2019 Nordica Enforcer 93 Ski Review: // Ski Reviews
Why change a good thing? That's the theme with most of Nordica's skis for 2019 as they're carrying over a lot of existing models including both the men's Enforcer and Navigator series of all mountain skis. These skis have proven performance and have solidified a spot among the most popular all mountain skis on the market. That being said, we thought we would take another look at the Enforcer 93 to chat about why it's an important ski within the Nordica line, how it performs, how it feels, who and what it's best for, and the influence that it's had on the industry.
The Enforcer 93 was first released for the 2017 season after the successful launch of the redesigned Enforcer, which has since been renamed the Enforcer 100. You may have seen our initial review of it from a couple years back, and since then Nordica has added two other skis to the Enforcer collection: the 110 and the Pro. What was once a single ski is now a collection of 4 skis ranging from 93 mm underfoot all the way up to 115 mm. As the Enforcer 93 is the narrowest, it's sometimes overlooked, especially by skiers who value soft snow performance, but it shouldn't really ever be overlooked. It's arguably the most versatile Enforcer of the entire collection and we're starting to see some other manufacturers take note and offer their own mid-90 mm all mountain ski to compete alongside the Enforcer 93.
Let's touch quickly on the overall design and construction of the Enforcer 93. It uses a relatively dense wood core made from poplar and beech. That wood core is then enhanced and supported by two full length titanal laminates. What's somewhat unique about the metal in the ski is that it's quite thin at .4 mm. That keeps the overall weight of the ski a little bit lighter and also allows for a slightly softer flex than other skis with thicker metal. That helps give the Enforcer 93 a relatively forgiving feel for being such a high performance ski, something that we've talked about quite a bit here on SkiEssentials.com. The construction of the Enforcer 93 matches the shape of the ski very well. Camber underfoot with a slightly shorter turn radius than some competitors' skis is combined with ample tip rocker with some subtle early taper along with less tail rocker, but again some slight early taper in the tail. The cambered shape and torsional stiffness provided by the construction of the ski is intended to retain solid performance on firm snow, while the slightly softer flex (for a ski with two sheets of metal) and the tip and tail shapes are designed to give it a maneuverable, relatively playful feel in soft snow.
The Enforcer 93 has a distinctly smooth feel both on groomers and off, which is one of the reasons why it has become such a popular ski. Let's start with groomers and firm snow. If you were to take away the rockered portions of the ski you'd be left with a cambered ski with construction almost like a GS race ski (wood core, two sheets of metal). The metal is thinner, of course, so the flex is different, but you really have to remember that the majority of the ski is camber and that there are two sheets of metal in there. That provides a really fun skiing experience on firm snow. We've had a lot of testers over the years comment on how the Enforcer 93 can compete with much narrower, more dedicated frontside skis, in terms of edge grip and performance on firm snow. While it doesn't quite have the torsional stiffness of something like a beer league GS race ski, it's awfully close, especially considering how versatile the ski is overall. You can be a really aggressive skier on groomers and you won't feel like you're overpowering the ski. Because there is a fair amount of tip rocker don't be afraid to ski it in a slightly longer length than you could choose in a full camber ski. You'll get a little bit of movement out of the tip at high speeds, but we definitely wouldn't call it chatter. It's more like a slow up and down movement as you hit imperfections in the snow and if you're not looking at your tips (which you most certainly shouldn't be) you likely won't even notice. For a 93 mm waist ski it feels relatively quick edge to edge when linking turns and turn initiation is exceptionally smooth thanks to the tip rocker and slight early taper. Roll your ankle over and you're into the next turn; it's that easy.
While it holds an edge well, it also releases its edge well. This is another performance characteristic that is responsible for the Enforcer 93 being so popular. It really lets you get out of a carving turn quickly and easily. It's a very intuitive ski; one that almost feels like it can read your mind because of how easily it lets you change turn shape and turn style. It really doesn't require that much skier input to go from holding a carving turn to releasing the tail edge and getting the ski to pivot and smear. That makes it less fatiguing over a long day of skiing as you're not putting as much effort into changing those turn shapes. It also makes it easy to quickly dump speed on groomers. If you're mobbing down a steep slope linking carving turns and realize you're going a little faster than you wanted to, it's exceptionally easy to let the tail of ski skid out a little bit on one turn and then go right back to rail road tracks on the next turn. Controlling speed on the Enforcer 93 is very easy for a ski with two sheets of metal. It doesn't just feel like a tank. A highly maneuverable tank, maybe.
Off the groomers is where the Enforcer 93 often gets overlooked as skiers want the wider models for soft snow, but you really have to be honest with yourself when choosing skis. One of our favorite ideas when choosing new skis is to buy the ski for the terrain and conditions you ski, not for the terrain and conditions you want to ski. While the Enforcer 100 (and of course the 110 and Pro) have more float in soft snow, they're not as quick as the Enforcer 93. Take Stowe, VT for example, which is where SkiEssentials.com is located. We get a fair amount of snowfall every season, but our terrain gets tracked out very quickly. As soon as the pure, untracked snow is harder to find a narrower ski with more quickness edge to edge starts to be more valuable in our terrain. Maybe you live somewhere with more open terrain that gets more snowfall. That, in our opinion, might be enough reason to bump up to the Enforcer 100, but really ask yourself what waist width you need before you make a commitment to a single ski. Also, if you have a powder ski in your quiver already you could make the argument that the Enforcer 93 is a better complimenting ski. For a lot of skiers, for example, an Enforcer 93 with an Enforcer 110 would make more sense than an Enforcer 100 with an Enforcer 110. While 93 mm isn't outrageously wide by today's standards, it's certainly wide by traditional measures. It wasn't too long ago that 93 mm underfoot was about as wide as you ever saw, so it's not like you're going to sink all over the place in soft snow.
Images Courtesy of Evan Williams
So, who is it best for? For a lot of skiers the Enforcer 93 could be their dedicated daily driver. It's one of those skis that can absolutely act as a "one ski quiver." Yes, a carving ski will carve better, and yes, a powder ski will perform better in powder. It's a luxury, however, to have a quiver with a bunch of different skis for different terrain and snow conditions, and if you're not spending a ton of days on the slopes within a given season having too many skis can be somewhat detrimental. You never really get to know a particular ski if you have 10 pairs in your closet and only ski 20-30 days a year. There's definitely an argument that getting to know your skis is more important than having the "right" skis for certain terrain and conditions. The Enforcer 93 is just that type of ski. Spend some time on it, get to know it, and you'll find that you can ski just about anything.
The Enforcer 93 is partly responsible for other manufacturers going narrower with some of their all mountain skis. There's definitely a demand for a ski like this and manufacturers are starting to take note that the quickness it provides edge to edge, while still being very versatile, is quite valuable. A lot of ski manufacturers will tell you the industry is trending a little bit narrower, and we have skis like the Enforcer 93 to thank for that. Going into its third season the Enforcer 93 is still a top competitor in the mid-90 mm all mountain ski category and we expect its popularity to continue through the 2019 season and beyond.
I ski my Enforcer 93 in the exact way this article lays out. It's the narrower end of my 2 ski quiver, complimented by a Backland 109. I live in Utah and am rarely ever disappointed when I opt for the 93. As the reviewer states, choose a ski for the conditions you actually ski, not the conditions you dream about skiing. Once the snow gets tracked out, I prefer to have the edge to edge quickness the Enforcer provides over the Backland, especially for moderate snowfall events. I've skied up to a foot of Utah powder in this and they perform excellently. I'm also glad to see the emergence of this mid 90s all mountain class (DPS 94, Rossi Experience 94). Its a great width for an all mountain daily driver.
Great reviews Jeff...the attention to detail is so good, I rarely need to demo.
I am currently on the Brahma 173...a very good ski for Cannon Mountain which is similar to Stowe except for the amount of snow. How does this ski compare to the Enforcer 177 & 185? Also, interested in how Enforcer 93 compares to the new Blizzard Rustler 9 as they seem similar in shape?
Thx!
Hi Joel!
The Enforcer 93 uses quite a bit more rocker than the Brahma, especially in the tip. On firm snow it has a shorter effective edge. I would also say it's a little bit more forgiving than the Brahma. Slightly softer flex overall, more early taper. The rounded off tail shape allows you to smear and pivot turns relatively easily. The 177 cm Enforcer 93 would be the comparable length to you 173 cm Brahmas. In my opinion the Rustler 9 is a more direct comparison to the Enforcer 93 than the Brahma. More similar tip and tail rocker profile, similar subtle early taper. The difference is the Enforcer 93 feels very consistent in terms of flex, edge grip, etc from tip to tail, while the Rustler 9 has a very precise, powerful feel underfoot, while the tips and tails feel lighter and more playful.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi there,
Im 6'4 and weigh about 185 lbs, my level is advanced and have a pretty agressive ski style on open groomers. I spend most of my time on piste but like also like parks and occasionally off piste when the snow is good enough. Im unsure between the enforcer 93 or the navigator 85? Also, if you could reccomend any other skis that fit my description that would be appreciated!
Many thanks
Alex
Hi Alex!
I responded to your question on our Ski Test page as well, but here it is copy and pasted from there:
I think the Enforcer 93 would be more appropriate than the Navigator for what you're trying to do. I personally wouldn't want to ski the Navigator in the terrain park, mostly because of the tail shape. The Enforcer 93 is also more versatile and performs better in soft snow. Within the Nordica line I would also consider the Soul Rider 87. Right in between those skis in terms of waist width, but the twin tip shape makes it much more capable in the park. It's also still really fun to ski around the whole mountain. No metal, but still good edge grip and a responsive feel.
Hope that helps!
SE
Yeah sorry, I posted on here as well because I wasn't sure if it had gone through. To update you on my park ability, I can only do 360's and a few rails so would that change your stance on the navigator? I am leaning towards the enforcer, but how would you honestly compare its performance on piste to the navigator as that's where 75% of my time would be spent.
Thanks once again
Hi Alex!
To be completely honest I wouldn't want to slide rails on either the Enforcer or the Navigator because they're both directional skis, so will be somewhat unbalanced.
That said, you could do it, and if you're not concerned with the ski balance it'll be fine. The Navigator feels a little more responsive and a little quicker on firm snow than the Enforcer. It doesn't have any tail rocker, so really liked to complete a full carving turn. The Enforcer 93 is more powerful and has better vibration damping as it uses more metal, and it also allows you to release the tail edge easier with its tail rocker and slight early taper, but it doesn't have the snappy responsiveness of the Navigators.
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for all the help!
One last question, do you know when the release of the 2019 navigators will be?
Thanks
Hi Alex!
I expect we'll have the 2019 graphics in August, but keep in mind it's just a graphics change from 2018 to 2019, so 2018 skis will have the same performance.
SE
Hey SE! First of all, thanks for all the great reviews!
I am 21 years old, 6'2.5" and 180 lbs. I consider myself an advanced and athletic skier that really enjoys pushing the limits and going fast. I found a great deal on the Enforcer 93 (299eu), only available in 193 cm. I was wondering if the 193cm model might be too long for me since I'm not the heaviest guy around. Is it likely to feel cumbersome compared to the 185cm model for me?
I currently live in Austria (lots of slopes above the tree line and a lot of snow sometimes), very close to the slopes and expect to go skiing a lot this season. I'm very experienced on the slopes, not so much off-piste, but really want to do that more this season. I expect to also buy a pair of race carver skis down the line, and maybe even a dedicated powder ski if the off-piste skiing goes well. Therefore I was wondering whether the Enforcer 100 might be a better option as my go-to ski.
Thanks in advance!
Alex
Hi Alex!
I'd decide whether you want one or two pairs first. If you get the front side carver, then I'd go with the 100, but for one pair, the 93 is a better choice. As far as length, I'm 6/2 220 and I skied the 193 Enforcer 100 for a few years, and while I liked it for the most part, I did feel that it got heavy in the powder. But that's it--other than multiple runs in heavy snow, the 193 was a good size for me. I've got 40 pounds on you so you might have a different experience, but if you're not skiing trees, there's nothing wrong with a longer ski. Hope that helps!
SE
Im 60 6'3" 245. Advanced skier on old AXIS K2 174'S. Want an all mtn for Mammoth. Tried elan 186 amphibio 88 xti.. I though too long too fast. Tried 180 Nord 84GT TI..nice, but shop did not have the Navigator 90 or the Enforcer 93. I ski aggressive but not crazy.
Should I choose 177. 180 or 185?
Enforcer or Navigator, or??
Is 93 under foot enough?
I'm happy to buy end of season skis now as well..
Txs for ur help?
Hi guys! So it seems that with the introduction of the enforcer 94, the price of the 93 is coming down a lot, so I might invest in some 93s. I’m 5ft10, 185lbs and an advanced skier, and I’m a bit uncertain about what length to get. They’ll be the only ski in my quiver and I’d like a length which would allow the best range of turns and carves whilst also performing well in the steep and deep. I tend to ski 50:50 on/off piste but rarely in more than 6in of powder. Thanks!
HI Ed!
Between the 177 and 185, based on your stats. I think that given the upper-end of the build, that the 177 would be enough ski for sure, and will allow for that range of turn shapes and styles, while the 185 might be a bit more locked in to high speeds and long turns. I'd go 177. Have fun!
SE
How would you compare the Enforcer 93 vs.the Head Kore 93?I have narrowed them down to these two.
Hi Ted!
To me the Enforcer 93 is a fantastic ski for Mammoth terrain. It's such a versatile ski. You can ski groomers and it feels responsive and fun, while its width, rocker profile, flex pattern, and vibration damping makes it an absolute blast to ski in un-groomed terrain as well. At your size I would recommend the 185 cm length. I know you found the Elan was a bit long, but the Enforcer 93 will ski shorter. More pronounced and longer tip rocker makes it quite manageable in the longer lengths. At your size I would expect the 177 cm would feel a little bit short.
We have the 185 cm 2018 Enforcer 93 on sale right now. No change to the ski for 2019. Might as well save some money and get the 2018, unless you really prefer the 2019 graphics.
SE
Hey Bo!
The shape is quite similar between those two skis, it really comes down to the construction and the different feel. The Enforcer 93 feels heavier and has better vibration damping and stability thanks to the two sheets of metal. The Kore feels much lighter, quicker, and is a little bit easier to maneuver. Aggressive skiers who ski fast usually prefer the Enforcer 93, while those that value quickness or want a lighter weight ski usually like the Kore. Skier weight plays into it too. Heavier skiers often value the extra stability from the metal and aren't as bothered by the extra weight of the Enforcer 93, while you could say the opposite about really lightweight skiers.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi
Thanks for the review. How does it stack up say against the Blizzard Bonifide and Elan Ripstick 96cm? How does it perform in icer conditions? Many thanks
Craig
Hi Craig!
The Enforcer 93 is kind of in between the Bonafide and the Ripstick 96 in terms of performance. The Bonafide is a little stiffer and a little more demanding. It rips at high speeds, has awesome vibration damping, but with relatively low rise rocker and not much early taper it demands a high ability level, good technique, and a relatively aggressive skier. The Ripstick 96 is lighter, softer flexing, and uses more pronounced rocker. Much more forgiving, easier to ski, better at slower speeds. The Enforcer 93 falls in between the two. It does use two sheets of metal like the Bonafide, but it's thinner metal so the ski is lighter and a little softer flexing. It also uses more rocker than the Bonafide, which makes it a little more maneuverable and more forgiving. It's not as light as the Ripstick, and the Ripstick is also more forgiving and a little easier to ski than the Enforcer 93. It handles ice quite well. Good torsional stiffness, good vibration damping. It's a fantastic all mountain ski; can do just about everything.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi! How would you compare the Enforcer 93 vs Fischer Ranger 102 Fr? Which is the best allmountain ski? Most important for me is that the ski is: playful, stable at high speeds, works good everywhere on the mountain and that you could jibb a little with it.
Hi Martin!
In my opinion the Enforcer 100 would be the closer comparison to the Ranger FR 102 just because of the closer waist width. Really similar performance between the 93 and 100, however, so everything I say here about the 93 vs the Ranger could be carried over to the 100 too, more or less.
Tough to say one is better than the other. I think the Ranger 102 feels more playful, however. The twin tip shape and overall feel of the ski really likes to maneuver, jump, and play, even though it uses metal like the Enforcer. I'd give stability at speed to the Enforcer, although it's a pretty close comparison between the two. Fairly similar vibration damping, to me the Enforcer just feels a little more stable. Tracks a little better through choppy snow. Again, not a huge difference in stability. Both work well around the whole mountain, although the Ranger is a touch better in soft snow. A little wider, better tail shape for powder.
When you add a little jibbing in to the comparison it starts to sway things a bit. The Enforcers are directional skis. No twin tip, and not as balanced overall as the Ranger 102. If you're really looking for an all mountain ski that you can also jib with, and you're between these two, I'd go with the Ranger.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello! I am coming off of about 9 years with my K2 Silencers ('08, probably 169) and for the past two years have been craving something much sturdier. I am on the aggressive-intermediate/advanced end and want something I can really progress into. I like to go fast and would like to work on my form and carve more. I ski the Northeast exclusively, mostly local mountains in PA, but the occasional trip to NY and VT. Since I am coming off such a long run with twin-tips I figured that I should look in the all-mountain category, with more of a carving, on-piste lean. Right now I am looking at these (Enforcer 93), Navigator (size?), and Volkl Kendo. I am worried that the Kendo might be a tad too demanding/unfun but I like the idea of a good, damped ski, hence my interest in the Enforcer. But I am wondering whether the Navigator is a better option since I am always skiing in the NE. I am 5'8" 170 lb. Thoughts? And what length would you recommend? Thanks!
Hi Phil!
Yeah, I think it's time to replace those Silencers. Fun skis, but they do leave something to be desired on firm snow and when you're trying to charge.
I agree that the Kendo might not be the way to go. It's a fun all mountain ski, but it's definitely on the heavy/stiff/demanding side of things. Considering you're coming off twin tips I think it might lack a little bit of the playful/fun factor. The Navigator (probably 90 would be best) is an interesting option. If you really want to focus on carving the Navigator does that really, really well. That said, the Enforcer 93 is more versatile, and in my opinion a little more playful. So, in other words, if you want to retain some of the playfulness and versatility of what you've been on, but boost stability and carving performance, I think the Enforcer 93 is a great choice. If you specifically want to focus on improving your carving and aren't too worried about other terrain and snow conditions, go with the Navigator.
If you go Navigator, I think 172 cm would be best. With the Enforcer it's between the 169 and 177 cm. 177 cm is a bit taller than you, but the Enforcer 93 uses a lot of rocker in the tip and tail, so is fairly forgiving. Essentially 169 cm would be a little easier to maneuver, while 177 cm would be more stable at speed.
Hope that helps! Let us know if you have any other questions.
SE
Hi! How would you compare the Enforcer 93 vs FACTION Dictator 2.0? Which is the best all mountain ski? Most important for me is that the ski is: playful, stable at high speeds, works good everywhere on the mountain. In any case, I'm 6'2", size recommended?
Hi Eduardo!
In your situation, I'd recommend the Nordica Enforcer 93 in a 185. You list three categories, and in my mind the Enforcer is more playful and works better everywhere on the mountain. I'd give the stable at high speed edge to the Faction, but not by much. You'll find more similarities than differences between these two models, and the differences are pretty slight. The flatter tail of the Faction will give it that better carving ability at high speeds, but it also handcuffs the ski's playfulness by locking it in the turn longer than the Enforcer. Hope that helps and happy winter!
SE
Hi, great review as always.
I'm 5'8" pretty light at 145lbs & an advanced level skier I usually ski on a 170/2cm ski wondering if the step up to 175/7 will be a step too far? Also I'm looking to pick a daily driver ski to throw around the mountain, I enjoy 50/50 and always looking for jumps and diving into the marginals or small tree sections. Usually ski in France/Germany so not always a massive amount of powder days about just the odd flurry. Currently torn between the Volkl Kanjo and the Enforcer 93 looking for a bit of advice. Cheers
Hi Adam!
I would go with the Enforcer 93 over the Kanjo. In my opinion the Enforcer 93 is a significantly more versatile ski and is much more appropriate for how you describe your skiing style. For length, the 177 cm should be just fine for you. The Enforcer series uses long tip rocker, so they tend to ski a little bit short. For someone who is used to handle skiing a ~170 cm length, you'll feel fine on the 177 cm Enforcer 93, especially considering you're an advanced level skier.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello,
I'm Jonas (24), 5'10, 170 lb, expert level skier. I am quite aggressive (short racing background) with a normal strength. 180cm would be my favourite length for the Enforcer 93, but since it only comes in 177/185 i am wondering whats best. This ski is supposed to be my go to daily driver for all but the days i want to carve my Race Ski (170m/15R) down the hill all day long. That means i want it to excel in the chop, bumps, pow, send some kickers, carving sof to firm groomers at high speed, just play around. While i do thing i can manage the 185, i think i should go for the 177, cause i am quite lightweight and want it to be more manageable in the bums and jumps. Am i right?
Hi Jonas!
Yes, I think 177 cm is the better choice for you, especially if you want it to be relatively playful and maneuverable. The 185 cm would be a good choice if you were just planning on skiing really fast in open terrain most of the time, but you'll get more versatility out of the 177 cm. I am about your size personally, have skied both lengths, and I think the 177 cm aligns with what you're looking to do more-so than the 185 cm. As you mention, I'm sure you could ski the 185 cm, but the 177 cm is still plenty of ski for when you want to be aggressive, and is that much easier to maneuver.
Hope that helps!
SE
Have reviewed most of the other sizing recommendations but would like to get input on size considering a few unique factors. 37 yrs old, 5'9" 195 lbs. Aggressive northeast skier with an occasional trip out west. 70 on piste but love getting in the trees when conditions allow. Getting more and more into sidecountry and therefore have my mind set on Shift bindings. Didn't mind bootpacking but am eager to start skinning. Was originally considering Kore 93s but think my weight might overpower them (and dissuaded by reviews of issues with top coat durability). Currently on Volkl Bridges 179s and love how they ski. Just looking for something with a slightly smaller turn radius, more carving oriented and just as playful. Enforcers seem to hit all the marks but am wondering about size. Leaning toward 185s but don't want to limit maneuverability in tight spaces and weight is a small factor given touring use. Thank you for any recommendations you can offer.
Hi PMcCoy!
You should be just fine on the 185 cm length. It'd a bit taller than you, and longer than what you're used to with your Bridges, but at your weight I don't expect you'll have too much trouble adapting to the 185 cm length. I'm about your height, but lighter, and don't find the 185 cm is too demanding for tight terrain. It makes you work a little harder than the 177 cm, but it's not outrageously difficult. Considering you've got about 40 lbs on me, it should feel even easier for you to maneuver or manipulate turn shape.
You'll notice in some of the comments below I recommended the 177 cm length, and that was because those skiers specifically pointed out that they were focused on maneuverability. If that sounds like you too, you could consider the 177 cm, although you're a bit heavier than those guys, so should have an easier time on the 185 cm.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi SE,
I am an aggressive intermediate skier looking to purchase a pair of enforcers. I am 6'1 and 200 pounds. I currently ski the navigator 85's (179 cm) and love them but am looking for something more stable/ adaptable for western conditions. I do 80% of my skiing on piste and like to carve up on the groomers. I am currently trying to decide on length of ski for the enforcers. I am very happy with my current length but want to be more cognizant for my next purchase. I am currently trying to decide between the 177 and the 185. I feel that the 177 would be very maneuverable but don't think Id have a hard time adjusting to the 185's. That being said I know the enforcers are a heftier ski and think the longer length could be tough. What would be the pros/cons of the 177vs185 and what do you think is the best option for my situation.
Joe
Hi Joe!
I replied to you over on the comparison article too... here's what I said there:
Considering you already have a 179 cm Navigator, I think it makes the most sense to get the 185 cm Enforcer 93. Because of the tail shape, the Enforcer might actually ski a little shorter for you than the Navigator with its relatively stiff, squared off tail. Also, at your size, the 185 cm shouldn't be as challenging as it sometimes is for smaller, lighter weight skiers. You probably already know the pros and cons: The 177 cm would be a little easier and more maneuverable at first, but your ability could progress past its limits. The 185 cm, on the other hand, may be more challenging at first, but will have more stability and will react better to higher speed skiing as you continue to improve. Makes sense to me to get the 185 cm!
Hope that helps
SE
Hey SE,
Great review as always. I need some advice. How would you say the enforcer 93 handles moguls? I ski equal time in North East and West, and I like high speed carving as well as quick turning for moguls. Thinking this is my one ski and demo a wider 110 if lucky enough to have powder days..
Thanks!
Hi Stefano!
As long as you have reasonably accomplished technique in the moguls, they perform really well. They're not the lightest, of course, but the shape of the tail lets you pivot the Enforcer 93 relatively easily considering how powerful it is. That sounds like a great decision to me. You'll find the Enforcer 93 performs well on all but the deepest of days, so you might not demo powder skis as much as you think!
Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks for the feedback..So what's the move if I ski 50/50 moguls and going fast with big gs turns..do I go with the 177 or 185?? I realize I give up maneuverability with one and stability with the other..5'10" and 175 pounds..You guys the best!
Thanks-Stefano
Hi again Stefano!
I think you can handle the 185 cm length. It's not drastically more challenging in the moguls. I'm about your size and have quite a bit of experience on both lengths. If you're relatively aggressive and have solid technique, you might as well get the 185 cm for the extra stability at speed when you're laying down those big carving turns.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello SE,
I am a intermediate skier with a height of 6 feet and a weight of 200 pounds (25 years old). I spend most of my time on the groomers of the northeast. I have recently decided to purchase the nordica enforcer 93 because I feel it is a good ski I can grow into as I progress. I am currently trying to decide what the right size enforcer is for my ability and build. I am in between the 177cm and the 185cm. I have done some research and discovered that the enforcers ski "short" and some experts have recommended that I go with the 185. That being said I am a bit worried that the 185 will be too much ski for me to handle. On the other hand I dont want to outgrow the 177cm version. Would I be making a mistake if I bought the 185cm? (especially because it is 1 inch taller than me) Or do you think it may be better suited for my situation. Please let me know what your thoughts are. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Best Regards,
Audien
Hi Audien!
Considering you're at the intermediate level, I would go with the 177 cm length. You're right that the Enforcer does ski a little bit short, but that 185 cm length still feels like it would be a bit much for you at this point in your skiing career. The 177 cm should provide enough stability, while also helping you progress more quickly than the 185 cm would. There may come a day when you want a longer ski, but I also don't think you'll outgrow the 177 cm very easily. I just think 177 cm will help you get to the next level(s) much more easily than the 185 cm, so I think that's the way to go.
Hope that helps!
SE
Great reviews! I'm 61 years old, 6'2", 195 lbs and advanced skier. (40+ yrs). Can get down virtually anything (not always pretty). Spend 50% in VT and 50% out west. Moderate speed with an occasional high speed groomer. Typically looking for stashes or following the sun. Groomers are mainly the road to get you where your going. Some moguls, but more out of necessity than desire. Trees , bowls, are welcome. Currently on "old" Enforcers, 177cm. Any ideas?
Hi Mark!
When you say old Enforcers, do you mean the original version? The new Enforcers are quite different, much more rocker. For someone your size we often recommend the 185 cm length because of that additional rocker.
If I'm correct that you're on the original Enforcer, I think it would make a lot of sense to upgrade to the new one in the 185 cm length. What do you think? Do you think you'd feel comfortable on a 185 cm ski? If not, there are some other skis we could consider. A 181 cm QST 99 from Salomon, for example, achieves similar performance as the Enforcers, but is a little lighter overall, and of course available in a slightly shorter length.
Hope that helps! Let us know if you have any other questions.
SE
Hello there!
I have been doing research and am down to the Enforcer 93 or Rossi Experience 94Ti. Im 46 yrs 6ft 270 pounds athletic. Fairly aggressive Intermediate/Advanced West Coast skier. Mostly Mammoth, Tahoe area. Enjoy groomers, ocasionally follow my son off piste but Im getting older and it is becoming more and more difficult to chase him down. I am just on the fence between those two skis and what size. I currently ski Rossignol Zenith Z5 from 2007 175's and its time to upgrade. Any of your professional input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
George
Hi George!
I just replied to your inquiry over on our ski test page, but I thought I would respond here as well.
Because you're a bigger guy, I think the Experience 94 Ti is a better choice. It's a little stiffer than the Enforcer 93, which I think will be a fairly significant benefit for you. Should be a more confidence inspiring ski when you're chasing down your son. Great ski for Mammoth and Tahoe terrain, too. I spent a year out there back in the early-2000s and would be psyched to go back and ski an Experience 94 Ti. The Enforcer 93 is a great ski, I just think the slightly softer flex might not have the stability for your size.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi SE,
Tons of great information. Thanks. I am an advanced, say 7-8 level, 6' 200lb, 58 year old who skies 18-20 days a year. Mostly East coast but a trip or a year out west for some powder. Spend about 80% of time on groomers and bumps. I am going to demo some Enforcers in 2 weeks in Vail. My current skis are 2013 Head Rev 85 Pro 170. I am leaning towards the 177 but, hearing that they ski a bit short, should I try the 185? I don't want to oversize myself and end up fighting these skis in the bumps.
Any help will be appreciated
Thanks
Bob
Hi Bob!
If you can, try to get on both lengths. Most demo shops will let you swap skis out during your ski day. There are plenty of people around your size who ski the 185 cm, but also plenty who stick with the 177 cm. My guess is you'll prefer the 177 cm considering the length of skis you're coming off of, but if you have the opportunity I do think it would be worth giving both lengths a try, even if it's just to see what the 185 cm feels like so you have some additional knowledge about how different ski lengths react.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hello,
I am a 6'4" 190 lb aggressive skier and I like to fly around on groomers (gps has clocked me at 45+ mph at times) and hit the pow if there is any available. I like the steeps and still venture into the trees from time to time, but do not ski bumps willingly. I skied some brahmas and they were too slow from edge to edge. I also skied some Rossi Experience 94's which were really fun but I felt they were too one speed, they did not like slower speeds or shorter turn shapes. I ski in the west and am looking for just one ski, so the ability to mix it up and ski various terrain and turn sizes is what I am looking for.
Based on my reading, I think the Enforcer 93 would be a good choice. I am used to skiing long and burly skis so I am thinking the 193 length would be fine, but I am willing to go shorter if that would increase the versatility. Any advice?
BTW, very nice review!
Thanks,
Lenny
Hi Lenny!
The Enforcer 93 is a little softer flexing than the Experience 94 Ti, which gives it a better feel at slower speeds and also allows for different turn shapes and styles a little more easily. I don't know if I would necessarily describe them as quicker edge to edge than the Brahma, considering the Brahma is narrower, but the Brahma is a stiff ski that's pretty heavy, so can feel a little bit slow if you're not charging on it. Enforcer 93 is definitely more appropriate in terms of versatility, especially considering you live out west. I'm not sure, however, that you need to go 193 cm. Even though that's about as tall as you, which isn't super long, some of our staff members around your size have found the 193 cm Enforcer 93 to be a lot of ski. At your weight, I think 185 cm would be just fine. I don't expect that length would lack stability at speed for you, and it's going to be much more maneuverable and more forgiving overall.
Hope that helps,
SE
Hey SE, I'm a 5ft 8, 150 advanced tele skier looking for a 60/40 on/off piste all mtn ski. Ski in the Rockies and Utah. I already have a softer snow/wider ski (K2 Pinnacle 95) for backcountry powder deeper snow resort days but the tips on the Pinnacles get kicked around some on crud and get a
bit squirrely at speed at the resort. I am looking at the Enforcer 93 as my go to ski for resort days when there is 0-6 new. I mainly ski steeps, bumps, or trees at resort, not a high speed groomers guy. Trying to decide between the 169 and 177 on these for my size and being a tele skier. Some of the reviews talk about these skiing short and I don't want to go too short to have some float off piste but these also sound stiffer and beefier so I want to be sure I can crank tight turns on bumps, trees, steeps.....Any thoughts about this as a tele ski and which length?
Hi JR!
Sounds like the Enforcer 93 would be a great ski for you. They're definitely more stable and track better through choppy snow conditions compared to the Pinnacle 95. Should be really fun as a tele ski for the terrain and snow conditions you're planning on skiing. For length, I would go with the 177 cm. That shouldn't be hard to handle at your height, weight, and ability level. I would worry the 169 cm might feel a little too short, unstable, or unbalanced for you, especially at higher speeds. 177 cm should work well.
Hope that helps!
SE
Great Reviews!!! I'm 6'3" - 230lbs, active Southern California/Western Skier, large athletic build. Intermediate, 45 years old who enjoys Mammoth, Tahoe, Park City and Colorado skiing. Hang with the kids and adventure off with the dads. Any recommendation between: Enforcer 93, Navigator 90 or 85 or Volkl Kendo; or other? Would you put these above the K2 Pinnacle line?
Thanks in advance for the data. Caught between the Volkl 90 eights, Enforcer 93 and Blizzard Rustler 9. 177/180 .
Skiing 15 year tele, 5'10" 190lbs SOLID (haha) aggressive, all-mountain East Coast skiing.
Commentary welcomes
Hi Kurt!
Considering where you live and your size, the Enforcer 93 or Kendo feel like the best choices. You get more versatility out of those two skis compared to the Navigators. I'm guessing you ski a fair amount of softer snow conditions just based off where you live, and both skis, especially the Enforcer 93, outperform the Navigators in soft snow. In fact, a 185 cm Enforcer 93 feels like a really good choice. The Kendo can be a bit of a challenge for intermediate skiers because it's quite stiff and doesn't use much rocker. The Enforcer is a little softer flexing and uses more pronounced rocker, which makes it a bit more forgiving. Still plenty stable and plenty of ski for someone your size, I just think it's going to work better with your ability level than the Kendo.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi JD!
Considering your weight and that you're a pretty aggressive skier, I'd go either Enforcer 93 or Rustler 9. The 90Eight doesn't have the stability or vibration damping those skis have, and I think you'll appreciate it. Between the E93 and R9, it's basically a question of how playful you want them to be. The Rustler 9 is a touch more maneuverable, slightly easier to release the tail edge. The Enforcer 93 feels a little bit more stable at speed.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hey SE,
I'm 24, skiing since I was 3... 6ft and 185-195lbs... Ski mainly in Colorado and other spots in the rockies. Which would be the better fit, Nordica Enforcer 93s, Soul rider 97s, Head Kore 93s or Volkl Revolt 95s. Length to range from 171-179... Groomers occasionally (mainly to get around or just a laid back run for relaxing), mainly off piste, in the trees or side runs having fun where the powder is. Started to play in the park and venture to the double diamonds a time or two during the day. If you recommend any bindings feel free to say so, type 3 skier. I demoed the 2018 Volkl Mantra 100s last year and felt they were a little bulky at times and not the best in tight turns/trees.
Thanks,
Trey
Hi Trey!
Considering you're spending a little bit of time in the terrain park, I think the Soul Rider 97 would be a great choice. I've spent a lot of time on that ski and it's really fun. Enough torsional stiffness to carve turns on firm snow, but it's also super playful and fun in soft snow conditions and in the park. I think you'd like it more than the directional skis you're considering. Way more capable in the park. For length, definitely at least get the 177 cm length. Anything shorter would be too unbalanced for your size. You could likely even ski the 185 cm, but if that sounds like a lot of ski, stick with the 177.
Hope that helps,
SE
Hi SE,
Great review! Curious of your advice for me too... I'd say I'm an advanced, 5'7" 155lb, 40 year old who skis mostly Colorado and Utah (e.g., Park City, DV, Breck, Vail) a dozen days a year. I spend about equal time charging down groomers, on the bumps, and diving into the trees when the groomers get boring. I typically lean towards shorter skis for the increased maneuverability in the bumps. Trying to decide between the Rustler 9 (164cm), Rossignol Sky 7 (164), Solomon QST99 (167), and the Enforcer (169). Last season, I demo'd the QST and loved them, but hesitant to buy because they don't get the best reviews; the Head Kore (162cm) which I also had a blast on but fearful I'll regret buying the 162's because I'll find them too small in any powder; and the Experience 88 (didn't like at all, too much of a carver). Any thoughts on my short-list? Am I overthinking length? Any help/advice to get me out of decision paralysis if much appreciated!!
Thanks,
Rob
Hi Rob L!
I'd narrow the list down to the Enforcer 93 and the Rustler 9. Between those two, the Enforcer is your stronger overall performer while the Rustler is a bit more laid back. That's not to say the Rustler is a slouch, but rather the Enforcer is a real-deal ski with two sheets of metal. The Rustler has a turned up tail that makes it a bit more playful while the Enforcer remains a bit more serious. Either ski you will love, so don't overthink it too much. Have fun!
SE
Hello. I'm 5ft 7, 185lbs, advanced intermediate and currently skiing in Solomon X-Drive 8.0 163. These were my first out of rental skis and I love them but I am looking for a more versatile ski that will give me more flexibility, stability and I think the 93s are the ones. I ski the East but i am planning a trip to Utah next year . I am no hot shot by any stretch, but I do like to get some speed up on the groomers and I am looking for more confidence underfoot. What size would you recommend for me, as I've been reading the rocker makes these ski short. Thanks for the great reviews! P.S. I'll be in Stowe in a few weeks and would love to strap these on.Thanks for the help!
Tom
Hi Tom!
Considering your background and the length of the skis you've been on, I'd start with the 169 cm. That length will be just about your height exactly, which should be manageable for you in the Enforcer 93. They're definitely more versatile than your Salomons, and more stable too. Start with the 169 cm. If that feels short, try the 177 cm. We have plenty of demos at our brick and mortar location, Pinnacle Ski and Sports. Definitely come say hi and take some skis out when you're here!
SE
I SE,
I'm torn between the Nordica Enforcers 93s in 177 to 185 length. I'm '5 "9, 200 pounds. Advanced / aggressive skier. Is there a big difference between the two? I seem to fall between sizes.
Your site has been so helpful for researching some new skis! I'm set on the Enforcer 93s, but am stuck between sizes. I'm 46 and am an advanced "cruiser" who used to be aggressive but am getting a bit more conservative with age. I'm about 5'8 and around 148lbs.
My home mountain is Sun Valley where I mainly do big long higher speed turns on groomed stuff, but occasionally venture into bowls and deeper snow. I'm hoping to venture off-piste more, but when I do, my confidence level drops a few ticks, especially in bumps. I'm upgrading from an old pair of Volkl AC3s... before those, it was K2 5500s from the 80s.
My Volkls are 170 in length and really start to chatter and jump around at higher speeds. I demo'd the Enforcer 93 at a 169 length in Aspen a few weeks ago and absolutely loved them, but am wondering if long term, bumping up to the 177 might be a better fit. My fear with the 177s is if I do actually venture off the groomers, the extra length may have me struggling in the bumps. I clocked myself on the 169 at about 44mph at Aspen Highlands and they still seemed really stable. That's about as fast as I think I'm comfortable going. Probably more of a personal feel thing, but any suggestions on length? I'll probably keep these new skis 10+ years.
Also... any thoughts on Salomon Warden vs Marker Griffin for the Enforcer? Thanks!
Hey guys - love the site and how you run the Q&A - it's been very helpful as I look for new skis. I've decided on the Enforcer 93 and could use your opinion on length. I'm 40 yrs old, 5'7" and 180lbs. Ski raced in college so I enjoy high speed big turns. I'm looking for something that will carve big turns but also handle crud, steeps and chutes. These skis will be for CO, if it snows a foot, I'll demo skis. 169 or 177? I looked at some other skis that were around 177 and was surprised they are taller than me, is that too tall? Thanks!
Hi Alan!
I think if you were comfortable on the 169, even at speed, it'd be a risky move to go with the 177. Especially with your emerging conservatism, I'd be wary of upsizing. As far as bindings, I personally prefer the Warden to the Griffon, but that's just me--easier step in and a more satisfying "thunk". Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Andy K!
I think the 177 is too big. Not by much, but I'd go with the 169. They're pretty stable thanks to the construction, so I wouldn't worry too much about the length. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi! Love the videos and the in depth analyzis. Im completely torn between 3 skis. Im a fairly competent skier and I have a pair of powder skis already that Im happy with. Im 6ft2 and 170lbs:
Enforcer 93 185 - love the stability combined with a tail that is easy to smear. I have a tendency for ending up in the back in tight terrain so grippy tails is a no no.
M5 Mantra 184 - Always loved the old Katana but it was a little too fast for the smaller ski hills. It looks like the M5 is taking a step back from that. But is it too demanding compared to Enforcer? Im worried that the tails will punish me...
Kore 93 180/189 - I Love to combo of light and stable, since I will use the ski with Shifts for the occasional tour (I wount tour often enough for a dedicated ski but when I do it will be longer tours). The biggest problem here is, how much stability do I sacrifice compared to Enforcer/M5? The lengths is also a bit off for me, I would prefer a 185...
Thanks, Rikard!
Everything's a compromise, right? I will say that the amount of stability you will sacrifice by going with a Kore 93 over an Enforcer/Mantra is significant. The M5 is a shade more precise and demanding than the E93, but not by a lot. The tails of the E93 are a bit more playful than the Mantra's . The Mantra comes in a 184 and the Enforcer a 185, so that might answer your question as well. Hope that helps!
SE
Thanks a lot for great answers, both here and on the M5-review. So the Kores are completely out by now. From what I can read it seems like the E93 and M5 are pretty similar. Would that be correct? You write that the M5s are more demanding and precise than the E93s but do that also mean that the M5s are a bit more trustworthy going fast through chop? Its weird to factor in price but here the difference is around 200$ in the E93s favour so maybe thats the way to go. Match the wifes Santa Anas as well 😉
Hi Tom,
I've been skiing on Brahma's for the past couple of seasons. While I like the ski for its stability and overall willingness to do just about everything, I'd like something that's a little more playful when it comes to carving and edge to edge quickness. Also have something that's a tad wider underfoot would be great.
As for sizing, I'm 6' 190lbs and ski the Brahma in a 180 with no issues whatsoever. What would you recommend for the Enforcer 93? 185?
Hi Bill!
I'd say the 185 would be great for you!
SE
Hi, Andrew here. I'm a 35 year old, 5'7, 165lb intermediate-to-advanced skier, East coast. I'm coming from an old set of Atomic Izor 9:7, 159 length that are due for replacement and I feel like they skit too short to me. I'm looking at picking up a set of Enforcer 93s, but I can't seem to decide between the 169 and the 177. The 169 seems like a more obvious choice, but I've heard that these "ski short" and I don't want to end up with a ski that didn't get me any length. I rarely ski moguls, but I do a mix of groomed and more challenging technical trails at Whiteface and Gore in NY, and need something that can hold the trail better than my Izors.
Hi again Rikard!
Stability is fairly similar between the Enforcer 93 and M5. The M5 has lower rise rocker, which for some can translate to a more stable feel because it has longer edge contact, but strictly based off construction the stability is quite similar. If it's that big of a price difference, I'd go with the Enforcer 93. It's a fantastic ski, and you and your wife will look pretty darn snazzy out there!
SE
I'm an advanced tele skier with new NTN boots looking for more stability and hard snow hold. But mostly ski on snowy days and prefer trees. Love bumps and like to go fast on runs, too. I think you have "talked me into" the Enforcer 93s over the Kendo's or QST.. Now the question is length. You told JR that 177 would be good, but I'm bigger than him. I'm 6'0", 180lbs. Yet 185 seems so long!
Hi Andrew!
When you're in between sizes, we usually ask about your level of aggressiveness. If you're more aggressive, feel free to size up, but if you're on the mellow side, then the 169 would be fine. Also, if you're on groomed terrain most of the time, you might like the extra stability of the longer length. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Gary!
If you're concerned that the 185 seems long, then you are probably correct. I'd go with the 177. Have fun!
SE
Hey SE,
I need some help choosing between the 93 and 100. I am 6,2 and 216 pounds - intermediate to advanced skier. Mostly prefer on piste but starting to venture off trail more. I am heading over to Japan for 2 weeks shortly and I live in Australia. I have had Armada ARV (2010) 175cm for the past 9 years and used these in Canada, Japan and NZ. Would you recommend the 93's or 100's? Also, what length?
Thanks
Been on nordica enforcer 93 in 193 for 3 seasons now approx 100 days. I'm 191cm myself and 230lb. Best ski I've ever owned hands down
Great reviews and videos of you guys rippin' it on the Enforcers! I just demoed the Enforcer 93 at Beaver Creak and Vail this week, and loved them. After seeing your review of the 2020 Enforcer 88, now I'm torn, so I need some advice.
I'm an ex-racer, 5' 9", 200, who pretty much skiis like you guys in your videos, at least on the groomers. My only issue is when transitioning to steep (45 degree plus) pitches that are hard pack, the Enforcer 93 isn't as quick as I'd like. My goto method to scrub off speed is to make quick slalom turns, and with the Enforcer 93s, I had to work at it. I ended up slarving alot, which just feels like I'm getting sloppy, so do you think the 2020 Enforcer 88 would help?
Thanks again, and please post some videos of transitions to the steep icy stuff (I know Stowe has plenty of those!) to illustrate the transition to slarving or quick slalom turns - love to see how the 83s or 88s perform!
HiFlo
Hi, this is Tom. I'm 65, 5'10" and an advanced skier. I've been skiing most of my life, but only get to go a few times/year, most of it in the East, but 2-3 days out West.
I think it's time to transition from my old K2 ModX axis skis to something more modern. I'll ski everything, but if the conditions are good I'll push aggressively, but if it's really hard pack or a narrow chute I'm more conservative. I'm looking for a ski that won't chatter on hard pack when going fast, and manage some moguls, but can still handle reasonable powder if present. I would also like a lighter ski that's easier to turn, but still stable. It looks like the Enforcer 93 and the Rossignol 88 Ti would be good choices.
Which one would you recommend (or other?) for me and in what size?
Thanks!
Hi Chris!
Overall I'd recommend the 93. Sounds like you are on-trail more often than not, and if you get a bunch of snow, the 93 has a nice rocker profile that lets it float above its width. You might like the 100 if you get some fresh snow, but that's not as much of a guarantee as not having fresh snow. I'd go with the 185 unless you are super-aggressive in which case you could get the 193, but the 185 should work just fine. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi HiFlo!
I think you'll love the Enforcer 88. It has a much different on-piste feel than the 93, and I really like the energy and edge grip you get out of the turn. I took them in the moguls and into softer snow, and they were able to do pretty much anything I wanted them to, so I don't think you'll have trouble controlling the skis. Definitely worth a test!
SE
Hi Tom!
Of those two, I'd recommend the Experience 88. Sounds like you're on-trail a bit more, and if you're looking for stability and edge control, the 88 is a better choice. The Enforcer 93 is highly versatile, but has more of an off-piste personality. Also check out the K2 Pinnacle 88 and the Blizzard Bushwacker for comparison. Have fun!
SE
Thanks for the great advice. After looking at +s and -s of those skis it still looks like the Experience 88 Ti may be best for me. I heard the 88 Ti runs short, so would the 180 be suitable for me (5'10", 160 lbs). Also I found some favorable reviews on the Fisher Ranger 90 Ti. Any thoughts on those skis in comparison?
Hi Tom!
I think the 180 is the right length for you. In terms of the comparison to the Fischer, the Ranger is a bit lighter so will be a bit quicker even though it's a tad wider. The Experience will carve better than the Ranger while the Ranger will most likely be a bit more versatile for on/off-piste skiing. Hope that helps!
SE
Really appreciate the insight in the article as well as in the comments. I'm a level 7/8 skier who spends 15-20 days per year in Montana and Wyoming but 70/30 groomed vs. powder. I'm 47 years old, 5'10" and 150 pounds. Looking for a great all- purpose ski and was about to pull the trigger on a pair of Brahma 173s before a ski instructor recommended the Enforcers. I skied for a week on the Brahmas and really liked them a lot. Questions for you - what length in the Enforcers would you recommend for me? And are there any other skis that you think I should demo? Thanks again for the incredible insight - really appreciate it.
Thanks, Taylor!
I'll throw a wrench in your system by recommending that you wait until you try the 2020 Enforcer 88 (we have a review out on our blog). They're just as quick and responsive as the Brahma, but more versatile. If you're looking for more soft snow and powder performance, then the Enforcer 93 is still a great option, but if you like that ~88 underfoot, definitely check out the Enforcer 88. For length, I'd go with the 177--they ski a bit on the short side, so that should coincide with your 173 Brahma length. Sorry to add another ski to the list!
SE
Thank you, Jeff! Really appreciate the advice. I will be on the lookout for the Enforcer 88s.
Hi - I am very excited about the Enforcer 93 and need advice. I am 5'6 160lb, somewhere between intermediate and advanced. The shortest Enforce 93 is 169cm which is just about my height. I am wondering if 169cm is going to be too long for me, and that I should go for a different pair of skis?
Felix
Hi Felix!
You'll be just fine on the 169 cm! With the rocker profile of the Enforcer, it's perfectly reasonable to get a length that's right around your height. Go for it!
SE
Hi guys,
Amazing reviews you have, so complex, you really make an amazing job here, you really do.
I am looking for the only pair of skis I want to have.
I am intermediate, 6'4", 260 pounds (trying to get to 210), afraid of speed and moguls as I do not feel comfortable and in control, own a pair of Head ISpeed 2014 in 176 cm which are great for carving in ideal conditions and speed.
But now I want to try some fresh snow too, a little bit more adventure, but not too much, and be ready for any cinditions let's say.
Now, looking at your reviews, and keeping in mind my shape and level, was thinking about Enforcer 93, Experience 88ti, K2 Pinnacle, Navigator 90 and Dynastar. The thing is, I would like to be a fun ski, easy to skid when not comfortable with the speed, and also manouvrable on moguls, late afternoon ski when snow is more wet and slushy
Hi Dan!
Because you're a fairly big guy, it sort of changes ski performance. As we often mention here, everything's subjective with ski performance and skier size can really change performance. Anyways, I thought I would stay with that.
I think the Enforcer 93 is the way to go. With the two (albeit relatively thin) sheets of metal, it's going to provide the best stability for your size. Even if you drop down to 210, I still think it's the way to go. Also, the shape of the Enforcer is pretty much just what you're looking for. Easy to skid, maneuverable in bumps, it's a blast in softer spring-like snow, and can still be skied hard and aggressively when you want to. For length, even though it's quite a bit longer than your carving skis, I'd go 185 cm. No need to go all the way to 193 cm, but I think the 185 cm will give you the stability you need.
Hope that helps!
SE
Sorry, I submitted my comment without finishing.
Yeah, so based on your super profi reviews and on the 37 min video on youtube found out that I would need a pair of skis with some metal as I am really heavy and tall. (If not, please tell me). But on the other hand, softer flex skis would be better for my intermediate level and for my fear of speed and need of control. That's why, I would like these new skis to allow me to skid more so I can control the speed better and to be easy to play with on moguls (not to heavy) or in the afternoon when the pistes are not that nice anymore. Skiding might me important as it alows me to reduce my speed when needed as well. But on the other hand, I saw that you said that a heavy guy could easily overpower a pair of Head Kore 93 (which was my favorite one).
We have to keep in mind though that I ski for fun, not for performance and I love to ski when it snows.
So based on all that, what should I choose? Metal, no metal?
I really trust you guys as I don't have the opportunity to test them and you are the most professional ski website I have seen (and believe me, I searched a lot)
Cheers,
Dan
I am 5'7", 165lbs and 57 years young. I ski mostly in the east with a trip out west sprinkled in. I am looking for a single quiver ski. I like the bumps and trees, but also ski hard/fast GS turns on the groomers. But maneuverability in the trees and playfulness is most important to me. At Jay Peak I recently demoed some long (188?) Elan Ripsticks and hated them. Rode some short 164 Rossi Sky 7 HDs and loved them, but am concerned they may not be enough ski overall. I can't seem to find Enforcer 93 skis to demo, but on paper they seem like a great fit. Also, I tend to ride in the backseat when it gets scary, so I don't need a hard tail ski. Thoughts?
Between this is Mantra M5, which would you say is easier to release tails/versatile?
Hi Crawdady!
Sounds like you're looking to split the difference between the stiffer Enforcer and the playful Sky 7. I'd imagine you'd find the tails of the Enforcers to be a bit of a handful in the trees while you'd be a bit discouraged when you got the Sky up to speed. Check out the K2 Pinnacle 95 and the Blizzard Rustler 9 for comparisons--both are nimble and playful, but still have some chops when it comes to high speeds and carving on-piste. Let me know what you think!
SE
Hi Dan!
Thanks for the kind words!
The only reason to get a ski with metal if you are not an expert is if you are big and tall and will overpower a wood core ski. But if that ski has other materials that are intended to replace the metal (like the graphene/koroyd in the Kore, or the Basalt in the Salomon QST line), then you can achieve similar effects. Ultimately, metal is the best dampener and stiffener in terms of performance, but if you're looking for a lightweight and stiff ski to skid around on, have fun, and not overpower, the Kore is a great option. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Dave!
I'd say the Enforcer is a bit more versatile. Both have pretty stiff tails, but the Mantra seems to want to stay locked in to the turn for longer than the Enforcer. A bit more rocker in the tail makes a big difference for the Nordica, and gives it more of a freeride mentality versus the stronger carving performance of the Mantra. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi guys, which lenght would you recommend for a 177 cm height, 110 kg skier with 10 years under my belt? Mostly groomers, some off-piste adventures planned. I like to go rather fast.
Hi Markus!
I'd say you're a 177 in that ski, unless you know you like to go fast and ski aggressively, at which point, you could use the 185. Have fun!
SE
Hi, I'm trying to decide between the Enforcer 93 and Head Kore 93. I live in Washington state, so we get a mix of powder, ice, cord, and whatever else you can think of. I pretty evenly split my times between moguls and grooms. On the grooms, I like to take long and wide turns rather than short sweeps. I'm 5'5" 150 lb. Any suggestion on what would work best for me?
Thanks,
Kushal
Hi Kushal!
Which do you value more, vibration damping or responsiveness? The Enforcer 93 and Kore 93 are very similar in shape, the real differences comes from their construction. The Enforcer is heavier with its two sheets of metal, which gives it more stability at speed and better vibration damping. The Kore 93 is a little more maneuverable as it has lighter swing weight, and its construction makes it respond really quickly to skier input, but it doesn't have the smooth feel of the Enforcer 93, especially at speed. Just a matter of which sounds like it matches your ski style more!
Hope that helps,
SE
I'm considering the NE 93 again. I was torn between it and the Nav 90 ended up with Navigator. Trouble is I fell into some Stockli Laser AX and SX skis. AX is great and the SX is a scary fast carver (maybe too much for me). I still ski the Nav 90's a lot and like that they are so easy to ski quick carving turns and the extra width underfoot (such an overlooked ski by most people). Really my only issue is that they might be a little too close to the AX in terms of turn shape, etc. If I wouldn't have stumbled into the AX, I would happily ski the Navigator.
So I've been thinking a lot again about the Enforcer line and having a bit more freeride feel in a tail that will smear more. My other issue is I ski mostly in Ohio and the ski weather here changes the snow dramatically and we get a lot of heavy wet snow, crud, mix of icy and heavy crud, icy/crusty hard pack after a warm day when temperature drops at night at it freezes on top. We see a lot of rough snow conditions that end up mixed together and can make for tough skiing. The Nav 90's are good , but how much more stability or dampness would I get out of a NE93 or even the NE100?
I'm 5'7" and 180lbs, looking to slim down (someday we hope). I'm and advanced skier and usually like to mix carving turns (mostly short) for most of my skiing, with some off piste when I have the chance, but would like to expand on that. Typically I'll be around 30-40mph... not super fast, but decent speed.
Would the NE93 or NE100 give me that extra stability/dampness to handle the crud, ice and mix of conditions a little better? If so I'm stuck on what size... 169 or 177? I currently ski the Nav90 in a 172. Not sure if the 169 for the Enforcer would be too short or 177 too long? My Laser AX skis are 167, but they're pretty stiff. With the rocker in the tip and tail it looks like the NE93 at 177 might ski shorter than the Nav 90's at 172? I also wouldn't mind the longer turn radius to differentiate things since the Stockli's give me short snappy turns when I want.
Your awesome staff, reviews and advice are appreciated!
Hi SE,
I am an advanced intermediate skier (33 years old, 6'1 around 210) looking to pickup my second set of skis. I ski mostly New York and Vermont with a yearly trip out west. The first skis I purchased were 175 Fischer Motive 80s, which have been great to learn on and I love making turns on groomers and hard pack with them. They hold up pretty well at speed but are a little soft, but now that I am skiing more of the mountain - bumps, some (mostly wide) trees and more ungroomed trails, I am looking for something to continue building my skills with. I also want a ski that is better in soft snow for the times I am ski in fresh snow. I have been reading reviews on the enforcer 93 and they seem like a great ski that can handle most conditions, but I was also thinking of the enforcer 88 or exp88. I was hoping to demo the 93s this past weekend, but I ended up demoing the 179 Navigator 90s which I really enjoyed. I felt stable on them at speed and on the steeper runs and they were pretty maneuverable in the powder and soft bumps that we had skiing there. I didn't get to test them on groomers though as it snowed the entire trip (not really a bad thing).
Would the 93s be a good move for me? If so, what size? I felt pretty comfortable on the 179 navs, but I don't want the 177 93s to be too short. Should I be looking at the enforcer 88s or exp 88?
Thanks!
Hi Matt!
Both the Enforcer 93 and 100 have a more smeary feel than the Navigator, so either one should satisfy that need. Do you think you'll keep the Navigator 90? I ask because if you are, I would just go straight to the Enforcer 100 so you have a more complimenting width to your existing skis. The 93 and 100 really feel quite similar. 100 is a little slower edge to edge, sure, but on the other hand it's better in soft snow and crud. How much stability and dampness will you see over your Nav 90? Well, quite a bit to be honest. The Nav does a good job, but Hex Titanium Bridge doesn't compare to two full sheets of metal in terms of dampness.
For length, it's certainly not unreasonable to go longer than your height with the Enforcers, but do keep in mind that those lengths will be heavier and a little more demanding. If you're okay with that, you shouldn't have any issues on the 177 cm. Plenty of skiers "size up" on the Enforcers, you just have to be up for it. Overall, 100 feels more appropriate than 93, whether you decide to go 169 or 177 cm.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi Rob!
The E93 is a step up in versatility and performance from the Navigator 90, but that Nav really excels on-piste. The E93 has more of a freeride personality while the Navigator is a bit more carving-oriented, but as you learned, is also pretty versatile. You could try the 88's and you'll love how they carve and perform on-piste, but that Enforcer 93 is a true all-mountain ski in the best sense of the word. At your size, you could certainly justify the 185. Hope that helps!
SE
I am a pretty big guy (6'4" 225lb) and advanced intermediate/expert level. I find myself on piste mostly with my kids, but do venture into trees and chase my son thorugh bumps. I try to find fresh snow when I can and do want some soft snow performance, realistically, a backcountry ski is unreasonable for me. I looked pretty hard at the Kore 93 but was afraid I would overpower it. Deciding between Mantra M5 and Enforcer 93. Thoughts?
Hi Rob!
I'd agree to look past the Kore 93. Between the M5 and the E93, I'd give the on-trail edge to the Mantra, despite the extra width underfoot. The Titanal Frame and the lower rocker profile make it a thrilling carver, and it's great in the chop, but the Enforcer has a better soft-snow personality. I've found the M5 to have a more metallic feel to it while the Enforcer is more woody. I feel it makes for a more forgiving and organic feel to the Nordica, but a lot of people love the stability of that Mantra. Hope that helps!
SE
Just wanted to follow up and say thanks. I ended up buying the Enforcer 100 in the 177cm from you guys and tried them this past weekend at Snowshoe. It took me about a half day to get comfortable with the longer length and weight. Given the conditions I was glad they showed up just in time for me to take on our trip. They did a great job of handling the various conditions we had, even in the bumps. Really enjoyed the longer turn radius on carves and then sliding the tails for quick short turns when needed. Crazy versatility in this ski and it was pretty forgiving. Only thing I'm disappointed in is the lack of snow days we have left here in Ohio...
Thanks again for recommending the Enforcer 100. I was leaning toward the 93, but after reading your response took a chance on the 100 and I'm very happy!
Morning guys,
Very impressed with your reviews! I recently purchased the Enforcer 93 (177 length) but am wondering if I purchased the wrong size. I'm absolutely enamored with the Enforcers but any advice about going with the 177 vs. 185 would be appreciated!!! I'm '5"9 200 pounds upper intermediate and aggressive skier. I live in Maryland (just outside of DC) and mostly ski the mid Atlantic, i.e. short, icy, cruddy and crowded runs. The longest run that I regularly ski is '1000 and there are not may long sweepers or bowls like you folks have so I practice carving. I may get out west once a year or up to your neck of the woods but 75% of my time will be on icy choppy and crowded runs. What's your take?
Hi Chris!
I wouldn't have recommended the 185, I'd say the 177 is the right length for your size. If you are super-aggressive and fast, you could certainly ski the 185, but I think it's long for you. Hope that helps and have fun!
SE
Thanks for the great reviews. I am looking to add a second ski to the collection. I am 5'11'' and 165lbs. Late 40s and have been skiing all my life- would classify myself in the advance to expert category. I ski BC resorts in Canada primarily and have been using a Nordica Enforcer 110 in a 185 length and love it. I had been using a Blizzard Brahma 88 180 as a non-powder day ski and love it skingi fast and hard on groomers of any condition. The Brahma is less than idea skiing bumps and trees on those days when you are trying to find stashes of powder but still want to rip. Enforcer 93 feels like a great compromise. Trying to figure out if the 185 is good fit or should I drop down to the 177? I want to be able to maintain high speed stability but still get time in the trees and moguls. If there is enough rocker to make these play at the 185 length, I would be inclined to go long. I have spring trip to Mt. Bachelor in April and need help!
Hi Guys, I need help on choosing between two skis. I am 5'-9" and 185 lbs. I have been on Rossi Bandits X 177 length for a long time and still love them but it's time to replace them. I am a high advanced skier who loves off piste and bumps. I'm a quick turn guy. I think I've come down to two skis, either the Völkl Mantra M5 or The Nordica Enforcer 93. Any suggestions? I think the 177 is my length or would you suggest a different length?
Hi Jonathan!
I've often said a 185 cm Enforcer (93 or 100) is easier to ski than a 180 cm Brahma or Bonafide. Considering we already know you like the length of your Enforcer 110, I think it's pretty safe to go 185 cm. I think you might find the 177 cm isn't quite what you're looking for when you're looking to ski fast and aggressively on firm snow, especially considering you're coming off a Brahma. 185 cm Enforcer 93 should retain the ability to rip with confidence, but in my opinion will also feel easier in moguls, trees, etc. Not as much tail rocker as your 110, but it's still a fairly forgiving ski considering its level of performance.
I say go for it!
SE
Hi Joe!
As a quick turning, mogul-loving skier, I'd go Enforcer 93. Its shape makes it easier to pivot, and the turn shape feels a little shorter than the M5 Mantra across the board (different terrain and turn styles). The Enforcer 93 is going to feel much more stable than your Bandits, in my opinion, so I don't really see a reason to size up. I'd stick with 177 cm for that easier mogul performance.
Hope that helps!
SE
Great information here, thank you! I for the first time in a while am finding myself in the market for some new skis. I currently ski Salomon X-Wing Tornado Titaniums 180's. I am 42 and a lifelong skier and consider myself in the advanced to expert category and am 5'11" and 190lbs. I ski aggressively and love going fast. I mostly ski southern Michigan, so mostly groomers, but get up to northern Michigan and New York a couple times a year where I could see some fresh stuff. I think I am down to a couple choices, Nordica Enforcer 93, Volkl Mantra M5 or the Head Core 93. Somewhere in the mid 180's for length depending on what is offered. Any suggestions or is there something else I should be looking at? Thanks in advance!
Love your site. Thank you for our comments.
Am 54 years old, 6 ft, and 190 lbs and am fairly athletic. Am an intermediate/advanced (currently) skier who skis in the rockies in western Canada. When younger, was more advanced than intermediate, but, have taken some time off from the sport. Am getting back into it with my kids who now have surpassed me in every aspect of the sport.
I enjoy a steep, long, blue run, however, can tackle black runs if need be, but am not looking for that. I am skiing a Black Crows Captis at 178.3, but would like something a bit more stable at speed and am leaning to the Enforcer 93.
Thoughts on length, or another ski, for that matter?
Thank you in advance.
John
Hi Jamie!
For your application, I'd take the Kore off the list and focus on the Mantra and E93. Of those, the Mantra has the stronger on-trail and carving profile, while the Enforcer has more versatility and soft snow performance. They're pretty similar in terms of overall performance, and I'd add that the Mantra has more of a metallic feel while the Enforcer is a bit more woody. Both are relatively unflappable at speed, and come in 184 and 185, so sizing shouldn't be an issue. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi John!
Sounds like the Enforcer 93 would be a great ski for you! Definitely a more stable feel than your Black Crows, super fun skis. Considering your experience and ability level, I think the 177 cm would be best. 185 cm is taller than you, which can be a bit much if you're not an aggressive, high speed skier. 177 cm should provide plenty of stability, especially compared to your Black Crows, and will be a lot easier to ski than the 185 cm would be.
Hope that helps!
SE
Hi,
I am trying to decide between the enforcer 93 in a 169 length and the vantage 97 ti in a 172. I am 5'10 150 pounds and an advanced skier that likes to charge but also enjoys nice long carves on groomers. I ski mostly in the sierras. Would both those lengths be ok for me or is 169 a little short?
Thanks,
Aaron
5' 10" 200 Lbs. Athletic gym rat. 72 Years young. Bought these 177's for last season. Wonderful one ski quiver for the north left coast. Pow, ice, crud, groomers these skis do it all. You can ski these aggressive or lazy and have a great day. Have not tried them in truly deep pow yet. For what we ski here I feel I could not have bought a better ski.
Hi Aaron!
The Enforcer 93 is a very stable ski, and although your height could warrant the longer length, you're not particularly heavy, so I think the 169 is a fine length. I'd be hesitant to recommend the 177. The Vantage is quite a bit lighter than the Enforcer, so you might want to give that one a second look. It is wider, and they also make it in a 90, for what it's worth. At the end of the day, they're all great skis, I'd stick to the low-170's in that model as well. Have fun!
SE
Hello,
I am 5'9" 180lb and looking to buy a pair of the enforcer 93's. I ski mostly blues and blacks, and am pretty aggressive. Would you recommend the 169 or 177?
Thanks
Hi Josh!
I think based on your aggressiveness, you should go with the 177. You're kind of in the middle based on size, but speed puts you in the longer length. Have fun!
SE
Hey guys,
Really appreciate the review and just sheer awesomeness of the site!
I'm 29 years old and I picked up skiing a little later in life. This will be my 5th year on the slopes. Last season I had 25+ days on the mountain and I can't wait to get back out there for more. All my skiing has been east coast in upstate NY. Nearly all skiing is on piste with the occasional off trail run. Lots of cold days with crusty icey condition but we get plenty of blizzard and fresh pow days too. Im 5'9 and weigh 185lbs. I'd consider myself an athletic intermediate. I'm currently skiing the Rossignol experience 80s at 152cm length. Towards the middle of last season I really felt hindered by my skis. They just don't give me stability with higher speeds. And if there is fresh powder, they seem really slow(makes sense with underfoot and length in using) I love to charge, carve, and go fast. Its Def time for an upgrade! After 18 months give or take of internet research(lol) I feel the enforcers might be a good route for me.
My question is, will this be too much of a jump in ski for me? I like the idea of stability claims but also forgiveness. I'm willing to grow into the ski and accept a learning curve. From reading, people seem to say size up from what you want due to the front rocker. Should I go with 177cm for my height and weight? Or be more humble and move up to the 169cm first?
Thanks you in advance!
Hi Tom!
You're not the only one. I'd say your level of aggressiveness should dictate your size if you're in between, especially if you know you've liked longer skis in the past. Based on your size, I'd look to the 177, but if you feel like you're working the ski enough to take on the 185, then go right for it. There's not a huge difference, you'll likely notice it the most in tighter turns, trees, and moguls, but more stability at speed. Hope that helps!
SE
Hi John!
Thanks for the kind words!
I think the Enforcer would be a jump for sure, but certainly something you'll grow to love. In that width, I'd also include the Blizzard Rustler 9 and the Salomon QST 92 if you haven't already. If you're worried about the burliness of the E93, those skis are just a shade under. I'd also say the 169 in the Enforcer or a low-170 in the other two if possible. Any route you choose, you're going to love the upgrade!
SE
I am considering the Nordica Enforcer 93 and I am 5'11 and 190 pounds. Pretty aggressive, like to ski fast and I ski mostly out west....the 2019's are a great deal but only in 185. With that said I don't want to save for the wrong size....is the 185 ok or should I go with the 177? Thanks
Hi James!
I think the 185 is fine. No change in the ski except graphics, for what it's worth. Have fun!
SE
I'm 65, 6ft. 185 lbs and I'm debating between the Enforcer 93 vs. 100 and 177 cm vs. 185 cm. I ski 40-50 days out West and am probably intermediate/advanced. I have been skiing 188 Rossi Soul 7's and also have some fat K2 Pettitors for powder. I probably ski groomers 70% but love to occasionally explore off-piste. Which ski should I add to my quiver?
Hi Steve!
I'd say to go for the 93 in the 185. They're better for groomers for sure, and I think it's a good idea to put more distance between your quiver models. If you're comfortable on the 188 in the Soul, my guess is that the 185 is the right size. Have fun!
SE
Hi SE,
Really enjoy your reviews. I would say I’m at least an advanced skier, as I’m skiing since I’m 3 years old and I’m now 23. Also I’m doing pretty exclusively simple, double and sometimes triple diamonds tracks. I would say I ski about 70% on piste and 30% off tracks, woods/moguls. I’m 6’00 and about 165 lbs. I’m skiing in the east of Canada (Quebec).
I am skiing some Salomon q98 in 180. I’ve read a lot about different models and as I’m skiing more on piste I want to change my q98 for something I would enjoy more on piste but without sacrificing to much the off tracks (as I really love to ski off track).
From what I have read, I think the enforcer 93 would be my first choice, but now I’m not sure between the 177 and the 185, what are your suggestion regarding this?
Thanks a lot,
Tony
Hi Tony!
It sounds like you're an Enforcer 93 skier to me! Definitely a stronger carver than the Q98, and while not as nimble or agile, it's still a pretty playful ski for how stable it is. If you're an aggressive skier, go ahead and get the 185, but if you're more mellow and prefer shorter and more turns, go with the 177. Have fun!
SE
Thank you for the review and the helpful discussion. I would be very grateful for a recommendation. I'm 5'10, 180lbs, intermediate-advanced skier. I'm on the east coast and take a trip or two to the west coast each season. I can handle most groomed runs but looking for a ski that I can use to improve off-piste and on moguls. I currently stay primarily on groomed runs but would like to start exploring off-piste. I demoed the QST 99 in Tahoe and the Volkl Kendo in Stowe last winter. I liked the QST 99 but I wonder how it would handle east coast ice. I also enjoyed the Kendo but found it to be less maneuverable and more fatiguing in the second half of the day when the snow gets piled up. I'm currently leaning strongly towards the Enforcer 93, but also considering QST 92 and Kore 93, all in 177cm.
Hi Andrew!
All good options. The QST 99 has changed and gotten a bit beefier for 2020, so if you liked that feel, the new model is a better hard-snow ski. Otherwise, i'd lean to the Enforcer 93 for its versatility and firm snow performance. The Kore can be a bit chatty on ice, and I think the Kendo is a bit narrow for your application. I'd say 177 is right on. Have fun!
SE
Hi, I'm looking to buy my first set of skis. I've been skiing most of my life (22 y/o) and would consider myself advanced but not an expert (confident on any black diamond but only some double blacks). I just do resort skiing at the moment, a mix of groomers with some moguls (70/30). I'm expecting to be skiing about 2 weeks per year (possibly more) with most of it being east coast, maybe some more west coast in the future -- hopefully 1 week per year.
After doing some research for a one ski quiver (that would be good both on the east and west coast), I came across the Nordica Enforcer 93. I'm 5'9 and 150 lbs. First, does this seem like a solid ski choice for me? Secondly, if I were to go with the Enforcer 93, should I go with a 169cm or 177cm length? From reading your replies on here, it sounds like with the rocker profile of the enforcer it's okay to get a ski a little long, but at the same time I'm not sure if the 169 would be better for my weight/height. I'm a pretty standard skier, definitely not passive but also not overly aggressive either.
Thanks! Let me know if you need any other info.
Hi Sam!
The Enforcer 93 is a great ski for advanced skiers looking to fill that one ski quiver. I'd go with the 169, not only due to your size, but also because it has two sheets of metal. The stability of the ski outweighs the rocker profile in terms of whether you size up or down. Have fun!
SE
Im 195cm (6'5"), 95kg (210lb) and a good skier. A friend suggested I should get Faction Candide 2.0, since he bought them and absolutely loves them. We both have similar styles in that we both ski as if we're from the 1980s with our ankles tied together bouncing down mogul fields/off piste.
However, on further research I've now got my mind set on the Enforcer series, but cannot decide on length or waist. 93 or 100? 185 or 193? Will they be OK in the moguls for me?
Hi Mark!
If you're more of a feet together type of skier, I'd go with the 93. At your size, I think the 185 will be fine--I'm a bit shorter than you and skied the 193 for a few years and wished I had the shorter size--they're very stable. I love them in the bumps, and especially the narrower waist with the shorter size. Have fun!
SE
Hi there, great review! I'm considering the E93s and also have a question about height. I'm 6'1, 185 lbs, mostly ski at Park City/Canyons. Been skiing since i was little and I'm "advanced", ski everything but the gnarliest double blacks, spend a lot of time on groomers with family (we grew up on the East coast) but also love the bumps.
So I have 2 questions:
- if I go with the E93, would you recommend 185 or 177? I'm currently on an old set of 180cm Atomic 102s as my one ski and think the length is good, given my size it seems like 185 might make sense but I'm considering 177 because I'm thinking manueverability might be better in the bumps and I don't care about speed. On the other hand, I'm worried the 177s might hold me back and have felt like my skis were chattering when trying shorter skis in the past
- are there notable differences or things to consider between the 2019 and 2020 versions of the E93?
Thanks for any help/insights!
Hi Jay!
Same ski regardless of year. I'd say the 185. I'm 6'2/220 and I'm between the 185 and 193. Now that I'm not skiing quite as aggressively as I used to, I prefer the 185. I was on a 174 cm Nordica Spitfire RB 80 the other day and it was definitely too short, so I'd guess the 177 Enforcer would feel short for you. Hope that helps!
SE
I know I am a little late to this but I am narrowed down to the Enforcer 93 and the Salomon QST 92. I ski mostly on the east coast but plan to take some trips out west. I'd say I am a pretty experienced skier but have always skied small skis (156) right now... I am 6'0, about 210 so I think its time to make the jump to something longer. First, would you recommend the Enforcers or QST? Second, should I go with the 169 or 177?
Hi Caden!
Never too late! The Enforcer is the more high-performing of the two, and has more metal. The QST is very intuitive and natural while the Enforcer requires more input. I'd say the 177 is the proper size, unless you know that you prefer shorter skis and really want the 169. Have fun!
SE
Hi there I enjoyed the review. I tried and really enjoyed the Enforcer 88 and Salomon QST 92, any other recommendations for me? I'm 6' 3" 160lbs I'm an intermediate skier, ski mostly groomed trail, glades and some park. I ski primarily east coast mostly Whiteface, Gore and the Poconos. And other recommendations
Hi Ron!
Check out the K2 Mindbender 90 Ti--a good mix of the QST 92 and Enforcer 88. Also Blizzard Rustler 9 and Rossignol Experience 94 Ti for slightly wider options. Have fun!
SE
Dear Jeff: I am very sorry to hear you broke your clavicle and needed surgery.Hope you get better soon! I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the redesigned Nordica enforcer 94 for 2021 and how it skis compared to the 2020 model.Is it any quicker with the redesign?Thanks,Bo
Hi SE,
I’m a 6-0 200lbs intermediate/advanced skier, only been skiing for 2 seasons, I’ve been able to pick it up rather quickly. I’m deciding between the Fischer ranger 94 FR and the nordica enforcer 93, as I can get a pretty good deal on either of those right now. Predominantly east coast/Midwest but want to start heading out west as well. Only ski in bounds and no park skiing. I like the enforcer more on paper but I’m worried about it being too much ski right now. On the flip side, I think I’ll appreciate the added stiffness since I am on the heavier/more athletic side and don’t really do any tricks/park skiing. Thoughts?
HI Gordon!
Given your improvement and your size, I think the 93 is an accessible ski for sure. Correct, the 94 FR might be a better choice for right now, but if you are worried about leaving some performance on the table, I'd go with the Enforcer. Have fun!
SE
Thanks for the quick response! Follow up on sizing, do you think the 185 will be too long, should I go with the 177 instead? I like the extra stability at speed of a longer ski, which is why I’m leaning towards 185.
Gordon,
Generally the lean is correct. I'd go with the 185 for that stability. Have fun!
SE
Hi Guys thank you for the great reviews.
How would the enforcer 93 compare to Fischer ranger 92ti?
I’m 36 230lbs and would call myself and an advanced skier. Use a qst 106 as my powder ski so need a ski for mainly for piste and off to the sides/ trees. I know the performance of these skis are high but I’m more interested in their lower end as there will be times skiing with my family where I will be forced to slow down.
I have taken a look at the qst 92 but in hindsight although it might be easier it’s high end might be lacking on groomed terrain. Probably looking at the 185cm length.
Hi Gavin!
Right you are! The Ranger is a great ski, but can't quite match up to the high end of the Enforcer, with its two full sheets of metal. For only having a partial metal laminate, the Ranger is still a pretty darn solid ski, and certainly has a better low-speed compliance, while the Enforcer can be a bit harsh. The QST 92 will have a similar overall feel/character as your 106, and for a ski without any metal, it's one of the most stable skis out there. I think the Ranger is a good middle-ground, unless you know that you want the high gear that the Enforcer offers. Have fun!
SE
Cheers! Although I love my 106s they are definitely off piste performers.
Would the stance 90 be close to the Fischer’s or are they more in line with the enforcers?