Mount Point for new Enforcer 104 Free

[Decreed_It]

I'm 6'0", 185 lbs level 7ish skier - replacing my beloved 3+ season old Enforcer 100s in 185 with the 104 Free in 186.

Should I mount on the line? This comment gave me pause: https://www.pugski.com/threads/binding-mount-question.14749/post-351549

The point is on most traditional mount skis - the recommended line has been just fine, This includes, Kastle Fx104, the original Enforcer, the old Nordica Girish, dynastar legends, Blizzard Cochise, Stockli SR95, SR105, etc. the only ones I have ever found that I didn’t like the line were the “new” Enforcers and those Rustler 11s

E100's were on the line - I don't know what I don't know is the problem, having never tried an Enforcer off the line. And this new ski is indeed a 'new' Enforcer. Got my 'new' 88's on the line and they are A-OK there. This bigger, fatter ski though . . . appreciate thoughts.

 

[givethepigeye]

if you liked them on the line, why go against the grain. I probably could/would have adapted, but coming off the Kastle, OG Enforcer, the old Girish, and some Dynastar Legends - the mount point seemed a tad off (forward) to me - these were the first year ever new Enforcers, and I don't mind an extra set of holes in a ski with metal. The Rustlers might have been a tune, but the tails seemed as long, if not longer, than the tips. My daily now is a Stockli SR95. mounted on the line - but a very traditional shape ski.

also, on my fat fondue pots - I just drilled them on the traditional line and only 2 of the 8 screws had less than a 1cm ctc. (7mm) <- again a ski with metal and im pretty fine with that. Im not dropping cliffs and sub 200lbs.

 

[Winks]

I'm 6'0", 185 lbs level 7ish skier - replacing my beloved 3+ season old Enforcer 100s in 185 with the 104 Free in 186.

Should I mount on the line? This comment gave me pause: https://www.pugski.com/threads/binding-mount-question.14749/post-351549



E100's were on the line - I don't know what I don't know is the problem, having never tried an Enforcer off the line. And this new ski is indeed a 'new' Enforcer. Got my 'new' 88's on the line and they are A-OK there. This bigger, fatter ski though . . . appreciate thoughts.

Blister says +2 and they did not feel they lost anything from the ski. I mounted mine at +3 and I am still indecisive if I want to go up one more or back one. So I would say for now +2 or on the line

 

[jmills115]

I mounted my 115s on the line and am happy

 

[Decreed_It]

Blister says +2 and they did not feel they lost anything from the ski. I mounted mine at +3 and I am still indecisive if I want to go up one more or back one. So I would say for now +2 or on the line

OK forgive the ignorance, have not deviated from factory mount point before - you mean 2 cm forward of the mounting line?

Edit: Nvrmind, found the comments in the Blister review under "mount point" - https://blisterreview.com/gear-reviews/2019-2020-nordica-enforcer-104-free - got it, makes sense.

 

[givethepigeye]

There was a huge thread on Epic about this but they say a picture is worth 1000 words:

all 185 length, cochise on left, “new“ enforcers middle, OG enforcers right


i guess I have a binding “type”. New enforcers had more rocker, so...

do watcha like

 

[DocGKR]

I am running my 186 Enforcer 104's on the line without any issues.

 

[Tom K.]

I'm a rear-mounted, traditional skier, but on the Enforcer 104 and 110, I'd be a bit leery of going back very much.

Those skis have enough tail rocker that I wouldn't want to get too far back there.

Side Note to Nordica: There are a LOT of us out here that would love a wider Enforcer that is not a FR version. Just stretch the current 100 ten millimeters in width, and change nothing else. Please!

 

[Decreed_It]

I'm a rear-mounted, traditional skier, but on the Enforcer 104 and 110, I'd be a bit leery of going back very much.

Yeah I'm only considering moving up - definitely not rear of the line. The basis would be +2 per the Blister review comments and experience of @Winks above. Then again I'm no pro or even remotely close to pro skier, so I hesitate. You can only drill them the 1st time once. Since I'd be using these in soft/deep conditions (the 88's are just so. dang. good. in anything up to a couple inches of fresh) I'm trying to decide if moving forward a bit would provide that goldilocks balance for a deeper ski. If it's snorkel depth I'm renting true powder boards and I rarely encounter that in the usual trips.

 

[GregK]

If you are happy on the line on your current 100s, the 104 with a similar mount will still be easier to pivot with its increased rocker and have lighter swing weight with it’s True Tip construction so it will feel more playful.

If you read the Blistergear comments about moving forward, keep in mind Luke is a freestyle biased, hard charging 5’8”/ 155lb skier, so moving any mount forward on a 184cm plus freeride type ski makes more sense than a larger, traditional skier on a “shorter for their size” ski. Jonathan is more of a traditional skier and felt no need to move from the line.

Moving binding mounts forward make the skis pivot easier(although too far forward and it can become too sensitive or twitchy), more balanced in the air, more playful and makes the ski “ski shorter”. Moving bindings back makes them more stable and less twitchy, possibly increase carving power, reduces tip dive in powder and makes the ski “ski longer”.

These are not HUGE changes with these movements but definitely noticeable. Most manufacturers recommend a max movement of plus/minus 2cm otherwise you are possibly starting to fight the sidecut, although there are some skis out there with larger “mounting sweet spot” ranges.

Keeping in mind you’re using these in deep snow, I’d be leaning towards the line or maybe 1cm forward which would be just a hair forward of your current 100 mount.

 

[Decreed_It]

If you are happy on the line on your current 100s, the 104 with a similar mount will still be easier to pivot with its increased rocker and have lighter swing weight with it’s True Tip construction so it will feel more playful.

If you read the Blistergear comments about moving forward, keep in mind Luke is a freestyle biased, hard charging 5’8”/ 155lb skier, so moving any mount forward on a 184cm plus freeride type ski makes more sense than a larger, traditional skier on a “shorter for their size” ski. Jonathan is more of a traditional skier and felt no need to move from the line.

Moving binding mounts forward make the skis pivot easier(although too far forward and it can become too sensitive or twitchy), more balanced in the air, more playful and makes the ski “ski shorter”. Moving bindings back makes them more stable and less twitchy, possibly increase carving power, reduces tip dive in powder and makes the ski “ski longer”.

These are not HUGE changes with these movements but definitely noticeable. Most manufacturers recommend a max movement of plus/minus 2cm otherwise you are possibly starting to fight the sidecut, although there are some skis out there with larger “mounting sweet spot” ranges.

Keeping in mind you’re using these in deep snow, I’d be leaning towards the line or maybe 1cm forward which would be just a hair forward of your current 100 mount.

Excellent feedback, thanks Greg - I woke this AM (taking them to the shop today) thinking on the line or MAYBE +1. Gametime decision probably, so any further thoughts are welcome! Y'all rock.

 

[GregK]

Excellent feedback, thanks Greg - I woke this AM (taking them to the shop today) thinking on the line or MAYBE +1. Gametime decision probably, so any further thoughts are welcome! Y'all rock.

plus .5 cm so you’re safe! Lol

 

[Decreed_It]

plus .5 cm so you’re safe! Lol

LOL - now I'm thinking .25 - dammitt Greg you just triggered my OCD tendencies

 

[GregK]

LOL - now I'm thinking .25 - dammitt Greg you just triggered my OCD tendencies

haha! The truth is it’s much harder to line up marks that aren’t 1/2 or full cm. You’ll be a mm off and your right ski will turn faster than your left!!

Go .5cm and call it a day.

 

[Decreed_It]

haha! The truth is it’s much harder to line up marks that aren’t 1/2 or full cm. You’ll be a mm off and your right ski will turn faster than your left!!

Go .5cm and call it a day.

I'm going +1! Caution: THROWN to the WIND! I'm such a rebel risk taker . . .

 

[GregK]

That’s still only .3cm ahead of your current mount so that’s nothing. You’ll love them! Skied almi

 

[oswaldr2]

Was just going to suggest meeting in the middle at +1, but it looks like you came to the determination.

seems like that's a happy medium between Blister +2 and Nordica 0. Mount them and don't ever think about it again, just ski them and enjoy!

 

[Tom K.]

Mount them and don't ever think about it again!

There ya go!

Nail. On. Head.

 

[Decreed_It]

There ya go!

Nail. On. Head.

Done. +1, maiden voyage at Steamboat next weekend, will report back. I expect them to feel about like the 100s they replaced. Only more enforcer-er and better-er

 

[Decreed_It]

+1 was the jam. 4 days at Steamboat, started the session on the 104's in the AM just to get a feel - as I expected, like the old 100s, only better. More rocker, easier to swing due to less weight in the tips (but not overall, same or heavier), 4mm difference not enough to notice when edging.

Rest of Fri - Sat, back on the 88s - such a fantastic all around ski for non-powder days.

Sunday it snowed, so back to the 104's. Only complaint is when we found the hard crust underneath and especially where wind had blown it down to the groomer surface - LOT of chatter setting a hard edge to scrub speed. Everywhere else with fresh on it the 104's shined. Except for deep dust on frozen over chunk and in mogul troughs. But that'd suck for any ski.

Monday did 31k feet on the 104's - fresh snow so we started early. So, so good on 3-5" of fresh over groomed runs. Great on the bumps, great in the trees, great on the bumps-in-the-trees.

Only time I noticed the mount point was when I got too fast while too tired and got on the tails too much. Luckily there was plenty back there to keep me upright, but could feel it. That's a technique problem though, not a ski problem.