take you some time to adjust to it, as it is a little bit heavier than what you've been skiing in the past, but I don't expect it will take you too long to get used to it. The tail shape lets you release the tail edge pretty easily, but it also can carve well. So, it will work with your current skiing style, but it also should help you continue to progress. What lengths have you been skiing in the past? I think 185 cm would probably be the way to go in the Enforcer 100 considering your size, but let me know.
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for the feedback SE. Yes, I've been skiing primarily stuff in the 185cm range.
Hi again Sean!
Perfect. A 185 cm Enforcer 100 should be a great ski for you.
SE
Hi,
I'm a 22 years old, 6'1", 200 lbs, advanced intermediate skier who skis 40% groomers 60% steeps and bumps at out west resorts in CO, Utah, etc. Trying to decide between the 177cm and 185cm. What do you think?
Hi JP!
I'd go with the 185 cm. Most advanced/expert skiers your size, especially those out west, find the 185 cm is the way to go.
SE
Size advice please? I'm 44 6'1 and about 265. Advance to expert skier who used to ski patrol on 204 skis before the started getting shorter. Living in the westcoast skiing whistler, baker and sun peaks the most. Currently skiing on 188 Rossi sky7hd. I got boots at the end of last season with a 130 flex and am now overpowering the skis. Would you recommend the enforcer 100? In what size? I'm thinking about the 193 but see a lot of recommendations for the 185.
Thanks for your help.
Hi Matthew!
So, to start, the Enforcer 100 is way more ski than the Sky 7 HD. I can understand why you're overpowering that ski considering your weight and that you're skiing 130 flex boots. That said, I'd go 185 cm. The 193 cm is a lot of ski. We have some big skiers on our staff who have skied it, but even those guys generally prefer skiing the 185 cm. The Enforcer 100 is quite stable at speed already. I'd worry you'd find the 193 cm to be a little unforgiving or just too long in tight terrain.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi again SE!
I'm still wondering between the Enforcer 100 and Rustler 9. Reading the reviews it sounds like the Rustler would be a bit more playful. Also at 188 cm I'm wondering would it be more appropriate (vs the 193 cm Enforcer) for amping up my game. Also the lighter weight of the ski intrigues me for touring, as well as the lower swing weight. These aspects pull me towards the Rustler. On the other hand, if I ever add a more playful groomer/park oriented ski to my quiver, the wider Enforcer with the added float sounds good. For some reason I'm more tempted by the Enforcer 100. How would you compare the two?
Toni
Hi Toni!
At the end of the day, there's nothing wrong with either of these skis. The Enforcer 100 has more damping thanks to the dual metal laminate. The Rustler is certainly more playful, mostly due to the turned up tail and slightly softer flex pattern. They are lighter, so if touring becomes an option, I'd give the edge to the Rustler. For high speed, all-mountain freeride and powder skiing, you simply cannot beat the performance of the E100. If you can put the heavier weight in your rear-view mirror, I'd recommend the Nordica.
Have fun!
SE
I have a pair of the 12-13 (I think) Nordic's Enforcers which are bronze with blue graphics (looks like a Torch on the tail of one ski) in 177cm length. I'm 5'9" and weigh 150. I absolutely love them and they are the best ski I've owned. I am an expert and ski all terrain in any conditions at Squaw/Alpine. I had a chance to ski the the 2017-18 Enforcer 100's, at 177cm, today and was thrilled with the increased quickness from the decreased turn radius. Unfortunately, I found them quite skitterish at speed and wonder if this is a common. They are my friend's skis and he also had the same feeling at speed. He brought them in for tuning today and am looking forward to see if there is a change in character. Is this a general issue? I'd be stunned if this is common in a ski that has had almost universal acclaim.
Bruce
Hi Bruce!
Are you experiencing a lack of stability at speed because of chattering? Or are you just noticing some movement in the tip of the ski? Because the rocker profile is fairly long, you will get some movement in the tip up and down. It's not really something that changes the skis performance, but if you're not used to a ski with this much rocker or happen to look down at your tips, it can feel or look kinda funny. The Enforcer also skis a little bit short because of that long, fairly high rise rocker. I am about your size (5'10 150 lbs) and actually prefer skiing the 185 cm length in just about every application.
If you were experiencing a lack of edge grip, not movement in the tip, I would venture a guess it's caused by the tune.
Hope that helps!
SE
I'm 6'2" and weigh 240. I am an advanced (not expert) skier, looking for something that I can slay off-piste but still hold an edgel on the east coast groomers. I like something fast but also playful. Someone is offering me a great deal on the E100 at 193cm. Is that too long for me? I would have probably got the 185cm ones, but he is offering them to me for $200. is 193 too much?
Hi Shawn!
The Enforcer 100 in that 193 cm length is a lot of ski, but that doesn't necessarily mean you can't ski it. One of our staff members is about your size and that was his daily driver most of last season. He's actually a little lighter, too. He did often comment that it was a lot of ski, and went back and forth about whether the 185 cm would be more appropriate, but he still had a lot of fun on the 193. Considering how good that price is, I'd say you might as well pick it up. Worst case scenario, it feels too long, and then you could probably just pass it along to another skier for $200 pretty easily...
Hope that helps!
SE
Looking at the enforcer 100's. Want a ski I can use out west when I travel but can still use here in the east when I'm home. Aggressive skier, love the steep stuff, trees, and bumps. Comparing against the Volkl 90Eight. Worried about the two sheets of metal in the enforcer and how that might make the ski too stiff. Any insights?
Hi Mike!
The metal in the Enforcer doesn't really make it too stiff. It's thinner metal than most skis, and the flex pattern is pretty reasonable, not super stiff, not super soft. It's heavier than the 90Eight, but you get really good stability and vibration damping out of it because of that. As an aggressive skier, I think you'd prefer the Enforcer over the 90Eight.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello,
I bought the Enforcer 100 in a 185, however I'm having trouble releasing the tail edge in moguls... It just seems like it doesn't want to link into the next turn. Maybe I'm just bad now. 6'0 190lbs 33 yrs old. Been skiing for 30 years =\
Thoughts?
Hi Kyle!
That length should be good for you. How many times have you skied them? Still the factory tune? You could try going to a 1.5 degree base bevel for a little surfier feel, or even a 2 degree if you want to get crazy. I assume normal mount point? Let us know if you've had them tuned or anything along those lines. Shouldn't be too challenging to release the tail edge.
SE
Hi, I really like the look of the Enforcer 100's and am close to pulling the trigger on some closeout 2018's, but I am uncertain about the length (and length options are limited with closeout stock) to go with. I am 5'10-10.5, weigh about 150-155, am 40 years old and am starting to really pick up the frequency of my skiing again after some sporadic years. I would classify myself as an aggressive/athletic, advanced intermediate to cautious expert that skis mainly east coast groomers, mixed icy runs, and trees. But I love powder when I can find it, and take one to two trips out west per year. I'm comfortable in western bowls, but not quite chute caliber. I really like the appeal of an all mountain, do everything ski. So the big question, are 169's too short? The next size up on the site that I am looking at jumps all the way to 185 and I really think that would be too long for me. I keep reading about how they run short and can be unstable at speed with the rocker tail - I'm not an absolute speed demon, but I don't want to sacrifice stability and safety when I am feeling the itch to let it run and go fast. Thanks in advance for your input!
Hi Jeremy!
At your size and your current ability level, unfortunately 177 cm would probably be best. That said, some skiers your size go with the 185 cm. Usually we only recommend that length for accomplished advanced/expert level skiers if they're only around the 150 lbs range, but you could probably ski it. Between the two, 185 cm is way more appropriate than 169 cm. That 169 would feel short.
We're sold out of the 2018 version, unfortunately.
SE
Hey there! Looking for some advice!
My names is Matt, I recently purchased some Nordica 100s, 177cm in length. I am 6'2" 190lbs and like to consider myself an advanced skier, but if I'm honest, I'm probably more immediate level. I live in SLC, Utah and love chasing powder days. I love to ski steep blues and blacks but also want to improve my ability to get off in the deep stuff.
The guy who sold me the 100s convinced me to get the 177cms despite my objection and I think I am regretting it, but am not knowledgeable enough to know better. I am wishing that I had got the 185cm just due to my weight and height. Also I hear they would be more stable at speeds and float more in powder if they were longer. I love the way these 100s ski and I like that they're short enough that I can turn them through tracked out moguls late in a powder day if I need to.
Hindsight is 20/20... if I had to do it all over again I probably would have bought the 93mms and the 110s as a two ski quiver. I'm thinking about getting a longer, fatter powder day ski but I want it to still be sble to hit groomers if I get tired. Is 185 the right length if I was going to buy the 110s as a second ski? Or should I be looking at the 193s? Will I see much of a benefit buying the right length 110s given that I already have the 100s in a length that's probably a little short for me?
Hi Matt!
Even if you're closer to the intermediate level, at your height and weight, I would've recommended the 185 cm. That said, it's not the end of the world. The 177 cm is still a lot of fun for someone your size, and you can kind of position them in your ski quiver as your more maneuverable ski for tighter terrain, less soft snow, etc. It's refreshingly fun to be on a shorter-length ski. Less stable, sure, but really fun to get that level of maneuverability. So, while I would've recommended 185 cm, it's not necessarily a bad thing that you got the 177 cm.
Now, for adding the 110 to your quiver, I'd go 185 cm. The 192 (3 depending on which ski) turns into a lot of ski in the Enforcer models. The 185 cm still feels pretty manageable and forgiving, those longer lengths get pretty heavy, fatiguing, and challenging to maneuver even for big skiers. A 185 cm Enforcer 110 has much more surface area than your 177 100, so will really boost float for those powder days. Even though they're fairly close in width and length, you're going to get much different performance out of the 185 cm Enforcer 110. Still performs pretty darn well on groomers too. I bet you'll end up skiing them more often than you might think.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi,
Really appreciate all your reviews!
I'm on the hunt for an additional ski. I'm 6'1", approx 180lbs and currently on some 165cm Nordica Dobermann Spitfires. Former ski instructor who enjoys carving down a fresh groomer, I'm looking for something fatter underneath that I could take off piste on a solid West Coast snow day (think Lake Tahoe area). I used to have K2 Public Enemies and loved them for their versatility and fun, something you could even do a quick lap in the park with every so often.
I was pretty intent on the Volkl Mantras, but recently discovered the Enforcer 100s (thinking 185).
Any advice on the above or any recommendations you could make would be very appreciated!
Thanks!
Josh
Hi again,
Appreciate your input!
I was sold on the Enforcer 100, but right after I posted I saw your review on the Enforcer 104... now I'm stuck again!
To re quote myself:
"I'm on the hunt for an additional ski. I'm 6'1", approx 180lbs and currently on some 165cm Nordica Dobermann Spitfires. Former ski instructor who enjoys carving down a fresh groomer, I'm looking for something fatter underneath that I could take off piste on a solid West Coast snow day (think Lake Tahoe area). I used to have K2 Public Enemies and loved them for their versatility and fun, something you could even do a quick lap in the park with every so often.
I was pretty intent on the Volkl Mantras, but recently discovered the Enforcer 100s (thinking 185)."
How would you compare the 100 vs the 104 in regards to what I'm hoping to do with it?
Again, appreciate your time and help!
Josh
Hi! Looking for some advice on whether to buy the Nordica Enforcer 93 or 100s!
I'm 5'7", 165 lbs and an advanced skiier. I ski in the Lake Tahoe area and spend 70% of my time in bowls/forests/moguls and 30% on groomers, mostly at Squaw. I demo'd both the 93s and the 100s and found the 93s easier to turn on and quicker edge to edge but found the 100s more stable once I had initiated the turn and smoother at speed. This will be my first season skiing 10+ days so I'm expecting to progress a great deal.
I'm wondering whether the 100s or 93s will be the better; thanks!
Hi Josh!
The 104 has a turned up tail and a more freeride personality--it will perform better in soft and fresh snow, but you'll sacrifice a bit of the hard snow carving performance. sounds like you're okay with that, though. If you have the Spitfire, get the wider and more playful ski. Have fun!
SE
Dear Ski Essentials,
Great article! I am a beginner skier who loves skiing and live in New England. I have gone here and there but now, I am going to commit to going more and exploring all the resorts in the region. I really enjoy it. I was wondering what is your recommendation for a good beginner ski, that has the ability to turn and control? I have been googling and the Enforcer 100's looks like a solid choice but your review sort of sounded like the ski might be too fast for me. I am not sure though. I am not looking to go slow but do not care to go ultra fast. I of course want some speed but not an expert skier looking to go super fast. I guess what is your recommendation for a beginner ski with control but not too slow but not too fast?
Thank you!
Maybe I am wrong though about the speed. Thank you for your input
Hi Kevin!
Definitely worth the wait to find out. We've seen the 2020's trickling in, but no scheduled review is in the works at this time. Keep checking, though!
SE
Hi Camilo!
I'd go with the 100, especially if you're 70/30. If it snows, you'll be stoked on the extra width as well. Have a great winter!
SE
Hi Gil!
As a beginner, it's best to find something without a lot of metal in it, which is what the Enforcer has. If you want something fun but not too fast, check out the K2 Pinnacle 85 or the Rossignol Experience 84 Ai. I feel like those Enforcers would be a bit too stiff, you'll enjoy something like these other models a lot more, I believe! Have fun!
SE
Dear SE,
Thank you!! I looked at reviews and impressions for the Rosignol Experience 84 Ai and it looks exactly what I am looking for. I am looking around to possibly buy a pair.
Thanks,
Gil
Hi Matija!
I wouldn't take this thing in the park or ride switch for any measurable amount of time. It's more of a rockered tail than a turned-up tail. Nordica makes the Soul Rider 97 and it's a pretty sweet combination of all-mountain and park. Have fun!
SE
Hi SE,
Great Review. I am planning on getting the 100's. I have a quick question on length. I am between the 177 vs 185. I live in New England and ski mostly on groomed terrain. I like to open it up with larger GS turns and enjoy speed. However, when the snow is good I will venture into the woods. I get out west 1x a year and enjoy getting into chutes, trees etc. I am 6'2" and 205.
I know most people would immediately say 185 with my size. However, I am currently on a pair of Fischer Motive 175. I believe this has a lot of rocker as well. My Local shop feels I would be OK on the 177 as it is wider and beefier ski anyway.
Thoughts?
Thanks
Can you advise length for a very heavy skier please. I'm quite experienced and aggressive on piste and tend to ski fast and wide carving turns whenever possible. Off piste I'm not an expert but still tend to try and take wider turns even in powder and crud just letting the skis power through everything. However I'm also as lazy skier and don't like to have to put too much work in when it gets steep or rocky or poor vis and I have to shorten up. I have used Enforcer 100 last year but not sure the length, they felt good so they are my favourites to buy now but I need to pick 177 or 185. My old skis are stiff Völkl vertigo g3 in 184 but useless for me off piste. Recently I have hired blizzard Brahmas in 177 which didn't float enough and last weekend Volkl mantra m5 in 185 that I found a little heavy and too much hard work in the bumps. While my technique isn't elegant I find it easy to throw skis around and get big angles because of my weight so nothing feels too stiff just the hard work in bumps and at slow speed puts me off the longer skis but I do regularly hit 60mph on piste so don't want to go too short either. Skiing mainly in Europe above the tree line and occasionally Whistler in the trees. I'm 5'10 and 330lbs so about as heavy a skier as you get. Thanks
Hi Scott!
I would also jump to say 185 based on your stats, but if you know you like the shorter length, then go right ahead! They are more stable, so you will get what you need out of the 177. Have fun!
SE
Hi Tim!
I think I answered your question on the ski test page as well, but I'll re-state here: I think your size combined with your level of aggressiveness points you to the 185. You'll appreciate the extra stability of the longer length. The E100 is pretty maneuverable for a dual-metal laminated ski, so I think you'll be able to handle it! Have fun!
SE
And how does it perform in park? Can't tell from pictures how big is tail rocker, is it rideable swich?
Hi SE,
Thanks for the great review. I am an advanced skier living on the East coast looking into the 185cm Enforcer 100. I am currently skiing the Rossignol Experience 88's in the 180cm length. I absolutely love those skis, and they rip on the frontside. However, I am finding that I am skiing more out west than east coast and am looking for a second pair of skis for the deeper snow and off piste terrain. Would you recommend the Enforcer 100 as an out west all mountain ski while I keep my Experience 88's for a frontside day? Or do you think I would be better off going wider for a two ski set up? I have demoed the Enforcer 93 and absolutely loved the feel and playfulness, and am sure I would love the 100 as well. I am worried though that getting the 100 will just replace my 88's and I will no longer feel the need to ski my Experience 88's.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
Hi Dawson!
I like to recommend at least a one cm difference in waist width if you're going for two pairs of skis, so I think you'll be good with the 100, you might even find that you like it frontside too! Also, Nordica is coming out with an Enforcer 104 for 2020, so if you're looking to go a bit wider, that might be worth a look. I have an 87 and a 105 for my two ski quiver and it works out great. Have fun!
SE
Hi SE,
Thanks for all the detail on this ski. I'm 6'4/5 and ~190lbs and ski a fairly even mix of off-piste, bowls, moguls and steep groomers out west. I was wondering what your thoughts would be between this and the M5 Mantra and which you would recommend getting. Based on reading the reviews and comments of both skis, it seems like the Enforcer is a better fit as it is more playful across the entire mountain but I wanted to get your thoughts and see if I was on the right track with this. Additionally, I wanted to get your thoughts on size. I generally ski high 180s. I was thinking the 193 for the Enforcer 100 but wanted to see whether this ski is too long for trees and moguls and whether the 185 would be a better length for my height and weight and the type of skiing I typically do.
Thanks for all your help and another great review!
Best,
Bryce
Hi Bryce!
To start, yeah, the Enforcer feels more versatile in different terrain and snow conditions than the M5 Mantra. If you're looking for a touch of playfulness and more versatility, Enforcer is probably the way to go.
We actually have a few guys on our staff around your size. Tall, but relatively thin. They've gone back and forth between the 185 and 193 cm Enforcer, and ultimately settled on the 185 cm. Keep in mind, we live in Stowe, VT, and the trees here are really tight. 193 cm is just a lot of ski for our terrain. If we were out west, I would imagine those guys would probably prefer the 193 cm. If you're generally skiing upper-180 cm lengths and live out west, you'd probably be fine on the 193 cm, but you should be aware that maneuverability changes when you bump up to that length. I wouldn't expect 185 cm to feel particularly unstable at your size, so you're not losing much if you decide to go shorter.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi SE,
I am an advanced skier living on the West Coast. I am a hair under 5'10 and about 170. i recently demo'd the Nordica Enforcer 100's in a 169 and really liked them. I liked them so much I bought a pair in the 169 cm, but I am rethinking my purchase given the recent reviews I have read. Luckily they have a 30 day return policy and was wondering if you advise sizing up to a 177. I am moderately aggressive, ski mostly groomers and crud and seldom do trees/moguls.
Thanks,
Nicolai
Hi Nicolai!
I'd go with what you liked rather than what you read. I would guess that at your size if you are moderately aggressive that you'd do just fine on the 177, but if you like the 169 then don't let anyone talk you out of it!
SE
I just demo'd the Enforcer 100's in 185 length. I liked them a lot, and I'm considering buying a pair. I'm not sure about length - should I go longer?
I am 6'7", 195 lbs, I am an advanced skier on piste, and intermediate off piste. My current skis are Elan Amphibio 88's in 184. I felt like the Enforcers were easier to turn in tight spaces, and provide better float and stability in the soft and crud. I think my Elans are better at grabbing and holding an edge in hard pack or icy conditions. Any advice on length for the Enforcers?
Hi Nathan!
I'm 6/3 215 and I skied the 193 Enforcer 100 for a number of years and found it to be just a tad long. You're taller, so I'm not sure you'll have the same experience. I'd go longer if I were you. Hope that helps!
SE
Looking for a little sizing advice for the Nordica Enforcer 100's. . . . . I will be skiing out west for a couple of days and looking to demo a pair. I will likely be splitting my time between Breckenridge and Vail- so will most definitely be both on Piste as well as also hoping to be in the bowls a bit as well. I ski primarily on the East coast in New England and I am on the Blizzard Brahma's in the 173cm length and I really think they are just right for me. If I go to the Enforcer's would you suggest sizing up to 177cm or down to 169? I am 5'7" and 170lbs.
Thoughts are very much welcome and appreciated . . . .
Thanks.
Hi Gary!
If you feel good on a 173 cm Brahma, you'll do just fine on a 177 cm Enforcer 100. Longer rocker, softer flex overall compared to the Brahma too. In fact, you'll probably find a 177 cm Enforcer 100 is actually easier to ski than your 173 cm Brahma.
Have fun!
SE
I 6'/175lbs and am currently skiing 2009 K2 Apache Xplorer (128-84-112 @ 177) and live in the Midwest and take occasional trips west. When out west I will ski everything. Steeps, trees, bumps & groomers, but usually looking for the softest snow I can find. I had originally been looking into the Mantra M5, but you had suggested also looking at the Enforcer 100 for a little better soft snow maneuverability without giving up too much performance on the Midwest hard pack (ice). I am now leaning toward the Enforcer, but unsure on what length would be appropriate for me. My current ski is camber from nearly tip to tail and feels appropriate in length for me in most situations, but find it a little tough in tight spaces & bumps. With the Enforcer's tip/tail rocker, will it ski noticeably shorter than my current skis and should I size up to the 185 or would I be giving back too much of the maneuverability I am looking to gain? Any advice on size or potentially any other skis I should add to my radar?
Hi Bernie!
Even though the Enforcer 100 uses a good amount of tip and tail rocker and you often hear people say it "skis short", in my opinion there's no reason why you can't stick with 177 cm. Considering you're finding the length of your current skis to be a bit tricky in tight terrain, I think it's worth staying with the shorter of the two lengths. While I'm sure you could ski it, I think you'd also find the 185 cm Enforcer 100 a bit challenging in those tight spots. I don't expect 177 cm to be unstable for your weight, and it's going to be that much easier to maneuver. It's a great ski and I think you'll really enjoy it, I say go for it.
SE
I'm an intermediate to advanced skier that enjoys off piste and trees. I'm a bit unsure if I should go with the 177 or the 185. I'm 6'1 and 175 pounds.
Hi John!
Most skiers your size typically go with the 185 cm. If you've never skied something close to that long, however, you could go 177 cm. The Enforcer 100 is a very stable ski, so you don't need to worry too much about losing stability in shorter lengths. Does 185 cm seem like a long length compared to what you've skied in the past? If it doesn't, or if it's just a little longer, go for it. If you've never, say, skied anything much over 170 cm in length, I'd stick to 177 cm.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi! Could you shed some light on the differences between the Nordica Enforcer S (Junior) ski and the Enforcer 100? Are they drastically different? I'm a 5'3 female and I think the 160 cm length would be more suitable for me.
Hi Alice!
They're pretty different, yeah. The Enforcer S doesn't have any metal, which is a big factor in the performance of the Enforcer 100 (and the rest of the adult skis). Have you considered a Santa Ana? The only difference between those and the Enforcer 100 is a lighter wood core. You still get 2 sheets of metal, the same rocker profile and shape profile, but it's available in much shorter lengths. There's a 161 cm Santa Ana 100 that would probably be perfect for you!
Hope that helps!
SE
Maybe you can help. I am 5'8" and about 130lbs. I consider my self expert and am in my element with short, quick turns. I tend to ski off Lise whenever I can. I don't ski groomers unless there is no other choice. I like the trees and chutes. Ski a lot at Snowbird. Steep chutes that require short turns. I am very unhappy with my Blizzard Rustler 10. I love my old 165cm Line Prophet. Twin tips and great for making those short turns in trees and bumps (another forté of mine). No early rise to speak of. Speed is not what I I like. Slow and techique is what (I'm sort of old school) I do. The Rustler was just hard to initiate a turn (172 cm ski). Plus, whenever the terrain was even somewhat rough or chaoppy the ski just beat me up in terms of chatter and banging. Just didn't feel very damp. So, the big question. Would the E100 be a good ski for what I just described I like. Your review seems like it might. Hard to find a ski out there with that 100mm underfoot and no early rise. Thought?
Hi- I am 5'6" tall and 155lbs female advanced/expert skier who enjoys bumps, steeps, powder and trees. I currently ski on 175 Salomons and yesterday I demo'ed the 177 Enforcer 100s and loved them. I am considering buying these skis but debating on length. The guy at the shops told me I should definitely get the 169s and that the extra length isn't really doing anything for me, especially in the bumps, but they don't have a 169 for me to demo. Any thoughts on length would be appreciated. Thank you!
Hi Jim!
You won't get the same chatter from the Enforcers as you did with the Rustlers, to be sure. While they can be skied slow or fast, they prefer to be pushed, but again, they're very versatile and can handle a lot of different speeds and snow conditions. I think the 169 would be the way to go for sizing. Have fun!
SE
Hi Robin!
I'd agree with the shop guy based on your stats, but if you loved the 177, I'm not going to talk you out of it, but I do think you'd be better off on the shorter ski in the long run. Have fun!
SE
Hi guys - I currently ski a pair of 2008 K2 Apache Recon skis (174). I am an expert skier and ski these out East only (Stratton, Okemo, etc) and I tend to ski very fast. I know they are on the shorter side for me (5'11"/175lbs). Do you have a recommendation on the size I should go with on the Enforcer - 177 or 185? Thanks - Jason
Hi SE!
I am an East Coast skier who moved to the West Coast 2 years ago. I am 5'-9" and around 135lbs. Being a ski patroller I have to go through everything. I demoed the 169 and loved it. The shop I demoed from recommened I try the 177, but I was not able to. My local shop has the 177 for sale. Will the 177 be anything super different compared to the 169 in that I should I try to demo the 177 first?
HI Jason!
If you're going fast, I'd size up. Your stats pretty much put you in the 185 length already, and with the high rate of speed, you'll appreciate the stability of the longer length. Have fun!
SE
Hi Michael!
I'd highly recommend trying it out first if you can. Your size to me indicates a 169, but if you're an aggressive skier and like to go fast and make big turns, you might prefer the longer length. Hope that helps!
SE
I am currently skiing the Nordica nrgy90 (177) for my 3rd year which I really like for most the mountain. I weigh 160 and am 6 1/2 inches tall. I consider myself a advanced skier, skiing most black diamonds and some double blacks. I ski at Schweitzer in northern Idaho for the most part, enjoy the off piste most but there are days when i settle for groomers., Wondering which length would suit me best, was thinking the 177 or longer possibly but wanted to hear your opinion or thoughts. Thank you, Jeffrey Dow
Hi Jeffrey!
How did you feel on the 177 cm NRGY? Did you find that length to be unstable at speed ever? If not, I'd stick with 177 cm. Even if you occasionally did, but not regularly, I'd still probably stick with 177 cm. The Enforcer is going to feel more stable overall than the NRGY because of the increased amount of metal. You'd really need to be looking for a substantial amount more power and stability to justify going to the 185 cm. At your weight, my guess is 177 cm will be better. Easier to maneuver, still plenty of power and stability for most skiers your size.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi,
I'm looking at a pair of Enforcers to replace my old but reliable K2 Launchers that are 174s. I'm an advanced to expert skier but slowing down a bit at 55 years. I'm 5'7" and about 178lb. I still love skiing a mix of powder, crud and fast cruising so keen to know what length you would recommend, 169 or 177?
Thanks,
Andy
Hi Andy!
I think you should be leaning towards the 169 given your stats and style. They're pretty stable skis, so I'd think you'll be fine for cruising, too. If you're super-aggressive and love the high speeds, you could consider the 177, but overall, I think the 169 will be the proper length. Have fun!
SE
Hi again,
Thanks for reply. I've just made the mistake of reading your review of the Enforcer 93 and am now wondering whether to go for it or the 100. If so, would you still go 169 or 177? I mainly ski (with the kids) one of the commercial fields in New Zealand, Mt Hutt but my passion Is skiing one of our club fields whenever I can, Craigieburn Valley. Craigieburn is steep with no groomers and you get what you get from NZ Powder (a bit wet like coastal US, I guess Mammoth) to crud, chowder and ice. I'm looking for a second pair of skis for mainly Craigieburn but that would still be OK on the groomed Mt Hutt slopes.
Any thoughts?
Thanks again,
Andy
Hi Andy!
I'd stick to the same length between models. The 100 is still an accomplished carver, just a bit slower edge to edge than the 93. If you have a narrower ski already, I'd go with the 100. If you're looking for just one pair, the 93 might be a better choice. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi
I am six foot and 230lb and deciding whether to buy 177 or 185cm skis. I generally ski in pnw and have slalomon q-98 (2016) skis (189cm). I am 46 and intermediate advance. I am not aggressive in my ski (generally don't do backcountry). The reason I want to change my skis is that I find my current skis quite cumbersome in tight spots like moguls. It always feel like hard work slugging the skis around a tight bend which makes me lean to 177. I understand that these skis do ski "short" due to the rocker but give my height and weight I am concerned that the 177 may be too short. What would the trade offs be?
Hi Cristian!
I think at your size, you're a 185 all the way. We're kind of walking back on our "skis short" impression and have found after a few years that they do ski more true to size, and that the longer rocker is offset by the burly build. You'll be sizing down from the 189, so you'll get that quickness and maneuverability that you want from the shorter length, but you'll maintain the stability of the longer one. I think downsizing 12 cm is a bit drastic. I'm 6'2 220 and I skied the 193 for a couple of years and found it to be a tad long, but loved the 185. The only real bonus of the 177 is that they'll be super-quick in the moguls and trees. But overall, I think the 185 is the way to go. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi SE,
I am looking for a ski that would be a good option primarily for normal days out west but also be able to do 5-10 days on the east coast enjoyably. I have fatter skis for big days, but am between the nordica enforcer and the black crow daemon. I would love to hear your thoughts on how the two options compare!
Thank you.
Hi Ben C!
The Enforcer is more stable at speed due to the race-like construction. The Daemon is a bit more playful and well-rounded, especially for lighter or less-aggressive skiers, but for high speeds and all-mountain crushing, there's not much that compares to that Enforcer!
SE
Hi SE
I too am wondering about whether the length I just purchased on the enforcer 100 is the right one. I'm 5'10" 180lbs and ski and enjoy pretty much everything from steeps to bumps to powder to cruisers. Id rate myself advanced and able to ski anything short of a cliff. If i had to pick an angle that has to work its bumps. My go to ski currently is a rossi soul 7 HD 180 and when its clearly going to be a big powder day i pull out my rossi s7.117 188s Those two stay in the quiver.
These enforcers are earmarked for days when the optimal ski looks from the car to be just a bit narrower, and in a pinch i'm not too disappointed that the fatter skis are sleeping in the car.
I did a bit of research and when i saw that there are 150 pound guys out there skiing the 185s i figured those were right. But looking at them i think the 177s might be a better choice.
These are a bit of a pain to return since they are mail order. Whaddya say, 185s or 177s? Thanks
.
Hi Karl!
I think you'll be fine on the 185. I'm 6'2 215 and I skied the 193 for a few years and loved it. In the tighter trees it was a bit of a handful, but overall, I loved the length. As you're a bit smaller than I, I think the 185 is an acceptable choice, especially for advanced skiers. Like me, you might find it a bit demanding from time to time, but overall, I think you'll be all set. Have fun!
SE
I am struggling to decide whether to buy the Enforcer 100 177cm or the 185cm. I am athletic, 6'1", and weigh 210 lbs. I can ski blues comfortably and at times aggressively. I have also started to meander my way down the black runs in CO and go off piste. I am not a speed demon by any means but I do ski aggressively from time to time. Most of the time I just like to cruise and carve. I like that the 177's will be quicker turning and maybe more playful than the 185's but I also want something I won't "outgrow" as my skills improve. I am afraid the 185's will be cumbersome at times. Being nimble is more important to me than speed. Do you have a suggestion on what size I should be leaning towards?
Hi Joe!
I think the 185 is the right ski for you. I'm an inch taller and ten pounds heavier, and that's my size as well. Yes, they will be cumbersome at times, but overall, for Colorado skiing, the longer length is the way to go. Have fun!
SE
Hi - great reviews. I ski east coast, Maine, Vermont, but take occasional trips out west. I rented some enforcer 100s and 93s last season in Montana and preferred the 100s, even on mostly groomed trails, as we didn't get any powder while there. I felt I could bomb through anything, but I didn't think the 93 had the same enjoyable feel as the 100s, and it was quite a different feel compared to my Rossi B1. I mix speed, turn length, terrain often, but I am stuck between the 2 widths based upon not knowing how they will perform on hard New England ice. I'm 5'9", 175 lbs and 177cm seems like the right size.
Thanks
Hi Noah!
There's nothing wrong with the 100 for eastern skiing. While the 93 may have better edge grip overall, the 100 does just fine. When it snows, you'll be stoked that you have the extra width as well. In terms of sizing, I think the 177 is the way to go. Have fun!
SE
Hi Back in the "long board" days I skied on 203 Dynastar Omiglass 2's with Lange XRT boots. I skied fast and fairly aggressively mostly diamond runs; but some blue and double diamond too. I ski in Washington so we don't get a lot of "real" powder, like say Utah. I am older now and am dialing back on the agro in my style. I am looking at the Nordica Enforcer 100 along with the Vokle M5 Mantra, Head Core and a couple others. I can only get one set of skis. I am 5' 7", 200 lbs and was planning on buying something around a 189-190. I see these come in 185 and 193 and seek your advice.
Thanks much,
Hi Skip!
The Enforcer is a bit better as an overall, all-mountain ski versus the Mantra, which has more of an on-trail personality due to the narrower shape and the less rockered profile. That said, they're both pretty amazing and versatile. I'd say the 185/184 would be better for your size versus the 191/193, which can be quite a handful. You'll get more maneuverability out of the shorter lengths, and due to their construction, they're still quite stable at speed. Hope that helps!
SE
Hello!
I was wondering if you could compare this in the 177 with the 174 Salmomon QST 99 for me and also possibly recommend one. These are the two I'm choosing between and having a very hard time. I probably ski about %50 on-piste and %50 off-piste and mainly looking for a very versatile ski that handles trees and ungroomed trails really well but can still really rip off-piste (I also want to try and learn a bit more in the park, but haven't really spent much time at all there yet) I a somewhat advanced skier (can ski any trail on the mountain comfortably) but wouldn't consider myself particularly aggressive.
Thanks!
Hi Luke!
I think your level of aggressiveness puts you in the QST category. They're both great 50/50 skis, but the QST has a more forgiving personality. The Enforcer can be a bit demanding off-piste. Have fun!
SE
I ski about 15 days a season at Big Sky but bought a season pass this year hoping for more days. 50+, 5' 11" 210 lbs, athletic, advanced skier and still love skiing the bumps, just not all day anymore. Even on the groomers I like to turn a lot. I'm considering the Mantra M5 in the 177 or the Enforcer 100 in the 177. Skied the Rossignol Soul 7 180 last year and loved it except for hard, wind swept/iced out conditions. What would be your recommendation? If there's a better choice than the above mentioned I'm open to that as well.
Hi Douglas!
I think you are in the right spot--look to the 95-100 range underfoot. The Mantra is narrower and more of a turner while the Enforcer is wider and burlier in the softer snow. Also look to the Rossignol Experience 94--an unheralded all-mountain ski with a lot to like. We also have a pretty comprehensive review on men's 95-100 mm skis on our Chairlift Chat Blog if you're interested. Have fun!
SE
https://www.skiessentials.com/Chairlift-Chat/2020-ski-comparisons-mens-95-100mm-all-mountain-ski-guide/
Hi, I am 5’8, 164 lbs, 72 years old. I ski on average between 25 and 30 days per winter, and I keep pretty fit. I look to get off the groomers any chance I get, however I find that I am no longer comfortable in tight trees. I currently ski Volkl Bridge at 179, and Volkl 100 Eight at around 180 when I am out west, and Volkl 100Eight at 172 when I am skiing Cannon Mt back east. I would say that the Volkl Bridge is my favorite do everything ski, but the 100Eights in the shorter length are also very versatile and I feel confident on them. Yesterday I tried a brand new pair of Nordica Enforcer 100s at 176. They were fine on the groomers and seemed to handle the lighter crud perfectly well, however when the crud got a little heavier, i lost confidence in my ability to initiate turns. They are brand new and I am wondering if I should detune the tips and tails? Is there anything about the factory tune you can tell me? Also, is the swing weight so much more than the 100Eights that I just have to get used to it. Thanks, Charlie
HI Charlie!
I don't think the tune is an issue, especially in crud. You'd likely notice it more on hard snow, but even then, a factory tune shouldn't have to be altered in that ski. Most factory tunes come at a 1 degree base and 2 degree side bevel. And yes, it's a heavier ski, so more effort is required to achieve the same performance. Hope that helps!
SE
I am 5' 10" and I ski anything on the mountain to groomers to bumps. I weigh about 130 pounds and I was wondering what would be a good length for skis. I can ski anything on the mountain and I love to go fast. Would Nordica Enforcer 100 be good for me?
Hi BWM!
Anything on the mountain is practically synonymous with the Enforcer 100. I'd go with the 172 in that ski since you're not terribly heavy. Still going to have a lot of stability! Have fun!
SE
Hi
I am 6'1" 172lbs and 21 years old. Ski in europe normally and probably hit about a 50:50 off piste:piste balance. Would you say 185 or 177 and further to that would you reccomend -1/+1 on the mounting as ive seen a few times on forums etc?
Hi Toby!
The 2021 E100 comes in a 179 or a 186, a change from years past. Does that 179 change your mind at all? I would recommend the factory line unless you know something specific about how you like your mount points. Have fun!
SE
I’m just getting into the sport. Very athletic, water ski, dirt bike, played college basketball, and mountain bike. I’m 6’-4” and 220lbs. I’m an extremely fast learner at any sport I do. I took one ski lesson and was going down greens fairly easily the same day. Likely moving into blues the next time out. I only have experience with rental skis. I’m not out to get crazy, but just have fun with the family.
Would the Enforcer 100 be too much ski for me this early? I would much rather buy something I’m going to be using for the next 8-10 years.
D
Hi Darrel!
You have athleticism and size in your favor. Big people need burly skis, and if you're looking to make them last, I do not think it's a terrible idea. Perhaps at first, but it'll only take a few days to get into it. I'd go with the Enforcer 100 in the 185. Have fun!
SE