Yeah I’m 160 on the 186….Go 191.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudfoot
Printable View
Yeah I’m 160 on the 186….Go 191.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudfoot
Great post, insightful and interesting take!
Day two on the 100
Wayyyy different ski.
Not sure it’s right to call it enforcer.
Forebody is so soft. It’s weird. Lots of tip flappage.
Can go fast on groomer. Still controllable. But not a missile.
But it would be a fun old man ski.
Super easy in bumps.
Spreading some cream cheese today and yesterday.
Is it the current 100 or the pre-2020 version? What length?Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Shot
Current ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Midget length. 186. If I bought them 191 for sure.
I 5 uc vwQuote:
Originally Posted by cinnepa
Sent from my SM-N986U using TGR Forums mobile app
Maybe you just suck at skiing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Shot
I’ve got those skis and I enforce the entire fucking mountain (unless it’s a powder day).
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
He's a bigger dude. 220-lbs from a post a few pages back. That's a lot of skier for a 186 Enforcer 100. I'm 200 and the 185's are definitely my old man/skiing with my blue groomer kids ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by AK47bp
Yea. I’m 6ft about 175. I have the 186 but would love the 190+ version. Although the 186 has been money this season in the bumps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
It’s a great ski. It’s a ski for the masses. It only goes to an 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by AK47bp
Anybody have a chance to get on the Enforcer Unlimited 104. Picked up a pair based on strong reviews and because Ptex1 is awesome and I have a gear problem but haven't mounted them. Skied the regular 104 Free at Snowbird this past weekend and liked it but it took me a bit to get used to it since the tail had so much rocker. Was pretty fun on anything soft though!
Nobody here has reviewed them afaik.
Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
Skiessentials A/B was best I could find.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheK12
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK47bp
True that. Not fat. Yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
But my comment was coming from the 94 enforcer.
That ski rails. And enforces.
Coming from a lifetime of much stiffer charging skis.
The 100 forebody is crazy soft to me.
But I’m starting to like it. It’s so forgiving in bumps.
And at speed it flaps like a Turkey vulture. And yet it’s still pretty stable hauling ass.
It’s a cool ski
The Enforcer 100 has always been a ski that can be skied pretty hard, but you have to "back-off" to get the most out of it, if that makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Shot
To folks who have or have skied both E104 and E115. Is the E115:
a) a wider E104?
b) a wider E104 with a slightly stiffer tail?
c) a wider E104 with a much stiffer tail?
d) other?
I have the 21/22 season E104 in 186. I am thinking about complementing it with an E115 for those few epic dumps in the PNW when the highways are not closed.
Can’t speak to PNW snow on the 115, but it has been my favorite inbounds pow ski that I’ve been on in a long time for CO.
It feels super similar to e104 other than the way better ability to stomp airs, ski bigger raidius turns, and smash cut up pow with ease. I love the extra length too, allows me to stand a little taller.
Tail doesn’t feel stiffer to me, again has similar characteristics to e104, in my opinion playful and able to charge. Two hard combos and reason everyone loves the Efrees. I think being Nordicas they get downplayed cause they’re not as cool as other hip skis out there, but when you look at shape/camber/rocker/build the frees are sick skis
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Attachment 408271
Also, can’t wait to tour on these! Just mounted these up, can’t tell a whole lot from skinning in the resort on them, but same weight as my ravens and they feel from what I can tell exactly like my e104 frees on the down
The powder returned to Utah yesterday and the E115's were fantastic. So fun and loose in the powder, even in the lower-angle stuff I was finding in PC:
Attachment 408555
They are also fantastic skiing the cut up stuff later in the day. Of course, they are not light, and so if you try to dance through chop or bumps, you will feel that extra weight. However, they are completely competent at steam rolling or taking longer turns through chop.
If I'm splitting hairs and saying what I would make different about the ski: I'd want it a bit* lighter, and I'd want to elongate the radius a little (from 21m to 23-24m). The short radius combined with the healthy rocker is probably what makes them so loose and surfy in powder, but when skiing fast on groomers back to the lift, I do notice when carving turns that the ski does not love being pushed into turns that are wider* than its radius. This is a small nitpick and probably not even worth mentioning, as the priority is soft snow and powder - where again, they are fantastic.
Hmmm I’d have to disagree as on soft groomers I was making at least 3x the radius with comfort
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
And definitely don’t want a lighter ski
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I would lower the amount of tail rise. I have the E110 which I like but really dislike twin tips. I do like the slarvy tail release feel, but you can get that same feel with out as much tail rise. Love how you can drive the fronts and just push into whatever size radius.Quote:
Originally Posted by VON
I have a 2019 Enforcer Pro (115 Free) and 186 Enforcer 104 Free. I also live outside of Seattle and ski Stevens and Alpental. The 115 is really just a slightly wider and slightly stiffer 191 Enforcer 110, which I skied for a few seasons but recently sold.Quote:
Originally Posted by seapine
I'd say that the stiffness in the tail between the 104 and 115 is similar, but the feel of the skis is notably different to me. The 115 rides more quiet and damp than the 104, IMO. Also, the 115 skis looser in the tail than the 104. For a 191, the 115 is fairly agile, but I prefer it in open spaces versus tight trees. The slightly softer 110 was much better tree ski for me. I really like the 115 for a place like Whistler, where you can ski high alpine deep snow and then deal with groomers and crud on the way back to the lift. It carves well for a wider ski and is on the high end of powder skis that nuke through crud and be un-phased. If you ever skied a Rustler 11 and wished for a burlier, looser version, that's the 115.
Here’s a review after my first tour on the unlimited 104s.
I’m 6’ 180lbs, on a 186 unlimited 104 mounted at +1. I ski a Salomon s lab x-alp with pro tour liner and MTN bindings no brake.
Yesterday went out for a tour in about 5” of new snow so can’t give an in depth review. The skiing was good and super easy which could have been fun on any ski honestly. I would say the most noticeable thing about them was how immediately familiar everything felt as my inbounds daily driver is a 186cm 104 e free. The uphill was easy transition from the ravens with such similar weights. I think it’s going to be pretty cool to have basically the same ski for inbounds and BC. I’ll add more as I get more days on em
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Big comparison question for ya Banditman:
Enforcer 115 vs. the 192cm M-Free 108!
Another Nordica vs M-Free comparison….Quote:
Originally Posted by VON
I like both my Dynastar M-Free 99 (128-99-120) and of my Enforcer 104 Free (134-104-124).
The E104 was my most used ski the last few years. I haven’t skied the E104 since mid Dec as I’ve been on the M-Free 99.
Both provide a good mix of maneuverability, balance, and stability.
Both are damp and supportive enough to be skied pretty hard in lots of conditions (ice, chalky, pow,slush) and yet both ski “easy” in all types of terrain, especially tight stuff cause of their upturned tails.
Comparing the two, the M-Free is prolly a bit looser, quicker. E104 more stable.
Been appreciating the 94’s so much that I grabbed a pair of 88’s.
Length of 186 has been a mental maximum for me, but now I’m sold on it. They are just so stable at speed on hard snow.
Attachment 408944
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Nice. Looking forward to hearing more about the 88’s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beder
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
More similar than different. Most notable difference is in the “feel”.Quote:
Originally Posted by VON
115 is more damp and handle variable snow much better, probably due to metal, mass of the ski, and nearly no camber. More charger than playful, but surprisingly manageable for its size. Decent on soft groomers, but as the snow gets firmer, feels less comfortable. Skis shorter than 191 in anything but powder.
192 Mfree 108 is the better all-Mtn, daily driver. Not a metal laminate ski and that shows up most in variable snow, where it lacks the composure of the 115. The significant camber gives it a energetic, playful side without the ski having to be a noodle. Lives up to the “playful charger” title. Floats in powder and soft crud way better than the 108 waist would suggest. Also, skis so loose and definitely looser than the 115, which is no slouch. Very quick in trees and tight spaces and out performs the 115 in that regard, as well. Very capable on groomers and only starts to show its limits on boilerplate. Skis shorter than 192 length. Mounted on the line, the shovel is about as long as my 184 Mantra M6.
I could totally see someone owning both. I ski mine on those less than 10” POW days, especially when that new snow falls on a harder base and an all-Mtn ski with soft snow chop is desirable. I also ski then on back half of real pow days after the goods have been skied out and you can benefit from a ski that handles chop.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Very useful thanks! Sounds like M-Free is way looser, especially in tight spots, and while the M-Free doesn't necessarily have as much composure as the E115, it's plenty stable in crud/chop. Much more western DD material than the E115, which has been my DD this year.
E115 has been a great DD on the soft days, but if I could up the quickness, that would seal the deal long term!
How do those 88's 186's compare to say a 2019 180 Brahma?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beder
Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
I'll let you know soon. I liked the Brahma and I owned 2 different pairs and still have the Brahma 82. But eventually I felt the 180 was too short for me. Not that I'm elite or anything but 184-186 just seems to be my sweet spot in a ski of this type.Quote:
Originally Posted by uglymoney
Can’t speak for the 88.
Brahma has been my ice coast DD for years.
Road the enforcer 94 at low tide JH for two days.
It fucking rails compared to Brahma.
Been considering changing to Enforcer 88 for ice coast DD.
I got a pair of E104s in 179 a month or so ago and have probably 7 days on them at Alta. I'm 5'8", 150 lbs. I would say I'm an intermediate-advanced skier, but I'm self-taught so I don't have a lot of the background about ski technique that others do. My preferences might be a little weird because I mostly tour. I rarely ski a big powder day at the resort, preferring instead to be in the BC. I wanted a single ski for the resort because I don't have much space in my apartment.
Not sure I have much to say except that I'm very happy with these skis. I like that they have metal. I like that they can stand up to high speeds and hard carved turns. They carve really, surprisingly well. I can see why people think they're too short-radius, but I don't bomb 40* groomers, so I don't really think I need a 30m ski. I can still make big, arcing turns all the way across the run, which is a ton of fun. I've also found them to be fine in moguls, by which I mean - I'm probably not a great mogul skier, and I don't really know what would make a good mogul ski aside from maybe light weight - but I've never found that I've been held back in moguls because of the skis.
I'm in pretty good shape, so I suspect ski weight is less important for me. They are definitely heavy skis, but like I said I like having a metal ski, so it's not really an Enforcer critique.
I mounted STHs at +1.5 because of a hole conflict at my preferred mount of +0.7. It was either +1.5 or rec, and I felt like for the characteristics of the ski and my skill, I'd prefer to be in front rather than behind so that I would be assured that I'd be on top of the ski rather than constantly struggling to get out of the backseat. The mount comes with all of the performance that I expected - yes I feel very happy with my ability to get on top of the ski but the ski can tend to bite a bit if I get too far forward. I think I'm pretty happy at +1.5, probably won't move the mount unless I get better.
Overall, what stands out to me is the carving performance. I mostly ski BC, so a lot of what I like about resort days is getting onto a groomer and working on my technique. It's nice to be able to bring up just one ski up and be able to carve on it and go off piste vs. maybe feeling like I have to bring my carving ski, an MX 83 in 173, if I really want to only ski groomers. I feel like I can make (or at least try to make) a huge variety of turn shapes with the E104, which I'm very happy with.
Edit: I've also demo'd the Ripstick Black Edition and the M Free 108, which were both fun skis. The M Free I recall being very friendly, and smooth. Not damp, necessarily, although it was pretty damp - smooth. Not sure if that makes sense. The Ripsticks I really liked too - felt really confidence inspiring & capable at speed. Great energy out of turns. Ultimately, though I wanted a ski with metal, especially in chop.
Question for the collective, anyone else finding the E94 to be capable, versatile, fun … but just too turny? Can anyone think of a similar feeling ski that just has less sidecut or is less eager to pull into a locked in turn?
I finally got to test these over the weekend as a replacement for my 10 year old OG E98s (flat tail and lightning bolt topsheet Enforcers), specifically for a low tide / firm snow / morning and night ski … maybe 70/30 off piste to groom ratio. I’m 5’ 8” / 140-145 lbs and I tested the 178s (same size as my E98) on west coast dust on crust and sludge on fudge conditions that we get this time of year, only got 2 laps but snuck in a wide variety of test conditions.
Overall I was really impressed by their balance of characteristics, not *quite* as damp and settled as my OGs but still really damn good, and on the flip side a more balanced combination of rebound energy and composure. I liked the flex in all conditions including dust on death cookies. But on the groom I felt the skis jump eagerly into a turn and pull me in as opposed to me pushing the tips where I wanted them to go, and since the tech probably didn’t aggressively detune the tail it felt too locked into a single radius turn that the ski wanted, as opposed to the turn that I wanted. Anyone else feel like the ski is more eager than they want in this respect?
E94 is listed at 17m and my OG E98s say 19 on them, plus I also have the tails on my 98s pretty well detuned … I’m wondering if the move is to keep trying other skis or just get the E94s and detune the heck out of the tails and maybe a little gummi stone action around the tips as well.
I really like my E98s for the low tide / firm / morning and night ski - just want more bite on boilerplate, and a little more modern shape in the tip and tail. Demo-ing isn’t super easy in my neck of the woods but I don’t mind trying by buying, and thankfully my E98s are still hanging in there!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudfoot
I’d agree.
Rode e94 two days low tide.
Never been on such a tight radius. But I found myself liking it.
Yeah. It pulls you into the turn. It’s not just a tail hook.
I’m old school. Large radius. Tail skidder.
But damn. I had a blast on those things.
If you’re looking for less sidecut I’d say blizzard.
Metal. Damp. Fun.
Ironically I’m thinking of e88 to replace my Brahma 88.
I really had fun on the enforcer vibe.
Every ski chooses its master. The e94 was so much fun I’m thinking about rethinking my ski style.
I think the TGR fixation on stated radius is way overblown.
That said on a low tide day I find it way more entertaining to rail tight short radius turns. I find the current Enforcer series makes that easy while still being able to ski a longer radius turn and having the capability and enough backbone to deal with variable conditions
Maybe try the 186 if you liked the 179 but felt it too hooky or locked in for you - effective length probably more similar to your old one with the flat tail
I have both the E94 and E88 in 186. Bought the 94 first and added the 88 later because I liked it so much. I find that the 94 certainly is easy to turn but I was mostly impressed by how well it just killed it in crud. Stable. Smooth.
The 88 has a different feel. It isn't a light ski but it skis light. Very poppy, energetic, quick. My first thought was, oh shit are these shovels gonna fold up if I get out there? No worries...I can ski them centered or get way out in front which I like to do sometimes, especially in the soft snow we have now. The tails release easily for noodling around in bumps.
I buy lots of skis and sell them pretty quick if I don't love them. I had the E 104 Free and the E 110 Free and sold them both. They were good but I just liked the Volkl M102 and K108 better.
Detuned mine heavily from top and tail contact points with a 100 grit stone.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChamArtist
Still lock in and carve on demand but I’m the pilot.
Some new 2022 E94s are on sale locally.
Just not sure I’ll ski a <95mm ski a ton.
And I love my M-Free 99s.
But I have some 100mm STH’s sitting here looking lonely.
And I love my 104 E104s…and I don’t mind shorter radius.
And this season has been the year of low-tide at Whistler since early Jan.
Ok convinced myself.