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

Enforcer Daily Driver for Destination Skier

projectawry

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Posts
4
Location
Chicago, IL
Hi all,

I'm a skier that is trapped in Chicago, where there are no mountains in sight. :( I get about 10 ski days per year in Colorado, Canada, or Utah, depending on the year. To date, I've always rented skis, which allows me to choose skis based on conditions. This, however, means I don't always wind up on the best set of skis because of the rental shops' available inventory. I'm considering buying some Nordica Enforcer 93s or 100s because I've demoed both and they are confidence inspiring.

I'm an athletic "upper intermediate" skier (confident on ungroomed blacks, trying some steeps). I like to ski a mix of groomers/ungroomed and trees/moguls.

My question is: Which of the following makes the most sense.

1. Buy the Enforcer 93s, which are the best in case of snow drought.
2. Buy the Enforcer 100s, which are a good balance (?)
3. Demo the Enforcer 104s ($$++) because they might be more versatile (?) than the above.
4. Continue to rent so I can choose skis based on conditions.

Price is important, but secondary to having the best ski experience. How would you choose a daily driver if you were a destination skier? Any thoughts would be appreciated!

Thanks!
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,490
Location
Colorado
If you're not spending a lot of time on them in the midwest -- but primarily using as an every day ski for your Western destinations, I'd go 100. That ski will cover 80% of your days out West without problem.
 

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
2,101
Location
Tokyo
What they said
 

AngryAnalyst

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
713
Short answer: Enforcer 100 is a great do it all western resort ski. Buy it.

Slightly longer answer: The Enforcer 104 appears to be optimized around a more centered "free ski" style versus the Enforcer 100. This is not the same thing as being more versatile, though it does make the ski easier to throw sideways which is beneficial in certain types of terrain. The cost is it tends to return less energy out of a turn. A substantial fraction of the people on this site find that balance of tradeoffs to be negative. Major caveat, I haven't skied the Enforcer 104 so my comments are based on time on some similarly shaped skis.
 

martyg

Making fresh tracks
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Posts
2,216
Why not just demo until you find your perfect arrow? That money you spend on a new kit would likely be better spent on a few half day clinics / lessons - that will develop your ability to enjoy the entire mountain far more than a dedicated powder ski - which you would only need maybe 15 - 20% of the time anyway. It is typical that as your skills develop, your preference in skis will change - likely decreasing in width.
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,490
Location
Colorado
The cost is it tends to return less energy out of a turn. A substantial fraction of the people on this site find that balance of tradeoffs to be negative.

Additional caveat -- the vast majority of people on this site are directional skiers who don't spend time in the air. As such they are going to undervalue the upside of the looser tail and more playful shape of the 104 compared to the energy of the 100.

The 104 is designed with someone who is looking for an all-mountain freestyle ski that doesn't mind a spin here and there, but can still stay composed through 3D snow conditions and on groomers.
 
Last edited:

AngryAnalyst

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
May 31, 2018
Posts
713
Additional caveat -- the vast majority of people on this site are directional skiers who don't spend time in the air. The 104 is designed with someone who is looking for an all-mountain freestyle ski that doesn't mind a spin here and there, but can still stay composed through 3D snow conditions and on groomers.

I was intending to be non-judgmental and avoid turning this into another one of those threads, but as someone who does love stiff twin tips I agree it is a good design.

But if we start talking about that pretty soon we’ll get into a debate over whether skis wider than 50 mm cause unacceptable amounts of knee damage, assertions that people ski in trees exactly the same way they ski gates and then finish by talking about why slalom skis are really the best thing for Alaska heli trips.
 
Thread Starter
TS
P

projectawry

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Posts
4
Location
Chicago, IL
Why not just demo until you find your perfect arrow? That money you spend on a new kit would likely be better spent on a few half day clinics / lessons - that will develop your ability to enjoy the entire mountain far more than a dedicated powder ski - which you would only need maybe 15 - 20% of the time anyway. It is typical that as your skills develop, your preference in skis will change - likely decreasing in width.

I've been demoing for the past 3 years, and, honestly, It's really hard to compare skis unless I ski them back-to-back in similar conditions. That said, it's easy to identify what I don't like pretty immediately. The enforcers seem "good enough." I think I'd rather own them than continue chasing something better.

I always take a full or half day lesson the first day of every trip, so that's not an issue.
 

martyg

Making fresh tracks
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Posts
2,216
I've been demoing for the past 3 years, and, honestly, It's really hard to compare skis unless I ski them back-to-back in similar conditions. That said, it's easy to identify what I don't like pretty immediately. The enforcers seem "good enough." I think I'd rather own them than continue chasing something better.

I always take a full or half day lesson the first day of every trip, so that's not an issue.

Right on. At 10 days out west.... it might be more cost effective just to demo. Many industry people from the East rock that model. Unless you really hit it ever time you fly out, legit powder days are the exception, not the rule.

If you haven't skied them,. also check out the Head Kore 95's. I'm on Stockli's Laser line 90% of the time in bounds. When we get hammered I am on the Head Kores. I also have a pair of 105's with tech bindings for touring.
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,399
I love the 100s, but in your shoes, I at least MIGHT buy the 93s and rent/demo wider skis during the Lucky Dumping Week, when you hit it.

As far as the 100 goes, I've never owned a friendlier, more versatile ski. It's happy fast, slow, powder, crud and hardpack. It does like to carve, which I strongly consider an attribute, but if you're a jibby guy, it might not suit you best.

I'm convinced that the magic sauce in this ski is that it has two layers of metal, is reasonably damp, but is NOT overly stiff. I just ordered a pair of the new 88s to flesh out my quiver!
 
Last edited:

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
2,101
Location
Tokyo
Unless you demo'd the 185 E100 and felt uncomfortable, I'd suggest you (at #180) take it out for a day before you buy the 177.
As a non-athletic upper intermediate at #155-160, I ski the 185 and don't feel at all like it's a lot of ski -- and I'll be 72 next month.
When I demo'd the 177 it felt very very short. but of course that's subjective, and I'm 6'2".
Just suggesting you at least try the 185 before you buy.
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,399
Unless you demo'd the 185 E100 and felt uncomfortable, I'd suggest you (at #180) take it out for a day before you buy the 177.
As a non-athletic upper intermediate at #155-160, I ski the 185 and don't feel at all like it's a lot of ski -- and I'll be 72 next month.
When I demo'd the 177 it felt very very short. but of course that's subjective, and I'm 6'2".
Just suggesting you at least try the 185 before you buy.

QFT. The 185 does NOT ski long.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,602
Location
PNW aka SEA
Short answer: Enforcer 100 is a great do it all western resort ski. Buy it.

Slightly longer answer: The Enforcer 104 appears to be optimized around a more centered "free ski" style versus the Enforcer 100. This is not the same thing as being more versatile, though it does make the ski easier to throw sideways which is beneficial in certain types of terrain. The cost is it tends to return less energy out of a turn. A substantial fraction of the people on this site find that balance of tradeoffs to be negative. Major caveat, I haven't skied the Enforcer 104 so my comments are based on time on some similarly shaped skis.

The enforcer 104 is a great ski. It can be 'driven' as well as 'ridden'. It makes pretty much any turn shape at will, skis easily, and has good edge grip. All nordica products work well on firm snow in my experience testing them over the past several years. It's an easy ski to make assumptions about, but prepared to be pleasantly surprised when it colors outside the lines of your expectations. It isn't a one trick pony. That said, of the two, the 100 is probably the ski the OP should be on for his stated needs.
 
Last edited:

DocGKR

Stuck at work...
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Posts
1,689
Location
Palo Alto, California
For much of the 21st Century, Bizzard and Nordica have been the staple of my all-mountain skis. Keep in mind I am a 6ft 200+ guy now in his sixth decade of life, primarily skiing the Rockies and Sierras. Currently I have several Enforcer's, including the 88/186cm, the 100/193cm, the 104/186cm, and the 115/191cm. Each has a large sweet spot, is easy to ski, and are very fun in all resort skiing conditions, with the caveat that each has slight advantages compared to the others depending upon the day and run. The 88 is my favorite for on-piste resort skiing, including moguls and groomers--it just rips and is perfectly fine in shallower fresh snow (6-8"). The 100 is extremely versatile, handling groomers, bumps, afternoon slush, and fresh snow up to at least 12+" with ease, and would probably be my pick if I only got to have one pair of Enforcers. I have the least time on the 104 and primarily got them because of the slightly increased float and easier ability to turn and break free compared to the 100's when skiing trees and tight chutes with my Colorado based young nieces and nephews who tend to prefer such terrain. Note that the 104's are essentially as versatile as the 100's, but with perhaps a slightly greater bent to softer snow, but still work fine everywhere a 100 excels. The 115's are obviously best suited for deeper (18+ inches) of softer snow, but also work great in afternoon spring slush.
 

Decreed_It

I'd rather be skiing
Skier
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Posts
905
Location
Northern Beaches, Sydney, Australia
Unless you demo'd the 185 E100 and felt uncomfortable, I'd suggest you (at #180) take it out for a day before you buy the 177.
As a non-athletic upper intermediate at #155-160, I ski the 185 and don't feel at all like it's a lot of ski -- and I'll be 72 next month.
When I demo'd the 177 it felt very very short. but of course that's subjective, and I'm 6'2".
Just suggesting you at least try the 185 before you buy.

6'0" 190 lb east coaster here. E100 in 185, I own them and love them, and you should too. So another vote. I will say in tight trees with bumps - a few times I've wished they were 177. But that's about 5% of my skiing? So - yeah. They do ski 'short'.

I did demo the Navigator 90 at Norquay last year - and if I was going with a low 90's ski that would be it over the Enforcer, all day. Loved those on groomers. Not enough to supplant the Enforcer though. Back east got a set of Volkl RTM 81's that are perfectly fine ice skates :ogcool:
 

Sponsor

Staff online

  • Dwight
    Practitioner of skiing, solid and liquid
Top