Individual Review Nordica Fire Arrow 84 EDT

[James]

I'd say for the 176 you should be 170 lbs or more. Or just know it doesn't matter- like maybe Dharon Rhalves weighs 150?? Yeah that works.

The 184 - good lord, Ted Ligety would be pretty happy screwing around on those.

I have the 168 and for me it's too short, but i'm over 200.

"One of the best production hard snow carvers ever made"- ( having issues quoting) I'd have to agree with this. It's also weird that this ski accelerates like no other production ski. Maybe it's the flex to torsional stiffness with a fast base. But damn, point them down and you are moving now! It requires recalibrating timing and line.

A 176 will blow the doors off a 173 Mx83 Kastle. Maybe if you stuck a Vist full plate on the Kastle it would be a fair fight, but then it's heavy. Is it as versatile as the Kastle? Probably not quite but it's much closer than many
would have us believe.

Comparing a184 Fa 84 evo edt to practically anything other than what Ligety is on is probably like comparing the Millenium Falcon before and after the jump to hyperspace.

The Fa84 evo edt -( all those letters distinguish it from the "normal" fire arrow) I don't know what the letters mean but each one adds speed and fun.

Here's the thing though, it's not a stiff, burly ski . It has great flex and is actually not that heavy - compared to skis in it's speed range. It is not a light ski.

It's a ski for advanced skiers but you can ski it like an intermediate if you want. You can use it to teach wedge christies. It's not for intermediates - an inadvertant being in the fall line too long will have them in hyperspace and screaming like Chewbacca.

My biggest complaint is the square tip. @ epic doesn't seem to mind it.

It's definitely one of the great skis of our time. Yeah it's more than a bit weird. Like that kid with all the facial piercings and no eye contact that just hacked into the NSA.

 

[Philpug]

I'd say for the 176 you should be 170 lbs or more. Or just know it doesn't matter- like maybe Dharon Rhalves weighs 150?? Yeah that works.

The 184 - good lord, Ted Ligety would be pretty happy screwing around on those.

I have the 168 and for me it's too short, but i'm over 200.

"One of the best production hard snow carvers ever made"- ( having issues quoting) I'd have to agree with this. It's also weird that this ski accelerates like no other production ski. Maybe it's the flex to torsional stiffness with a fast base. But damn, point them down and you are moving now! It requires recalibrating timing and line.

A 176 will blow the doors off a 173 Mx83 Kastle. Maybe if you stuck a Vist full plate on the Kastle it would be a fair fight, but then it's heavy. Is it as versatile as the Kastle? Probably not quite but it's much closer than many
would have us believe.

Comparing a184 Fa 84 evo edt to practically anything other than what Ligety is on is probably like comparing the Millenium Falcon before and after the jump to hyperspace.

The Fa84 evo edt -( all those letters distinguish it from the "normal" fire arrow) I don't know what the letters mean but each one adds speed and fun.

Here's the thing though, it's not a stiff, burly ski . It has great flex and is actually not that heavy - compared to skis in it's speed range. It is not a light ski.

It's a ski for advanced skiers but you can ski it like an intermediate if you want. You can use it to teach wedge christies. It's not for intermediates - an inadvertant being in the fall line too long will have them in hyperspace and screaming like Chewbacca.

My biggest complaint is the square tip. @ epic doesn't seem to mind it.

It's definitely one of the great skis of our time. Yeah it's more than a bit weird. Like that kid with all the facial piercings and no eye contact that just hacked into the NSA.

We had a 160 leftover and actually found the right person for it. A woman came in an was an ex US Ski Team member, sorry I don't really her name, but she got on it and could actually ski it. The ski is a technological tour de force. If it was a car, it would be a Nissan GTR.

 

[Muleski]

For any fans of the FA 84 EDT, I just cut the price on the pair of 176cm {once skied} that I have listed. Better than new.

$600. Blows me away that nobody has jumped on these {They're also listed at the "old place"}.

Christmas shopping, anyone? Sorry for the thread drift.

 

[Tom K.]

Disclaimer: I generally love every Nordica ski I get on.

I'm 6'2" and 195, and I bought this ski several years ago in 184. Holy cow! Maiden voyage was two days in Sun Valley. Fun? Yes, but for me, only when I got up to speeds not really suitable for public runs. I did rip a couple of amazing laps by waiting, waiting, waiting at the top of runs for The Big Gap in people, but ultimately moved on, after, ahem, getting a bit of a lecture at my home area.

I always wonder if I would have fallen in love with the 176...........

But for this kind of ski, the 181 cm FA80 Pro does it all for me, clown puke graphics and all. Rails the turns, rips bumps, and does just fine in shallow pow and crud.

 

[Muleski]

This is the reason that my daughter wanted to sell the 176cm. She's a former NorAm level racer. She can ski…..anything. She felt at her size that the 176cm was a LOT more ski than she felt it would be. Keep in mind that she has been skiing 183cm FIS GS skis for a long time {she retired just before the 30M rule was in effect}.

At her size, the skis were happy skiing rail to rail, as if on tracks. She said the edge hold was tremendous. The skis were damp, and incredibly stable, but they wanted a good dose of speed, and they're weren't so versatile. Same general thinking as above. She has friends who ski it in the next smaller size, and love it. She just didn't want what amounted to a wide GS ski.

I'm about 205lbs, and I'm a skilled skier. I've skied this in a 184cm, and it wouldn't be my choice as I simply don't get to ski very often on wide open cruisers, with virtually no other skiers near me. It's a missile. I have also skied the 176cm, and found it to ski very differently……and to be a lot more versatile, less work, more fun. Without really giving up a thing.

It's a tremendous ski. Based on my experience and the experience of a umber of skilled friends, I think it's one that you don't need to go long with, and probably one that really should be demo'd if possible.

 

[James]

This ski has a small cult following. Somehow Nordica just missed the market.

Got into an all things skiing discussion with this guy that went on and on due to less than stellar conditions. Ranged from talking about hiring a guide in Chamonix that was the partner of Patrick Vallencant, cigarette smoking euro coaches, Alaska Chugach skiing, to skis. Anyway this fall he'd just picked up the 176, new, at a ski swap at the very end for $400.

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

Nordica doesn't even really seem to market it. I don't understand why.

 

[James]

Is it still in their catalogue?
Somehow this ski got a rep as practically unskiable. Plus it's expensive.
I used to have the Head super shape magnum. Stores though that was a race ski. Even when I got it the comment was "that's a lot of ski" . The thing was a noodle. Probably the softest ski I've ever had. (170cm, the 177 was a beefier). Just made no sense.

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

http://www.nordicausa.com/product-d...plate=ski&product_uid=202144&color_number=BLK Yup, still there.

The funny thing is that I first encountered this ski at the SIA demos at Snowbasin in 2013. I went to the Nordica tent looking for some other ski and the size I wanted was out. I don't remember why the guy recommended I try this ski but I did and I instantly fell in love with it and I seriously wanted it, until I found out how much it cost, even at proform prices. The guy I work for now wanted to sell his pair in a 176 and made me a very good offer. I skied them for two days at Bridger Bowl during the gathering in 2013. I only considered myself an advanced intermediate at the time and nobody ever told me they were only for hyper-experts so I took them into the trees, bumps, powder, the same places I would go on my Nordica Steadfasts. They were pretty scary in the trees and they were not great in the bumps either. I liked them but the 176 was a lot more work than the 168s I demoed so I didn't buy them. Then last year I was working in his shop part-time and Nordica decided to close out their existing stock because they were changing bindings and topsheets for this year. The offer was just too good to pass up. I used them in a season ending race, a dual GS course and raced against the same person both runs. There was a serious ice patch on one of the courses and quite a few people fell, including some of the masters racers on their GS race skis. I got a bad start on my first run and my partner beat me by probably 20 feet. The second run I got a good start and finished nearly two gates ahead. I didn't even notice the ice with the Fire Arrows. Even the 168s seem to have no speed limit. I've had them up to 50mph, according to Ski Tracks and that might be about as fast as I want to go on any ski at my age. One of the things that I like best about them is they won't allow me to be sloppy with technique. I have to drive them all the time which makes me a better skier. I can take that same technique to a pair of Head Strong Instinct Ti, which are not regarded as an expert ski and make them respond in a way that reminds me of the Fire Arrows but on a ski that is better in bumps and powder and probably trees too.

 

[James]

Well I'm surprised they're still available.
Maybe one issue is sizing though you'd think they'd be ok. It seems that carving and eastern oriented ski usershave now settled in the 173,4 cm size for men let's say 150-200lbs roughly.
I can tell you that the 168cm for me, at over 200lbs and a 313mm boot is too short. Only because the thing gets up to speed and there's not enough length to bend into a turn that brings you across the fall line more.
Now I believe the 176 would pretty much be perfect.
But in the east, they be better off with a sizing that was like 168, 173, 178. So for all around smaller mts you'd go 173 and bigger 178.

Then 183 or even jump to 186 for the Ligety's skiing Sun Valley or other speed zones.
(Or... Go and use something like Soloman's old power numbers. - kidding.)

That I think is part of the success and failure of the Kadtle Mx83. 173 is a great size for lots of places. But then there's nothing till 183 which is too far. I'm still amazed that companies will bring out many different park skis of serious unknown acceptance, yet not fix a hole in the lineup of a very popular ski.

As to th FA 84 edt, I actually think its kind of light for what it is. It's much lighter than a slalom ski or a gs. It also has nice flex. I'd like to see Nordica not abandon the technology because it works.

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

If Nordica brought out a 78 or 80 Fire Arrow EVO EDT, I'd be all over it. When I read they were introducing an 80mm FA for this season, the Nordica tent was the first one I hit at the Copper Mountain demos. But, alas, it was not an EVO EDT. It was a nice ski but it just didn't have the zing. At 168cm the Fire Arrow is a faster quicker ski than my old Volkl P30 RC Racecarvers were and I collected quite a few NASTAR gold medals with them. If there was NASTAR racing around here I've be out there with the FAs every chance I had.

 

[James]

If Nordica brought out a 78 or 80 Fire Arrow EVO EDT, I'd be all over it. When I read they were introducing an 80mm FA for this season, the Nordica tent was the first one I hit at the Copper Mountain demos. But, alas, it was not an EVO EDT. It was a nice ski but it just didn't have the zing. At 168cm the Fire Arrow is a faster quicker ski than my old Volkl P30 RC Racecarvers were and I collected quite a few NASTAR gold medals with them. If there was NASTAR racing around here I've be out there with the FAs every chance I had.

That's a good point. A narrower version could work quite well. I like the feel of the flex, then it has the turbo carbon plate on it. ( the edt?)Except you don't notice the kick in it's gradual. I like that solution better than Blizzard's now overly stiffish 810 x or whatever it's called now. (edit Z Power 8) The orange one. It just lacks feel to me. Much preferred the feel of the older 8.5 ti construction.

But people are different. I ski with a guy who's never liked the Kastle Mx83. "They lack pop". But he liked those Blizzard X Power 8's. Whereas I really like the Mx83 but dislike the X Power8. But I like the feel of a laminate style construction in general.
I certailnly didn't think the x power had pop.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

If you guys like this ski, better get it now. I just saw next year's ski and Firearrow is gone. New ski is called GT. They had a 76 (Or maybe it was a 74), an 80 and an 84. They have the milled out titanal like the NRGy and no more carbon thingie. For reference, the 80 and 84 have a 16.5 (or maybe it was 15.5 TR in a 180 length. I saw a 174 and a 180. Hopefully I can try them next week. There is also an NRGy85 which seems like a winner. And thankfully, the Patron lives on.

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

Yup, I saw this yesterday too. I have doubts that the GT 84 is going to be a better ski or even as good. Since it doesn't have EDT in the name I assume it isn't an EDT. Helldorado is also gone. We do a demo day at Big Sky in late February with Atomic, Salomon and Nordica so I'll be trying some these GT skis.

 

[James]

So basically they took the turbo off and are trying to make it lighter?
Hopefully they're not as hated/liked as the Nrgy skis. Of course the FA edt evo was hated too except for the cultists. I don't see a cult of Nrgy people.

 

[jmeb]

Just FYI if anyone is hunting these skis. The 2013 are currently available at Sierra Trading Post in 176cm, including the system binding for $505 with the code
SFB010616 (good through midnight tonight.)


http://www.sierratradingpost.com/no...dt-84-alpine-skis-n-pro-evo-bindings~p~7061k/

 

[Muleski]

That ^^^^^^ is a smoking good deal!
I have another used pair to sell for my son's GF, but I'm not going to try until STP unloads those!

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

So basically they took the turbo off and are trying to make it lighter?
Hopefully they're not as hated/liked as the Nrgy skis. Of course the FA edt evo was hated too except for the cultists. I don't see a cult of Nrgy people.

When the NRGy series came out I kept hearing people talk about the NRGy90 being a new and improved Steadfast. The Steadfast was my daily driver and I loved that ski, still do actually. I tried the NRGy90 and thoroughly disliked it. It was dead as far as I was concerned, no pop to it at all. I fear these new ones may just end up being another toothless frontside carver.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

I am a little concerned too. I am still skiing my Steadfasts as well. The only thing is if you are Nordica, do you really want to be selling a ski that has a rep as an untameable wild beast and can be found for half price all over the web? At that point does it matter how good the ski actually is. As far as the GT, the thing that I find least desirable on paper is that the radius has moved from 18ish to 15ish. I like that they chose the Marker XCell binding for it rather than the VIST. I think that means they at least expect it be a performer.

 

[Philpug]

I too saw the new GT series last night. The 84, while it does not have the EDT plate on the top appears to be one still ski. Shape is similar to the Fire Arrows but the tip it a bit more rounder end not as blunt/snub nosed as the FireArrows. I think it will be a better ski for more people out for the select few who appreciated the power of the FA EDT, the top 5%ers lost an exceptional ski.