What's Blizzard up to?

Curious to see more on the snow feedback come in as I've really enjoyed my Rustler 10s (188) as a daily driver here in Whitefish, but they are near end of life and I've been pondering replacements. Looks like current shop inventory will be my last chance to pick up the old design if I decide I want more of the same.

I'm not opposed to the extra length, but not if it makes them harder to swing around through the tighter trees.

Are they keeping the variable waist widths? Article just says 102 underfoot for the 180cm, but I recall the older models stepped up to 104 underfoot for the 188 (and down to 100 for the short size).

Gonna miss the 10s being blue--I appreciated that they kept them consistent even as the 9 and 11 switched colors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesbrother49

Hahahha..I just did a trade show showing the new lineup to dealers and buyers and their was one consistent message from any woman in the booth..."Those are the coolest women graphics I've ever seen". Men know nothing!

---

Attachment 442040

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Same amount of metal as before repositioned to give the skis a much more round and consistent flex from tip to tail. Present layup can cause some hinging in the tip and tail where the metal ends in the fore body of the ski. Two strips of metal that change in width depending on the model, run the full length of the ski but are not joined in the tip and tail. The third piece of metal under foot is also not joined to the strips over the sidewalls. This is important as it keeps the playfulness that the old construction had by keeping the ends of the skis torsionally softer.

I can feel the full length of the ski more on this new model. Previous gen, especially the 10, I felt like you couldn’t feel much of the ski past where the rocker started and they always felt very short

10 got the biggest change to the rocker with much less tail rocker which is a very welcome change.

9 is now 96mm under foot.

Spent most of my time on the 192 R11 so far as it’s been snowing so much. I don’t think we’ll see 192 r10s to test until maybe March.

All in all I think the top end has been improved considerably without sacrificing the ease of use and playfulness.

---

Badass - thanks for sharing the straight dope.

Is the 192 R11 still significantly burlier than the [checks notes] 186 R11? I understand the first-gen had a stiffer layup or something.

When will us plebes be able to buy the new shit?

Are the hustle heavier than the v2 rustlers? Dont really understand the published weights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meter-man

Badass - thanks for sharing the straight dope.

Is the 192 R11 still significantly burlier than the [checks notes] 186 R11? I understand the first-gen had a stiffer layup or something.

When will us plebes be able to buy the new shit?

---

Yup. Longest lengths are always burlier in construction. 186 is also stiffer than 180, etc.

Varying waste width concept continues

R11 192=116, 186=114, 180 and down = 112
R10 192=104 186=104, 180 and down = 102
R9 186 = 98 180 and down = 96

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Same amount of metal as before repositioned to give the skis a much more round and consistent flex from tip to tail. Present layup can cause some hinging in the tip and tail where the metal ends in the fore body of the ski. Two strips of metal that change in width depending on the model, run the full length of the ski but are not joined in the tip and tail. The third piece of metal under foot is also not joined to the strips over the sidewalls. This is important as it keeps the playfulness that the old construction had by keeping the ends of the skis torsionally softer.

I can feel the full length of the ski more on this new model. Previous gen, especially the 10, I felt like you couldn’t feel much of the ski past where the rocker started and they always felt very short

10 got the biggest change to the rocker with much less tail rocker which is a very welcome change.

9 is now 96mm under foot.

Spent most of my time on the 192 R11 so far as it’s been snowing so much. I don’t think we’ll see 192 r10s to test until maybe March.

All in all I think the top end has been improved considerably without sacrificing the ease of use and playfulness.

---

I have the green 192 R11s - with less 'hinging' will the new 192 R11s be more stable in chop? or what is the result of this update?

Just watched the skiessentials video on them, they’re saying not much change to the R10s in shape, but had a higher top end, presumably less turny?

They said the R9s changed considerably, sounded like the new ones are way more mantra like, which is not something I think I want out of a Rustler. My 9s still have plenty of life, but I personally like the soft tip/tails, though do admit they need to be skied pretty centered when really laying into them, flip side is they’re really fun and playful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted reborn

I have the green 192 R11s - with less 'hinging' will the new 192 R11s be more stable in chop? or what is the result of this update?

---

Yes more stable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VTskibum

Just watched the skiessentials video on them, they’re saying not much change to the R10s in shape, but had a higher top end, presumably less turny?

They said the R9s changed considerably, sounded like the new ones are way more mantra like, which is not something I think I want out of a Rustler. My 9s still have plenty of life, but I personally like the soft tip/tails, though do admit they need to be skied pretty centered when really laying into them, flip side is they’re really fun and playful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Mantra like in the R9?!? That’s not what I got from their review at all. “the narrowest of the group, it is most at home in an all-mountain format, and the big changes for this ski make it more agile, smoother, and floatier than ever before. This is a big step in the direction of sophistication, tip to tail precision, and energy out of the turn. It makes short, snappy turns with ease, and feels like the whole ski is engaged throughout varying shapes and styles of carves.”
The R10 gets a new core and that’s where they differ mostly.
“really wants to be driven through crud, powder, windslab, and chalk. The stability of this ski is one of the perks, and you can really feel the difference between the new TrueBlend core combined with the FluxForm metal laminates.”
Edit: what they say, is that the increased width makes them a competitor of skis such as the Mantra and that their metal placement is in similar spots

Any idea if these might get an early release this season? That new R9 is intriguing for an EC daily


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ticketchecker

Any idea if these might get an early release this season? That new R9 is intriguing for an EC daily


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

---

They will be available in certain sizes at select retailers. 186,180,174 in 9/10/11

In my opinion the biggest change to R10 is reducing some of the rocker in the tail. It falls between 11 and 9 now where as before it was the same amount of rocker as the 11, which was too much for a 102 wasted ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sf

The new Sheeva 10 and 11 are probably the ugliest skis I’ve ever seen.

---

Heheh I’m on the teal Sheeva 11s with glitter feathers, it saved me $350 over the men’s topsheet. I didn’t like the look at first, but it’s growing on me! [emoji23]
Ugly topsheets are great opportunities for deals!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

They will be available in certain sizes at select retailers. 186,180,174 in 9/10/11

---

Thanks, I work at a Boyne resort so I'll check with the shop rats here.

Might as well post a shout out to Blizzard/Nordica support.
My 180 Sheeva 11s didn’t have any issues on 2D snow but they were miserable to ski in fresh high density bottomless snow. True bar showed that they were edge high on the rockered sections of BOTH the tips and tails, on both skis. I sent pics and submitted a claim to Blizzard/Nordica. They agreed to cover the cost of grinding these things back into flatness and get edge bevels reset (1.5 base / 2.5 side is their spec).
The bases were initially so concave at the hinge points of the rockered sections that even after a decent grind they were still slightly edge high at just the hinge point … my tech asked me to ski it because he didn’t want to go super crazy taking off material right off the bat. I got them out in cream cheese and they were smooth and marvelous, pivoted, smeared, or carved with ease at my direction. Problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

They will be available in certain sizes at select retailers. 186,180,174 in 9/10/11

In my opinion the biggest change to R10 is reducing some of the rocker in the tail. It falls between 11 and 9 now where as before it was the same amount of rocker as the 11, which was too much for a 102 wasted ski.

---

I’m pumped on the changes to the R10 and it has the best graphics of the three. Take my money!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SacTo

Mantra like in the R9?!? That’s not what I got from their review at all. “the narrowest of the group, it is most at home in an all-mountain format, and the big changes for this ski make it more agile, smoother, and floatier than ever before. This is a big step in the direction of sophistication, tip to tail precision, and energy out of the turn. It makes short, snappy turns with ease, and feels like the whole ski is engaged throughout varying shapes and styles of carves.”

---

All true, but if you take out the short snappy turns part, pretty close to a Mantra/Enforcer from what I've heard. Been a long time since I've been on either. I like the very soft entry/exit of the current R9 and they changed that pretty significantly. Maybe it's better, who knows, but is a pretty big departure and takes it a bit closer towards those, not just in width.

I'm excited to get on the 10 and 11.

Unrelated, I've been super stoked on the Hustle 11s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VTskibum

[/FONT][/COLOR]

All true, but if you take out the short snappy turns part, pretty close to a Mantra/Enforcer from what I've heard. Been a long time since I've been on either. I like the very soft entry/exit of the current R9 and they changed that pretty significantly. Maybe it's better, who knows, but is a pretty big departure and takes it a bit closer towards those, not just in width.

---

0.69% of the crap that comes out of ski essentials mouth can actually be trusted. That leaves a lot of garbage. And they loved the last Rustler 10 that everyone else hated. So that should tell you something to start with.

I think the new ones may be what changes my quiver. It would be nice to have something a little less hammer time then my Cochise and Bodacious. Stick a bonafide in there with a rustler 10 and a zero g 105 and that’s a 5 ski quiver that will conquer the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoVT Joey

It would be nice to have something a little less hammer time then my Cochise and Bodacious.

---

Blasphemer!

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoVT Joey

0.69% of the crap that comes out of ski essentials mouth can actually be trusted. That leaves a lot of garbage. And they loved the last Rustler 10 that everyone else hated. So that should tell you something to start with.

I think the new ones may be what changes my quiver. It would be nice to have something a little less hammer time than my Cochise and Bodacious. Stick a bonafide in there with a rustler 10 and a zero g 105 and that’s a 5 ski quiver that will conquer the world.

---

Exactly, nobody ever called Volkl’s Kendo/Mantra/Katana’s, or Nordica’s Enforcer series light and lively. I’m hoping the new R10s straddle the energetic/damp line similarly to the R11s with less of a hinge-y shovel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregorys

Blasphemer!

:)

---

LOL! Settle down. I brought my Atris and Nocta out west with me. Wished the entire time that either the Cochise or the Bodacious went in the bag instead of my Atris. Needed that heavy metal thunder!!

I am very excited for the new rustler 10. I cant wait to get on it. I have faith they made it rock!!

Hey wasatchback, 2022 Sheeva 11. Same ski construction and flex as Rustler 11? Is the “womens specific design” blurb just bogus?

You mentioned a couple of years ago that my 2020 Sheeva 11s were the same ski. Just wanted to confirm if that’s still the case for 2022. Because the feather topsheet is soooooo much less expensive [emoji23]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

Hey wasatchback, 2022 Sheeva 11. Same ski construction and flex as Rustler 11? Is the “womens specific design” blurb just bogus?

You mentioned a couple of years ago that my 2020 Sheeva 11s were the same ski. Just wanted to confirm if that’s still the case for 2022. Because the feather topsheet is soooooo much less expensive [emoji23]

---

Defer to the expert, but it looks like just the new 2023/24 Sheevas have a different layup.
Attachment 442524

2022 should be the same as rustlers--at least that was my understanding when I almost bought a pair.

My buddy reminded me that my vague recollection of what WB said about the 19/20 skis were, 180/188 the same, shorter lengths womens specific flex. Hoping that’s still the case!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

My buddy reminded me that my vague recollection of what WB said about the 19/20 skis were, 180/188 the same, shorter lengths womens specific flex. Hoping that’s still the case!

---

I seem to recall seeing that the difference between Sheeva and Rustler was a single stringer in the core.

Old construction of Sheeva differed from Rustler by yeah one stringer of wood, the center stringer. In the longer lengths I’m just guessing they didn’t differ at all but I don’t know that for sure

New one has a more significant difference IMHO. Center piece is metal in Rustler and fiberglass in Sheeva. 164 and down have a different mounting point than Rustler. Other than that they have the same core and both have the same amount of metal over the edges.

Skied the new Rustler 9 yesterday…in a nutshell, if I was shopping for a mid 90s ski, this would be it. I loved skiing the Kastle 96 Ti, so fuckin’ solid and stable…BUT, I still want my 95ish waisted ski to be damp and stable while still being fun and loose when I want it to be, that is the Rustler 9. Super solid underfoot that I could totally trust it at speed, yet fool around park, side hits, trees, etc. At 6’2” 190 lbs I’ll always ski a 190 ish ski and the 186 available was the only 185ish I felt confident enough on. Saying that, I still want a 190+ version of it.

Didn’t ski the Rustler 10 as only 180 currently available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robnow

Skied the new Rustler 9 yesterday…in a nutshell, if I was shopping for a mid 90s ski, this would be it. I loved skiing the Kastle 96 Ti, so fuckin’ solid and stable…BUT, I still want my 95ish waisted ski to be damp and stable while still being fun and loose when I want it to be, that is the Rustler 9. Super solid underfoot that I could totally trust it at speed, yet fool around park, side hits, trees, etc. At 6’2” 190 lbs I’ll always ski a 190 ish ski and the 186 available was the only 185ish I felt confident enough on. Saying that, I still want a 190+ version of it.

Didn’t ski the Rustler 10 as only 180 currently available.

---

I’ll second this every day. The last gen 188 R9 very quickly became a staple in my quiver because it did everything I wanted out of my Kastle MX 98s and could be playful. I’m excited to try the 186 R9s.

Glad to hear I’m not the only one on here who didn’t like the last Gen R10. The 188 just felt wrong. Excited it comes in adult lengths and is a bit more stable. The 19X is on the short list to try when my ZX108s die.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Question for the Blizzard gurus:
I've been in love with Blizzard skis since I demoed a pair of Titans (9s? with the topo topsheets?) back in the early aughts. Liked those so much I immediately bought a pair. Skied the shit out of em, then moved on to a pair of Bushwhackers. Loved those skis too and skied those till an edge somehow separated from the base. Now I'm on a pair of Brahmas which I love more than either of the predecessors.

My question is: I'm on 2019s (black and red with carbon fiber tips and tails). But man those new red ones are sharp! and they're RED! Clearly, faster... so what changes has Blizzard made to the Brahma (88) since 2019? Any? Or is it the same ski with different topsheets, like the Rustler since 2019?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamond Joe

My question is: I'm on 2019s (black and red with carbon fiber tips and tails). But man those new red ones are sharp! and they're RED! Clearly, faster... so what changes has Blizzard made to the Brahma (88) since 2019? Any? Or is it the same ski with different topsheets, like the Rustler since 2019?

---

A fairly big update happened in the '21 ski. Blizzard Introduced the True Blend Cores that season, each length gets its own engineered core. They also added a size and changed up the radius just a little bit.

Yeah, big change in the 20/21 skis. Different shape, rocker profile, etc. I felt the skis became more front side/smooth snow oriented and generally ski bigger per size than the previous models. This goes for Black Pearl, Brahma, Bonifide. New sizes too. For most NA ski areas I went from 187 to 183 as I found the 189s just shortened up most mountains more than I really wanted too. The 183 Bonifide still provides plenty of stability for me, but I’m not closing out a 900-1200ft run in 6 turns.

Why do you feel like the new Brahmas are more front side oriented? One thing I like about my Brahmas, is that (and I read this in a few reviews) they ski long - and they're so stable - that its possible to ski them a size shorter than what you normally would. So that would seem the same?

The 2019s are 127-88-111 w/17m radius at 180 and 15.5 at 173. The new version is 128-88-110 w/17.5m at 183 and 16m at 177. So the shape seems pretty close spec-wise? curious how that new core affects the versatility, stability, quickness, etc on-snow.

New ones have more engaged edge than the older ones. Also more camber. Definitely don’t ski off piste as well.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

@wasatchback or others; quick comparo of the Firebird HRC vs Thunderbird R15 WB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamond Joe

Why do you feel like the new Brahmas are more front side oriented? One thing I like about my Brahmas, is that (and I read this in a few reviews) they ski long - and they're so stable - that its possible to ski them a size shorter than what you normally would. So that would seem the same?

The 2019s are 127-88-111 w/17m radius at 180 and 15.5 at 173. The new version is 128-88-110 w/17.5m at 183 and 16m at 177. So the shape seems pretty close spec-wise? curious how that new core affects the versatility, stability, quickness, etc on-snow.

---

Contact points are further out, with more camber as mentioned. The tip and tail don’t feather through inconsistent, grabby, or 3D snow as smoothly. The new design really pulls in to the turn from the very front of the ski. 183 skis closer to the previous 187 than the 180 IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diamond Joe

Why do you feel like the new Brahmas are more front side oriented? One thing I like about my Brahmas, is that (and I read this in a few reviews) they ski long - and they're so stable - that its possible to ski them a size shorter than what you normally would. So that would seem the same?

The 2019s are 127-88-111 w/17m radius at 180 and 15.5 at 173. The new version is 128-88-110 w/17.5m at 183 and 16m at 177. So the shape seems pretty close spec-wise? curious how that new core affects the versatility, stability, quickness, etc on-snow.

---

Yeah, dims are similar but long low rocker on yours and pretty much none on the red ones.

Another big difference is the red ones are stiffer, tip to tail although the tails have been noticeably softened up on the '23's compared to the 21 & 22's.

I like the red Brahmas. It's a skiers ski and it's unique. To me, it is similar to the 16/17 Head Monster, but rather than what I consider a piste ski made wider for all mountain the Brahma comes at it like an all mtn ski with a piste bias. It is not as stiff as the Monster but the big dif is in the tip and shovel of the Brahma, where it is noticeably softer. Not to mention the taller and more tapered tip shape of the Brahma just make it a more versatile ski (relative to the Monster) for a technical and fast skier. That plank like shovel of the Monster was always my only gripe with it. YMMV. For me, the versatility of the red Brahma is that tip shape and shovel flex.

I actually find the Kendo since '20 a lot like your the black Brahma except the black Brahma is a heavier/more damp ski.

Based on just the weight, camber and stiffness (each of which is greater on the red ones vs the black ones) they should be an even more stable ski.

Hey yall, I've been crawling around this thread for almost an hour looking for anything on a mount point for Gunsmokes.

I have a pair of '16s? (green stoned cow) in 193, that I picked up cheap with some damage. The previous mount dictated somewhat, and based on what little I was able to read I went just a bit past +1.5 for the mount, which has felt too far forward, especially for tele. The tails are not punishing, but maybe a bit weird and invasive, especially in the sub-par layer cake of variable buried crusts that is passing for our snow pack in oregon thus far.

Remounting I can start again at -1.5 or go even farther back, wayback which would eye test more closely with the rest of the quiver. Thoughts? Reqs? Ski pretty centered, never backward, plenty noodling- mostly a work/patrol ski.

I’ll look at mine and get back to you

not set up for tele but I like how they ski

I still tele but not that much these days

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by teleposeur

Hey yall, I've been crawling around this thread for almost an hour looking for anything on a mount point for Gunsmokes.

I have a pair of '16s? (green stoned cow) in 193, that I picked up cheap with some damage. The previous mount dictated somewhat, and based on what little I was able to read I went just a bit past +1.5 for the mount, which has felt too far forward, especially for tele. The tails are not punishing, but maybe a bit weird and invasive, especially in the sub-par layer cake of variable buried crusts that is passing for our snow pack in oregon thus far.

Remounting I can start again at -1.5 or go even farther back, wayback which would eye test more closely with the rest of the quiver. Thoughts? Reqs? Ski pretty centered, never backward, plenty noodling- mostly a work/patrol ski.

---

I did the same study a couple of mounts ago when mounting NOS 193 bargain find, re-reading old reviews etc.. Most seemed to like the 193's right on the line.

I don’t ski those every day

when I first got em three years ago they were my first alpine set up - Fritschi Freeride Pro on the line - a good fatter alternative to my Watea 101 with Outlaw

they sat unused for two seasons until last week - now mounted with Shifts on the line - didn’t have to fuss with holes

they ski just fine for me