So: I have a pair of 100’s x180mm with shifts and have loved them for everything from resort to a/t. They do everything well. When the 90 came out, was stoked because I was hopeful that they may be ideal as a resort ski. After watching your video, I got them at the beginning of the season with Strive 14’s. They are the best all ‘round resort ski I have ever owned. I got the 175’s since I have 180’s in the 100 figuring a little shorter for bumps and tree’s. And they rip the bumps and the trees but also do surprisingly well in crud ( they’re very light) and also arc medium slalom/gs turns very well being a bit shorter in the turn radius. A great all around ski. Thanks for your review pushing towards me towards them.
Probably the best use of marketing $$$ ever spent by a ski manufacturer if both Bob & Jeff can both love the exact same ski and now ski it as their go-to ski. I bought the Enforcer 88 a few yrs back the day after I saw your glowing review of it - and now to hear that Bob has benched it for this ski is an incredible endorsement. If only my home hill here north of Toronto wasn't usually ice that required my daily to be a Volkl Racetiger with .5 base and 4-degrees side edge to traverse safely. Pretty incredible ski.
It's a great ski, Paul, but that said, it's still no Enforcer 88 on the groomers. I think we're most impressed with the simplicity and ease of use of the Bent 90. Enforcer is fun, but I haven't really found it to be easy, especially when you're trying to find the top end. I can slide around on it and have a good time for sure, but to make it sing, it must be skied with intent and purpose. The Bent will adapt to your input and react, except for at higher speeds and on firmer snow, mostly for me at 225 pounds. One of my favorite things about testing skis is finding the limitations, and sometimes the limiting factor is me as a skier or a sizeable human.
I typically ski trips out West, looking for chutes, bumps, trees, and some fresh powder when possible. After watching past Bentchetler 100 reviews, the Bent 110 review, and now this, I feel like the 100 is for me. I'd probably take the 90 if I skied back East more and the 110 if I wanted to add a powder ski to my quiver. Great content as always... thanks Jeff and Bob! And oh... First =D
Thanks, Christian! Sometimes we feel that model lines are too diluted, and then a comment like this comes along and emphasizes the need for a nice variety of skis. While the 90 is great for a lot of skiers, there's still that demand for the 100!
Bought 2 pairs for me and my "better half" with shift binding and mounted +6. The intention is to learn to ski switch and park as the main focus with an option to ski slopes do a little "touring" on them to try it out. I really enjoyed it on "broken in" slopes with bumps. Started to learn small jumps and skiing switch. Also tried "touring" on the slope (we managed only once until the snow melted) and there was no issue. Hard turns and hard snow are a challenge, but maybe I can learn how to do it in this setup with more proper technique or borrow a pair of racing skis for a day in case I'll feel the urge for some high G turns. Otherwise really light and enjoyable "fun" skis. It feels almost like nothing. Maybe for better balanced all-around setup you could mount at +3 instead of +6 but no regrets so far.
East Coast Skier ski 40+ times a year. 51 yo 6' 240lbs.....Resort Skier groomed trails...I'll do the steep Black Diamond (if they are too bumped up I'll most likely avoid them) and also rip down Blue squares.... I have Brahma 82 180cm....They do a great job for those trails....My son is 10 and likes to go in the woods plus I want to ski more types of terrain.....I've started to go into the woods more often than I have in the past but still not truly confident.....I was looking at the Bent 90 but having a hard time deciding on a length. In the past I skied a Brahma 88 that was 183. I found that ski to be a lot of work. I could ski it but it beat me up and I was pretty tired by the end of the day. That's when I went to the Brahma 82 180....My first thought was to go with Bent 90 175 because in the trees the shorter ski would be a little easier BUT even on those days I go in the woods I'm still going to ski groomers and would the 175 be short/soft because I'm a heavy guy that naturally skis on the Faster side making GS style turns? Not looking to replace my Brahma's looking to add to my collection. Thanks for you help.
Hey Brett! Sorry for the delay getting back to you. In the Bent 90, I think 184 would be the way to go. It's light and relatively soft flexing, so very manageable in longer lengths. The other ski that I was thinking of was the Rustler 9. You already know you like Blizzard skis, and a lot of Brahma skiers really enjoy having a Rustler too as it retains good strength underfoot, but with much more maneuverability from the rocker profile. I don't want to steer you away from the Bent 90 as I do think it's a great ski for what you're looking for, just figured I'd give you another ski to consider.
Great in-depth review! After watching many of your reviews of the Backland, Maverick, and Bent, I decided and purchased the Bent 100 today. Super excited to get on them. I'm a retired racer, now skiing on Head SuperShape i Magnum (170cm). I wanted to go more off-piste and occasional knee-deep powder. I considered going up to 107 underfoot but decided to work my way up instead of making a big jump to 107+ width. Keep up the great reviews! You guys are my go-to reviewers! From Tokyo.
Between This, the Atomic maverick 86C and The Elan ripstick 88, what would be more forgiving and fun for a beginner/intermediate that focuses on side hits, small to medium jumps, bumps and carving small to medium radius turns on piste?
HI Nav! I'd say the Bent is the way to go. Ripstick is great but is really more of a directional ski, as is the Maverick. The Bent certainly has the most playful character.
I have a pair of 88 ripsticks and I have to say I do love them but they do not have the best build quality. Granted I’m an instructor and teach 7 7 year olds, but even after 8 weeks on them they’re destroyed
@@gank9 love my ripstick 88s but you are right the top sheet gets thrashed with light use. It’s something Elan needs to improve on. That being said I wouldn’t trade them in over it. They are awesome.
Thanks for this amazing review, guys! I’m looking to buy my first own ski next season. I rented the Blizzard Black Pearl 88s (165cm) for the last two years and want to progress to something a little more playful. I’ve been enjoying venturing into the trees off the intermediates at Heavenly Tahoe and would love to start getting into small jumps. Overall I feel like I’d prefer maneuverability/playfulness over going super high speed, I just want to still feel safe on harder or icy snow. I’m female, 5’7” and 110lbs, so I feel like I don’t have to worry about them being too flexy? I’m interested in these Bent 90s, the Line Chronics and the Volkl Revolt 95s. Any opinions? Size recommendations? Would be immensely appreciated so I can get a better idea of what to demo next season! Thank you!!
Hey! Fellow female skier here, who is also about 110 pounds, and I ski a Moment Sierra after renting several skis, including the Black Pearl 97s, and though I enjoyed several, falling in love with the Moments. They have a unique shape Moment developed called Triple Camber which provides an unusual amount of lively playfulness and spring while allowing the skis to bite and grip into difficult surfaces--something I've never felt in a ski before. I recommend checking out the Ski Diva forum if you haven't already, whether you already found your perfect ski setup or not! Its a skier forum just for women and super helpful as a resource and fun place to learn about skis, especially useful for us in the lighter weight category which affects our ski experience just as much as it does between heavier or light men. Hope you find awesome skis for you!
Hi Jeff and Bob, watched a lot of review videos from you and they really are informative! Thanks at first! Now I've closed down my choices and I'm standing in from of the decision to buy either the Bent 90 or Armada ARV 96. I ski mostly in Alps, 70% on piste and am getting more and more into parks, a little off-piste. I'm not a big or heavy person, and I would not charge the new skis too much on hard or icy piste or do high-speed carving because I have the Fischer RC4 Curv GT for those situations. Above all I find myself wanting to do and learn more tricks in easy parks and near-piste. And I want a pair of skis which are flexible to go everywhere with kids (not necessarily in trees) and yet on which I can from time to time enjoy the freshly prepared groomer in the morning. I understand from you and other reviews that ARV 96s are heavier, the wood combination has more density and therefore are more stable. Does this stability also reflect on carving turns? How do they compare on cruds? I'd assume that Bent 90 will be more nimble on moguls but less stable on harder snow, right? I would go 177cm on ARV 96 and 175cm on Bent 90. The width and length difference wouldn't matter much, correct? What's your opinions between the two?
And also, I watched the winter Olympics this year and found a couple of athelets were using Bent 90s in Big Air, Slopstyle and Half Pipe, both men and women, but none was using ARV 96. Does this mean that Bent 90s are more suitable for freestyle? Or let's say the other way around, are the ARV 96s more allrounder / more all-mountain?
Some of it has to do with sponsorships. Henrik has his own Armada ski, so he doesn't have to use the ARV 96, for example. I have found the ARV to be a bit more sturdy of a ski than the Bent 90, so for me, skiing all-mountain, I'd rather have the ARV for a bit more power.
i would like to get on a pair of these but i would also like to get on a pair of Maverick TI.. probably the 95s.. but if that is the case i would like to compare those to the M6s.. so maybe the best way to do it would be to demo the M6s first thing so i can rip the rock hard groomers and then transition to the Maverick TI and then finish with the Bents..
I ski at the pyrenees, 80% fast piste and the occasional light off piste playing with friends, 177cm tall and 70kg, advanced to expert skier but knee injured. Not very strong but pretty technical, what skis do I look for? I also have dps wailer 99 for that one day in the year, I tried brahma 82 and like it, but it lacked ‘something’, looking for a premium ski. Thanks guys! Best ski channel by a long way. Regards from Spain
salut! i grew up skiing the alps but unfortunately never made it to the Pyrenees to ski, been there in the summer (french side) beautiful region how's the snow?
Check out the Elan Wingman 82 or 86 CTi, I think those skis will fill whatever you were expecting to find in the Brahma. th-cam.com/video/ceJv65AvDcM/w-d-xo.html
These, the Stance 90s, or the Mindbender 90s? I was going to get the Stances based on your previous reviews but it seems like you guys are raving about these as well. I ski half east-coast, half-west; 6'4" // 210 lbs., and probably 60% on-piste. What do you think? And thank you for all the valuable research!
Both the Stance 90 and Mindbender 90 (or new 89) are stronger than this ski. More edge grip, more vibration damping, stiffer flex pattern. That makes them superior carving skis and superior at high speeds. On the other hand, the Bent 90 is far lighter, more playful, and more forgiving. Really the Maverick 88 TI is a better ski to compare to the Stance or MB as it's more directional and includes metal. I think it's fair to say we've raved about all of those skis, but for different reasons.
"If you watched that video, you alread know that stuff". No, i didn't watch "that" video, i watched them all, haha :D Great job, super useful insights and a joy to watch your videos, simply outstanding. I remember one early video where Bob introduced himself as "Hi, i'm Bob, i'm, just here to help". I think it couldnt have turned out better for bot of you! Now, up to the next season highlight and a 1 on 1 comparision to the new Ranger 90 please ;)
Thanks Pat! We like looking back on old videos and footage as well and seeing the progress. Individual Ranger skis incoming, so we'll get to those hopefully by mid-late March.
I mounted mine at +5 and loving em so far. I’m usually someone who prefers speed and wide turns but recently wanted to try a more playful approach on some days. so i pulled the trigger on these as soon as I heard about em. I’m not a park guy but I’m using these skis as my gateway.
@@allenchristopher8095not too bad actually. I don’t feel nearly as stable as I do on my “hard-charging” skis because they are a bit softer…still very capable tho. The camber def helps. I also sized down a bit, so I’m not exactly comparing apples-to-apples. However, given a smaller ski and more of a center mount, I’m still very impressed how I can push these at speed. (I’m also on the lighter side, 145lbs.)
Interested to know your thoughts on which ski you think would make the better one quiver ski - Bent 90 or Bent 100. I would say i'm an intermediate/advanced skier (174cms and 77kgs or 5ft9 and 170lbs). Due to conditions i have to ski quite a lot of groomers but also try to find pockets of fresh snow or different lines/chutes/bumps throughout the whole ski field and be as playful as possible and on a powder day (can be rare in NZ) love to try and make the most of it in steeps and off piste areas. I am not really a park skier although do enjoy hitting jumps and finding fun things to jump/drop off (not much of a rail guy). I also enjoy getting up a bit of speed on the groomers but don't need a super hard charging ski and would definitely push towards more playful than super responsive which has what has pushed me towards the atomic bent series.. At the moment I don't do any touring but wouldn't mind the idea of it in the future but definitely not the reason to chose one or the other, but if it can do it that is definitely a benefit. Any advice is much appreciated! Price is not an issue, we get stung no matter what over here :')
I think the best way to think about it is how often are you in soft snow. Is it a lot? A decent amount? Maybe it's not really soft snow, but un-groomed off-piste terrain? If you find yourself in those situations often, I think it makes the most sense to go with the 100 just so you get a little more versatility in one ski. If, on the other hand, it's not that often, and you're realistically on groomers most of the time, I'd probably stick with the 90. The other benefit of the 90 is you'll save $100 compared to the 100, which is pretty significant. Hope that helps!
Even though I’m 33 yrs old I chose the new Chetler Mini cuz the shorter length suited my 5’1”, 100 pound build. They feel amazing! Is there more info on the densolite foam core in the minis or can you do a review on the minis!?! Thanks!!!!!!!!
This looks like the perfect ski for my 14 year old son who will be starting teaching ski school. This past season he passed me in just about every category lol. I saw our local ski shop had some early pairs in which we were excited to see. Probably the least important thing, but with this ski I think the art is a big selling point, we noticed the graphic looked much darker and the printing lower quality than they appear online. This could have been those specific pairs or even the darker lighting in the store. Is this something you noticed on the bent collection or even other skis? Can there be a difference in runs of the same ski?
Hi! I don't expect there's any significant difference in the color or brightness of the graphic from one pair to the next. Maybe a little bit, but there shouldn't be much as all the topsheets would be printed in the same production run so to speak. I imagine it's just a difference in how they look only vs in person. They definitely look brighter when the sun comes out, I've noticed that just when skiing them.
5'11" 175, 60 yo but very active and in good shape. Ski in Utah - after a 30 year layoff, advanced, ski on piste and alongside it. Ski mostly blues with my young teens and wife, carving, teaching, with a few pines along the edges of the piste, with maybe a run or two per day on my own, in bumps or steeps. Currently on a frontside Dynastar speed zone 14 pro, and wanting something more all mountain and more playful. You had me sold on Ripstick Blacks until this video. I don't know anymore... What do you think?
It's a different ski for sure, the Ripstick is wider, more powerful, and overall a bit more versatile in that it's a cleaner carver and a slightly better floater. That said the Bent 90 is amazing in the bumps and trees, but doesn't hold an edge like the Elan. I think for true all-mountain the Ripstick is still the way to go, but honorable mention for sure for bumps, trees, and park for the Bent 90.
I am interested in the Atomic Bent 90. I usually ski on-piste most of the time and occasionally ski unpaved rough terrain. I do not go to the backcountry. I ski in Hokkaido, Japan most of the time, so there is a lot of snow. I am currently using Atomic vantage 90cti, would you recommend Atomic bent 90, what is the difference from Atomic Marven and Maverick? I am also considering elan ripstick and NORDICA SANTA ANA. Can you please suggest some recommendations including the differences from the others?
The Bent 90 could be a really fun ski for you! In the Maven and Maverick, you'll get a little more strength and torsional stiffness, so will hold an edge better, but they aren't as playful or as agile as the Bent. The Ripstick is a very fun ski, kind of like a Maven with a touch more playfulness thanks to longer rocker lines. Santa Ana is a different animal. Much heavier, more like the men's Maverick with metal, but heavier still. Hope that helps!
Thanks, Kyle! The Ranger 94 is quite a bit stiffer than the Bent 90, and when you add the extra width, it makes it a better crud performer and a slightly better carver on the trails. The carbon nose of the Ranger is significantly stronger than the HRZN tech found in the Bent, and while the tails are similar shape, the Ranger's are again, a bit stiffer and more responsive. If you're looking for more of a freestyle, smeary ski versus something that has more power to it, I'd lean to the Bent. Very fun in the trees and bumps, as you can really put that Bent 90 wherever you want.
Great review! Would you guys recommend putting demo bindings on them to take advantage of the versatility? I'm an intermediate skier, 80% piste, but looking to venture into the park more.
Not really. What you gain by being able to move the mount point is likely canceled out by the added weight and higher stand height of the demo binding. I think a retail binding moved slightly more forward is likely a better option.
i just bought my bent 90s as an upgrade from my revolt 95s as i felt those were a little heavy on my feet so i decided to go with the bent 90s this year im just not sure where i should mount them I spend probably 30% park 20% in trees and moguls and i like to do a lot of the side trails when doing down the mountain and i have a playful style just messing around going backwards and twisting i also want to learn to flip i’m 5’8 160lb and i got the 166 bent 90s but i don’t know where i should mount them any suggestions also east coast
Hello! I think something like +2 or +3 would be a good choice. I wouldn't go all the way to +6 as that starts to take away some all-mountain performance in favor of just park performance. +2 or +3 feels like a nice happy medium that will still be fun and agile in the trees, work well on groomers, but will still be relatively balanced for the park. Hope that helps!
Hi I am switching from snowboarding and just started skiing the blue runs at Breck. 57 years old 177cm 185lb. As I get older I seem to be a lazy skier, I just want to cruise around, have fun with a little of everything Trees, powder, groomers. Working the edges What ski would be best for me Bent 100 or 90 166 or 175 and center mount, +2cm++ I am skiing 166 atomic 92 mavericks now and they seem to be a lot of work. I am ok with some sliding turns, actually enjoy it
I’m 14, a pretty good skiier, and trying to decide between these our the 2023 Salomon QST 92. I’m more of a playful skiier and I ski all around the mountain. I especially want to start getting good at the upper mountain/off-piste stuff. Your opinion would be appreciated. I’m also looking to get 2 seasons out of these. Thanks guys! 🙏 🙏
I have heard some people I wont be able to handle the QST because it is stuffer. But isn’t it made of a poplar wood core just like the Bents? I also demoed stiffer skis before (Volkl Kenja 88), I am aware it is a women’s ski, but have heard it is a pretty stiff ski. Thanks again! 🙏
Playful skiers tend to gravitate towards the Bent while the QST and Kenja are on the stiffer side. QST has carbon in it as well as poplar, and the Bent uses a thinner overall profile, so that explains the difference in stiffness. For an off-piste focus and more playful skiing, the Bent probably makes more sense.
I think I am going to go with the qst, I think it would be a better long term ski that I can progress and grow into. I also have heard the difference in stiffness is very comparable and not something that is a huge difference. Is this true? Also I do enjoy carving when on groomers, so which ski would be best for that (although I understand they aren’t carving specific skis)
Seriously considering making these my first ski purchase as a good all-around ski to make up a 1-ski quiver (as a TX resident, can only justify it so much!). I end up doing a lot of piste and trail skiing, but I like speed and usually make big turns, only carving heavily when I am skiing something steeper or more advanced where I need to be slower and focus on technique. However I love tree skiing and seek that out along with small jumps wherever/whenever possible and am trying to get better at jumps. 5'11 and 165lb, previously rode the Kendo 88s 163cm and LOVED them but felt they sank just a bit too much in powder stashes in the trees. Do you think the 175s are shorter than ideal for me? I'm afraid to commit to a longer ski since I rode some 180+ demo skis and found it pretty difficult to get good turns in, but also worride the rocker on these skis reduce the "usable" length to something that's too short. Will these skis still serve me well for the the majority of piste skiing that I end up doing when I can't find good trees to ski through?
As long as you're not expecting Kendo-like carving, I think this ski makes a lot of sense for you. It's an absolute blast in the trees and bumps, and I don't think the 184 is necessary. I'd go 175 and have fun!
I'm long overdue for a ski upgrade. Currently on my old crimson ti 174's. I love this ski and have tried some heavier, stiffer ski's but feel I want something lighter that will still carve nice turns but more playful for trees, bumps etc. Also important is something easy to ski when I'm with the kids. Is this the ski I've been looking for? Also, sizing recommendations. I'm 6' 185lbs for reference.
If you want the lighter ski for trees and bumps and kids, I can't think of much better than the Bent 90. That said, it's not going to carve and hold an edge as strongly as the heavier skis, but if your priority is lighter and playful, then this is great. I'd look to the 175 in that ski for your size and application.
so i just ordered a pair of 2023 90s and i am that guy ur taking about i spend probably 20% of my time in the park 20% in the woods and then the rest being playful on groomer and i'm not sure where i'm gong to mount them i'm 5"6 and ordered 166cm 180 pounds but i'm not sure where to mount them i live on the east coast btw
Hey Eli! I think something like +2 would be a really good spot. If you're only in the park 20% of your time, I don't think it's worth going closer to center as you'll start to take away some performance as an all-mountain ski. +2 or maybe +3 will still feel great on groomers and in the trees, and also shouldn't feel too unbalanced in the park. Hope that helps!
If you're looking for a ski on the stronger side of the performance spectrum, I'd go with the Rustler. Bent is great, but is more focused on trees, bumps, and park. Rustler has considerably better on-trail carving and stronger behavior.
Pocket Rockets are 90. Those were my "fat" skis, while my all mountain skis were Bandit X at 77 This looks like an ideal all mountain ski for Colorado were the amount of huge and deeply rutted moguls is crazy, (in each single day at Winter Park or Copper I skied more moguls than in 2 entire winters living in Mammoth where the wind autogrooms the mountains, lol) but it still has enough width for soft snow.
Thank you thank you for the amazing review! I am about to buy a new pair of skis to ski in Europe (I live in north Spain) and I've been watching some of your reviews of 90mm All Mountain skis. A bit confused on which would be the perfect ski for me. I am kind of and advanced skier, 40 years old, willing to practice more and more relaxed skiing and wanting to learn floor tricks as Jeff does on the video, skiing backwards and learn to enter a bit on the park, but still beeing able to used them mainly on the slopes (usually hard snow). I love the Volk Mantra M5 that I've tried a few times, but I'd love to see them compared with these Bent 90 of the Fisher Ranger 94R... Which skis you think make for a better 1-ski-do-it-all ? I really appreciate your advice. Thanks!!
The Ranger splits the difference of the Bent and the Mantra quite nicely, I'd narrow focus to that model as a do it all ski for on and off trail as well as freestyle and freeride skiing.
Love the reviews! I’m torn between these and the Maverick 88/95 for an all mountain ski that can kinda do it all. I was also eyeing the Rustler 9 and the Sick Day 94, but want to ask you guys what might be the best ski for carving, trees, and occasional jumps. (5’11” 165lbs if it matters)
Sick Day 94 is actually a nice blend of all of your skis on the list. It's snappy and energetic while being stable enough for carving. Maverick is the best carver, while Rustler is on the heavier side of this list. Bent 90, like the Line, is just very well-rounded for your application.
After watching the video and considering the fact that I ride 70% on the slopes, 20% in the park and 10% off the slope, I realized that the bindings on my bent 90 should be set in the middle between the recommended and +6 marks. I think, should I put +3 or +4? On the other hand, 1 centimeter back or forth is unlikely to drastically change the behavior of skis. What can you recommend?
Hey guys, I've got a pair of Salomon qst 98 in 183cm with shifts and was looking at getting the Atomic Bent 90 for more all rounded snow conditions, trees and moguls in particular. With regards to size of Qst 98, would you think a 175 in Bent 90 be OK for 178cm 75kg average fella like myself? Was thinking err on shorter length for greater play ability and manoeuvrability quickness etc. Great reviews btw 👍
Hi Mal! Yeah, I think that's reasonable, especially since you have the longer QST 98. It's always fun having a shorter ski that's super playful and maneuverable. Go for it!
Amazing review. I'm already thinking "do I want to go +4 or +5". I'm starting to think I might take the extra cm back from center next go around - given your comment on trees and moguls.
Loved the review but have one question keeping me from getting these skis right now. I am a very light (>120 lbs) skier at level intermediate/advanced (black diamond, double black diamond.) I love skiing tight trees and moguls when I can, but where I ski those aren't always possible to do so I am looking for a ski that I can rip groomers with and enjoy it at the same time as well. I know in Bob's review, he talked about the bent 90's performance on groomers a good amount, but that's for someone about twice my total weight. Do you think for my weight I'd still be able to push these skis past their limit on groomers? Again, awesome review. Keep doing what you guys are doing.
I think that any skier, regardless of weight, will likely find the carving limit of these skis. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy these skis on the groomers, but they're not in the same league as something like a Kendo or Brahma when it comes to carving. I use them mainly in the woods and bumps, as that's where I try to spend most of my time--I'm rarely at speed on these things. I'd also check out the Black Crows Captis, and on the slightly wider side, Armada ARV 96. Have fun!
Thanks for these reviews! How does the flex of the shovel compare to an ARV 94? Is the ARV much softer? I need to butter but would like a bit more all mountain qualities so torn between the two.
It's a bit softer than the Bent but not by much. There's more all-mountain shaping and principles behind the Bent making the ARV slightly more park-oriented, but they both function well in both capacities.
Bob and I have chatted about that quite a bit. It's interesting as Bob finds a 180 cm Bent 100 too short, but doesn't mind skiing the 184 cm Bent 90. I also think it's curious they didn't just stick with the same length breakdown as the 100 since the skis are so similar, but perhaps they wanted to provide a bigger total of length options between the two withs.
Really useful video! Came here after watching the mid80 skis review. Love all the content! Question. I am looking to buy my first set of skis that I can use for on and a bit of offpiste. I am torn between the Bent90 and Kaanjo84. Could you please help. I am trying to decide between the Atomic Bent 90s and the Kanjo84. I ski europe area and go probably 80% piste and rest off piste. I’ve been trying to get better at Park and usually go in there a fair bit as well for small jumps. Id say i prefer a playful ski but also want to be able to carve. Which ski would you recommend? I am leaning towards the Volkl Kanjo84 for the on piste ability but I am worried it won’t work in the park which I am trying to improve at? Therefore I am tempted by the Bent90 as it looks like it can carve well and also be fun in the park. Do you have any recommendation? Thanks in advance!
If park is anywhere in your list of priorities, you kind of have to take Kanjo off. Bent 90 is fantastic in so many avenues, and is just a whole lot of fun. It's not quite as poppy and energetic as the Kanjo on trail, but way better in bumps, trees, powder, and park. Dynastar M-Free 90 is another great choice.
Very good! ..do U often play with the mounting Point of bindings?.. you spoke in the Story over mounting Point over the Camber Center.. couldn't follow you, will U explain IT again? ..please.
The highest point of the middle of the ski when lying flat is the camber center, and that would line up with your midsole of the boot. It's way more preference than science, so if you are not sure of where to put the binding, the factory line is usually best.
Atomic bent 90 vs line sick day 94? Can’t decide which to choose. I ski mainly resort, on piste but love side hits and trees a lot so looking for something maneuverable and with nice pop. Thanks
The Sick Day is a bit more consistent in the flex than the Bent, which is softer in the tips and tails. If you want a bit more energy and pop, I'd lean to the Line, but I love that Bent 90 for the bumps and trees for sure! SE
I’m looking for a resort ski that allows me to focus on learning and perfecting moguls. I ski very fast and even though metal has a place I want a more lively, energetic, and playful ski. I’m 5’8” 180#. Will this ski do this? If not what would? I ski mostly out west. I prefer longer skis.
This is one of the best mogul skis I've been on. While it's not quite as stable or strong as some other skis out there, it's amazing in the bumps and trees. If you go a bit longer to the 175, I think you'll be pretty happy.
Great video as always! How does it compare to the QST 92? I'm looking for a ski for mainly groomers, trees and offpiste in Norway when there's not a lot of pow (where I'll use my black crows atris). I'm a advanced intermediate skier and value maneuverability over stability😊
There are certainly some similarities, but differences too... The QST 92 has more pronounced early taper in its shape, and also wider tips and tails. It makes a shorter, and specifically rounder turn. They're both extremely agile and maneuverable, but in the Bent 90 that comes more from the lightweight feel and HRZN tech than sidecut shape. Perhaps the biggest difference is the Bent 90 is a twin tip with far more freestyle influence in its design. Certainly doesn't have to be skied backwards, but is far more capable than the QST. Additionally, QSTs have a little more vibration damping, a smoother feel, but that's at the cost of some weight compared to the Bent 90s.
Nice video! I have my eyes on bent 90 for a while, and is looking to get a pair this year. I am really debating the mounting point and is hoping you guys can provide some insight. I consider myself an advanced skier but I have never skied the park before, which is something I am trying to get into with the having the bent 90 as my first pair of park / free ride ski. I am debating where I should mount it between +3 to +6 (I want it a bit forward as I do want to ski park). Can you help me understand better what are the main downsides of mounting say just +3 or even on the recommended line like Bob compared to +6 when you ski park? My understanding from research and also what you touched on a bit in the video is that the main downside will be when you ski backwards and do tail grab (due to shorter tail), but will this impact skiing rail at all (do you need more even tip and tail to better ski rail)? Also Jeff, will you be able to ski park and do all your tricks if the minting pint is on the recommended line or just +3 (just trying to understand how big impact the mounting point will be)? Currently I am leaning towards +4, as I do want to be able to do all park tricks with the ski (including ski rails), but at the same time, keep a bit more float for powder days / as free ride ski. Any thoughts? Thanks!
Hi Kevin C! I think the +6 is pretty aggressive and very central for everything except pure park. In a freeride sense, you'll have a lot of tail to contend with and very little tip to rely on. If you're using these for any type of non-park skiing, and are unsure about mount points, further back is way safer than further forward. I'm also not opposed to a re-mount on a pair of my skis if I don't like how it feels. SE
Basically the same dimensions as my first twin tip pow ski. Line motherships in a 172, 120-90-110. They were my most versatile ski as they were light and excelled in the park, but were wide enough to be considered a pow ski at the time. I miss those old skis. May have to try these out.
Looking for a recommendation. Son is 14 yo, 125 lbs, advanced intermediate skier. Looking at the bent 90 or the Black crows Jr. Camox - what are your thoughts?
Hi Chris! Either could work, although I like the idea of the lightweight Bent 90 for a skiers of his size. Very snappy and energetic performance for lighter weight skiers.
I mainly ski trees/moguls w/some fun times skiing switch and small jumps on the mountain. The choice between 175 and 184. I'm 6 feet tall, 175lb. 184 seems too long for what I like to do and 175 seems too short for my height. Only thing making me a little hessitant on these skis. Wish there was a size between 175 and 184.
I think this ski is okay to size up on. They're quite light and maneuverable so the extra few cm's aren't going to negatively affect you all that much. conversely, I just think the 175 is too short for the same reasons. Very fun skis!
Hi, I live in the midwest but I go out west skiing a couple times a year, so I’m mostly in the park but I also want something that would be fun in trees and powder when I do go west. So I was wondering what length I should get (I’m 6 feet tall and around 150 lbs) and where to mount my bindings?
I would get the 184 for length. 175 seems short for your size, although it could work if you specifically prefer shorter skis. For mount point, I would go +3 or +4. +4 better in the park, +3 would be a little better in powder. Either one would be fine, so you can pick which application you want to focus on without worrying too much about choosing wrong. Hope that helps!
Amazing review! Planning to get these next season as a park ski. I'm 5'11" and thinking of going 175 or 184. I have the Bent 100 in 180 and love them but what are the advantages of having longer skis in the park?
Hello guys! Thanks a lot for the review! Definitely one of the earliest and best ones out there. I am 5'8" and about 130 lbs, I thought maybe around 170 would be the ideal length, would you recommend me going with 166 or 175? I am an intermediate skier primarily skiing on piste, but I want to start doing some simple park stuff and do more moguls in the future. I am also considering the black crows captis 171. How would you guys compare between the bent 90 and the captis? I would love your suggestion! Thanks a bunch in advance!!!
The Captis is one of the few skis that I'd have to think about trading my Bent 90's for. Similar ease of use, but the Captis is perhaps a bit snappier and more grippy than the Bent. The lightness, quickness, and floatiness of the Bent is not to be overlooked, and I think it makes for a better park ski for less-experienced park skiers. conversely, I would rather ski the Captis on groomed trails to get the snappy and grippy pop from it. And that's a big compliment considering how much I like the Bent 90. I think you can do 175 in Bent 90 or 171 in Captis.
I am still on an x Wing Tornado 178cm 5'7" 158 lbs, 61yr old, skiing 45+ years looking to get a new ski. What size would you recommend? I ski 60% trees, bumps in NM and Southern Co. How do these carve and do on groomers? What other skiis should I look at? Thanks! Love the reviews.
They're fine on groomers--not the best carvers, but that's part of the charm--they're so playful and fun that it just wouldn't make sense for them to be strong carvers as well. If you're looking for a bit more of a mix, check out Black Crows Captis or the Salomon QST 92--both have a better blend of power and playfulness versus the Bent 90. Either way, I think the high 160's is the place to be for width based on your stats and application. Have fun!
If you had to choose between the Atomic Bent 90, the Maverick 95 Ti and the Sick Day 94, for all mountain (some days of roads and days of mountain-forest) which one would you recommend for someone of intermediate level? ... From your videos I'd say the mavericks but I'm not sure... Thanks for your detailed videos.
Hey Renzo! I think the Maverick 95 is a better all-mountain ski than the Bent 90, especially if you don't need the twin tip shape. I generally like the Mavericks more than the Sick Day also, I just think they have better technology. Maverick can feel somewhat demanding for an intermediate, but as long as you're reasonably athletic, you won't have any issue adjusting to them. Hope that helps!
@@SkiEssentials It helps me a lot to make my decision, thanks for responding and for all the work you take with your videos and how detailed you are. Greetings from Argentina!
Thanks! I think the 175 is fine. It's a pretty light and playful ski from the start, so I don't think you need to size down to access the fun-factor of these skis.
Thanks for the great reviews. Could you give me some advice on the appropriateness and sizing of these skis. I have other skies for charging. I'm just looking for something playful to muck around on the side of the hill (jibbing, switching, little jumps, just playing around off stuff) while the missus tele's down. I'm in Aus, so mostly hardpack. Also wondering about sizing: I'm 172cm, 70kg, advanced all mountain skier. Feel a bit in between 168 and 175, thinking 175cm?
How do these compare to rossi blackops escaper? Trying to add playful 90 ish to my quiver. Eaast coast 60/40 advance skier at 165 cm and 145 lbs. what length do you suggest? Keep up the good work, you guys have the best ski content on the internet!!
Pretty close comparison, although the flatter tail of the Escaper is what really sets it apart. If the Escaper was more of a twin tip, and narrower overall, they'd be quite similar. As it stands, the Escaper is a much cleaner and more energetic carver, while the Bent 90 absolutely smokes it in the bumps and trees and park.
I own a pair of bent 90s. I would like to add a pow/west coast resort day ski for my collection. I’m a mostly directional free ride skier. Do you think the bent 110 could be a ski for that pow ski?
Hey Nathan! Certainly could work, just remember the Bent 110 has a freestyle-inspired shape. More tail rocker than most directional powder skis. I wouldn't necessarily steer you away from it, but something to consider. If you do choose it, just go a little further back with your mount point.
Nice and detailed review. I probably will buy this ski, but i dont know where to mount them. Id like to learn riding park but also want to ride on and maybe off piste. Would you recommend mounting it as centered as possible for the park or what would you recommend? (i only go ski in the alps)
I think you can still learn park with the factory recommended line. That'll give you more all-mountain performance as well. If, down the line, you feel that you need to be in the middle, then a re-mount is fine.
trying to figure out what mount point for my daughter... being women skis recommend a more forward center for woman? my daughter is a strong all mtn skier I bought her the 157 cm bent 90... she is 5'1'' 108 lbs she loves glades bumps and playing in park also skiing switch... for the most part we spend our time on natural ungroomed terrain and glades when the north east allows us to ski glades we ski the glades! love to hear an opinion or even a recommendation from you guys
I don't see a need to go further forward than the factory recommended line for an all-mountain application. At her weight, it doesn't seem like there'd be enough mass to make the forward mount make sense. Have fun! SE
Hey guys, that’s pretty much the ski I’m looking for. If there’s bumps thats what I ski all day, otherwise I find trees and off piste areas. Are there any other options or is this the best
really struggling between the 90 and the 100.. 5'10" 155-160lbs. live in minnesota so the 90 seems like obvious choice but I generally only ski twice a year out west. never really see any crazy powder... the price might make the choice for me. free $100 off from the bent100. the float should be enough with the 90 but how does the 90 hold up in the steeps?
The torsional stiffness of the narrower ski makes it a bit better on steeps versus the 100, especially if that snow is on the firmer side of the spectrum. 90 mm with HRZN tech in the tips is still a pretty floaty ski. As for Pivots, if you're using price as a potential deciding factor for skis, you may not like the sticker shock of a Pivot binding. Marker Griffons, Tyrolia Attacks, and the new Atomic Strive are all great bindings for both safety and performance.
Hey, I currently have the 2021 line chronics 185cm. I enjoyed them but they do not hold up the top sheet chip pretty easy. For my next ski I was looking at the K2 poacher or the atomic bent 90. I ski about 65% park and 35% the rest of the mountain. I enjoy a light tappy ski but also stable at high speeds which would you recommend? Thanks for your time
If you're looking for more durability, the Poacher is one of the most durable park skis I've ever seen. Bents won't chip as easily as the Chronic because it's a partial cap construction, I just can't yet claim they're as durable as Poachers as I haven't had a full year on mine yet. I will say they're holding up pretty good so far. They're also quite a bit lighter than Poachers, so if you're trying to focus on a lightweight ski, Bent is probably best.
Whats the best ski for me: I want a double tip, rocker, really light ski, 75-84, 155-170, I ski the mountain, but look for the trails and small bumps, no black diamond and no downhill fast, I like to ski the mountain, side to side. Thanks.
Hello! It sounds like a narrower twin tip would be the best option for you. You might end up going a little wider than 84, however, as there aren't many skis that narrow with the characteristics you're looking for. Atomic Bent 90 would be a good example of something that checks all your boxes, but is a little wider than your range. The Volkl Bash 86 is similar, but a little narrower. There are quite a lot of options in that mid-80 twin tip category, actually. The other option for you, which I think worth considering, would be eliminating the need for a twin tip. I know you mention you want it, but I'm curious if you really need the twin tip shape? If you're not skiing switch or using it in the park, you could stick with a more directional ski that may be more beneficial. M-Pro 85, Atomic Maverick 86 C, Black Crows Vertis, Elan Ripstick 88, Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt, Volkl Kanjo 84, those would all be good directional all-mountain skis to consider.
Not quite, no. It's about 1 or 1.5 cm back, basically to account for the difference in tip and tail rocker. That's where I (Jeff) have mine mounted and they basically feel true center.
Hey I’m 5’6” about 130lbs still a growing teen and I’m coming off of 163cm armadas looking for something longer and I like the size of my other 172cm skis so should I just go with the 175cm bent 90’s? Thank you, Josh
What size would you recommend for a 5’10” 165 lb upper intermediate? I prefer a 179-180 ski, so I’m right between the sizes. Would it be worth going for the Bent 100 for that reason since it’s offered in 180cm?
Hey James! I (Jeff) am just about your size exactly. I also generally prefer the 179-180 range, especially in a playful twin tip. I've been skiing the 184, however, and wouldn't want any other length in this ski. The 184 cm 90 feels feels just as easy to ski for me as a 180 cm Bent 100. That said, if you're hung up on length and can't get past the 184, the 90 and 100 are exceptionally similar skis. Same build, same profile, just 10 mm wider.
Great review as always! A question though, i’ve been torn between arv 96 and bent 90 for a long time now and cant decide what would suit me best. Pretty intermediate skier 185cm 80kg, would really love to focus more on trees and off piste also want a more playfull ski to learn some basic tricks, but also ski piste with friends. I’ve had my old völkl 174 directional carving skis for a while now and the lenght is also a big questionmark feels such a big jump to go from 174 to 184. So pretty much what would be better ”allrounder” for me.
The Bent is definitely an easier ski to learn and progress on. The ARV is deceivingly heavy and sturdy, and while that can be great for some skiers, it doesn't sound like it fits your stats and application. I'd say the 175 in that ski would be a great choice. I'd mount it right on the factory recommended line. Have fun! SE
Looking for my first pair of piste/park ski’s. I’m 5”10 and around 80kg. I’m torn on whether the 175cm would be too big for me. Intermediate skier looking to venture more freestyle/park on a ski that’s lighter and easier to manipulate. Any advice on this ski for me or others that would be more suited. Thanks!
These Bent 90's are great! Easy to turn, floaty and simple in the trees, and with great park capabilities! No real reason to go much further, but I also like the Dynastar M-Free 90 and the Black Crows Captis for this realm.
Thought about this for a minute, and I think that you'd have to deal with some chatter at speed for sure, but the quickness of the ski could more than make up for that. I telemarked on the Automatic 102 (kind of predecessor to Bent 100) and loved it, so there is something to the Atomic non-metal, non-carbon skis that make for a nice tele setup, it all depends how agile you want the ski to be.
Hi guys, been watching you for years and love all the reviews and content you post. I have a question, i currently have the bent chetler 100 2020, but thinking about buying a pair of the 90s. i ski mostly all mountain (EU) when im with my girlfriend but like to dabble in the park. im an advanced skier looking to improve in the park and for better carving on the piste. IM 6FT 2, 95KG. my 100s are mounted "recommended" but i cant seem to butter without the boot coming out of the binding. and i feel like im mounted too far back to what i want to be now. so thinking about moving forward a few clicks like +2 or +3 if i get the 90s. do you think this is worth the upgrade or not at all and just stick with the 100s? cheers
I like the 90 for a lighter, more maneuverable option than the 100, and if you're looking to get the more park-style performance, then +2 from the line is a good place to start. Likely more the boot/binding interface that's making you come out rather than the ski, which is still pretty darn flexible.
The Bent 90 has more than enough tail for learning to ski switch. No real need to go any further, as these are fantastic all-mountain options as well. Have fun! SE
Yes for sure. You can go narrower, with something like a Salomon Stance 84 for better on-trail performance, but the 90 is very well-rounded for a lot of levels of skier.
At 170 cm tall, I'm torn between getting the Bent 100 in a 164cm or 172cm, OR the Bent 90 in 166cm. I'm an expert skier that hasn't bought skis in 20 years. I had a few pairs of 1080's back in the day and still have fun on those in a 169cm and a 171cm. My preferred skiing is all over the mountain, out the gates and looking for things to jump and rocks to drop. I had a pair of Volkl Mantras in 177cm and found they were too cumbersome to be fun, they just wanted to rip. So I want lightweight and fun ski hence tilting towards going shorter since I'll still have surface area due to the extra width. I'm skiing mostly in the Cascades (PNW) now. What do you think?
172 cm Bent 100 feels like a nice choice. Both the 90 and the 100 are very easy to ski even in longer lengths, so i wouldn't worry about that being too long. It will feel WAY more agile and more playful than that 177 cm Mantra. 164 feels too short, and even the 166 Bent 90 feels kinda short to me. I'd probably point you towards the 175 in the 90, but the 172 cm 100 feels like a nice sweet spot.
Question for you guys. Im 5’10” 175 lb primarily midwest skier that dabbles with the west a few times a year. How different are the bc 100 at 180 compared to the 90 at 175? Narrowed the search down to these 2 and Im at a bit of a crossroads. Intermediate skier 70/30 groomer/park, I like trees but never more than boot height pow.
HI Victor! I think the 90 will be a slightly better choice for the majority of your time on snow. better at groomers and park, and if you're not consistently in deep snow, that's another vote for the 90.
What mount point would you recommend for me? I recently bought the 184 cm. I would say I do 85% all mountain 15% park but I also like to spin around on flatlands and do side hits on trails. Thank you
I want these skis but I want twin tips. I am switch into skiing and want some feedback about twin tip and partial tip. Planning on skiing park and all mountain.
Hi, In thinking these skis or the k2 poachers what are your thoughts. I am 5,11 and weigh 160. Im looking for a ski that I can use both in the park and on groomers.
It's a difference in weight and stiffness, with the Poacher being the heavier and stiffer of the two. As such, it does become a better groomer ski than the Bent 90, and in the park, it depends if you want some more substance on your feet or if you prefer quickness and maneuverability, in which case the 90 is a better choice. Objectively, though, the Poacher is a slightly better groomer ski.
If you're looking for a playful ski for these conditions and terrain, then it'll be fine, but if you are in the market for a ski that excels on groomers and harder snow, there are better options. Atomic's Maverick 88Ti is a better choice due to the build and more directional shape, for example.
Hey! I’m coming from a bent 110 but want something better suited for groomer and park days but don’t want to commit to either. Would you recommend mounting at -3 from center (same as my 110s) for a similar feel as my 110s? Thanks!
The rocker profile is different, so the same point as the 110 will feel farther forward in the camber on the 90. The Factory line in the 90 is pretty good.
Amazingly, we have the 2024 version in stock in the 175 at the moment! I'm sure more sizes are on the way, just not sure when. www.skiessentials.com/catalog/product/view/id/440061/s/2024-atomic-bent-90-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-14-gw-bindings/category/3/
Hey Bob and Jeff, thanks for all that you do! You guys are legends! I just bought a pair of Bent 90s, 184cm and mounted them +3 from factory. I also have a pair of QST 99s, 181cm from last year, mounted at factory. I took my bent 90s out for the first time this past weekend, and one thing I noticed is they are noticeably harder to release an edge than on my QSTs. There were a couple times where I tried to turn but the edge wouldn’t release and I’d keep shooting forward. As the day went on, I was able to kind of figure out that keeping my weight forward would alleviate some of this, but every once in a while I’d get caught off guard. I’ve never had this issue with my QSTs. Is this something you’ve noticed at all while riding them? Do you think this could be due to the high rise camber of the Bent 90s, or could it be an affect of mounting forward from factory? Mainly just curious, trying to attribute ski characteristics to their profiles
I think it may be a combination of the mount, the high camber of the ski, and the softness of the tips and tails. If you are able to bend the shovel into the turn because of the forward mount, then there's more ski behind you that you need to account for. If you're expecting the ski to behave like a directional carver, the performance will not be the same. Since there's more camber from the boot sole back to the start of the tail rocker, that could be giving you inconsistent feedback on the release of the turn. The QST, in addition to being a more directional ski mounted at factory, is a sturdier ski as well, so I'd expect the edges of that ski to be more engaged more of the time. The softness of the Bent is part of the charm.
This is what I’ve been needing to get the confidence to buy these. Thank you
I want to see footage of the cameraman following through the bumps. If that isn’t on a gimbal then that’s Oscar worthy.
Hey thanks! No gimbal. I (Jeff) have had a lot of practice trying to follow Bob through bumps and am finally figuring it out...
This has to be one of your best reviews...totally hits home for something I've been looking for.
Thanks! Glad you found it useful!
So: I have a pair of 100’s x180mm with shifts and have loved them for everything from resort to a/t. They do everything well. When the 90 came out, was stoked because I was hopeful that they may be ideal as a resort ski. After watching your video, I got them at the beginning of the season with Strive 14’s. They are the best all ‘round resort ski I have ever owned. I got the 175’s since I have 180’s in the 100 figuring a little shorter for bumps and tree’s. And they rip the bumps and the trees but also do surprisingly well in crud ( they’re very light) and also arc medium slalom/gs turns very well being a bit shorter in the turn radius. A great all around ski. Thanks for your review pushing towards me towards them.
Probably the best use of marketing $$$ ever spent by a ski manufacturer if both Bob & Jeff can both love the exact same ski and now ski it as their go-to ski. I bought the Enforcer 88 a few yrs back the day after I saw your glowing review of it - and now to hear that Bob has benched it for this ski is an incredible endorsement. If only my home hill here north of Toronto wasn't usually ice that required my daily to be a Volkl Racetiger with .5 base and 4-degrees side edge to traverse safely. Pretty incredible ski.
It's a great ski, Paul, but that said, it's still no Enforcer 88 on the groomers. I think we're most impressed with the simplicity and ease of use of the Bent 90. Enforcer is fun, but I haven't really found it to be easy, especially when you're trying to find the top end. I can slide around on it and have a good time for sure, but to make it sing, it must be skied with intent and purpose. The Bent will adapt to your input and react, except for at higher speeds and on firmer snow, mostly for me at 225 pounds. One of my favorite things about testing skis is finding the limitations, and sometimes the limiting factor is me as a skier or a sizeable human.
I typically ski trips out West, looking for chutes, bumps, trees, and some fresh powder when possible. After watching past Bentchetler 100 reviews, the Bent 110 review, and now this, I feel like the 100 is for me. I'd probably take the 90 if I skied back East more and the 110 if I wanted to add a powder ski to my quiver. Great content as always... thanks Jeff and Bob!
And oh... First =D
Thanks, Christian!
Sometimes we feel that model lines are too diluted, and then a comment like this comes along and emphasizes the need for a nice variety of skis. While the 90 is great for a lot of skiers, there's still that demand for the 100!
won a pair of these at a film tour in Golden, CO. Typically snowboard but stoked to learn on these
Bought 2 pairs for me and my "better half" with shift binding and mounted +6. The intention is to learn to ski switch and park as the main focus with an option to ski slopes do a little "touring" on them to try it out.
I really enjoyed it on "broken in" slopes with bumps. Started to learn small jumps and skiing switch. Also tried "touring" on the slope (we managed only once until the snow melted) and there was no issue. Hard turns and hard snow are a challenge, but maybe I can learn how to do it in this setup with more proper technique or borrow a pair of racing skis for a day in case I'll feel the urge for some high G turns. Otherwise really light and enjoyable "fun" skis. It feels almost like nothing. Maybe for better balanced all-around setup you could mount at +3 instead of +6 but no regrets so far.
Awesome feedback, thanks for sharing!
East Coast Skier ski 40+ times a year. 51 yo 6' 240lbs.....Resort Skier groomed trails...I'll do the steep Black Diamond (if they are too bumped up I'll most likely avoid them) and also rip down Blue squares.... I have Brahma 82 180cm....They do a great job for those trails....My son is 10 and likes to go in the woods plus I want to ski more types of terrain.....I've started to go into the woods more often than I have in the past but still not truly confident.....I was looking at the Bent 90 but having a hard time deciding on a length. In the past I skied a Brahma 88 that was 183. I found that ski to be a lot of work. I could ski it but it beat me up and I was pretty tired by the end of the day. That's when I went to the Brahma 82 180....My first thought was to go with Bent 90 175 because in the trees the shorter ski would be a little easier BUT even on those days I go in the woods I'm still going to ski groomers and would the 175 be short/soft because I'm a heavy guy that naturally skis on the Faster side making GS style turns? Not looking to replace my Brahma's looking to add to my collection. Thanks for you help.
Hey Brett! Sorry for the delay getting back to you. In the Bent 90, I think 184 would be the way to go. It's light and relatively soft flexing, so very manageable in longer lengths. The other ski that I was thinking of was the Rustler 9. You already know you like Blizzard skis, and a lot of Brahma skiers really enjoy having a Rustler too as it retains good strength underfoot, but with much more maneuverability from the rocker profile. I don't want to steer you away from the Bent 90 as I do think it's a great ski for what you're looking for, just figured I'd give you another ski to consider.
Great in-depth review! After watching many of your reviews of the Backland, Maverick, and Bent, I decided and purchased the Bent 100 today. Super excited to get on them. I'm a retired racer, now skiing on Head SuperShape i Magnum (170cm). I wanted to go more off-piste and occasional knee-deep powder. I considered going up to 107 underfoot but decided to work my way up instead of making a big jump to 107+ width. Keep up the great reviews! You guys are my go-to reviewers! From Tokyo.
I think you'll find a lot of floaty fun on that 100. Great in the bumps, trees, and powder. Have fun!
SE
Between This, the Atomic maverick 86C and The Elan ripstick 88, what would be more forgiving and fun for a beginner/intermediate that focuses on side hits, small to medium jumps, bumps and carving small to medium radius turns on piste?
Bent 90 100%
HI Nav!
I'd say the Bent is the way to go. Ripstick is great but is really more of a directional ski, as is the Maverick. The Bent certainly has the most playful character.
I have a pair of 88 ripsticks and I have to say I do love them but they do not have the best build quality. Granted I’m an instructor and teach 7 7 year olds, but even after 8 weeks on them they’re destroyed
@@gank9 love my ripstick 88s but you are right the top sheet gets thrashed with light use. It’s something Elan needs to improve on. That being said I wouldn’t trade them in over it. They are awesome.
Thank god there is finally a full review on this ski, I haven’t bought it yet because i couldnt find enough information😭
Hope you like it!
Thanks for this amazing review, guys! I’m looking to buy my first own ski next season. I rented the Blizzard Black Pearl 88s (165cm) for the last two years and want to progress to something a little more playful. I’ve been enjoying venturing into the trees off the intermediates at Heavenly Tahoe and would love to start getting into small jumps. Overall I feel like I’d prefer maneuverability/playfulness over going super high speed, I just want to still feel safe on harder or icy snow. I’m female, 5’7” and 110lbs, so I feel like I don’t have to worry about them being too flexy? I’m interested in these Bent 90s, the Line Chronics and the Volkl Revolt 95s. Any opinions? Size recommendations? Would be immensely appreciated so I can get a better idea of what to demo next season! Thank you!!
Hey! Fellow female skier here, who is also about 110 pounds, and I ski a Moment Sierra after renting several skis, including the Black Pearl 97s, and though I enjoyed several, falling in love with the Moments. They have a unique shape Moment developed called Triple Camber which provides an unusual amount of lively playfulness and spring while allowing the skis to bite and grip into difficult surfaces--something I've never felt in a ski before. I recommend checking out the Ski Diva forum if you haven't already, whether you already found your perfect ski setup or not! Its a skier forum just for women and super helpful as a resource and fun place to learn about skis, especially useful for us in the lighter weight category which affects our ski experience just as much as it does between heavier or light men. Hope you find awesome skis for you!
Hi Jeff and Bob, watched a lot of review videos from you and they really are informative! Thanks at first!
Now I've closed down my choices and I'm standing in from of the decision to buy either the Bent 90 or Armada ARV 96. I ski mostly in Alps, 70% on piste and am getting more and more into parks, a little off-piste. I'm not a big or heavy person, and I would not charge the new skis too much on hard or icy piste or do high-speed carving because I have the Fischer RC4 Curv GT for those situations. Above all I find myself wanting to do and learn more tricks in easy parks and near-piste. And I want a pair of skis which are flexible to go everywhere with kids (not necessarily in trees) and yet on which I can from time to time enjoy the freshly prepared groomer in the morning.
I understand from you and other reviews that ARV 96s are heavier, the wood combination has more density and therefore are more stable. Does this stability also reflect on carving turns? How do they compare on cruds? I'd assume that Bent 90 will be more nimble on moguls but less stable on harder snow, right? I would go 177cm on ARV 96 and 175cm on Bent 90. The width and length difference wouldn't matter much, correct?
What's your opinions between the two?
And also, I watched the winter Olympics this year and found a couple of athelets were using Bent 90s in Big Air, Slopstyle and Half Pipe, both men and women, but none was using ARV 96. Does this mean that Bent 90s are more suitable for freestyle? Or let's say the other way around, are the ARV 96s more allrounder / more all-mountain?
Some of it has to do with sponsorships. Henrik has his own Armada ski, so he doesn't have to use the ARV 96, for example. I have found the ARV to be a bit more sturdy of a ski than the Bent 90, so for me, skiing all-mountain, I'd rather have the ARV for a bit more power.
i would like to get on a pair of these but i would also like to get on a pair of Maverick TI.. probably the 95s.. but if that is the case i would like to compare those to the M6s.. so maybe the best way to do it would be to demo the M6s first thing so i can rip the rock hard groomers and then transition to the Maverick TI and then finish with the Bents..
I ski at the pyrenees, 80% fast piste and the occasional light off piste playing with friends, 177cm tall and 70kg, advanced to expert skier but knee injured. Not very strong but pretty technical, what skis do I look for? I also have dps wailer 99 for that one day in the year, I tried brahma 82 and like it, but it lacked ‘something’, looking for a premium ski. Thanks guys! Best ski channel by a long way. Regards from Spain
salut! i grew up skiing the alps but unfortunately never made it to the Pyrenees to ski, been there in the summer (french side) beautiful region how's the snow?
@@urbanrunoff you must go to Baqueira, top resort
Check out the Elan Wingman 82 or 86 CTi, I think those skis will fill whatever you were expecting to find in the Brahma. th-cam.com/video/ceJv65AvDcM/w-d-xo.html
Thanks a lot guys!
great review,
I'm going to use this skis for parks for ski tracks and for out tracks
Great application!
These, the Stance 90s, or the Mindbender 90s? I was going to get the Stances based on your previous reviews but it seems like you guys are raving about these as well. I ski half east-coast, half-west; 6'4" // 210 lbs., and probably 60% on-piste. What do you think?
And thank you for all the valuable research!
great question!
Both the Stance 90 and Mindbender 90 (or new 89) are stronger than this ski. More edge grip, more vibration damping, stiffer flex pattern. That makes them superior carving skis and superior at high speeds. On the other hand, the Bent 90 is far lighter, more playful, and more forgiving. Really the Maverick 88 TI is a better ski to compare to the Stance or MB as it's more directional and includes metal. I think it's fair to say we've raved about all of those skis, but for different reasons.
"If you watched that video, you alread know that stuff". No, i didn't watch "that" video, i watched them all, haha :D
Great job, super useful insights and a joy to watch your videos, simply outstanding. I remember one early video where Bob introduced himself as "Hi, i'm Bob, i'm, just here to help". I think it couldnt have turned out better for bot of you!
Now, up to the next season highlight and a 1 on 1 comparision to the new Ranger 90 please ;)
Thanks Pat! We like looking back on old videos and footage as well and seeing the progress. Individual Ranger skis incoming, so we'll get to those hopefully by mid-late March.
Good stuff, thanks for the heads up :) I'm really curious about them, so much has changed in the Ranger build.
I mounted mine at +5 and loving em so far. I’m usually someone who prefers speed and wide turns but recently wanted to try a more playful approach on some days. so i pulled the trigger on these as soon as I heard about em. I’m not a park guy but I’m using these skis as my gateway.
Right on!
how do they carve at high speed?
@@allenchristopher8095not too bad actually. I don’t feel nearly as stable as I do on my “hard-charging” skis because they are a bit softer…still very capable tho. The camber def helps. I also sized down a bit, so I’m not exactly comparing apples-to-apples. However, given a smaller ski and more of a center mount, I’m still very impressed how I can push these at speed. (I’m also on the lighter side, 145lbs.)
@@sknowmann is this your one quiver ?
Interested to know your thoughts on which ski you think would make the better one quiver ski - Bent 90 or Bent 100. I would say i'm an intermediate/advanced skier (174cms and 77kgs or 5ft9 and 170lbs). Due to conditions i have to ski quite a lot of groomers but also try to find pockets of fresh snow or different lines/chutes/bumps throughout the whole ski field and be as playful as possible and on a powder day (can be rare in NZ) love to try and make the most of it in steeps and off piste areas. I am not really a park skier although do enjoy hitting jumps and finding fun things to jump/drop off (not much of a rail guy). I also enjoy getting up a bit of speed on the groomers but don't need a super hard charging ski and would definitely push towards more playful than super responsive which has what has pushed me towards the atomic bent series.. At the moment I don't do any touring but wouldn't mind the idea of it in the future but definitely not the reason to chose one or the other, but if it can do it that is definitely a benefit. Any advice is much appreciated! Price is not an issue, we get stung no matter what over here :')
I think the best way to think about it is how often are you in soft snow. Is it a lot? A decent amount? Maybe it's not really soft snow, but un-groomed off-piste terrain? If you find yourself in those situations often, I think it makes the most sense to go with the 100 just so you get a little more versatility in one ski. If, on the other hand, it's not that often, and you're realistically on groomers most of the time, I'd probably stick with the 90. The other benefit of the 90 is you'll save $100 compared to the 100, which is pretty significant. Hope that helps!
Even though I’m 33 yrs old I chose the new Chetler Mini cuz the shorter length suited my 5’1”, 100 pound build. They feel amazing! Is there more info on the densolite foam core in the minis or can you do a review on the minis!?! Thanks!!!!!!!!
Makes a ton of sense to me! We'll try to work in some info on shorter skis like that.
This looks like the perfect ski for my 14 year old son who will be starting teaching ski school. This past season he passed me in just about every category lol. I saw our local ski shop had some early pairs in which we were excited to see. Probably the least important thing, but with this ski I think the art is a big selling point, we noticed the graphic looked much darker and the printing lower quality than they appear online. This could have been those specific pairs or even the darker lighting in the store. Is this something you noticed on the bent collection or even other skis? Can there be a difference in runs of the same ski?
Hi! I don't expect there's any significant difference in the color or brightness of the graphic from one pair to the next. Maybe a little bit, but there shouldn't be much as all the topsheets would be printed in the same production run so to speak. I imagine it's just a difference in how they look only vs in person. They definitely look brighter when the sun comes out, I've noticed that just when skiing them.
Looking for something new over my QST 92s... This is it. Pre-Ordering.
If you're looking for a 184, we have them now as of 3/4!
5'11" 175, 60 yo but very active and in good shape. Ski in Utah - after a 30 year layoff, advanced, ski on piste and alongside it. Ski mostly blues with my young teens and wife, carving, teaching, with a few pines along the edges of the piste, with maybe a run or two per day on my own, in bumps or steeps. Currently on a frontside Dynastar speed zone 14 pro, and wanting something more all mountain and more playful. You had me sold on Ripstick Blacks until this video. I don't know anymore...
What do you think?
It's a different ski for sure, the Ripstick is wider, more powerful, and overall a bit more versatile in that it's a cleaner carver and a slightly better floater. That said the Bent 90 is amazing in the bumps and trees, but doesn't hold an edge like the Elan. I think for true all-mountain the Ripstick is still the way to go, but honorable mention for sure for bumps, trees, and park for the Bent 90.
I am interested in the Atomic Bent 90.
I usually ski on-piste most of the time and occasionally ski unpaved rough terrain. I do not go to the backcountry. I ski in Hokkaido, Japan most of the time, so there is a lot of snow. I am currently using Atomic vantage 90cti, would you recommend Atomic bent 90, what is the difference from Atomic Marven and Maverick? I am also considering elan ripstick and NORDICA SANTA ANA. Can you please suggest some recommendations including the differences from the others?
The Bent 90 could be a really fun ski for you! In the Maven and Maverick, you'll get a little more strength and torsional stiffness, so will hold an edge better, but they aren't as playful or as agile as the Bent. The Ripstick is a very fun ski, kind of like a Maven with a touch more playfulness thanks to longer rocker lines. Santa Ana is a different animal. Much heavier, more like the men's Maverick with metal, but heavier still. Hope that helps!
Thanks for the reply！It was very helpful.
I heard that BLIZZARD's SHEEA9 is also very well received, what are the differences compared to Bent90?
Great video guys! How would you compare/contrast to the outgoing Ranger 94fr? For what use cases should someone lean towards one over the other?
Thanks, Kyle!
The Ranger 94 is quite a bit stiffer than the Bent 90, and when you add the extra width, it makes it a better crud performer and a slightly better carver on the trails. The carbon nose of the Ranger is significantly stronger than the HRZN tech found in the Bent, and while the tails are similar shape, the Ranger's are again, a bit stiffer and more responsive. If you're looking for more of a freestyle, smeary ski versus something that has more power to it, I'd lean to the Bent. Very fun in the trees and bumps, as you can really put that Bent 90 wherever you want.
Great review! Would you guys recommend putting demo bindings on them to take advantage of the versatility? I'm an intermediate skier, 80% piste, but looking to venture into the park more.
Not really. What you gain by being able to move the mount point is likely canceled out by the added weight and higher stand height of the demo binding. I think a retail binding moved slightly more forward is likely a better option.
i just bought my bent 90s as an upgrade from my revolt 95s as i felt those were a little heavy on my feet so i decided to go with the bent 90s this year im just not sure where i should mount them I spend probably 30% park 20% in trees and moguls and i like to do a lot of the side trails when doing down the mountain and i have a playful style just messing around going backwards and twisting i also want to learn to flip i’m 5’8 160lb and i got the 166 bent 90s but i don’t know where i should mount them any suggestions also east coast
Hello! I think something like +2 or +3 would be a good choice. I wouldn't go all the way to +6 as that starts to take away some all-mountain performance in favor of just park performance. +2 or +3 feels like a nice happy medium that will still be fun and agile in the trees, work well on groomers, but will still be relatively balanced for the park. Hope that helps!
Hi I am switching from snowboarding and just started skiing the blue runs at Breck. 57 years old 177cm 185lb. As I get older I seem to be a lazy skier, I just want to cruise around, have fun with a little of everything Trees, powder, groomers. Working the edges What ski would be best for me Bent 100 or 90 166 or 175 and center mount, +2cm++ I am skiing 166 atomic 92 mavericks now and they seem to be a lot of work. I am ok with some sliding turns, actually enjoy it
Probably the 90 in the 175. I think the factory line is fine.
I’m 14, a pretty good skiier, and trying to decide between these our the 2023 Salomon QST 92. I’m more of a playful skiier and I ski all around the mountain. I especially want to start getting good at the upper mountain/off-piste stuff. Your opinion would be appreciated. I’m also looking to get 2 seasons out of these. Thanks guys! 🙏 🙏
I have heard some people I wont be able to handle the QST because it is stuffer. But isn’t it made of a poplar wood core just like the Bents? I also demoed stiffer skis before (Volkl Kenja 88), I am aware it is a women’s ski, but have heard it is a pretty stiff ski. Thanks again! 🙏
Playful skiers tend to gravitate towards the Bent while the QST and Kenja are on the stiffer side. QST has carbon in it as well as poplar, and the Bent uses a thinner overall profile, so that explains the difference in stiffness. For an off-piste focus and more playful skiing, the Bent probably makes more sense.
I think I am going to go with the qst, I think it would be a better long term ski that I can progress and grow into. I also have heard the difference in stiffness is very comparable and not something that is a huge difference. Is this true? Also I do enjoy carving when on groomers, so which ski would be best for that (although I understand they aren’t carving specific skis)
Seriously considering making these my first ski purchase as a good all-around ski to make up a 1-ski quiver (as a TX resident, can only justify it so much!). I end up doing a lot of piste and trail skiing, but I like speed and usually make big turns, only carving heavily when I am skiing something steeper or more advanced where I need to be slower and focus on technique. However I love tree skiing and seek that out along with small jumps wherever/whenever possible and am trying to get better at jumps. 5'11 and 165lb, previously rode the Kendo 88s 163cm and LOVED them but felt they sank just a bit too much in powder stashes in the trees. Do you think the 175s are shorter than ideal for me? I'm afraid to commit to a longer ski since I rode some 180+ demo skis and found it pretty difficult to get good turns in, but also worride the rocker on these skis reduce the "usable" length to something that's too short. Will these skis still serve me well for the the majority of piste skiing that I end up doing when I can't find good trees to ski through?
As long as you're not expecting Kendo-like carving, I think this ski makes a lot of sense for you. It's an absolute blast in the trees and bumps, and I don't think the 184 is necessary. I'd go 175 and have fun!
what will be your adviese 175 vs 184 im 6'1 @@SkiEssentials
I'm long overdue for a ski upgrade. Currently on my old crimson ti 174's. I love this ski and have tried some heavier, stiffer ski's but feel I want something lighter that will still carve nice turns but more playful for trees, bumps etc. Also important is something easy to ski when I'm with the kids. Is this the ski I've been looking for? Also, sizing recommendations. I'm 6' 185lbs for reference.
If you want the lighter ski for trees and bumps and kids, I can't think of much better than the Bent 90. That said, it's not going to carve and hold an edge as strongly as the heavier skis, but if your priority is lighter and playful, then this is great. I'd look to the 175 in that ski for your size and application.
so i just ordered a pair of 2023 90s and i am that guy ur taking about i spend probably 20% of my time in the park 20% in the woods and then the rest being playful on groomer and i'm not sure where i'm gong to mount them i'm 5"6 and ordered 166cm 180 pounds but i'm not sure where to mount them i live on the east coast btw
Hey Eli! I think something like +2 would be a really good spot. If you're only in the park 20% of your time, I don't think it's worth going closer to center as you'll start to take away some performance as an all-mountain ski. +2 or maybe +3 will still feel great on groomers and in the trees, and also shouldn't feel too unbalanced in the park. Hope that helps!
@@SkiEssentials thanks it's does a lot !
what did you end up going with?
Sweet review. One ski quiver 5'7 170lbs adv/expert. Fast poppy turns, trees, on run jumps, backside... Rustler 9 or Bent 90 ?
If you're looking for a ski on the stronger side of the performance spectrum, I'd go with the Rustler. Bent is great, but is more focused on trees, bumps, and park. Rustler has considerably better on-trail carving and stronger behavior.
Pocket Rockets are 90. Those were my "fat" skis, while my all mountain skis were Bandit X at 77
This looks like an ideal all mountain ski for Colorado were the amount of huge and deeply rutted moguls is crazy, (in each single day at Winter Park or Copper I skied more moguls than in 2 entire winters living in Mammoth where the wind autogrooms the mountains, lol)
but it still has enough width for soft snow.
It's one of my favorite all-time mogul skis--would be an excellent ski for those Colorado resorts.
Bob sure does rip the bumps up!
He's still got it!
Great skiing. Ya hit it ALL in one run. Where was this test filmed at?
Thanks! Most all of our review videos are filmed at Stowe in northern Vermont. That's where our company is located as well.
Thank you thank you for the amazing review! I am about to buy a new pair of skis to ski in Europe (I live in north Spain) and I've been watching some of your reviews of 90mm All Mountain skis. A bit confused on which would be the perfect ski for me. I am kind of and advanced skier, 40 years old, willing to practice more and more relaxed skiing and wanting to learn floor tricks as Jeff does on the video, skiing backwards and learn to enter a bit on the park, but still beeing able to used them mainly on the slopes (usually hard snow). I love the Volk Mantra M5 that I've tried a few times, but I'd love to see them compared with these Bent 90 of the Fisher Ranger 94R... Which skis you think make for a better 1-ski-do-it-all ? I really appreciate your advice. Thanks!!
The Ranger splits the difference of the Bent and the Mantra quite nicely, I'd narrow focus to that model as a do it all ski for on and off trail as well as freestyle and freeride skiing.
Love the reviews! I’m torn between these and the Maverick 88/95 for an all mountain ski that can kinda do it all. I was also eyeing the Rustler 9 and the Sick Day 94, but want to ask you guys what might be the best ski for carving, trees, and occasional jumps. (5’11” 165lbs if it matters)
Sick Day 94 is actually a nice blend of all of your skis on the list. It's snappy and energetic while being stable enough for carving. Maverick is the best carver, while Rustler is on the heavier side of this list. Bent 90, like the Line, is just very well-rounded for your application.
thanks for the analysis. no moguls where I ski (Mammoth/Big Bear CA.) Regards -
Surely there's some moguls at Mammoth!
After watching the video and considering the fact that I ride 70% on the slopes, 20% in the park and 10% off the slope, I realized that the bindings on my bent 90 should be set in the middle between the recommended and +6 marks. I think, should I put +3 or +4? On the other hand, 1 centimeter back or forth is unlikely to drastically change the behavior of skis. What can you recommend?
I think 20% park brings you closer to factory than +4. I'd say 2 or 3 would be best.
Hey guys, I've got a pair of Salomon qst 98 in 183cm with shifts and was looking at getting the Atomic Bent 90 for more all rounded snow conditions, trees and moguls in particular. With regards to size of Qst 98, would you think a 175 in Bent 90 be OK for 178cm 75kg average fella like myself? Was thinking err on shorter length for greater play ability and manoeuvrability quickness etc. Great reviews btw 👍
Hi Mal! Yeah, I think that's reasonable, especially since you have the longer QST 98. It's always fun having a shorter ski that's super playful and maneuverable. Go for it!
Amazing review. I'm already thinking "do I want to go +4 or +5". I'm starting to think I might take the extra cm back from center next go around - given your comment on trees and moguls.
As a bigger skier, I just need that extra ski in front of my feet, that's mostly why I just stay on the line.
Loved the review but have one question keeping me from getting these skis right now. I am a very light (>120 lbs) skier at level intermediate/advanced (black diamond, double black diamond.) I love skiing tight trees and moguls when I can, but where I ski those aren't always possible to do so I am looking for a ski that I can rip groomers with and enjoy it at the same time as well. I know in Bob's review, he talked about the bent 90's performance on groomers a good amount, but that's for someone about twice my total weight. Do you think for my weight I'd still be able to push these skis past their limit on groomers? Again, awesome review. Keep doing what you guys are doing.
I think that any skier, regardless of weight, will likely find the carving limit of these skis. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy these skis on the groomers, but they're not in the same league as something like a Kendo or Brahma when it comes to carving. I use them mainly in the woods and bumps, as that's where I try to spend most of my time--I'm rarely at speed on these things. I'd also check out the Black Crows Captis, and on the slightly wider side, Armada ARV 96. Have fun!
Thanks for these reviews!
How does the flex of the shovel compare to an ARV 94?
Is the ARV much softer? I need to butter but would like a bit more all mountain qualities so torn between the two.
It's a bit softer than the Bent but not by much. There's more all-mountain shaping and principles behind the Bent making the ARV slightly more park-oriented, but they both function well in both capacities.
If they made a 188cm I'd buy them. Do they feel short compared to your 100s, Bob?
Bob and I have chatted about that quite a bit. It's interesting as Bob finds a 180 cm Bent 100 too short, but doesn't mind skiing the 184 cm Bent 90. I also think it's curious they didn't just stick with the same length breakdown as the 100 since the skis are so similar, but perhaps they wanted to provide a bigger total of length options between the two withs.
Really useful video! Came here after watching the mid80 skis review. Love all the content!
Question.
I am looking to buy my first set of skis that I can use for on and a bit of offpiste. I am torn between the Bent90 and Kaanjo84. Could you please help.
I am trying to decide between the Atomic Bent 90s and the Kanjo84. I ski europe area and go probably 80% piste and rest off piste. I’ve been trying to get better at Park and usually go in there a fair bit as well for small jumps. Id say i prefer a playful ski but also want to be able to carve. Which ski would you recommend? I am leaning towards the Volkl Kanjo84 for the on piste ability but I am worried it won’t work in the park which I am trying to improve at? Therefore I am tempted by the Bent90 as it looks like it can carve well and also be fun in the park. Do you have any recommendation? Thanks in advance!
If park is anywhere in your list of priorities, you kind of have to take Kanjo off. Bent 90 is fantastic in so many avenues, and is just a whole lot of fun. It's not quite as poppy and energetic as the Kanjo on trail, but way better in bumps, trees, powder, and park. Dynastar M-Free 90 is another great choice.
Very good! ..do U often play with the mounting Point of bindings?.. you spoke in the Story over mounting Point over the Camber Center.. couldn't follow you, will U explain IT again? ..please.
The highest point of the middle of the ski when lying flat is the camber center, and that would line up with your midsole of the boot. It's way more preference than science, so if you are not sure of where to put the binding, the factory line is usually best.
Atomic bent 90 vs line sick day 94?
Can’t decide which to choose.
I ski mainly resort, on piste but love side hits and trees a lot so looking for something maneuverable and with nice pop.
Thanks
The Sick Day is a bit more consistent in the flex than the Bent, which is softer in the tips and tails. If you want a bit more energy and pop, I'd lean to the Line, but I love that Bent 90 for the bumps and trees for sure!
SE
I’m looking for a resort ski that allows me to focus on learning and perfecting moguls. I ski very fast and even though metal has a place I want a more lively, energetic, and playful ski. I’m 5’8” 180#. Will this ski do this? If not what would? I ski mostly out west. I prefer longer skis.
This is one of the best mogul skis I've been on. While it's not quite as stable or strong as some other skis out there, it's amazing in the bumps and trees. If you go a bit longer to the 175, I think you'll be pretty happy.
Great video as always!
How does it compare to the QST 92?
I'm looking for a ski for mainly groomers, trees and offpiste in Norway when there's not a lot of pow (where I'll use my black crows atris).
I'm a advanced intermediate skier and value maneuverability over stability😊
There are certainly some similarities, but differences too... The QST 92 has more pronounced early taper in its shape, and also wider tips and tails. It makes a shorter, and specifically rounder turn. They're both extremely agile and maneuverable, but in the Bent 90 that comes more from the lightweight feel and HRZN tech than sidecut shape. Perhaps the biggest difference is the Bent 90 is a twin tip with far more freestyle influence in its design. Certainly doesn't have to be skied backwards, but is far more capable than the QST. Additionally, QSTs have a little more vibration damping, a smoother feel, but that's at the cost of some weight compared to the Bent 90s.
Nice video! I have my eyes on bent 90 for a while, and is looking to get a pair this year. I am really debating the mounting point and is hoping you guys can provide some insight. I consider myself an advanced skier but I have never skied the park before, which is something I am trying to get into with the having the bent 90 as my first pair of park / free ride ski.
I am debating where I should mount it between +3 to +6 (I want it a bit forward as I do want to ski park). Can you help me understand better what are the main downsides of mounting say just +3 or even on the recommended line like Bob compared to +6 when you ski park? My understanding from research and also what you touched on a bit in the video is that the main downside will be when you ski backwards and do tail grab (due to shorter tail), but will this impact skiing rail at all (do you need more even tip and tail to better ski rail)? Also Jeff, will you be able to ski park and do all your tricks if the minting pint is on the recommended line or just +3 (just trying to understand how big impact the mounting point will be)? Currently I am leaning towards +4, as I do want to be able to do all park tricks with the ski (including ski rails), but at the same time, keep a bit more float for powder days / as free ride ski. Any thoughts? Thanks!
Hi Kevin C!
I think the +6 is pretty aggressive and very central for everything except pure park. In a freeride sense, you'll have a lot of tail to contend with and very little tip to rely on. If you're using these for any type of non-park skiing, and are unsure about mount points, further back is way safer than further forward. I'm also not opposed to a re-mount on a pair of my skis if I don't like how it feels.
SE
Basically the same dimensions as my first twin tip pow ski. Line motherships in a 172, 120-90-110. They were my most versatile ski as they were light and excelled in the park, but were wide enough to be considered a pow ski at the time. I miss those old skis. May have to try these out.
Nice and drifty too! The HRZN tech in the tips makes a big difference.
Looking for a recommendation. Son is 14 yo, 125 lbs, advanced intermediate skier. Looking at the bent 90 or the Black crows Jr. Camox - what are your thoughts?
Hi Chris! Either could work, although I like the idea of the lightweight Bent 90 for a skiers of his size. Very snappy and energetic performance for lighter weight skiers.
I mainly ski trees/moguls w/some fun times skiing switch and small jumps on the mountain. The choice between 175 and 184. I'm 6 feet tall, 175lb. 184 seems too long for what I like to do and 175 seems too short for my height. Only thing making me a little hessitant on these skis. Wish there was a size between 175 and 184.
I think this ski is okay to size up on. They're quite light and maneuverable so the extra few cm's aren't going to negatively affect you all that much. conversely, I just think the 175 is too short for the same reasons. Very fun skis!
Hi, I live in the midwest but I go out west skiing a couple times a year, so I’m mostly in the park but I also want something that would be fun in trees and powder when I do go west. So I was wondering what length I should get (I’m 6 feet tall and around 150 lbs) and where to mount my bindings?
I would get the 184 for length. 175 seems short for your size, although it could work if you specifically prefer shorter skis. For mount point, I would go +3 or +4. +4 better in the park, +3 would be a little better in powder. Either one would be fine, so you can pick which application you want to focus on without worrying too much about choosing wrong. Hope that helps!
Amazing review! Planning to get these next season as a park ski. I'm 5'11" and thinking of going 175 or 184. I have the Bent 100 in 180 and love them but what are the advantages of having longer skis in the park?
More stability in the air, which is kind of necessary because of their lighter swing weight than some other park skis.
Hello guys! Thanks a lot for the review! Definitely one of the earliest and best ones out there. I am 5'8" and about 130 lbs, I thought maybe around 170 would be the ideal length, would you recommend me going with 166 or 175? I am an intermediate skier primarily skiing on piste, but I want to start doing some simple park stuff and do more moguls in the future. I am also considering the black crows captis 171. How would you guys compare between the bent 90 and the captis? I would love your suggestion! Thanks a bunch in advance!!!
The Captis is one of the few skis that I'd have to think about trading my Bent 90's for. Similar ease of use, but the Captis is perhaps a bit snappier and more grippy than the Bent. The lightness, quickness, and floatiness of the Bent is not to be overlooked, and I think it makes for a better park ski for less-experienced park skiers. conversely, I would rather ski the Captis on groomed trails to get the snappy and grippy pop from it. And that's a big compliment considering how much I like the Bent 90. I think you can do 175 in Bent 90 or 171 in Captis.
I am still on an x Wing Tornado 178cm 5'7" 158 lbs, 61yr old, skiing 45+ years looking to get a new ski. What size would you recommend? I ski 60% trees, bumps in NM and Southern Co. How do these carve and do on groomers? What other skiis should I look at? Thanks! Love the reviews.
They're fine on groomers--not the best carvers, but that's part of the charm--they're so playful and fun that it just wouldn't make sense for them to be strong carvers as well. If you're looking for a bit more of a mix, check out Black Crows Captis or the Salomon QST 92--both have a better blend of power and playfulness versus the Bent 90. Either way, I think the high 160's is the place to be for width based on your stats and application. Have fun!
I will try to demo these three very soon.
thanks! @@SkiEssentials
If you had to choose between the Atomic Bent 90, the Maverick 95 Ti and the Sick Day 94, for all mountain (some days of roads and days of mountain-forest) which one would you recommend for someone of intermediate level? ... From your videos I'd say the mavericks but I'm not sure... Thanks for your detailed videos.
Hey Renzo! I think the Maverick 95 is a better all-mountain ski than the Bent 90, especially if you don't need the twin tip shape. I generally like the Mavericks more than the Sick Day also, I just think they have better technology. Maverick can feel somewhat demanding for an intermediate, but as long as you're reasonably athletic, you won't have any issue adjusting to them. Hope that helps!
@@SkiEssentials It helps me a lot to make my decision, thanks for responding and for all the work you take with your videos and how detailed you are. Greetings from Argentina!
Great review!
I’m 5’9”, 165lbs, intermediate skier. Wanted to get a playful ski in my arsenal. Should I go with the 166cm or 175cm length?
Thanks!
I think the 175 is fine. It's a pretty light and playful ski from the start, so I don't think you need to size down to access the fun-factor of these skis.
Thanks for the great reviews. Could you give me some advice on the appropriateness and sizing of these skis. I have other skies for charging. I'm just looking for something playful to muck around on the side of the hill (jibbing, switching, little jumps, just playing around off stuff) while the missus tele's down. I'm in Aus, so mostly hardpack. Also wondering about sizing: I'm 172cm, 70kg, advanced all mountain skier. Feel a bit in between 168 and 175, thinking 175cm?
I'd go 175--they are very light and somewhat flexible, so there's no real need to size up. Have fun!
SE
How do these compare to rossi blackops escaper? Trying to add playful 90 ish to my quiver. Eaast coast 60/40 advance skier at 165 cm and 145 lbs. what length do you suggest? Keep up the good work, you guys have the best ski content on the internet!!
Pretty close comparison, although the flatter tail of the Escaper is what really sets it apart. If the Escaper was more of a twin tip, and narrower overall, they'd be quite similar. As it stands, the Escaper is a much cleaner and more energetic carver, while the Bent 90 absolutely smokes it in the bumps and trees and park.
I own a pair of bent 90s. I would like to add a pow/west coast resort day ski for my collection. I’m a mostly directional free ride skier. Do you think the bent 110 could be a ski for that pow ski?
Hey Nathan! Certainly could work, just remember the Bent 110 has a freestyle-inspired shape. More tail rocker than most directional powder skis. I wouldn't necessarily steer you away from it, but something to consider. If you do choose it, just go a little further back with your mount point.
Nice and detailed review. I probably will buy this ski, but i dont know where to mount them. Id like to learn riding park but also want to ride on and maybe off piste. Would you recommend mounting it as centered as possible for the park or what would you recommend? (i only go ski in the alps)
I think you can still learn park with the factory recommended line. That'll give you more all-mountain performance as well. If, down the line, you feel that you need to be in the middle, then a re-mount is fine.
trying to figure out what mount point for my daughter... being women skis recommend a more forward center for woman? my daughter is a strong all mtn skier I bought her the 157 cm bent 90... she is 5'1'' 108 lbs she loves glades bumps and playing in park also skiing switch... for the most part we spend our time on natural ungroomed terrain and glades when the north east allows us to ski glades we ski the glades!
love to hear an opinion or even a recommendation from you guys
I don't see a need to go further forward than the factory recommended line for an all-mountain application. At her weight, it doesn't seem like there'd be enough mass to make the forward mount make sense. Have fun!
SE
You guys think a +2 is good for a wellrounded and playful Ski ?
Yes, absolutely.
Hey guys, that’s pretty much the ski I’m looking for. If there’s bumps thats what I ski all day, otherwise I find trees and off piste areas. Are there any other options or is this the best
i spend around 30-40% of my time in the park and the rest around the mountain should i go with a +4 or +5?
I'd say +4 or maybe even +3 just so you're retaining the best all-mountain performance you can.
really struggling between the 90 and the 100.. 5'10" 155-160lbs. live in minnesota so the 90 seems like obvious choice but I generally only ski twice a year out west. never really see any crazy powder... the price might make the choice for me. free $100 off from the bent100. the float should be enough with the 90 but how does the 90 hold up in the steeps?
and ive always wanted to try a pivot binding, would that be a good or bad idea? im not advanced enough to really know the differences with bindings
The torsional stiffness of the narrower ski makes it a bit better on steeps versus the 100, especially if that snow is on the firmer side of the spectrum. 90 mm with HRZN tech in the tips is still a pretty floaty ski. As for Pivots, if you're using price as a potential deciding factor for skis, you may not like the sticker shock of a Pivot binding. Marker Griffons, Tyrolia Attacks, and the new Atomic Strive are all great bindings for both safety and performance.
Hey, I currently have the 2021 line chronics 185cm. I enjoyed them but they do not hold up the top sheet chip pretty easy. For my next ski I was looking at the K2 poacher or the atomic bent 90. I ski about 65% park and 35% the rest of the mountain. I enjoy a light tappy ski but also stable at high speeds which would you recommend? Thanks for your time
If you're looking for more durability, the Poacher is one of the most durable park skis I've ever seen. Bents won't chip as easily as the Chronic because it's a partial cap construction, I just can't yet claim they're as durable as Poachers as I haven't had a full year on mine yet. I will say they're holding up pretty good so far. They're also quite a bit lighter than Poachers, so if you're trying to focus on a lightweight ski, Bent is probably best.
How will these handle icy blacks on the east coast?
not well they are really soft
Not the best edge grip for a steep, firm, icy groomer, but good for firm bumps, so kind of depends on which you'e referring to.
Whats the best ski for me: I want a double tip, rocker, really light ski, 75-84, 155-170, I ski the mountain, but look for the trails and small bumps, no black diamond and no downhill fast, I like to ski the mountain, side to side. Thanks.
Hello! It sounds like a narrower twin tip would be the best option for you. You might end up going a little wider than 84, however, as there aren't many skis that narrow with the characteristics you're looking for. Atomic Bent 90 would be a good example of something that checks all your boxes, but is a little wider than your range. The Volkl Bash 86 is similar, but a little narrower. There are quite a lot of options in that mid-80 twin tip category, actually.
The other option for you, which I think worth considering, would be eliminating the need for a twin tip. I know you mention you want it, but I'm curious if you really need the twin tip shape? If you're not skiing switch or using it in the park, you could stick with a more directional ski that may be more beneficial. M-Pro 85, Atomic Maverick 86 C, Black Crows Vertis, Elan Ripstick 88, Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt, Volkl Kanjo 84, those would all be good directional all-mountain skis to consider.
@@SkiEssentials thank you. I may order from you. Will call you. Do you know what number I can dial to purchase. ?
Jeff: Not as good as ... (welcome to the club buddy lol). Great job guys!
It happens slowly, then all of a sudden.
If this isnt the benchmark who else is? Id like to research them :) thanks!
Is plus 6 true center?
Not quite, no. It's about 1 or 1.5 cm back, basically to account for the difference in tip and tail rocker. That's where I (Jeff) have mine mounted and they basically feel true center.
Hey I’m 5’6” about 130lbs still a growing teen and I’m coming off of 163cm armadas looking for something longer and I like the size of my other 172cm skis so should I just go with the 175cm bent 90’s?
Thank you, Josh
Since you're still growing and prefer the longer size, I'd say yes the Bent 90 in the 175 is a good choice. Have fun!
SE
What size would you recommend for a 5’10” 165 lb upper intermediate? I prefer a 179-180 ski, so I’m right between the sizes. Would it be worth going for the Bent 100 for that reason since it’s offered in 180cm?
Hey James! I (Jeff) am just about your size exactly. I also generally prefer the 179-180 range, especially in a playful twin tip. I've been skiing the 184, however, and wouldn't want any other length in this ski. The 184 cm 90 feels feels just as easy to ski for me as a 180 cm Bent 100. That said, if you're hung up on length and can't get past the 184, the 90 and 100 are exceptionally similar skis. Same build, same profile, just 10 mm wider.
Great review as always! A question though, i’ve been torn between arv 96 and bent 90 for a long time now and cant decide what would suit me best. Pretty intermediate skier 185cm 80kg, would really love to focus more on trees and off piste also want a more playfull ski to learn some basic tricks, but also ski piste with friends. I’ve had my old völkl 174 directional carving skis for a while now and the lenght is also a big questionmark feels such a big jump to go from 174 to 184. So pretty much what would be better ”allrounder” for me.
Forgot to add. What mounting point would you recommend since I wont be riding much switch at the beginning at least
The Bent is definitely an easier ski to learn and progress on. The ARV is deceivingly heavy and sturdy, and while that can be great for some skiers, it doesn't sound like it fits your stats and application. I'd say the 175 in that ski would be a great choice. I'd mount it right on the factory recommended line. Have fun!
SE
Looking for my first pair of piste/park ski’s. I’m 5”10 and around 80kg. I’m torn on whether the 175cm would be too big for me. Intermediate skier looking to venture more freestyle/park on a ski that’s lighter and easier to manipulate. Any advice on this ski for me or others that would be more suited. Thanks!
These Bent 90's are great! Easy to turn, floaty and simple in the trees, and with great park capabilities! No real reason to go much further, but I also like the Dynastar M-Free 90 and the Black Crows Captis for this realm.
Excellent job as always boys! Thoughts on the Bent 90 as a tele ski?
Thought about this for a minute, and I think that you'd have to deal with some chatter at speed for sure, but the quickness of the ski could more than make up for that. I telemarked on the Automatic 102 (kind of predecessor to Bent 100) and loved it, so there is something to the Atomic non-metal, non-carbon skis that make for a nice tele setup, it all depends how agile you want the ski to be.
Hi guys, been watching you for years and love all the reviews and content you post. I have a question, i currently have the bent chetler 100 2020, but thinking about buying a pair of the 90s. i ski mostly all mountain (EU) when im with my girlfriend but like to dabble in the park. im an advanced skier looking to improve in the park and for better carving on the piste. IM 6FT 2, 95KG. my 100s are mounted "recommended" but i cant seem to butter without the boot coming out of the binding. and i feel like im mounted too far back to what i want to be now. so thinking about moving forward a few clicks like +2 or +3 if i get the 90s. do you think this is worth the upgrade or not at all and just stick with the 100s? cheers
I like the 90 for a lighter, more maneuverable option than the 100, and if you're looking to get the more park-style performance, then +2 from the line is a good place to start. Likely more the boot/binding interface that's making you come out rather than the ski, which is still pretty darn flexible.
Wanna learn how to ski switch, ski in the east coast so mainly groomers and park. Should i go for a full twin tip or will these work good for switch?
The Bent 90 has more than enough tail for learning to ski switch. No real need to go any further, as these are fantastic all-mountain options as well. Have fun!
SE
(new to skiing) would you say this is a great "do it all" ski for the east coast? any others that compete with the Bent 90s?
Yes for sure. You can go narrower, with something like a Salomon Stance 84 for better on-trail performance, but the 90 is very well-rounded for a lot of levels of skier.
At 170 cm tall, I'm torn between getting the Bent 100 in a 164cm or 172cm, OR the Bent 90 in 166cm. I'm an expert skier that hasn't bought skis in 20 years. I had a few pairs of 1080's back in the day and still have fun on those in a 169cm and a 171cm.
My preferred skiing is all over the mountain, out the gates and looking for things to jump and rocks to drop. I had a pair of Volkl Mantras in 177cm and found they were too cumbersome to be fun, they just wanted to rip. So I want lightweight and fun ski hence tilting towards going shorter since I'll still have surface area due to the extra width. I'm skiing mostly in the Cascades (PNW) now.
What do you think?
172 cm Bent 100 feels like a nice choice. Both the 90 and the 100 are very easy to ski even in longer lengths, so i wouldn't worry about that being too long. It will feel WAY more agile and more playful than that 177 cm Mantra. 164 feels too short, and even the 166 Bent 90 feels kinda short to me. I'd probably point you towards the 175 in the 90, but the 172 cm 100 feels like a nice sweet spot.
Question for you guys. Im 5’10” 175 lb primarily midwest skier that dabbles with the west a few times a year. How different are the bc 100 at 180 compared to the 90 at 175? Narrowed the search down to these 2 and Im at a bit of a crossroads. Intermediate skier 70/30 groomer/park, I like trees but never more than boot height pow.
HI Victor!
I think the 90 will be a slightly better choice for the majority of your time on snow. better at groomers and park, and if you're not consistently in deep snow, that's another vote for the 90.
What mount point would you recommend for me? I recently bought the 184 cm. I would say I do 85% all mountain 15% park but I also like to spin around on flatlands and do side hits on trails.
Thank you
The Factory line works great for that application.
I want these skis but I want twin tips. I am switch into skiing and want some feedback about twin tip and partial tip. Planning on skiing park and all mountain.
While a bit more low profile, the Bent 90 is certainly a twin tip in the freestyle realm. This makes it a deadly blend of park and all-mountain.
Hi, In thinking these skis or the k2 poachers what are your thoughts. I am 5,11 and weigh 160. Im looking for a ski that I can use both in the park and on groomers.
It's a difference in weight and stiffness, with the Poacher being the heavier and stiffer of the two. As such, it does become a better groomer ski than the Bent 90, and in the park, it depends if you want some more substance on your feet or if you prefer quickness and maneuverability, in which case the 90 is a better choice. Objectively, though, the Poacher is a slightly better groomer ski.
What size do you think would be good for me for the atomic?
@@yitzisinger2065 175
Hi !
Same construction with 2024? Only top sheet change ?
Thanks 🔆
Yes, correct!
How far back from center is the recommended line? I can’t find it anywhere online
It's at least -6cm but not much more than that.
I’m in the Midwest 6’6 150lb, would be primarily on groomers/harder snow. Would this be too wide of a ski?
If you're looking for a playful ski for these conditions and terrain, then it'll be fine, but if you are in the market for a ski that excels on groomers and harder snow, there are better options. Atomic's Maverick 88Ti is a better choice due to the build and more directional shape, for example.
Hey! I’m coming from a bent 110 but want something better suited for groomer and park days but don’t want to commit to either. Would you recommend mounting at -3 from center (same as my 110s) for a similar feel as my 110s? Thanks!
The rocker profile is different, so the same point as the 110 will feel farther forward in the camber on the 90. The Factory line in the 90 is pretty good.
Which bindings would you recc. for the Bent 90s?
Amazingly, we have the 2024 version in stock in the 175 at the moment! I'm sure more sizes are on the way, just not sure when.
www.skiessentials.com/catalog/product/view/id/440061/s/2024-atomic-bent-90-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-14-gw-bindings/category/3/
Hey Bob and Jeff, thanks for all that you do! You guys are legends!
I just bought a pair of Bent 90s, 184cm and mounted them +3 from factory. I also have a pair of QST 99s, 181cm from last year, mounted at factory.
I took my bent 90s out for the first time this past weekend, and one thing I noticed is they are noticeably harder to release an edge than on my QSTs. There were a couple times where I tried to turn but the edge wouldn’t release and I’d keep shooting forward. As the day went on, I was able to kind of figure out that keeping my weight forward would alleviate some of this, but every once in a while I’d get caught off guard. I’ve never had this issue with my QSTs. Is this something you’ve noticed at all while riding them? Do you think this could be due to the high rise camber of the Bent 90s, or could it be an affect of mounting forward from factory? Mainly just curious, trying to attribute ski characteristics to their profiles
I think it may be a combination of the mount, the high camber of the ski, and the softness of the tips and tails. If you are able to bend the shovel into the turn because of the forward mount, then there's more ski behind you that you need to account for. If you're expecting the ski to behave like a directional carver, the performance will not be the same. Since there's more camber from the boot sole back to the start of the tail rocker, that could be giving you inconsistent feedback on the release of the turn. The QST, in addition to being a more directional ski mounted at factory, is a sturdier ski as well, so I'd expect the edges of that ski to be more engaged more of the time. The softness of the Bent is part of the charm.
Interesting, thanks for the response! I’m excited to get more days on them so I can figure out all the nuances
Hi I’m an intermediate skier and I’m 5foot 9 170ibs. I ski the majority of the time on groomers and trees. Should I get the 166cm or 175 ?
I'd go 166 in that ski. Have fun!
SE
Same day drop of a Bent Chet review and Demo sale. Ski Essentials is on 🔥
All for you, Christopher!
What mounting point would you recommend for someone who wants to do everything?
Traditional mount point works great for everything. I think it's "Factory Recommended" on the ski.