2018 Bonafide still stable?

[Gaperious Basterd]

I'm just wondering if the 2018 Bonafide is still as stable as the 2012-2014 model?

I skied my '14 Bonafides for the first time on a real mountain, and was blown away by the stability. They are just so STABLE, on Amy surface. There were landings and runouts that would have created chatter and imbalance on my Brahma, but was great on the Bonafide. They gave me confidence to ski everything open (named or not) at JHMR without thinking twice because they are that stable.

They are also fun, and I think the best ski I have ever ridden on (yeah; I'm late to the party on this one). The 180 is just maneuverable enough for me at 5'7" and 160 lbs to go through tighter trees (though super-tight evergreens forget it). It is true they aren't the very best at super-short turns in deep snow, but the strengths make up for that.

I googled the topic and mostly came across reviews either directly or indirectly linked to a retailer. Not saying anything about that, but they're not gonna bash a ski they will be selling.

I just don't know how at 18m turn radius, the carbon, the shovel, and the reduced tip early rise how it could be anywhere as stable and damp as the old model.

[toast2266]

I spent some time on the 2018 Bonafide. This comes with the caveat that I haven't skied the 2012-2014 Bonafide, but the 2013 Cochise is my daily driver.

I'd say the 2018 Bonafide is as stable (probably even a bit more stable) than my Cochises. I got to ski a bunch of the 2018 skis at a demo and the Bonafides were, by a fairly significant margin, the most damp and stable ski I got on. High speed, long sweeping turns through chunky, chopped up snow were ridiculously smooth on the Bonafides. I tend to dislike a lot of skis that have a tighter sidecut radius, but I didn't notice it to be an issue on the Bonafides (and that was with fairly sharp, fresh edges).

Like you said, they're a bit more work at lower speeds and in tighter spots, but I didn't find them to be unmanageable or difficult.

For reference, I'm 5'9", 160lbs, and was on the 187. If I were going to buy one, I'd probably go with the 180 unless I lived in a place that allowed for max speed all the time.

[Gaperious Basterd]

Thanks for the reply.

I look forward to demoing these sometime.

Based on the ski shop informational write-ups on the rationale of the new construction, I'm surprised to learn the '18 model is actually slightly HEAVIER than previous models.

While I happened to really like the '14 Bonafide like I said in OP, I find it fishy that they claim they're making it so much more accessible to lower-level skiers.

So not concerning what experience I would have on the ski, raising the weight total weight (even with the modest carbon in tip and tail) and taking off 3 m of TR isn't going to suddenly make this a low-speed-friendly and playful ski.

LOL, and I suppose that contradicts my OP thought that it might not be as stable (though that was before I took a look at ski weight charts, bc I was just under the assumption they removed a bunch of weight when they in fact added some).

Going on a tangent, if the Bonafide is as stable as it gets in the 98/100mm width group, then all I can say is that there must be a crap-ton of skis out there that are straight-up not very stable at all.

[m07d2c]

i just got these setup and they are just a stable as 2017. I am advance skier, 55, 5'10, 170 and slowing down so went with the 173s. Probably should have gone with 180s. The biggest difference is the graphic, which is better in my opinion. Yes, they are a heavy ski, but this is what makes them great for skiing places like Mt Hood. I find them to be more fun on the steeps and thrashed moguls, but in general they still rip and are a very stable ski.

[skibrd]

Only ski more stable then the 187 Bonafide (I skied both variations over the past 4 years) in the 95-100mm under foot category is the Kastle MX 98. The MX98 is a tank compared to the Bonafide, just be warned, the Kastle is way more demanding of a ski, but rewards a strong skier. After 10 days on them, I'm just starting to trust them in tight places around Jackson.

[Gaperious Basterd]

After four days at Tahoe, I can say the 2014 Bonafide is the best ski ever made.

I should probably be on the 173 given my size.

In high-consequence lines where you can't fall, however, I wonder if the 173 would still provide the stability I need.

The tail--while you need to keep off of it, just forget it--does immediately let you know what's up if you get aft, BUT HOLDS YOU UP AMD GIVES YOU YHE CHANCE TO GET FOREWARD AGAIN INSTEAD OF GIVING OUT OR SENDING YOU FOR A RIDE.

I'm thinking maybe the 173's shorter and (softer?) tail might not hold up to the backseat mistakes that occasionally pop up.

[Gaperious Basterd]

Do the '16 through '17 models with carbon in tips and tails have a NOTICEABLY reduced swing weight?

Just asking b/c total weight is not down and when skiing the overall ease of use cannot be changed by only redistributing a little weight in the tips and tails

[FlimFlamvanHam]

Only ski more stable then the 187 Bonafide (I skied both variations over the past 4 years) in the 95-100mm under foot category is the Kastle MX 98. The MX98 is a tank compared to the Bonafide, just be warned, the Kastle is way more demanding of a ski, but rewards a strong skier. After 10 days on them, I'm just starting to trust them in tight places around Jackson.

Or Head Monster 98

[gregorys]

So, off-topic, I guess - but Kastle's are IMO incredible. [A +1 to the Kastle rec, above.]

I've got a pair of FX94's and had a pair of Fx104's [both w/ metal]
I sold the 104's to a friend - and nearly wish I hadn't. Kept the 94's and found a second pair for a friend also.

I got them for a song. [Yeah, *really* insane cheap, esp for Kastle's]
I'd heard good things about them, but was completely blown away by them. Comparing them to the Mantra [which is the Volkl equivalent of the Bonafide] I much prefer the Kastles - more smooth, less planky. Totally great in the NW chop. And, IMO, not that demanding.

[skibrd]

I didn't really like the Mantra, they felt vague and not responsive, but I did try them after I had skied the Bonafides for 3.5 seasons and half a season on the Kastle MX 98.

I do love my Kastles, but they are so much ski and the more I read about the 2018 Bonafide, I wonder if they will slot in between the 194 MX 98 and the 2016-2017 187 Bonafides. The reason I replaced the 16/17 Bonafides was I got to the point where they felt squirly at speed, not confident carving going Mach loony, and just not as stable as they did when they were new. I looked for something a little longer, stiffer, and would hold an edge better at higher speeds, hence getting the MX 98s. The mistake I made was forgetting that what I gained in high speed groomer experience, I was give up in maneuverability in tight, steep spots.

I think I'm going to try to get on a pair of 16/17 and 17/18 187 Bonafides (as well as my Kastles) this fall and A/B them to see how I feel on all three. I did spend a lot of time in trees, steep lines, and in powder on my Bonafides, places which I just don't feel I can take the Kastles.

[schindlerpiste]

Do yourself a favor. Forget the Bonafides. Go to powder7 and buy one of their few remaining pair of MX98. When the original Bones came out, I had a 2 year old pair of MX98. I was skiing with a guy on 187 Bones who happened to have the same boot size as me. We traded skis for two runs. We both agreed that there really is no comparison. Bones actually like noodles compared to MX98. In fact, I just bought my second pair at the end of this season.

In this category, from what I have skied I would rate as follows for big turns, dampness and stability
MX98 by a mile
Enforcer
Bones
Mantra.

[Shredhead]

The 184 MX98 is much more manageable than the 194.

[Gaperious Basterd]

If I go the Kastle route, I can downsize? Even with their more mainstream (now) FX lineup?

In the bonafide a 180 was probably the right size for me.

It is ironic, but since I’m not a pro skier, LONGER skis are actually EASIER to ride on (balance).

Powder7 has said lineups in the 173 size. I should probably pass.

[skibrd]

You can downsize in the Kastle MX 98s because they have 0 rocker. The 174 MX98 is probably comparable to the 180 Bonafide.

I got back on 187 Bonafides this year and after 2 runs got my MX98s our and haven’t looked back. They are just a superior ski in all conditions. Well the Bones handle deep pow (more then 12 inches) better, but if you have your MX98s out when it’s that deep, you made a mistake.

[cinnepa]

Or Head Monster 98

tru dat.

[N-Da-Bunka]

I am Gold/Silver level NASTAR racer that has been racing with my teen-aged son for the last 5 seasons. I have been recreational skiing for 52 years (started when I was 3). I used to LOVE moguls and still enjoy them here & there when they aren't over the height of my waist. I have always been an aggressive skier hunting down blacks at the tougher resorts around the globe (Crested Butte is my favorite in CO & Saalbach Hinterglem in Austria).

I weigh a mostly "athletic" 215 lbs and stand 5'10" tall and my race binding settings can be anywhere from an 8 on my Marker 20's on 165cm Nordica Dobermanns for Slalom to 10 on my 175cm Rossi Hero Master's with Look Axial3 150 MFX's so that will give you an idea of my current weekend sticks.

I am getting tired of skiing "Fun" days through powder, crud and trees on the racers so I am in search of a solid all-mountain ski and have narrowed it down to either the Blizzard Bonafide or the Nordica Enforcer 100. I have already picked up the Marker Duke binding so that is what will go onto the target

Just got back from Banff & Lake Louise and while I was able to work the narrow-waisted racers through the pow and trees as long as I kept them tight and functioning as a mono platform (lots of experience doing this on 198cm straight skis in the past so now finding I have to do the same with racers in powder). Just seeing others easily skiing pow & crud on the new tech and figure it's about time I get a pair myself.

When searching on weight, height and ski style (aggressive/expert) most are directing me to the 185cm length. I am trying to decide between the Nordica ($520)vs. the Bonafide ($370).

[nyskirat]

Why the duke...are you planning on doing any touring?



TBH you can't go wrong with either. Really popular skis.

[skibrd]

I am Gold/Silver level NASTAR racer that has been racing with my teen-aged son for the last 5 seasons. I have been recreational skiing for 52 years (started when I was 3). I used to LOVE moguls and still enjoy them here & there when they aren't over the height of my waist. I have always been an aggressive skier hunting down blacks at the tougher resorts around the globe (Crested Butte is my favorite in CO & Saalbach Hinterglem in Austria).

I weigh a mostly "athletic" 215 lbs and stand 5'10" tall and my race binding settings can be anywhere from an 8 on my Marker 20's on 165cm Nordica Dobermanns for Slalom to 10 on my 175cm Rossi Hero Master's with Look Axial3 150 MFX's so that will give you an idea of my current weekend sticks.

I am getting tired of skiing "Fun" days through powder, crud and trees on the racers so I am in search of a solid all-mountain ski and have narrowed it down to either the Blizzard Bonafide or the Nordica Enforcer 100. I have already picked up the Marker Duke binding so that is what will go onto the target

Just got back from Banff & Lake Louise and while I was able to work the narrow-waisted racers through the pow and trees as long as I kept them tight and functioning as a mono platform (lots of experience doing this on 198cm straight skis in the past so now finding I have to do the same with racers in powder). Just seeing others easily skiing pow & crud on the new tech and figure it's about time I get a pair myself.

When searching on weight, height and ski style (aggressive/expert) most are directing me to the 185cm length. I am trying to decide between the Nordica ($520)vs. the Bonafide ($320).

184 cm Kastle MX 98 solves all your issues

[sruffian]

When searching on weight, height and ski style (aggressive/expert) most are directing me to the 185cm length. I am trying to decide between the Nordica ($520)vs. the Bonafide ($320).

I wouldn't go shorter than 185 and I only weigh 185ish lbs

Nyskirat is right - unless you're planning to tour, which your post did not indicate, dukes suck. They are a bulky, heavy, clumsy binding. fwiw they're even worse at touring...

[N-Da-Bunka]

184 cm Kastle MX 98 solves all your issues

I can see that there are a number of people here that think that the Kastle's "hung the moon" but as originally stated I am only considering the two options I outlined (Bonafides or the Enforcers). Quotes from this and other threads...

...I do hear what you're saying on the running length and camber profile of the MX's. Not for everyone. Not for powder. Not versatile.

Well the Bones handle deep pow (more then 12 inches) better, but if you have your MX98s out when it’s that deep, you made a mistake.

If the MX98's are stiffer, that is the OPPOSITE of my objective as I already have stiff GS skis so if I want to run on-piste at 60MPH, I'll ride my Rossi Master GS skis. The Bones are "softer" than the MX98s but they are stiffer than the Enforcers so if you view my question that way you will may get a better understanding of my objective. I am searching for more of an "all-mountain" ski that can handle the pow & crud better than the 65mm underfoot race skis.

[N-Da-Bunka]

I wouldn't go shorter than 185 and I only weigh 185ish lbs

Nyskirat is right - unless you're planning to tour, which your post did not indicate, dukes suck. They are a bulky, heavy, clumsy binding. fwiw they're even worse at touring...

I previously posted an extended summary of why I picked up the Dukes that this site delayed saying it was "being reviewed for content" but then it never showed up so I'll try to summarize again.

Bulky - I like a raised design as that will replicate the way my existing skis are configured with Race plates so I actually viewed the added height as a positive.

Weight non-issue (for me) - I don't think that the additional .50 lbs weight per foot, underfoot would be a factor as these are already lighter than my race skis.

Deal (Filet for the price of a Big Mac) - I bought the Dukes for the street price of a pair of Jesters.

Other Options - I could likely return them before I mount them if any of the above expectations are identified as unfounded.

[Meadow Skipper]

Where you getting Bonafides for $320?

[N-Da-Bunka]

Where you getting Bonafides for $320?

My apologies. That was a typo I corrected. I ordered them from Corbetts on the 8th for $370 after monetary exchange differences.

[skibrd]

I understand what you are saying and I went through the same process. I had Rossi GS skis, Bonafides and fat pow skis. The Kastles are the best option as an ‘all-mountain’ Ski for pow and crud. The Bonafides will get soft if you ski them hard, then will lose their ability to handle anything other then pow and smooth fresh groomers. Ive only got a day on the Enforcers and I don’t get why they are rated so high. They are wonky, don’t hold an edge worth a dam and get deflected off crap.

Yes the Kastles will do 60 on edge, but they also will handle up to 12 in of pow and crud will disappear in front of you. If you can actually drive a ski, it’s the most versatile ski on the 951-100 under foot range

[N-Da-Bunka]

I understand what you are saying and I went through the same process. I had Rossi GS skis, Bonafides and fat pow skis. The Kastles are the best option as an ‘all-mountain’ Ski for pow and crud. The Bonafides will get soft if you ski them hard, then will lose their ability to handle anything other then pow and smooth fresh groomers. I've only got a day on the Enforcers and I don’t get why they are rated so high. They are wonky, don’t hold an edge worth a dam and get deflected off crap.

Yes the Kastles will do 60 on edge, but they also will handle up to 12 in of pow and crud will disappear in front of you. If you can actually drive a ski, it’s the most versatile ski on the 951-100 under foot range

THANKS!
Best constructive reply by far in this thread. As you may have seen I did go ahead and buy the Bones so we will see how that goes. Ski season is coming to an abrupt end here in the southeast. SnowShoe got some fresh over the weekend but it looks like rain/snow mix or just plain rain for the next 10 days

You say the Bones are good "up to 12-inches of powder" so I assume you ski something else if it's deeper than that but I'll need to ski the Bones should I get into that during the few trips planned for next year so when I say "all mountain" I really mean 50% piste crud & 50% off-piste powder up to 4 feet deep. It's been 6+ years since I've had an opportunity to ski anything deeper than knee deep as I live in the southeast but do travel the world for business and sometimes skiing. Really just looking for something that is a LOT LESS work in the crud than the race skis currently are

I could always ski the Bones a time of two & then sell them on fleabay 1/2 way through the '18/'19 season if they turn out to be too soft.