What's Blizzard up to?

[Gweilo]

Euros be like, 15C, let’s ski as fast as we can on heavy metal.

Yankees be like, 15C, is that French for this?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C5Tsy...E5YjZlMncxdDhw

[emoji2957]

Shit googles but R10 did just fine [emoji1305]




Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

[Tony911]

Just spent a couple days with a Anomoly 88 and 94.

Definately not replacements for Brahma and Bonafide, which can be good or bad depending on your outlook.

Didnt ski much on the 94, just didnt do anything for me, seemed similar to a Enforcer 100, sturdy but boring. I have a new Enforcer 99 in this size range and its my new favourite ski.

I really liked the 88 but wouldnt replace my Brahma with one. The 88 is a lot easier to ski, more nimble, can be skied at a slower speed and still be fun. I skied a 182 and I ski the Brahma in a 183. It definately skis short, in fact when I measured it has 9cm less running surface. I think it will be a great ski for a lot more people. I havent tried a 188, that may make them more stable at speed. Maybe for smaller skiers they will be strong enough, Im 6'1 200 pounds. I could see buying this to ski with kids or family (if they skied slower than me but they dont). I think if these get the write-ups they deserve, Blizzard will sell a lot of these.

[gregL]

Just spent a couple days with a Anomoly 88 and 94.

Definately not replacements for Brahma and Bonafide, which can be good or bad depending on your outlook.

Didnt ski much on the 94, just didnt do anything for me, seemed similar to a Enforcer 100, sturdy but boring. I have a new Enforcer 99 in this size range and its my new favourite ski.

I really liked the 88 but wouldnt replace my Brahma with one. The 88 is a lot easier to ski, more nimble, can be skied at a slower speed and still be fun. I skied a 182 and I ski the Brahma in a 183. It definately skis short, in fact when I measured it has 9cm less running surface. I think it will be a great ski for a lot more people. I havent tried a 188, that may make them more stable at speed. Maybe for smaller skiers they will be strong enough, Im 6'1 200 pounds. I could see buying this to ski with kids or family (if they skied slower than me but they dont). I think if these get the write-ups they deserve, Blizzard will sell a lot of these.

Personally I think the 84 and 102 are the best skis in the Anomaly line, and I added the 102 to my quiver. I'm on the 182 @ 170-ish lbs. and mounted on rec - seems like you would do well to go up in size . . .

[Tony911]

[QUOTE=gregL;7065771]Personally I think the 84 and 102 are the best skis in the Anomaly line, and I added the 102 to my quiver. I'm on the 182 @ 170-ish lbs. and mounted on rec - seems like you would do well to go up in size . . .[/QUOTE

Didn't have a 188 to try but would have like to on the 88.
Im skiing mostly on a 185 Enforcer 99 as a daily ski and love it,

[forumskier]

How do Brahma 88s handle firmer off piste and funky firm/refrozen moguls?

Some of the reviews say they are mostly for on-piste, but that was also said about Head Monster 98s which I loved off piste. Is 88 not enough? I always thought Brahmas were supposed to be good for weird firm bumps under strong technique, and that was before Blizzard "neutered" them over the past decade. They seem a bit looser now. I haven't skied anything under 100mm in a long time, I'm lost a bit.

Should I stick to looking for Bonafide 97s or M6 Mantra (harder to find at the price I want to pay), should I go wider?

[SchralphMacchio]

I settled on Enforcer 94 for that firm off piste skiing. After I looked at the Kendo, Brahma, and Enforcer side by side in a shop I saw that the Enforcer had the most tip and tail rocker, which may or may not be a desirable feature to you; for me I knew it was going to be help hunting for turns off piste in low elevation variable garbage PNW conditions that could be anything from dust on crust to crust-softening-into-schmoo to refrozen marbles and chickenheads on top of railroad tracks. I also did demo the 2023 Brahma in bad PNW snow and I found it pretty decent off piste, but off piste I prefer the core feel of the Enforcer. Interestingly enough when I did the demo of the Brahma I also tried the 2023 E94 that day and did not get along with the aggressive E94 tune on piste, and I felt that I much preferred the longer turn radius of the Brahma that was more driveable and less automatic - but when I later bought my 2024 E94 the factory tune had much better detuning and was more versatile in turn shapes than the one I demoed, despite what I believe to be identical construction. Go figure.

My shop was sold out of E88 in my size which is what drove me to the E94. E94 is also the skinniest ski that I own for regular inbounds use, and I’m totally fine with that despite initially looking for an 88. I can’t comment on the E88/E89/E93 as I have not tried those skis yet, nor have I tried the Anomaly 88 that replaces the B88 and I think may have a touch more tail rise than the outgoing B88. The other thing is that Enforcer is -9 cm mount point (and in hindsight I would have preferred mounting it at -8) where the Anomaly is -10.5 mount point. So I’d probably say pick your desired mount point and then grab the ski to match, as the Kendo, outgoing Brahma, and Enforcer all seem equally loved and I have yet to hear a truly disappointing review of the Anomaly … but the Enforcer will likely be the easiest to break loose of the bunch and also more adept in soft variable on firm, given the extended tip and tail taper of that ski design. And just because it’s got the most tip and tail rocker and taper of the bunch doesn’t mean it’s incapable on pure firm snow - it definitely holds its own on rock solid high water content crust, on or off piste, even if not totally up to the level of the Brahma. With freshly tuned edges, I cannot at all find the speed limit of my 179cm skis on bulletproof snow at my weight of 64 kg / 140 lbs.

I’m kind of hoping the segmented (instead of continuous) metal topsheet makes its way into the Enforcer line at some point, seems like it’s working well for the new Rustler series and Anomaly series.

[forumskier]

I'm coming to the Brahmas because I also need on-piste skis. Was hoping they could play two roles.

I could not get comfortable with Enforcer 93s off piste. They were damp and heavy and were so close, but there was a hinge point or something in the tip that just did not work with my biomechanics. I've felt more comfortable at speed on softer noodle skis, but ones that had consistent flex patterns.

I haven't tried an Enforcer in a while though, the new ones could be different flex and better for me.

Currently using M4 Mantras as my firm bump skis. Was thinking about replacing with M6 Mantras, but I don't love Volkls 3D radius. 3D is great in bumps, but has hooked up on me on the Katana 108s when I'm trying to ski uber fast and straight on groomers or smoother snow.

I would prefer the predictable, SkiEssentials calls "one-dimensional", sidecut of Brahma/Bonafide. It also seems like the longest sizes can still ski pretty straight without hooking up.

Want Bonafide 97s, but can find much more and better deals on Brahma 88s, and thought maybe they where the choice for moguls and piste.

[carlh]

What size b97s? I’m considering flipping mine (189) for rc85s since I picked up fl105s last winter.

I'm coming to the Brahmas because I also need on-piste skis. Was hoping they could play two roles.

I could not get comfortable with Enforcer 93s off piste. They were damp and heavy and were so close, but there was a hinge point or something in the tip that just did not work with my biomechanics. I've felt more comfortable at speed on softer noodle skis, but ones that had consistent flex patterns.

I haven't tried an Enforcer in a while though, the new ones could be different flex and better for me.

Currently using M4 Mantras as my firm bump skis. Was thinking about replacing with M6 Mantras, but I don't love Volkls 3D radius. 3D is great in bumps, but has hooked up on me on the Katana 108s when I'm trying to ski uber fast and straight on groomers or smoother snow.

I would prefer the predictable, SkiEssentials calls "one-dimensional", sidecut of Brahma/Bonafide. It also seems like the longest sizes can still ski pretty straight without hooking up.

Want Bonafide 97s, but can find much more and better deals on Brahma 88s, and thought maybe they where the choice for moguls and piste.

[forumskier]

189s, but I'm going back to the drawing board to figure out which skis actually gonna be a true mogul masher.

[Jupski]

Did Blizzard get rid of the Hustle ski line? Not seeing them on their site.

[kid-kapow]

Did Blizzard get rid of the Hustle ski line? Not seeing them on their site.

yeah, probably - I think that they sold extremely poorly.

[SoVT Joey]

I’m still looking for a pair of the hustle 11s to try out. Heavier then the rustler is so interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FlimFlamvanHam]

How do Brahma 88s handle firmer off piste and funky firm/refrozen moguls?

Some of the reviews say they are mostly for on-piste, but that was also said about Head Monster 98s which I loved off piste. Is 88 not enough? I always thought Brahmas were supposed to be good for weird firm bumps under strong technique, and that was before Blizzard "neutered" them over the past decade. They seem a bit looser now. I haven't skied anything under 100mm in a long time, I'm lost a bit.

Should I stick to looking for Bonafide 97s or M6 Mantra (harder to find at the price I want to pay), should I go wider?

I actually love the Brahma for those very conditions and it rips on groomers if you do. Basically the deeper the snow gets the less appealing they become. I owned Monster 98's, 88's, and 83's. They were all serviceable in bumps but the Brahma is much better for me, just because that tip flexes far softer than a Monster tip. I also own the most recent Kendo shape/layup: Brahma is better in bumps. The better the snow, the better the Kendo becomes.

But you like an M4 in bumps...I guess the full rocker makes it easier? If you like the tip to tail round, consistent flex of the Monster 98, then Kendo, Mantra etc flex very similarly just softer.

I don't think anyone who is on Brahmas who can actually ski would ever say they feel they are not enough ski, especially for what they are (an all mtn groomer biased 88). Also, the Brahma's radius is def longer than what is printed on the tails FWIW.

wider is for fags.

[Gweilo]

I actually love the Brahma for those very conditions and it rips on groomers if you do. Basically the deeper the snow gets the less appealing they become. I owned Monster 98's, 88's, and 83's. They were all serviceable in bumps but the Brahma is much better for me, just because that tip flexes far softer than a Monster tip. I also own the most recent Kendo shape/layup: Brahma is better in bumps. The better the snow, the better the Kendo becomes.

But you like an M4 in bumps...I guess the full rocker makes it easier? If you like the tip to tail round, consistent flex of the Monster 98, then Kendo, Mantra etc flex very similarly just softer.

I don't think anyone who is on Brahmas who can actually ski would ever say they feel they are not enough ski, especially for what they are (an all mtn groomer biased 88). Also, the Brahma's radius is def longer than what is printed on the tails FWIW.

wider is for fags.

Spot on, 88 « black » Brahmas in 187 are such a great ride !


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

[Flippo]

yeah, probably - I think that they sold extremely poorly.

They really missed their target with the Hustle and the Rustler redesign. I was hoping for a heavier rustler to differentiate it from the hustle and they made it lighter…

[skibrd]

Thought the new Rustlers were good skis?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

They really missed their target with the Hustle and the Rustler redesign. I was hoping for a heavier rustler to differentiate it from the hustle and they made it lighter…

The dud was the Hustle, not the redesigned Rustler. The latter is inline with where the meat of the market is and they are easy to ski skis that ski very well across most conditions that can be used by novice skiers all the way to experts. The new R9 was not for me, but the new R11 is a fantastic ski imho. Sure, it would be even better in variable if it was a bit heavier, but it is kinda hard to fault the decision to make them a bit lighter in a market were light freeride ( 50/50 skis) skis are all the rage.

I have not skied the R11s a ton (unlike the old version), but the new version seems to be an improvement across most metrics compared to the old. I happily recommend them to whoever - it is a great ski.

[J. Barron DeJong]

I’m still looking for a pair of the hustle 11s to try out. Heavier then the rustler is so interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was looking for the same thing and ended up getting Optic 114s to replace my first year Rustler 11’s late last season. Very similar shape, significantly heavier. No regrets on that so far.

[kc_7777]

I was looking for the same thing and ended up getting Optic 114s to replace my first year Rustler 11’s late last season. Very similar shape, significantly heavier. No regrets on that so far.

I owned 2 pairs of Rustler 11’s (2019 green and 2021 orange ones) and then replaced them with the Line Optic 114. Similar experience to Barron….Optic 114 is like a heavier, damper R11.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[muted reborn]

I owned 2 pairs of Rustler 11’s (2019 green and 2021 orange ones) and then replaced them with the Line Optic 114. Similar experience to Barron….Optic 114 is like a heavier, damper R11.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The old Rustler 192 were slightly heavier/damper versions of the exact ski in the 188. What was the length of your old Rustlers?

[J. Barron DeJong]

The old Rustler 192 were slightly heavier/damper versions of the exact ski in the 188. What was the length of your old Rustlers?

You didn’t ask me, but I’ll answer too:

My Rustlers were 188. New Optics are 186.

I’ve seen that description of the 192s before. I never skied them personally, but if you look at measurements on Sooth Ski the 192s seem like what you’d expect for a normal size progression with regards to flex and weight. Nothing really stands out there.

[Flippo]

The dud was the Hustle, not the redesigned Rustler. The latter is inline with where the meat of the market is and they are easy to ski skis that ski very well across most conditions that can be used by novice skiers all the way to experts. The new R9 was not for me, but the new R11 is a fantastic ski imho. Sure, it would be even better in variable if it was a bit heavier, but it is kinda hard to fault the decision to make them a bit lighter in a market were light freeride ( 50/50 skis) skis are all the rage.

I have not skied the R11s a ton (unlike the old version), but the new version seems to be an improvement across most metrics compared to the old. I happily recommend them to whoever - it is a great ski.

I thought that their goal was to market the hustle as the 50/50 playful skis. This would have allowed to have a slightly heavier R9 or R10 (2000-2100 instead of 1800). I was interested in the new R10 (I used to like the old R9) until I saw the weight reduction and blister’s flash review mentioning the reduced dampness.

Nordica did a much better job at differentiating the enforcer and the unleashed.

[muted reborn]

if you look at measurements on Sooth Ski the 192s seem like what you’d expect for a normal size progression with regards to flex and weight. Nothing really stands out there.

I disagree, I skied the 188 and was lukewarm about the ski, sold them, then I bought the 192 and thought it was considerably different, more stable with no annoying tip dive, and I loved them.

[Bandit Man]

Thought the new Rustlers were good skis?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The new Rustlers are solid skis. Only tried the 10 and 11, but I bought the 10 and will likely use it as my DD next year. The 11 is a bit more soft snow focused than the previous version (looser in deep snow and not as precise on firm groomers) but still very good for a resort ski. Curious to try the new R9.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[forumskier]

I actually love the Brahma for those very conditions and it rips on groomers if you do. Basically the deeper the snow gets the less appealing they become. I owned Monster 98's, 88's, and 83's. They were all serviceable in bumps but the Brahma is much better for me, just because that tip flexes far softer than a Monster tip. I also own the most recent Kendo shape/layup: Brahma is better in bumps. The better the snow, the better the Kendo becomes.

But you like an M4 in bumps...I guess the full rocker makes it easier? If you like the tip to tail round, consistent flex of the Monster 98, then Kendo, Mantra etc flex very similarly just softer.

I don't think anyone who is on Brahmas who can actually ski would ever say they feel they are not enough ski, especially for what they are (an all mtn groomer biased 88). Also, the Brahma's radius is def longer than what is printed on the tails FWIW.

wider is for fags.

Missed out on the Brahma deal, but still looking at some Bonafide 97s. Probably done buying gear til 2025 tho, gotta consolidate what I got.

I do prefer a consistent flex throughout, and sometimes stiff tail/soft tip skis mess with me, but have had good luck with Blizzards with this type of flex.

The full rocker M4s make bumps so easy because they are so loose. Steep, tight, bumped out chutes are an absolute breeze on them. I ski a lot bases flat, and they are absolute grease balls bases flat tho. I prefer Katana 108s unless bumps/tight.