Quick review: head kore 105

[Climber Joe]

So I took these out on a hard snow day. Two weeks of warm followed by a deep freeze. On top was a little bit of soft. Perfect conditions to test a ski on.

First off these skis are light. Given the weight they are pretty stiff and damp. However I felt that they transmitted more energy from snow to skeleton, but it was very hard out.

The profile, flex, and turning radius was pretty versatile in my opinion. I didn't feel like the skis compromised a ton to weigh so little.

In my personal opinion they would make a superb soft snow specific ski, especially for a burlier touring option that is still feathery. I don't think they are bad on firm conditions, but they are lacking compared to something like a bodacious.

I won't be getting a pair, but I would ski them if I had them.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I demoed these too. 105 in 189 length. They're great in smooth consistent soft snow. I didn't like them in chunky crud at all. They deflect way to easily for me and I don't know if it was the mount position or they have soft shovels but they wouldn't support an aggressive forward stance skiing steep chunky crud and chalk. They felt like the front of the ski was just folding up. I think they'd be great as a touring ski with a tech binding on them. Not a daily driver for the resort for sure.

[TAFKALVS]

I demoed these too. 105 in 189 length. They're great in smooth consistent soft snow. I didn't like them in chunky crud at all. They deflect way to easily for me and I don't know if it was the mount position or they have soft shovels but they wouldn't support an aggressive forward stance skiing steep chunky crud and chalk. They felt like the front of the ski was just folding up. I think they'd be great as a touring ski with a tech binding on them. Not a daily driver for the resort for sure.

Joe is much smaller and lighter than either of us, I'm not surprised he had a different impression. Personally I didn't find them as unstable as you have been saying they are.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Joe is much smaller and lighter than either of us, I'm not surprised he had a different impression. Personally I didn't find them as unstable as you have been saying they are.

Did you ski them down No Name and Nertz that day? They were great on the skied out groomers and smoother snow I could find, nice and damp feeling but on really chunky, punchy crud and chalk they weren't confidence inspiring. I skied the same runs immediately after on a Monster 88 and it was way better. I had been skiing the same stuff all morning on my Invictus and those runs were fun.

I don't think what I posted isn't much of a difference that Joe did. Even Deano said they're noticeably less stable than something in the Monster line. He and Bryce both agreed when I said they'd make a better touring ski than an inbounds ski. I don't know, maybe there's something I'm missing that you're feeling on the ski.

[ghettostyle]

I have a friend that mounted dynafits on Kore 105s - he's very happy with the setup, though they were free

[Climber Joe]

Joe is much smaller and lighter than either of us, I'm not surprised he had a different impression. Personally I didn't find them as unstable as you have been saying they are.

I agree with them feeling jittery and getting bounced around a ton. They are stiff enough to send bumps to my skull, but not burly enough to charge. It's a weird feel.

I think aside from uber fresh and touring these are not super great. Blister seems to think the fat ones in the long length were super stiff though. Maybe they ski different?

[mr_pretzel]

I got to try these today in the 189 and though they were pretty great.
They definitely chatter a bunch when it gets variable but I didnt really feel like it compromised anything( im only 170lbs). Very energetic skis, easy to smear and makes lots of different turn shapes.

I kinda want a pair

[Nevada29er]

I demoed these in 189 a few weeks ago. My consensus, as someone else said, was they would make a great burly touring setup with a kingpin. While they are certainly passable for inbounds skiing, the Monster 108 was so much more damp and stable, it would be my easy inbounds choice.

I really don't get the whole push for light inbounds skis. Maybe for somewhere with a lot of sidestepping, or uphill traverses.

[oltrepiave]

so i'm looking to replace some first-gen Tracer 108 in the 188 length and found a good deal for a pair of 189 (used).

I'd use them for touring only. Hawx Ultra XTD, MTNs. I live in the Alps. Weight and specs seem promising.

What kinda confuses me is the actual versatility. Tip taper looks impressingly playful, tip flex is said to be quite forgiving. Still consensus on overall flex, as well as rec. mount point, makes it sound like a very directional ski.

Last thing I want is a harsh, pingy directional ski but it does seem like it's forgiving and versatile enough. Would I be able to get some more playfulness out of it with (my own input but also) moving the mount point forward?

[CallMeAl]

I messed around with mount points on this ski and found moving it forward just made it awkward. It really is just a directional ski that is not playful by 2024’s standards.

Howerver, the Kore 111 is grossly underrated and has/supports a much more upright/playful stance.