Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    370

    Which Rustler 11 length?

    End of season means ski sales. Looking to pick up the rustler 11. I'm 6' and 220 lbs. Have always reached for the longest in whatever. I have the cochise 192. Also the bodacious 196. Looking to ease up my powder day board, being a 56 y.o. non dentist. Go for the 192 or shorten down to the 188?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,444
    192s are bit wider, while still probably being plenty accesible due to the softer tips/tails on all Rustler11s. So if you like longer skis, want more float for powder days and you are a good skier that weigh 220lbs, why go shorter on such an accessible yet capable ski as the Rustler11? Why not just keep the winning formula?

    I am small/light and use the 180s, so can't speak from trying 188s or 192s, or from being big and powerful. The 180s at least are a killer blend of being accessible, yet plenty able to go fast.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,907
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    192s are bit wider, while still probably being plenty accesible due to the softer tips/tails on all Rustler11s. So if you like longer skis, want more float for powder days and you are a good skier that weigh 220lbs, why go shorter on such an accessible yet capable ski as the Rustler11? Why not just keep the winning formula?

    I am small/light and use the 180s, so can't speak from trying 188s or 192s, or from being big and powerful. The 180s at least are a killer blend of being accessible, yet plenty able to go fast.
    I’d say the same for the 188 at 6’ 165#. It’s not difficult to ski. Definitely rewards shin driving and a forward stance.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    11,205
    Get the 192. It's not a difficult ski. I'm quite a bit smaller than you and got along with the 188 just fine.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    United States of Aburdistan
    Posts
    7,338
    I disliked the 188, and then shortly replaced it with the 192. Big difference. Now I love the ski.

    At 56 though, you might love the 188. But at more than 40# heavier than me, you might love the 192. /nohelp

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,785
    the 192 and 188 are very different beasts even though the length is close. If you ski the 192 cochise definitely get the 192 Rustler.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Fred Pabst View Post
    Go for the 192 or shorten down to the 188?
    I'm 5'8" and 170, older than you, and ski the 188. Get the 192.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    370
    192 it is. Found somemore info on this at about pg 27 of the blizzard thread. I'd like to thank all the enablers on this site for making this happen.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,444
    A quick de-rail since the OP seems well happy - does anybody have time on Rustler 11s and BC Animas and can compare the two real quick?

    I am a bit curious about Animas you see, so any insights would be most appreciated!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,399
    You made the right choice on the 192. Its really easy to ski, especially compared to the 196 Bod and 192 Cochise.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    370
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Rustler 11.jpg 
Views:	159 
Size:	910.7 KB 
ID:	278545

    UPS made the drop Friday, I mounted my own f'n skis Friday night, and skied them Saturday. Got the green on green thing going. Wish I could say the maiden voyage was in pow, but spring slush will have to do. The 192 was definitely the right call. Wow what a ski. Great looking, love the way they hook up, mount point on the line seems to be spot on.

    I got to do a day to day comparison with my cochise 193. Skied those on Friday in the same conditions. The cochise doesn't deflect at all, just crush the spring slush. I wasn't sure if the soft tip on the Rustler would get deflected in that condition. Was quite surprised with the solid feel. Seems the main body of the ski is just stiff enough. I was looking for more of a versatile pow width board, ie crossover ski. I think I found just what I was looking for.

    Connected Plug: Bindings came off Bodacious 196 all black, which are now on the selling block. $350 no bindings used dozen times. I'll ship.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,444
    nice! Nice green game you've got going there too

    For how soft the tips and tails are I agree - R11s sure ski solidly

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    4,201

    Which Rustler 11 length?

    One of the most versatile skis out there. I agree about the Cochise being more stable/less deflection, but I haven’t skied my Cochise since picking up the Rustler 11. I’ll give up a little of the “crush everything” for the added versatility.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,285

    Which Rustler 11 length?

    For the Rustler owners -

    Friend is a great snowboarder. Skied growing up. Switching back to skiing. I’d say he’s intermediate+ right now skills wise.

    6’2 225. Found a good deal on some Rustler 11s 188cm for him.

    Thinking they should be a pretty good 1 ski quiver for a year or two in Tahoe? Little wider than I was looking for, but seem accessible enough at his size and I don’t think he’s planning on zipper lining moguls any time soon.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    660
    They're relatively easy to ski. I'm 5'10, 205 and have the 188's. a strong intermediate skier his size should be able to ski that length, I'd think. They do well enough on groomers to be a single quiver ski. I had about 8 pairs of skis last year ranging from 88 underfoot two sheets of metal 180cm up to 125 underfoot 192cm pow skis, I got rid of everything except my Rustler 11's. They're great skis.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,303

    Which Rustler 11 length?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1477.JPG 
Views:	156 
Size:	227.0 KB 
ID:	306979

    May as well post these here too. New 2019 180cm @ -6 (+2cm) with Pivots. Will try these at Whistler tomorrow! 5’7”, 165lbs
    _________________________________________________
    I love big dumps.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    3,018
    Looking at getting a pair. I'm 5'11'', 195 lbs. I'm an ok skier, but not a super charger ex racer dude.

    I've never skied anything longer than 187 Liberty Origin 106s which are pretty soft.

    I'm looking for a daily driver at Targhee that I'll do some side country laps with as well.

    My initial thought was go 188 since I value easier to turn skis, but I've read a couple reviews where people talk about not liking the 188s as much as 192s and them being very different skis. How do they ski different, other than the length?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    902
    I’d probably recommend the 188 for you especially if you’re going to do some touring on it. 192 is great for bigger guys that might prefer the “chargier” feel or are coming off of longer skis. 188 is no noodle but from what you’ve described of your size/style, it should be ideal.

    192 is wider and has a stiffer overall construction than the 188. The 188 in turn is also wider and has a stiffer construction than the 180. 180/172/164 are all relatively similar. They’re very much designed differently by size.

    Almost all the Blizzard athletes that ski the R11 ski the 188.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    3,018
    Quote Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post
    I’d probably recommend the 188 for you especially if you’re going to do some touring on it. 192 is great for bigger guys that might prefer the “chargier” feel or are coming off of longer skis. 188 is no noodle but from what you’ve described of your size/style, it should be ideal.

    192 is wider and has a stiffer overall construction than the 188. The 188 in turn is also wider and has a stiffer construction than the 180. 180/172/164 are all relatively similar. They’re very much designed differently by size.

    Almost all the Blizzard athletes that ski the R11 ski the 188.
    Thanks! What's your take on where to mount 188s for someone like me?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    Thanks! What's your take on where to mount 188s for someone like me?
    Where do you normally mount your skis? Unless you’re used to skiinb everything pretty far forward I’d go on the line.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Movin' On
    Posts
    3,018
    Quote Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post
    Where do you normally mount your skis? Unless you’re used to skiinb everything pretty far forward I’d go on the line.
    Past couple skis (Liberty Origin 106, Volkl Kendo, Line Influence) have been on the factory line. I remounted Origin 106s with different bindings forward by 1 or 1.5 and don't like them as much.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevo View Post
    Looking at getting a pair. I'm 5'11'', 195 lbs.
    On the line. Blizzard's recommended mounts are usually right on, IME.

    I go +1 on the 188 (5'8", 170) because it's a tad longer than I'd normally choose to ski.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,789
    I mounted mine at -.5. I like traditional mounts. They're great as is but would like to try them at -1 out of curiosity. No interest in going forward. I'm 5'10" 170.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using TGR Forums mobile app

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,444
    Yeah, I kinda wished they made a 183-4 version aka a shrunken 188. The jump from 180 to 188 is a bit big for us smaller riders, where the 180 one is a tad bit smaller than I would ideally want for where I live (we get a lot of snow). I guess I should just pony up, grow some balls and try to be worthy of a pair of 188s.

    And yes, the line is bang on - though I have not tried any other mounting points.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    the most beautiful place in the whole wide world
    Posts
    2,214
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    Yeah, I kinda wished they made a 183-4 version aka a shrunken 188. The jump from 180 to 188 is a bit big for us smaller riders, where the 180 one is a tad bit smaller than I would ideally want for where I live (we get a lot of snow). I guess I should just pony up, grow some balls and try to be worthy of a pair of 188s.

    And yes, the line is bang on - though I have not tried any other mounting points.
    lmk if you tire of your 180s haha

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •