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

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
I have a midfat hole in my current 3 ski quiver.
The narrow Twisters are great in moguls, ok on groomed, lousy in fresh or crud, and aging.
The tank like fat S7's are superb in fresh powder, a mediocre tool once snow is tracked up, and too heavy for backcountry uphill.
The short really light The Ski skis were bought for backcountry powder.

Thus this fall have been reading reviews and opinions on:
Nordica Navigator XX, Head Monster XX TI, and Rossignol Experience XX TI. Some excellent reviews and information on this site, thank you Phil and Tricia.

However as a gal sized guy, I learned decades ago to be wary of opinions and reviews of men's skis because the world flexing skis at my 137# is a lot different than heavier men. Thus have also looked at the similar models for women that are better designed for my forces like the Astral XX and Experience XX CI TI W. Unfortunately expensive demoing doesn't tend to be enlightening because shops usually only carry beefier lengths for normal sized men. Thus my ski history is one of gambling during buying and then adapting to whatever. I am going to wait till Tahoe actually gets a minimal base as would not want to buy if this ends up like last year with little skiing till January or the recent drought years.

I ski for pleasure, fun, while little for challenge, and have long been content with skills. Want a balanced mid fat that will efficiently bounce short turns down groomed slopes at slow to moderate speeds, that I will be able to manage in bumps, and especially will be a better all terrain tool. At this point am leaning towards the Nordica Navigator 88 or 84. I have noticed good numbers of other bump skiers today riding midfats on mogul slopes so I might be surprised. However all terrain aspects are more important since I already have the Twisters. Help me choose. Appreciate any advice from similar lighter skiers, especially women, that have opinions.
 
Last edited:

Analisa

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Posts
982
Out of your list, agreed the Navs seem right up your alley. Blizzard Bushwacker should be on your list, or better yet, last year it was sold as the Brahma CA (hooray for clearance deals). They're the same weight as the women's Black Pearl 88, so I'm inclined to think they're the same/very similar ski if you want to get out on a demo. QST 92 or 85 also shares the same construction across men's and women's, and even my smallest beginner-intermediate friends are able to bend them.
 
Thread Starter
TS
SSSdave

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Thanks Analisa. I looked up reviews for your suggestions that are indeed worth considering.

And thankyou surfsnowgirl. Visited your review link that indeed shows they are skis with value for consideration.

And indeed Dwight, she and I have similar weight and boot size haha. I did read her useful reviews on my ski's of interest that were helpful.

At this point am still leaning towards the Nordica Navigator and probably the 85 at 165cm that is 120-84-105 while could go with the 172cm at 123-85-108. And do see the former ski already discounted to $325. With say the economical Look NX11 B90 at $130, that would be ~$450.
 
Thread Starter
TS
SSSdave

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Was over at a nearby mobbed Sportsbasement for a Snowfest event. As an old guy with a museum of clothing and gear, really nothing to buy except midfats, so mostly just wandered about absorbing some vibe. Lots of loud rock, for example Ozzy with constant raffle ticket excitement.

Did settle into a useful conservation with the Nordica guy by the ski rack. He has edged me away from the softer Navigator's to the 169cm 93mm Enforcer. I'd been shying away from a wider stiffer heavier with metal all terrain choice as I'm yet convinced that is all that fun by keeping more a balance with fun on groomed while still being able to cope in bumps. Ski has a $650 list but all was on sale for 20% off or $520. However a check online showed that ski already is discounted down to $475. With the NX11 B100 at $130, that would be $600. Then noticed the same binding in women's color NX11 W B100 was just $97 on one site so $570. Given recent 3 poor seasons until January, and since am in no hurry to gamble with major bucks, I won't consider committing to till actually seeing enough white in Tahoe to be worthwhile.
 

Josh Matta

Skiing the powder
Pass Pulled
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Posts
4,123
My wife is smaller than you, and primarly skis off trail and she abandoned her Brahmas for some 169cm E93. The advantage of her being 120lb is she can float easily on those 93s...
 
Thread Starter
TS
SSSdave

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Thanks Josh. That someone else with light weight finds the E93 at 169cm a fine tool is an important positive consideration.
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,630
Location
Maine
Thanks Josh. That someone else with light weight finds the E93 at 169cm a fine tool is an important positive consideration.

I'm exactly your size. 56, hack beer leaguer, east coast except when Pugging it out west.

You started the post with comments about having much different reactions to skis than big guys have. I totally relate to that and agree. With that in mind, and given your own description of your skiing, I'd be careful of taking Josh's post too much to heart. Why? Because even though she is our size, the chances of you being as strong a skier as Josh's young, fit, ski instructor wife are close to zero. (I have skied with them.)

My guess is that the Nordica guy pushing the Enforcer had fifty pounds on you. Right? Doesn't mean you wouldn't like the ski; just means, "Why take his word for it?" So, back to your first principles.
 

Monster

Monstrous for some time now. . .
Skier
Joined
May 8, 2018
Posts
172
Location
NH
I'm 5'5", 125# live in the east.

My choice: 177, 130/88/120, 19m, full camber, generous flex:

View media item 2819
I also enjoy a 177, 113/67/96, 16.5m, my go-to frontside carver (also pretty bendy) that despite being skinny, does well in resort manque and bumps.

 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,630
Location
Maine
^^^

Oooh. Gorgeous. Are those from that Jackson Hole guy?
 

Monster

Monstrous for some time now. . .
Skier
Joined
May 8, 2018
Posts
172
Location
NH
Thanks. Nope - just little old me having fun in my home shop. . .
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
I have a midfat hole in my current 3 ski quiver.
The narrow Twisters are great in moguls, ok on groomed, lousy in fresh or crud, and aging.
The tank like fat S7's are superb in fresh powder, a mediocre tool once snow is tracked up, and too heavy for backcountry uphill.
The short really light The Ski skis were bought for backcountry powder.

Thus this fall have been reading reviews and opinions on:
Nordica Navigator XX, Head Monster XX TI, and Rossignol Experience XX TI. Some excellent reviews and information on this site, thank you Phil and Tricia.

However as a gal sized guy, I learned decades ago to be wary of opinions and reviews of men's skis because the world flexing skis at my 137# is a lot different than heavier men. Thus have also looked at the similar models for women that are better designed for my forces like the Astral XX and Experience XX CI TI W. Unfortunately expensive demoing doesn't tend to be enlightening because shops usually only carry beefier lengths for normal sized men. Thus my ski history is one of gambling during buying and then adapting to whatever. I am going to wait till Tahoe actually gets a minimal base as would not want to buy if this ends up like last year with little skiing till January or the recent drought years.

I ski for pleasure, fun, while little for challenge, and have long been content with skills. Want a balanced mid fat that will efficiently bounce short turns down groomed slopes at slow to moderate speeds, that I will be able to manage in bumps, and especially will be a better all terrain tool. At this point am leaning towards the Nordica Navigator 88 or 84. I have noticed good numbers of other bump skiers today riding midfats on mogul slopes so I might be surprised. However all terrain aspects are more important since I already have the Twisters. Help me choose. Appreciate any advice from similar lighter skiers, especially women, that have opinions.



I think you are going to love the Head V10. Fun ski and at 85mm width very versatile. Not as stiff as the Monsters but still capable. It looked and felt very well made and should take a beating and last a long time like the Monsters.
 
Thread Starter
TS
SSSdave

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Posts
2,516
Location
Silicon Valley
Thanks Ken on the Head tip. Went back and looked at the Head info. V10 ok though more piste oriented, shaped ski shovel. Then looked at the lightweight non-metal Kore models where at 171cm, that ski (130 91 113), has moved up a notch in front of the others. I do like that it does not contain a metal sheet that makes it a lighter ski and more suited for lighter weight skiers as well as its modern freeride shaped shovel and tail. As a very dynamic skier, I am not one that needs a shaped shovel to get into short turns, light weight is always important for rapidly doing so, and reviewers like it's soft snow performance that I read in as an even better float for a light person without going as fat as heavier men. Although I seem to have distilled a choice now, on the negative it is more expensive.
 
Last edited:

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
I just posted this in another thread but is worth repeating: The Kore 93 is a lot lighter but also stiffer than an Enforcer 93.

Two mother and daughter friends of mine who are similar sized to Dave and strong black diamond skiers, both bought Head Wild Joy skis last season after also demoing Line Pandora, Head Total Joy, and some others. Wild Joy are 90mm at the waist and of course very light weight.
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,630
Location
Maine
Thanks. Nope - just little old me having fun in my home shop. . .

I think I need one of those bendy 88s. Maybe 5cm shorter. What's under the topsheet?
 

Monster

Monstrous for some time now. . .
Skier
Joined
May 8, 2018
Posts
172
Location
NH
Triax glass, wood core, triax glass, base. Pretty standard.
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
Thanks Ken on the Head tip. Went back and looked at the Head info. V10 ok though more piste oriented, shaped ski shovel. Then looked at the lightweight non-metal Kore models where at 171cm, that ski (130 91 113), has moved up a notch in front of the others. I do like that it does not contain a metal sheet that makes it a lighter ski and more suited for lighter weight skiers as well as its modern freeride shaped shovel and tail. As a very dynamic skier, I am not one that needs a shaped shovel to get into short turns, light weight is always important for rapidly doing so, and reviewers like it's soft snow performance that I read in as an even better float for a light person without going as fat as heavier men. Although I seem to have distilled a choice now, on the negative it is more expensive.

The Head V10 does not have metal. It has carbon instead. Its not as light as the Kore 93 obviously but it is lighter than the Monsters. Whats a cool about the V10 is that it is light but still damp enough and pretty smooth. I hate skis with big shovels and I liked this one. I did not have to make short turns it kinda did what I wanted which was cool. It had good power. Again, not as much as the monsters but for lighter skiers like you I would recommend the V10 instead of the Monster. I would choose the 177cm since the turn radius does not feel super short at all.

I demoed the Kore 93 in 180cm last season and loved it. Might be a bit too stiff for light skiers (maybe the shorter version is softer?) but it is not a super stiff ski like the Kore 99 which is crazy stiff.
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,630
Location
Maine
I would choose the 177cm since the turn radius does not feel super short at all.

Just to clarify, what you mean is that you would choose that length for yourself. Right?
 

Sponsor

Top