^^^^^If I owned Brahma, Bonafide, Cochise, I would almost never ski the Bonafide. Apart from groomers and bumps with deep troughs (where Brahmas shine), I think the Cochise is both more capable and less work to ski than the Bonafide.
Printable View
^^^^^If I owned Brahma, Bonafide, Cochise, I would almost never ski the Bonafide. Apart from groomers and bumps with deep troughs (where Brahmas shine), I think the Cochise is both more capable and less work to ski than the Bonafide.
Thats interesting. Ive always imagined the Cochise to be more work than the Bonafide. The Cochise does come in my preferred length too. Im really tempted to acquire both and just see what I end up skiing most. Just have to get the length figured out. I already own the Brahma and Bodacious.Quote:
Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
A little depends on where you’re skiing them. Sorry not paying attention if you said where that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by slowroastin
I’ve got you by a couple lbs and an inch or so. 180 Bonafides are fun on groomers and in tighter terrain but on bigger mountains you’d want more ski. Maybe on a smaller mountain 180 would be fine but for everything else I’d go bigger. I personally like the 187 mounted 1 to 1.5cm forward.
As someone who has every model to choose from in the garage my two ski quiver is a 187 Bonafide and 192 Rustler 11. Out West I personally don’t need a Brahma. Maybe if I wanted to ski bumps more but I certainly don’t want to do that shit. If I skied Snowbird or Jackson all the time maybe a Cochise would be in there but for me I’m between sizes. 192 is too much work and 185 is a bit short especially in soft snow. Bonafides are a ton more fun on groomers than a Cochise is. As someone who grew up bashing plastic I still enjoy me some big arcs on groomers.
Digging the new 188 Rustler 10 construction. Might end up skiing them a little more this winter on say the day after a storm.
175cm/75kgs as god created me, after a morning dump.Quote:
Originally Posted by slowroastin
First day on the 188 R10. Six inches of heavyish pow on a firm base. Very fun on the untracked, can really feel the flex fore and aft. Ski locks in the carve and releases it easily when you want it to. Relieved I didn't go with the shorter ski. Of course now I want the R11, but I own the 2013 Bodacious and these two will road trip together.
6’ 0”, 175 Lbs, not an ex-racer, have traditionally preferred big, damp skis (187 Legend XXL, 188 RC112, 184 Mantra, 185 Cochise) to compensate for poor technical turn technique. Have traditionally liked going fast, have recently been focusing on turning well at speed along with more shifty/360s off natural terrain. Have skied at Bridger (2 years), Snowbird (2 years), Targhee (2 years) and Alta (past 5 years).Quote:
Originally Posted by dfinn
To be clear, I haven’t skied the Rustler 10 yet, just picked them up last night. I’ve been deciding between Cochise/Rustler 11 depending on snow conditions and mood.
Cochise is for 2 dimensional (refrozen, chalk, high speed groomers) snow and fast, powerful (Silver Fox, Little Cloud-ish, High Boy, West Rustler) skiing OR when skiing with friends also on similar skis (OG Katana, Cochise, Kaestle MX108).
Rustler 11 is for 3 dimensional (Soft chop, pow to knee deep, mid-winter mashed taters not too deep, soft and turn-y groomers) and playful, yet directional skiing (Thirds, Fred’s Trees, Westward Ho, Gad 2, Baldy). Also been recently into spinning off natural features, which was more difficult on the Cochise.
I’ve picked up the Rustler 10s for playful, yet directional skiing when the snow is more 2 dimensional (chalk, springtime, groomer days) and for skiing with friends on their smaller skis (J-Skis Master Blaster, Mantra, MSP 99). Time will tell if they fill that niche well. I like that they are the same length, but stiffer. Still on the fence about the smaller radius though. We’ll see.
So I think someone asked me to compare the 188s and 192s after a few days on them....I probably suck at writing ski reviews though but I'll try.
188s R11s: Had a few days on them. Tips dove, and not confidence-inspiring at high speeds. Just kinda 'meh' to me. Didn't suck, didn't blow my mind. Good for stomping airs though, they are not flimsy.
192s R11s: Much stiffer tail, charges through chopped up snow, so it's what I'm looking for. No tip dive at all. Just as good for landing airs but hard to compare the two precisely air-wise with only a few days on the 188s. I'll guess the 188s are easy to trick with. The stiff tails of the 192s are work, no doubt, when it's not a pow day and it's bumped up in the trees, but you just have to lift the backs up as they ain't gonna slide into a turn easy. In soft treed moguls they do slide a bit and are good enough. If it's PNW snow, these things rip fast in trees!!!! They are more work in Utah light snow though. If you want something a notch down from this ski and is more surfy and playful, try the Salomon QST 118s.
MY big point I want to make is I'm finally won over by light skis. I thought they could never be as damp as traditional skis, and while they aren't they are plenty good enough. I now own 3 pair of light skis, and they all perform better than I'd guess. Past traditional skis I've owned have been El Dictators, 1st gen Big Daddys, and original m103s, all were 192 or more (can't remember exactly).
About me: I'm 6'2" and maybe 175pounds. I like to go fast like Ricky Bobby and catch air every run if it's soft. I ski forward and like to lean way over if possible. I ski at Solitude, and if I skied at Snowbird or BS the 192s are a must I think, there isn't a lot of places to really go fast at Solitude. Sounds like all Blizzard pros are 188s, and yes they are better skiers than me! So, if 188s are good enough for them that kinda makes my review questionable, I know, but I like the 192s and glad I stuck with the ski and didn't try something else.
The 187 Brahma is a fun ski for no pow days in Jackson. An awesome two ski quiver for Jackson if you are a bigger guy would be the 187 Brahma and the 192 R11.
The 192 Cochise is fun, but it sucks in pow. 187 Bonafide is fun too, but just about anything you can do with a Bonafide, you can do with a Brahma and if you need more ski the Rustler 11 is perfect.
I haven’t been on the new (OG) Bodacious yet, but I bet that would slide in very nicely if you wanted to go a Brahma, R10/11, Bodacious quiver.
The Cochise and Bonafide are great one ski quiver skis, but once you get a second ski, they lose out quickly to the Brahma, R11 or similar skis.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
After a bunch of days on Rustler 11 192 I have to admit that I don’t grab my metal Katanas anymore. R11 is a better powder ski and less grabby in shit snow. The tails release more easily which makes skiing steep narrow lines less work. Katanas are still damper and smoother in non-soft 3D snow and on 2D snow. R11 gives maybe 10% of top end to Katanas in those conditions, nothing which can’t be adjusted to.
This applies just to the 192 cm version. In 188 length the R11 is more of an easygoing ski. Not bad on its own but not really comparable with the metal Katana.
The other question is what do I need the asym Spur for. The Spur is very surfy but kinda works best in deep powder in low angle terrain. As soon as it’s getting steeper I can’t tell a clear advantage over the R11. In contrary, in steep alpine terrain, chutes, spines etc. R11 is a clear winner because it has more backbone and is more agile.
Just wanted to chime in and add some quick thoughts on the Rustler 10s now that I have a few days on them.
3 days total, 1 at Big Sky, 2 at Bridger.
Skied the 188cm Rustler 10s at Big Sky on a sunny, but very cold day with soft snow (~4 inches of powder on top of a week's worth of cold and soft conditions). First run was a cut up groomer, was super fun. These things really like to turn. Definitely a smaller radius than the 11's but actually felt more stable. I think they are definitely stiffer. I've heard people describe them as not particularly lively. I think that is an incorrect statement. They aren't particularly poppy, like my 184 Mantras, but they are definitely lively. They are really fun to be turning on. More lively than the 188 R11s. Was having fun on groomers and wide open mellow pow fields, hadn't hit a rock yet so I took them over to Challenger for some steeper terrain. Doh. Compressed edge, right below the heelpiece on the outside edge. Super bummed. No core shot though. These appear to be just as burly as every other Blizzard I've skied, cause I definitely smoked that rock. Hung out on groomers the rest of the day. Didn't spin, but they felt good in the air with little shiftys. Small landings were very confidence inspiring (less than 10 ft of air).
Next two days were at Bridger. Same conditions as described above. Skied off Schlaschman's most of day one, with a mix of Schlaschman's/Ridge Laps on day two. Spent time not going big, but getting into tight and steep terrain where precision turns needed combining with skiing fast to get things back under control. Man, these things were super fun. They are really good at turning small, but fast. No airplane/GS turns, but turning at speed and carving through moguls and terrain undulations. Really like that. The only weird thing I found was on steeper terrain, at low speeds (i.e. getting to the top of a chute), the downhill ski has a tendancy to hook the inside tip edge in 3D snow. Don't know if it is cause they are brand new and sharp, but my buddy who has the 180 R10s with less sharp edges, felt the same way. Very interesting. I may detune them if they continue to do that.
Anyone else experience that? I don't get that phenomenon on the R11s...
In my experience, skis with shorter radius tend to be more hooky in weird 3D snow in steeper terrain. Camber plays a role as well. R11 has longer radius and less camber = less hooky.Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenchMoose
Anyone have experience to compare the Bushwackers to the Rustler 9?
East coast skier, 6'1" 185, off trail when ever possible, bumps over groomers....not a particularly fast skier, and don't really care to be. Much prefer trees and bumps to steeps.
Had the Bushwackers for about 5 years and loved them. Only complaint, on icy groomers- which, yeah, they are thing out here... - never felt they gripped all that well. But absolutely loved them in the trees and bumps.
Ripped an edge out last weekend, so....was going to replace them with Bushwacker 2019, but then the R-9 caught my eye with the partial metal underfoot. But I'm concerned they will be much stiffer and won't have that quick turn playfulness of the Bushwackers.
Thoughts?
Oh, and yeah....I just bought a pair on sale, so I guess I'll know soon enough.
R11 188s just came in the mail.
I have the cochise 185 and the recommended mount on these R11s is significantly forward of that.
I am trying to decide between -1 and at the line. Have narrowed it down to these 2 choices.
I have seen a few posters who went -1 and thought is was good.
Anyone mount at the line and subsequently wished they had mounted back?
I want to get it right the first time if possible, have several sets of skis with an extra set of holes cause I wasnt happy with my first mount:(
Skied my 188’s today and still happy with them on the line. They have a lot more tip and tail rocker and a tighter radius than a Cochise...and they ski like it. The more forward than a Cochise mount point makes sense for how the ski is designed and what it is intended to do.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I’m the same height as you but you have 10lbs on me and I ski the 180cm Rustler 9. Great ski for trees and bumps! Will be more solid underfoot than the Bushwacker and hard snow grip is quite good on mine as I run them full sharp with a 1/3 tune. They pivot very well with the rocker profile and the binding mount being slightly forward of the Brahma/Bushwacker.Quote:
Originally Posted by TadNT
Find mine very playful at lower speeds but have more backbone than the Bushwacker especially if you do some faster carving on groomers occasionally.
Thanks - sounds perfect then. That 'playful at lower speeds' is exactly what I was worried about.Quote:
Originally Posted by noslow
Appreciate the info!
Find the Rustler series are not super fussy with mounts and you can move them forward or back a cm or two without upsetting the balance too much. More forward of the line like the FWT pros do will make it a bit more playful and ski shorter and back of the line makes it a bit more directional and a touch less playful. Line is a good comprise of playful/stability I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by azmtbiker
You could always mount 0.5cm back to stop the worrying and they would ski fine there.
I'm also getting ready to mount my R9s this weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by noslow
180s, I'm 6'1". 185lbs.
Been on the 180 bushwhackers for years. Probably just go on teh line unless someone tells me otherwise.
Can't wait to try them, but not sure when I can get out. Sunday was my best short term bet but it looks like rain.
The rec mount on the Rustler 9 is more forward of the lines on the Brahma and I assume Bushwacker so I’d stay at the line for the best compromise of stable/playful. Works well there.Quote:
Originally Posted by TadNT
I’d only go forward if you were going to the 188cm and wanted to make it ski a bit shorter or back if you wanted to make a Rustler 10 or 11 ski longer. The 9 is stiffer with less rocker than those models and find it doesn’t ski as short.
Great - thanks. On the line it will be...Quote:
Originally Posted by noslow
Just measured the center of boot on my BW and they are about 1" back from the suggested line on the R9.
Interestingly (or not...) there is no suggested mark on the BW.
Current 180cm Brahma Mount is 11.1cm back from center/77.7cm from the tail and the Rustler 9 180cm mount is 7.7cm back from center/81.4cm from the tail.Quote:
Originally Posted by TadNT
thanks for this. Stripped the BWs of the bindings tonight. Will mount the R9s tomorrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by noslow
Thx for the mounting infos... Got myselft a Rustler 9 188cm (I'm 176cm) and I'm going to mount the Look Pivot +1 from recommended. Hope that it will turn a little better and feel a bit shorter.
My wife really liked the Sheeva 10 in a 164. Is the Rustler 10 in a 164 the same ski with a different topsheet?
Exact same weights on the Sheeva 10 and Rustler 10 in the 164cm so I think they are the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
In size 164 yesQuote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
Rustler 11 $480 US from Corbetts. All sizes.
Corbetts usually has their Spring sale starting soon and usually skis are 40% off(currently 20% off) so that ski should be another $100 US or so cheaper if it’s the same this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Beder
2020 skis like the Nordica Enforcer 104/88 or K2 Mindbenders won’t be discounted much though as I asked when I recently got my 104 Free there a few weeks ago.
Anyone here been on the 2020 Brahma 82s?
What's that you say? F off to Pugski?
K thanx
I'll give em a whirl. Meantime I have a pair of lightly used Latigo 184's if anyone is looking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Like a Boss
How is Blizzard’s factory tune? I have a new pair of Bonafides. Do they need a base grind? The tips and tails are de-tuned, edges are sharp, and the shop that mounted them gave them a machine wax.
Thanks!
They definitely don’t need to be ground, In fact the likelihood of a shop actually doing more damage is greater than them fixing anything that might be wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Hood
You should be good to go.
The only thing I ever do to all my demo skis every year is add a little more base bevel to the rockered sections. I prep probably 100 pairs a year by hand and this is generally all they need, other than taking a gummy and detuning the tips and tails. You could ski them right out of the wrapper and most likely be rather happy.
The only tune I would really alter is on anything wider than a Rustler 10. I think they ski a little better with more base bevel as the skis are all petty strong torsionally. Rustler 11, Cochise, Bodacious, Spur all get 1.5* base bevel for my skis.
Never ski a ski out of the wrapper. Unless it’s a Stockli, then by all means, have at it.
At least check the tune before you ski it. Even the best factory tunes (and Blizzard is great) can be off, and skis can change a bit as they cure after leaving the factory.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttahflake
I’ve skied hundreds out of the wrapper and would disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttahflake
Skied some horribly finished Stockil’s too.
So why do the reps all go to the Montana facility in Georgetown, Massachusetts to get their demo fleets ready for the season? It’s because they know better, skis are not ready to go out of the wrapper. Maybe out west you can get away with that stuff on anything wider than 90, with the soft snow and whatnot. But no way can you do that on the east coast. Some brands are notoriously bad out of the wrapper, I’m looking at you Atomic/Salomon. I stand by what I said, only Stockli comes ready to ride.
Ready to ski and ready to test by all your accounts prior to submitting their POs are not the same thing.
i need a pair of 180 bonafide. i got a lot of groomer and hard snow time last week on the resident demo fleet at revelstoke. i would normally be on an older 193 cochise, but traveled with the ski i wanted to be on. i thought the 180 bonafide was as powerful as the cochise in those conditions (drought skiing). i wouldn’t buy them to ski good snow, but my cochise don’t do that too well either.
Thanks all. I talked to the shop where I demod from.
They didn't alter the factory grind, and I liked it that day. Snow should be the same as then for the next few trips, so I will give them a go before I make any changes to the base bevel.
The 180 is just what I bought.