Nordica Enforcers - TGR-Enough for Their Own Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VON

Big comparison question for ya Banditman:
Enforcer 115 vs. the 192cm M-Free 108!

---

Another Nordica vs M-Free comparison….

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beder

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.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VON

Big comparison question for ya Banditman:
Enforcer 115 vs. the 192cm M-Free 108!

---

More similar than different. Most notable difference is in the “feel”.

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beder

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

---

How do those 88's 186's compare to say a 2019 180 Brahma?

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uglymoney

How do those 88's 186's compare to say a 2019 180 Brahma?

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.

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

Moved from SLC to a new mountain with PNW snow. Bought my first sub 100mm waisted skis in 10 years. Enforcer 94s. Have skied them for 5 days on various kinds of extreme hardpack and ice. Did not detune them at all and cannot see ever doing that. They totally live up to the hype. My one concern was the stiff tails but that has been a non-issue, even in small steep icy bumps. In case it has not been conclusively settled, theses things are carving machines. I am 6'4" and 230 lbs. All my other skis are at least 190 cm. I went with the 186 Enforcers and they have been totally up to the job of holding an edge at speed while giving me that "dancing shoes" feeling. Looks like they are already selling the 2023 model for $100 more but it appears to be the same ski with a new topsheet.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChamArtist

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!

---

Detuned mine heavily from top and tail contact points with a 100 grit stone.

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.

^^^ that's the thing with extra bindings, they always find a friend

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beder

^^^ that's the thing with extra bindings, they always find a friend

---

Right?

Like new STH 16s, worth say $150US…

opportunity cost is $450US for E94 skis + $150US bindings not sold = $600US

I seem to succumb very time.

Should just learn to sell excess bindings. But it never happens.

Ok ,revisiting the E94 vs E100 debate. I'm usually on a 98-100 daily driver for both EC and fairly frequent travel to LCC, previously the old red Mantra than the Nordica Hell and Back. Have too many skis 115+. I was considering going with the 94 , but then realized even in trash conditions I'm still not on groomers all that much , so now thinking the 100 again, especially for travel. What would Jeebus do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duffman

Ok ,revisiting the E94 vs E100 debate. I'm usually on a 98-100 daily driver for both EC and fairly frequent travel to LCC, previously the old red Mantra than the Nordica Hell and Back. Have too many skis 115+. I was considering going with the 94 , but then realized even in trash conditions I'm still not on groomers all that much , so now thinking the 100 again, especially for travel. What would Jeebus do?

---

Skied the 94-179 at Alta this past weekend. Previously had the 2018 100-177 and have the 2021 104-179. In heavy spring snow - some heavy chalk on northerlies, otherwise 6" of spring slush, the 94s were the most fun <100 ski I skied off-piste, but they were still a bit underpowered off piste imo.

The 100 has more width, same rocker; the 104 have a bit more tip and tail rocker and more width. Right? Both of those characteristics translate to on-piste/off-piste exactly how you think.

I like my 104s as a single ski for Alta, but if I were thinking EC AND LCC, the 100 seem to make a lot of sense too. Of the three, I wouldn't choose the 94 for the do-it-all LCC ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duffman

Ok ,revisiting the E94 vs E100 debate. I'm usually on a 98-100 daily driver for both EC and fairly frequent travel to LCC, previously the old red Mantra than the Nordica Hell and Back. Have too many skis 115+. I was considering going with the 94 , but then realized even in trash conditions I'm still not on groomers all that much , so now thinking the 100 again, especially for travel. What would Jeebus do?

---

Having only spent time on the 93, not 94, my opinion is that those two skis are much more "groomer-focused" for western duty and the 100 gives a little up to the narrower variants on-piste, but is the much more versatile option overall.

I demoed the E94-179 at Alta last weekend with cirquescaler and echo what he was saying. Its the best sub-100 ski I've used off piste, the ski tracks very well and the tips don't get hung up like on most other skis in that category. Also very easy to pivot, they feel lighter underfoot than they are (in a good way). They did get a little bogged down in soft snow just like any ski in that width. I am considering to buy it as a secondary ski as my only resort ski right now is 108, I would not choose it as a one ski quiver for Utah. I also demoed the E104-179 and the E94 definitely skis longer as it has less rocker. I can't really give great feedback on the E104 as the 179 is just too short for me in that ski but the 179 E94 works. In a perfect world they would make it in 182.

I have the 93 and 100.
Agree with what written above. IMHO the 93 is noticeably quicker edge to edge and better on piste so if it’s a groomer day, firm day or even spring corn thats my pick.
If I’m throwing one pair in the car for a trip here in CO it’ll almost always be the 100 - just much more versatile in soft, pow, mank, variable and still decent on firm.
So for your question - travel to LCC assuming you bring a big ski then 100 (104 if bringing one pair); for EC I reckon I’d lean to 94 but you could easily argue opposite and choose to go either way depending on your preference, your terrain, your skiing, your quiver etc.

I got my dad (intermediate skier, 67 years old) a pair of 185 Enforcer 110s for Christmas this year. He loves them and prefers them over all his other skis, even on hard pack.

He likes how easy they are to ski, how maneuverable they are and how damp they are. He has some old sports injuries, so he's started to really appreciate how a damp ski saves his knees a bit.

He's now looking to get something similar as a low tide ski for hardpack and groomers. An ideal ski for him would carve well, but also be forgiving and be damp and maneuverable.

The Enforcer 104 Free comes to mind, along with maybe Rustler 10. Is there anything else that should be on his list?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcpnz

I have the 93 and 100.
Agree with what written above. IMHO the 93 is noticeably quicker edge to edge and better on piste so if it’s a groomer day, firm day or even spring corn thats my pick.
If I’m throwing one pair in the car for a trip here in CO it’ll almost always be the 100 - just much more versatile in soft, pow, mank, variable and still decent on firm.
So for your question - travel to LCC assuming you bring a big ski then 100 (104 if bringing one pair); for EC you could easily go either way depending on your preference, your terrain, your skiing, your quiver etc.

---

Yeah this all makes a lot of sense. The 100 probably works the best here , paired with the Praxis Q or GPO as the bigger ski. I'll give up some EC hardpack performance but it should still work. If I want more of that can always get some type of groomer zoomer down the road , since the correct answer to any ski quiver question is always N+1. Thanks all for the input !

FYI. I found a hudge difference between the 94 and the 100.

94 was a carving beast
100 was a forgiving ride

Those are the only two I’ve ridden. Both current models.

I think 94 and 84 are different from the rest of the fatty lineup.
Ymmv