What's Blizzard up to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Sure we don't sell Cochise any more, but we sell a ton more Rustler 10s than we ever did Cochise and even with the new Cochise, the Rustler 10 will still be more than double (probably triple) the quantities at least in the US. The Enforcer 110 might be the only ski with metal sold over 100mm in any sort of quantity in the US. People aren't really buying skis like that anymore. Shocking to people here I'm sure but the market for skis like that is tiny in the grand scheme of things. Hoping that changes and I think you're gonna see a shift back toward skis with a little more mass, we'll see.

Sorry you're not interested in any more skis in the line, hopefully if you get a chance to try the new ones you'll change your mind, maybe not.

Forgot there's also a new Spur.

4 sizes. 189, 179, 169, 159.. 129, 127, 125, 123 are the waste widths. Based off the original spur shape with a completely different construction. Haven't skied it in anything super deep. Had a good day at Jackson last Monday on them. 6" on top of the 18" leftovers from the day before. Fun, not super demanding. Small sample set.

Modern take on an old graphic from the 70s. If you ski Jackson you'll probably see an old pair screwed to the outside of Corbet's cabin.

Attachment 311540

---

Those Spurs look sick! Would love a range of skis with graphics based on the design with different colors.

Damn those Spurs are sexy!



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

The new Cochise does not get the True Blend core that Bonafide, Brahma, and Black Pearl get. They were tested with that core and they were just too heavy. It has a core similar to Rustler 11.

---

@wasatchback: What is the weight of the new Cochise like? Similar to the old Cochise or more towards the Rustler weight? (i.e ~2300 gr or sub 2000 grams in a 185? )

Great graphics on the spur


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Rant time: Why do ski companies continue to make pow skis for only short people? 189 is short of a huge segment of the skiing population! Hell, even Moment, who swore they would make a charger or pow ski over 190, finally caved, made a bunch of 194 cm skis, and sold out. The new Spur seems like it’s a cool ski, I love the graphic, but I won’t step into a pair because I guarantee they are too short. Sucks, I liked the OG Spur, just wanted it a bit softer and more forgiving.

Also, can Blizzard bring back a limited run of the 193 Gunsmoke? The R11 isn’t a replacement. I got on next years Enforcer 115 Free last week and instantly felt at home because they are very close to the Gunsmoke. Everything on the Gunsmoke just worked for a lot of people. You still see people on them because they can’t find an acceptable replacement.

Also, I’m really surprised the Enforcer 110 is selling. That ski is really weird to ski. No matter how much I detuned it, it just wanted to hook across the fall like. Guess that’s what people want.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I find it the most confusing when they have other skis in the line-up over 190 but not their widest powder ski?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier

I find it the most confusing when they have other skis in the line-up over 190 but not their widest powder ski?

---

Right? I’m not here asking for another 203 cm Volkl Shiro, but a 192-195 cm Spur with be perfect!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatty

Those Spurs look sick! Would love a range of skis with graphics based on the design with different colors.

---

That was the request. Stoked to get at least one. Hopefully in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smooth operator

@wasatchback: What is the weight of the new Cochise like? Similar to the old Cochise or more towards the Rustler weight? (i.e ~2300 gr or sub 2000 grams in a 185? )

---

I'll check later. I think it's similar in weight to the first year or two of Cochise. That ski progressively got heavier and stiffer. Even in the original shape by year 3 (the horrible graphic with all the stars) had a different construction that was heavier. guessing around 2300 in the 185. Everything is going up in weight I believe. Bonafide, Brahma, Black Pearl are all slightly heavier. We added more mass to the Rustler 10 for 19/20 as well, not sure if everyone knew that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skibrd

Rant time: Why do ski companies continue to make pow skis for only short people? 189 is short of a huge segment of the skiing population! Hell, even Moment, who swore they would make a charger or pow ski over 190, finally caved, made a bunch of 194 cm skis, and sold out. The new Spur seems like it’s a cool ski, I love the graphic, but I won’t step into a pair because I guarantee they are too short. Sucks, I liked the OG Spur, just wanted it a bit softer and more forgiving.

Also, can Blizzard bring back a limited run of the 193 Gunsmoke? The R11 isn’t a replacement. I got on next years Enforcer 115 Free last week and instantly felt at home because they are very close to the Gunsmoke. Everything on the Gunsmoke just worked for a lot of people. You still see people on them because they can’t find an acceptable replacement.

Also, I’m really surprised the Enforcer 110 is selling. That ski is really weird to ski. No matter how much I detuned it, it just wanted to hook across the fall like. Guess that’s what people want.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

The original Spur was a 189 you know... what you asked for is essentially what you got. Similar shape with quite a bit different construction.

I'm 6'2" 230 and don't really feel the need for it to be larger. Put some on a buddies feet for that day in Jackson who's maybe 6'3"/6'4" 250. He wanted me to move them back a bit cause he thought they'd be too short. Said they definitely didn't feel short at all. It's 129 under foot, the surface area alone is more than a 196 Bodacious or a 192 Rustler. If we made that ski over 190cm the entire global production would be less 100 pairs, probably less than 50. Most likely this whole Spur lineup won't provide a return on investment. One over 190 literally wouldn't pay for the cost of the mold.

The Gunsmoke worked for a select number of people, and that number was very very small in the grand scheme of things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

If we made that ski over 190cm the entire global production would be less 100 pairs, probably less than 50. Most likely this whole Spur lineup won't provide a return on investment. One over 190 literally wouldn't pay for the cost of the mold.

The Gunsmoke worked for a select number of people, and that number was very very small in the grand scheme of things.

---

But dammit, I want you to make skis at a loss, so I can pick them up at fire-sale prices, rather than full-fat prices! <sarcasm>
Yeah, I get it. I'm the guy who wants short tank Bodacious'
We all want cheap gear that is exactly as we like, and cheap as hell. :)

It's why I picked up another pair of Dakotas from the year you made them with metal at the end of last season. They were pretty cheap, and I love the way they ski. [I like them a lot more than the Orange or Blue Cochises.] More damp, less twitchy. Roll over most anything. If I want more float, I'll put on a different ski. But like your point - I'm not the guy you make money from.

It's just going to be tough, being cheap, and having "likes" that don't match what the majority of the population want to buy. The result is that finding skis you really like is probably going to be kind of tough going.

I do hope you're right that the pendulum is swinging back toward heavier/damper skis. I'm probably good for a while - but I'm not in the "light and playful" crowd while skiing lifts.

I thought the Gunsmoke had too much tail rocker and was pointlessly heavy for the shape. The Rustler 11, on the other hand, is a work of art. The range of conditions and terrain where that ski works well is significantly broader than any ski I've used. What the flip core skis have always done so well is provide a seamless, hook-free transition between carve and slarve. The 11's do it best of all. If the new line is taking cues from that ski, it's a good thing.

The only Enforcers I've been on were the 100's. Fun on soft groomers and bumps. Otherwise...just ok. Too turny for my tastes. Tips a bit too soft to drive the front of the ski in heavy chop. I don't give a shit if a 100-waisted-ski floats in pow. I just want those tips to go where I tell them to go. I should note I tend not to like skis in that width. I like <90mm and then want to jump up to >105. Nonetheless, I'm glad Blizzard isn't trying to replicate the Enforcer or QST line and is sticking to what they've done well in the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

The original Spur was a 189 you know... what you asked for is essentially what you got. Similar shape with quite a bit different construction.

---

But why going so wide on the Spur? 129 is a lot. In my part of the woods which happens to be one of the biggest ski areas in the world (and unfortunately very famous for “freeriding”), everything gets tracked out like in two hours. To get virgin powder we have either to go touring or ski really gnarly lines. In both cases skis over 120 are not really helpful. It’s getting crazier every year. I can understand why heavier metal laminate skis in the 105-110 range are gaining momentum nowadays. Those are simply best suited in the battle for powder reality.
As much as I liked the OG Spur I’m afraid I have no use for a such a wide ski anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Modern take on an old graphic from the 70s. If you ski Jackson you'll probably see an old pair screwed to the outside of Corbet's cabin.

Attachment 311540

---

Isn't that a take on the old Buzzard? Cool graphic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Pabst

Isn't that a take on the old Buzzard? Cool graphic.

---

I think it was the Wizzard.

Weighed one pair of new Cochise last night

185cm
2280/2290g

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roQer

But why going so wide on the Spur? 129 is a lot. In my part of the woods which happens to be one of the biggest ski areas in the world (and unfortunately very famous for “freeriding”), everything gets tracked out like in two hours. To get virgin powder we have either to go touring or ski really gnarly lines. In both cases skis over 120 are not really helpful. It’s getting crazier every year. I can understand why heavier metal laminate skis in the 105-110 range are gaining momentum nowadays. Those are simply best suited in the battle for powder reality.
As much as I liked the OG Spur I’m afraid I have no use for a such a wide ski anymore.

---

Resort powder skiing is what Rustler 11 is for.

This Spur especially, is designed for untracked snow. Heli skiing, cat skiing, etc. We are/were working with a few different heli/cat skiing operations on the design of this ski. That being said they were pretty fun in leftovers at Jackson the one morning I've skied them.

Wasatchback, is there any talk of a Zero G ski based on the Rustler 11?

a 186 ZeroG 118 in the bodacious shape and rocker profile would be pretty fucking awesome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XavierD

a 186 ZeroG 118 in the bodacious shape and rocker profile would be pretty fucking awesome

---

I dunno. I love the Bodacious, but I think being heavy and damp is a lot of the magic there. You'd lose that in the lighter construction, and I think it's a shape that works best as a chargy-crud buster. They're not an especially great true pow ski, and I don't really care about how a touring ski works in cut up, heavily tracked pow, which is where the Bodacious shines the brightest. My two cents anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XavierD

a 186 ZeroG 118 in the bodacious shape and rocker profile would be pretty fucking awesome

---

Goddamn yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds!

Wasatchback, is there any talk of a Zero G ski based on the Rustler 11?

---

Yup. Some were made a few years ago when Rustler first came out where the metal DRT piece was replaced with Carbon. They weren't different enough to justify it. However it's still in discussion and you will most likely see something in the future. Not 100% sure when.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Yup. Some were made a few years ago when Rustler first came out where the metal DRT piece was replaced with Carbon. They weren't different enough to justify it. However it's still in discussion and you will most likely see something in the future. Not 100% sure when.

---

Tell them Austrian nerds to figure out a 1600g 186 bodacious shape with a hair more tip splay. Get some more money out of the mold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

They weren't different enough to justify it.

---

Do you mean the weight savings weren't enough?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

They weren't different enough to justify it.

---

Do you mean the weight savings weren't enough?

Today I got on my Rustler11 180s for the first time this season. Also a first - I did not swap skis. R11s are just so amazing. It is like they were made specifically for the resort/terrain/snow that I rode today. Super dependable on groomers - even on pure ice, flickable and floats tolerably well. And the 2021 colorway is even looking good, even if i still like/prefer my old green ones. 100% cold, dead hands status.

I put in over 100 days on the OG Cochise and at times regretted selling them, but yeah, the tip dive in soft snow was a problem. This new version sounds intriguing for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasatchback

Yup. Some were made a few years ago when Rustler first came out where the metal DRT piece was replaced with Carbon. They weren't different enough to justify it. However it's still in discussion and you will most likely see something in the future. Not 100% sure when.

---

Is there a market for 115-125 waist light touring skis though? Volkl killed the V-werks BMT 122 due to no one buying it (except people grabbing them super cheap on close-out).