Enforcer 110 Feedback Needed

[noslow]

Brilliant info thanks. On your last point don’t the 110 and 104 share the same build?

The Enforcer 88 and 104 share the same build as the other current Enforcers but they added carbon stringers imbedded in the slightly lighter fiber glass in the center of the ski and called it Carbon Chassis. Then they extended the lighter wood core further into the tip so they could reduce the amount of heavy ABS there as well as slightly tapering the tip in their True Tip design which reduces swing weight.

The Carbon Chassis makes it slightly damper and stiffer while actually shedding a bit of weight and the True TIP definitely reduces swing weight and makes the 104/88 feel lighter on its feet. The Enforcer 93 goes to 94 next year with the same lengths as the 88/104 and they add the Carbon Chassis & True Tip tech to the 94 and 100 which gets the new size lengths too. The 94 and 100 get length scaled dimensions too next year.

Think the 110/115 would benefit the even more from the Carbon Chassis/True Tip but I’m sure that will come eventually.

[CaliBrit]

The Enforcer 88 and 104 share the same build as the other current Enforcers but they added carbon stringers imbedded in the slightly lighter fiber glass in the center of the ski and called it Carbon Chassis. Then they extended the lighter wood core further into the tip so they could reduce the amount of heavy ABS there as well as slightly tapering the tip in their True Tip design which reduces swing weight.

The Carbon Chassis makes it slightly damper and stiffer while actually shedding a bit of weight and the True TIP definitely reduces swing weight and makes the 104/88 feel lighter on its feet. The Enforcer 93 goes to 94 next year with the same lengths as the 88/104 and they add the Carbon Chassis & True Tip tech to the 94 and 100 which gets the new size lengths too. The 94 and 100 get length scaled dimensions too next year.

Think the 110/115 would benefit the even more from the Carbon Chassis/True Tip but I’m sure that will come eventually.

Amazing thanks.

[phatty]

Any more feedback on either the 104 or 110? Debating these internally.

[STLHD]

Haven't skied the 110, just the 100 (185) and 104 (191). I am in love with the 104. Its exactly what I was hoping the 100 was (I thought the 100 was a great ski, just a little boring). Good stability, though not as good as say the Woodsman 108, and pretty playful in crud and bumps. Rails groomers. Really don't have anything bad to say about it. I did try it at + 2, but greatly prefer it on the line.

[Bandit Man]

After some initial “gushing” feedback on the 186 104, I found one “weakness”, at least for my style. In bumpy, variable conditions (we get those a lot in WA), I get a lot of feedback and what I would call “springiness” from the ski. They are very reactive and not as damp as I would like. I have met another skier with similar tastes as me who made the exact same observation. It’s the same reason I didn’t take to the Bibby Pro...stiff and capable ski, just not as damp and more reactive than I like. Anyone else feel this way?

[CaliBrit]

After some initial “gushing” feedback on the 186 104, I found one “weakness”, at least for my style. In bumpy, variable conditions (we get those a lot in WA), I get a lot of feedback and what I would call “springiness” from the ski. They are very reactive and not as damp as I would like. I have met another skier with similar tastes as me who made the exact same observation. It’s the same reason I didn’t take to the Bibby Pro...stiff and capable ski, just not as damp and more reactive than I like. Anyone else feel this way?

Kind of the same as I feel on the 191 110. Sort of why I was looking at the 104. I’ll get around to sharing my full ski thoughts soon.

[bourbonisgood]

After some initial “gushing” feedback on the 186 104, I found one “weakness”, at least for my style. In bumpy, variable conditions (we get those a lot in WA), I get a lot of feedback and what I would call “springiness” from the ski. They are very reactive and not as damp as I would like. I have met another skier with similar tastes as me who made the exact same observation. It’s the same reason I didn’t take to the Bibby Pro...stiff and capable ski, just not as damp and more reactive than I like. Anyone else feel this way?

Skied my 104s for the first time last Sunday and I think this describes something I was feeling too. I only noticed it in choppy funky snow though, I thought they were stellar elsewhere. FWIW I own and love the 190 Bibby

[STLHD]

After some initial “gushing” feedback on the 186 104, I found one “weakness”, at least for my style. In bumpy, variable conditions (we get those a lot in WA), I get a lot of feedback and what I would call “springiness” from the ski. They are very reactive and not as damp as I would like. I have met another skier with similar tastes as me who made the exact same observation. It’s the same reason I didn’t take to the Bibby Pro...stiff and capable ski, just not as damp and more reactive than I like. Anyone else feel this way?

I haven't but I've only had mine out in very dry snow, which is unusual for here, so perhaps they feel more damp than they will when our maritime conditions return.

[bjorn240]

I love my E100s but man this thread really makes me want 104s. I wonder if there is a “block thread” feature...