2023 Salomon QST 92 Ski Review with SkiEssentials.com
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.ค. 2024
- The unsung hero of the Salomon QST line! We had a blast doing some further testing on this QST 92 and we think there's a lot to like here, especially for a ski that's $549.95.
Written Review: www.skiessentials.com/Chairli...
0:00 - Intro
3:00 - Construction
6:05 - Shape vs Previous QST 92
7:20 - Freeride Feel
9:05 - On-Piste Performance
13:30 - Off-Piste Performance
16:40 - Skiing Switch
19:10 - Mogul Performance
20:25 - Length Discussion
Thank you! I've been looking for what ski I wanted for over a year and you guys have just sold me on the QST.
Great ski! So versatile, so fun.
Thanks for this! Just got a pair of
Awesome, have fun!
Bought this version of QST 92 for this year and this review really had an impact on my decision! Had the chance to ski them during the weekend and had a blast!! They are easy to turn, love trees and bumps, surfy feeling and extremely manoeuvrable, just as you described. The green color looks neat and catchy. Bought them for 40% off from last year's. Salomon has really got it right with QST line. This season is going to be jollyyy. Thanks both you!
Awesome, enjoy!
I just added the QST92 (184cm) to my quiver, my local shop had them marked down 30%!!! Love these skis!!! They are a ton of fun! I also have it's big brother, the QST98 (189cm), they're perfect for the PNW! Thank you for the review.
Great find!
I have one pair and test skis regularly. These are the best deal in that segment without a doubt! Happy that you talk about that. These skis need more praise and at that price i encourage skiers that have more carving skis to get a pair of those for softer days and spring. This will be the best 500$ spent in ski equipment. You guys are legit testers and reviewers your comments on ski performance where 100% correct. I have no affiliations with salomon….my others skis are volkl racetigers and deacon 84, head gs race dept. I bought a pair for my wife last spring and when she got at the end of the run she told me it felt like cheating because the skis were so easy. Kore 93 would be my 2nd choice….on sale.
Agree 100%. At this price, people should be way more impressed by the performance of these skis than you typically hear. That's why Joe (Salomon) referred to it as the unsung hero of the QST line. It's a fantastic ski and packs a ton of value, but you don't hear about them nearly as much as the 98, 106, Blank, etc.
Agree and for the east us and Quebec canada 92 is enough 95% of the time. Keep the reviews coming i really enjoy them.
Absolutely love your reviews. I'm looking to add an additional ski to my quiver making it all of two total :) I'm 6'0" and 175 pounds. Have the 2023 Kore 99 in a 184. Now looking for something in the 90mm category that is super well-rounded and versatile. Traits I'm aiming for are: quick, maneuverable, relatively forgiving, decent/enjoyable carving (though doesn't have to be top-top notch), something I can take down steeper chutes off piste with control/agility, ease of use in moguls, strong general fun factor without compromising too much in directional performance. My six ski short list I'm trying to at least narrow down to two or three. It includes this QST 92, Line Blade Optic 92, Black Crows Captis, Elan Ripstick 88, Blizzard Rustler 9, and Armada Declivity 92ti. I'm 52, been skiing 10 - 15 days/year on average since my pre-teens and would characterize my ability level as high end advanced, low-end expert. Love to turn, love to explore, don't do park really at all. I'm probably 60/40 on piste/off piste. Would love and appreciate any thoughts on shortening/prioritizing this list down to say 3 based on all this (w/ sizing suggestions as bonus if not too much to ask :). Really appreciate all you guys bring to the reviews, just discovered you this year and am thoroughly impressed by (and kind of addicted to) your reviews and the collaborative nature between the two of you. A great service to us sort of perfectionist shoppers (I don't buy often, so like to get it right when I do!). Thanks again.
I think the narrower skis may be a better complement to what you have, and of those, I really like that Ripstick--it's pretty turny and has some good off-piste capabilities as well. Captis falls more to the playful side, kind of like the Line and QST. Declivity, while on the wider side, is the best carver of the group, so it skis slightly narrower than it is. I'd narrow focus to the Ripstick or the Declivity, and you could base a final choice on whether you're looking for a lighter and quicker ski in the Ripstick or a heavier and more powerful one in the Armada. For your stats, I'd keep it around 180--both skis come in this length.
Which one did you end up buying and why? I hesitate between the QST 92 177 and the Ripstick 88 189… My wife would like me to avoid buying both haha
It is a great ski. Feels good under foot and fun in the moguls. And I have the older 92's.
The new ones are even better! At least from a sturdiness and crispness standpoint.
I've been watching your videos all season while I've been demoing to find a new daily driver, and they have been invaluable! I've decided to go for these puppies in the 184 length and wondering if you had any recommendations for bindings to pair with them. I'm 6' 2" and 195 lbs, live in SLC and ski 2-3 times a week all season. Thanks for all the work you guys do to put these out!
Awesome! We pair them with Tyrolia Attack 14's and they work great!
www.skiessentials.com/2023-salomon-qst-92-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-14-gw-bindings.html
I don't know about grading skis, but I would love to see more discussion about mogul performance in your reviews
Noted!
@@tomasaro4910great idea. I would love to see it for the chick skis too
I bought mine last month from ski essentials. I replaced my Ripstick 88 with the QST92. Very happy with the decision. The QST is more surfy and Even easier to turn than the rip stick. It makes more sense in my quiver.
I was able to take them to hunter mountain after the 18" of snow last week. They were pretty much perfect for a packed powder day. I think you get A bit more energy and Edge hold out of the rip stick.
But I definitely Prefer the QST in moguls, trees and soft snow.
Great write up. I have the 2022 model and was initially torn between these and the Ripsticks. Pretty sure I would have been good with either but nice to hear your take on the differences.
@JesterX Fan I think you made the perfect choice. 2022 model is actually more versatile And better as an all mountain ski. 2023 is a little bit more one dimensional. But more surfy!
Awesome to hear! Big fans of both QST and Ripstick for sure.
Agreed. I also have both skis. They both ski well but like you said, advantage QST in the moguls.
Ok, I am now convinced. I think I know what I want in my first set of skis and what you guys are describing is exactly what I expect. I'm gonna rent some on my next trip and if it works out buy them. 😎
Go for it!
Nice review. You mentioned the structural differences between the 2022 & 2023 models. Does that translate to a significant difference in how the skis perform on the mountain or do they still ski quite similar in similar conditions. BTW, recently purchased a pair of 2022 QST 92’s from you guys. Appreciate the great service! Cheers
It's more of a grippy feel underfoot and a smeary feel in the tips and tails due to the taper. I think the new build and shape make the 92 more freeride-oriented versus all-mountain, and for Salomon, that distances QST from Stance within their catalog quite effectively. No issues with the 2022 ski, the 2023 just takes it to another level. Have fun!
SE
Hey guys,
I love the reviews.
Im 193 cm 150 lb and looking for skis. Im currently struggling to decide between the qst 92 or the bent 90s I probably spent the most time on-piste but I also want to have lots of fun off-piste. I like to ski "fun" on- or off-piste.
Hope to hear from you soon
HI Anton!
The QST is pretty darn automatic. It's snappy and energetic but also floaty and fun. The Bent is floaty and fun for sure, but doesn't quite have the same on-trail acumen as the QST. I'd lean that route, likely in the 176, but the 184 would be fine if you know you prefer longer skis.
Hi SkiEssentials,
thanks a lot for the work you're doing, this is extremely helpful and unique.
After spending hours watching your reviews I am split torn between qst 92 and rustler 9 and I am looking for an advice.
I am 5'7" and 195lb, intermediate lvl skier. Enjoying taking off-piste sections, but still not advanced enough to enjoy trees or true powder.
Mostly I enjoy exploring off-the-groomers section of the resort and fancy to learn the Jeff's ski style where you casually carve on the groomers but add some jumps/switches to it.
I am looking for a ski that would help me progress and won't sink in the occasional powder zones around the slopes.
So aiming to QST 92 or Rustler 9 both in 168cm length and looking for some advice. Or maybe I am better with some other options?
Thanks!
My bet is that the slightly narrower QST 92 will offer you a greater overall chance for success. The Rustler is great, but is not quite as adept in an on-trail format and in a carved turn. This puts the QST in a pretty rare air--so incredibly able in both on and off-trail situations. The Rustler leans slightly more to the off-trail side of the spectrum. 168 sounds good!
i have lots to say and i am going to act like i know what i am talking about.. you guys said that these have 15m turn radius.. the QST 106 x 188 that i broke my arm on i think had a 21m turn radius.. i could have sized those down to a 180 and been fine.. i want to compare the QST to my DPS F100 RP x 184.. i find a lot of similarities between these skis.. i describe both as waterskis that will go through anything.. my personal opinion is that they are soft snow skis that will go through the crud.. i still really haven't skied enough slush to know.. my DPS have the 15m turn radius which just like these make them extremely fun when there are a ton of people on the hill.. or you could say that they are fun while going at slow speed.. but get this.. when i went skiing on Tuesday 12-20-2022 it started as 5 degrees and when i left it was 27 degrees.. i think you guys will get this but the snow lost that grippiness of the sub zero temps.. i checked my stats and i got up to 55 mph.. i am sure that was during the warmer part of the day.. btw.. that was faster than i ever had my stockli stormrider 88s.. and i know that i can still get those DPS to go faster and i would say the QST are basically the same.. what i mean by that is that they are an incredible damp but stable ski.. that and what effort i put in i get out of the ski without it being reactive..
i would compare my kastle 96 fx hp to the DPS pagoda or alchemist construction or maybe even in the head kore in the fact that they are reactive skis.. i put a little into the skis and the skis put out so much that i can't handle them.. that was kind of my experience with being on volkl..
the other day i started watching your review on stockli but i fell asleep... i will have to watch that one when i get some time but i totally agree with jeff when he says that the ski needs a hard surface.. that is how my 2016 stormrider 88s are.. even with the hard surface these skis with the 19m turn radius do not like to make quick turns and the tails do keep me in the turn whether i want to be in the turn or not..
Hey guys,
These videos are so incredibly helpful for trying to decide on a new pair of skis.
I’m in the market for my first pair of non-rental skis. I’m a decent intermediate skier, but I still have a lot of experience to gain. I ski about 6-7 days a year out west and I am looking for a ski that can handle anything. I spend about 50/50 on groomers vs off in the trees or in bumps. I’m looking to spend more time off trail as my skills and confidence improve. I’m 5’8” 150 lb. I’ve basically narrowed it down to the QST 92 or 98, blizzard rustler 9, and black crow camox. Do you have any thoughts on what’s best for me?
Thank you so much!
Thanks, Jacob!
You're in the right zone for sure! I think you'd be very happy on any of those. QST (both 92 and 98) are wonderful floaters for the width, but isn't quite as snappy as the Rustler or Camox. If you're looking for more energy, I'd look to the latter 2. Between those, the Rustler has a bit higher performance ceiling while Camox is more playful and fun-loving. Have fun!
SE
As it's on my mind and somewhat relevant to this video, thoughts on detuned vs sharpened tips for a ski like this (narrower freeride ski with good rocker and taper)? Have them sharp up to the widest point or detune the rockered portion? Got new skis and I'm stressing 🤣
Hey Steven! Depends how you ski, really. Some skiers choose to de-tune the contact points to make things feel less-catchy. Others, particularly on a ski like this, would prefer to keep it sharp as you already have a relatively short effective edge. Don't stress too much. My advice for someone in your position is to ski it a couple days with the factory tune. Get to know its personality and feel, then make tweaks to customize for your personal skiing style and desires.
Thanks for your reviews they’re 👍. I ski a mantra 102 and love them on fast days but getting beat up on bumpy off days. Question-I have volkl 90eight’s that I’m not super in love with and wondered how you would compare them to the qst 92 and bent 90? Thanks
The 90Eight is more precise and exacting than the QST 92 or Bent 90 which are more drifty and easier to turn. The QST 92 is a no-brainer easy to choose ski that you simply cannot go wrong with. The Bent 90 isn't as good of a carver, but it is a better choice if you're including park in the equation. If not, the QST is a better option.
You boys are killing it. Loving the new "right ski, right day" review philosophy.
Any comment on binding choice?
Any 30/70 Touring/Resort application possibility?
I'm an advancing intermediate skier in the Austrian Alps. I've got a Mantra M5 and a K2 Shreditor, looking for something in between and questioning whether I could move my Shift bindings to this ski from the Shreditor...
Keep up the awesome work! This season feels like a great step forward for you both as presenters and producers. Vielen Dank!
Thanks, Tom!
Do you need two touring options, or can you leave the BC to the Shreditor and just get an alpine binding for QST? Nothing wrong with the Shift for the QST at all, or a Marker Duke PT takes the downhill performance to the alpine level, but it's heavy. I think if you have the tour setup, and like it, just get a Strive 14 for the QST and call that your lift-served setup.
SE
@@SkiEssentials thanks!!!
Will be testing the touring ability of the Shreditor as soon as we get some decent snow here.
I am a little concerned it'll be too wide after hearing you mention that fat tourers can cause chaos in the skin tracks. 😬
Standby!
Quick follow up, what would you see as a direct comparison to this QST in terms of fun factor, width, all mountain application? 🤔 Thanks again
I’ve been on a Salomon X Wing Tornado 178. I like to carve but mainly ski, bumps and trees, 60% off piste. but I’m also turning 62. I ski in New Mexico and Southern Colorado. 5’7 156 ilbs. The ski looks really great very similar to what I’m on. What size would you guys recommend? What other skis would you recommend? Love your reviews, thank you.
It's a great ski that can do a whole lot of things--I think you'll be stoked on the versatility for sure. I'd go with the 168 in that ski. May seem short, but they handle it very well.
Hi! First of all, really nice job with your reviews! I'm from Europe, usually skiing in the Pyrenees and the Alps. I own a pair of Vist Crossover 3, 10 years old, 84 underfoot... which I love and I'll keep. But I have recently bought a pair of Scarpa Quattro boots with the intention of doing some approaches as well as skiing the whole resort (mostly playing away, trees, bumps... but liking much groomers too). I'll put shitft bindings. For the akis, I began looking to the Mavericks 95ti / Senders 94ti... then saw how you loved the Unleashed 98... and finally also taking into account the QST 92 and Rustler 9. I'm going to pick between them, I'm 5'9 and 160lbs. What would you suggest?
Paired with a Shift, for trees and bumps mostly, I do think there's a lot to like about the QST 92. Maverick and Sender have more of an on-trail personality for sure while the Unleashed and the Rustler have a lot of splay in the tips and tails--good for most everything other than uphill. QST seems to marry the applications and requirements quite well. I'd lean to that ski in the 176.
Got these for 300 euro, I hope they will deliver, such a steal!
Such an underrated ski! Great value!
Hey guys! Awesome review - kinda impressed with my excitement about this ski! Makes me wonder what skis in 90-100mm are the best “do it all”?
Bob and I tend to get really excited about skis that we think hold a lot of value. At $549, you're getting a lot of ski and a lot of versatility for your dollar. There are a lot of contenders for that. It really comes down to skiing style and personal preference when deciding what the "best" is, but this is definitely the best category for "do it all" skis IMO (90-100). I'm sure someone out west would argue that wider is better, but I think this range is a great sweet spot for versatility for most skiers.
Love this and all of your reviews! I just ordered a pair for the QST 92s in 184cm. I’m 6’3” 225lbs, mostly ski blues and maybe the easy blacks on the west coast. Do you think this is a good length for me or should I try to exchange them for the 177cm version? This is my first ski that I’m buying for myself. I usually ski a hand-me-down set that is 166cm and is very short for me
I'd think the 184 is the way to go. I'm about the same size and that's what I'd take, although I did enjoy the shorter ones as well, but I don't think they'd be as good in a daily format.
I currently ski RTM 84’s and Love them. Unfortunately they are not great at going slow. I’m looking for a better ski for skiing with my 7 year old. These sound great for being decent on groomers but more capable for just hanging out with family. Would they be stiff enough to hold a larger framed person. Thanks, Love your reviews
I'm 6/2 225 and found the 176 in the QST 92 to be a very sturdy ski. While not too stiff, they are great for skiing with kids for sure.
Currently skiing on Brahma 88 mostly in the Northeast. Looking for a new ski that is not as stiff and more fun. I like the QST 92 and the Ripstick 88. Which would be better as an east coast daily quiver?
Hey Kevin! Both those skis are a ton of fun, but I feel like the QST 92 would be a better complement to your Brahma (that is if you're planning on keeping them). A little wider, way more tail rocker, etc. Ripsticks have a somewhat similar shape to your Brahma, just lighter, softer, and more playful. So, if it's a complement, I would go QST. If it's a replacement, you may want Ripstick as I do think that ski is a little more rewarding on trail.
I get the feeling that Salomon took this from a solid reliable do it all for almost everyone , to a more freeride priented, less broad range ski.
I've often felt I should have grabbed a pair of 21/22s but I'm not sold on the new shape asuch for a "one ski" east coaster.
I can completely understand that, but you can't get too hung up on the shape with the new QST 92. They really strengthened it underfoot, kind of negating any lack of stability the change in shape would cause. It's basically the same story as the 98, 106, etc. The shape changed quite drastically, but they didn't lose any stability or grip, at least not in my opinion.
Hey guys thanks for your amazing content. Im from Europe and ski often in Austria. My last few ski trips i started to try a little bit off piste action and loved it but still have plenty of room to improve. Normally i only rode on piste with a lot of carving. Always got some rental skis and always pure on piste skis.
Now i plan to buy my first own skis since a long time and from your review the qst 92 would fit good right?
Im 178 and weigh about 85 kilo.
Im thinking about the 176 size of the qst 92?
My profile would be 50 50 i quess for on and off piste.
The reason i think about getting my own pair is because you get the 22/23 models relatively cheap now.
The QST is a great choice for so many people. I'd go 176 in that ski. Have fun!
I’ve got the 2021-22 model and they vibrate quite a lot during high speed runs, I don’t know if they’ve done something to correct this. Anyway overall I love them, they’re fun.
That's a conversation we've had quite a bit about the QSTs. Each version gets a little bit better with vibration damping, which is certainly true with this 92. Not a night and day difference, but certainly smoother than the previous version.
Hmm I have the 2023 version still chatter in high speed but it better now
I love these reviews. Is it fair to say compared to the Atomic Maverick 95 Ti's, overall you would favor these QST's?
I would. For skiing more in the trees, bumps, and softer snow, the QST is definitely the more accomplished ski. At high speeds on groomed and firm snow, the Maverick has the edge, but everything else favors the Salomon.
Jeff, how do you film Bob in the moguls? If he is saying they are dicey, your video looks great where I would be tossed trying to do anything other than survive them😂… great job on the reviews and the videos
Lots and lots and lots of practice! And it's still tough. I'm doing some weird stuff back there. Lots of counter rotation and my left arm probably moves around a lot to try to keep the other arm as stable as possible. This wasn't too bad as Bob took it easy on me with the speed, but when he opens it up, it's tough!
Great review guys :)
Im just wondering about the performance on icy groomers? can they hold an edge there as well?
Not too bad, actually! I think skis like this at this width get a bad reputation for not being able to hold, but the shorter radius and sturdy underfoot section make a big difference when it comes to ice and hard pack. We're still not talking about the same performance as a true front side or detuned race ski, but for what it is, I'm very impressed.
Hey guys thanks for the great review. I was wondering if you could help me find my next pair of ski. What’s the best all mountain ski for someone who like to do carving on the slope but also want something good when off piste occasionally. I was looking for the Nordica enforcer 88, Atomic Bent 90 or the Volkl kendo 88. If you have any better suggestions you can let me know. I ski on the east coast. I’m 5’11 145 lbs. Thanks
The Kendo and Enforcer place more emphasis on the carving aspect while the Bent is more freeride/freestyle. I think the QST 92 offers a nice blend of the two, especially for here on the east coast. I'd look to the QST in the 176. Have fun!
SE
I demoed the ski on a firmer day in the Tahoe area because of this review and absolutely loved it!
I’m super curious what skis you’d consider pairing it with if I was to use the qst 92 as a daily driver but need a 50/50 soft snow/touring ski for the west.
If I was to go wider for a soft snow/touring ski, I think I'd take a square look at the Nordica Enforcer 104 Unlimited. That and the Blizzard Hustle 10, or 11 if you're looking to go 110+ in terms of width.
@@SkiEssentials thanks! I’ll demo the enforcer this weekend. Any thoughts on the new QST 106 echo? It seems logical that the similar shapes between the 92 and 106 would work well together.
Hello guys, congrats for the review it was amazing! Im an advanced 1m76 skier from europe and Im hesitating between the stance 84 and the Qst 92, I want to put them freetouring bindings for a 60/40 (resort/touring) skis. What would you recommend? Thanks!
I'd go QST 92 if you're going to be in off-piste zones more often than not, and they're pretty darn good in the resort as well.
Wondering how they compare to the Atomic Bent 90? I've been considering both as potential tele skis.
Similar skis in some aspects, but also different. Bent 90 feels lighter and more energetic. Snappier flex pattern. The QST 92 feels surfier, and also stronger. More vibration damping and a little stiffer underfoot.
Hi, I've been skiing on 2015 elan amphibio 88 xti that are 178 mm I bought used as my first skis. I'm looking upgrade my skis and thanks to you all have settled on the QST 92s since I spend a lot of time in the woods and bumps!
I'm 6 foot 180 pounds and was wondering if you recommend the 176 or 184? I read Bob tried the 176 which he enjoyed but would opt for the 184 to buy. If I do go the route of buying the 184 will I sacrific any manuverability in the trees/bumps?
Thank guys!
I think the 176 makes sense if you're looking to spend time in the bumps and trees. What I was most surprised about with the 176 was how stable and confident it felt. I really couldn't believe how much I liked that 176, and I'm almost convincing myself that I might even get that! Have fun!
SE/Bob
hey,
i ski in australia (so east coast quality snow) at an intermediate level, love ripping groomers/side hits and the occasional bumps. i do this right now on the arv 86 but being a park ski this ski struggles in bumps/steeps and anything that isn’t freshly groomed. would getting on the QST 92 23/24 be worth the upgrade?
cheers
Yes! Huge upgrade! The other ski you should consider is the new Armada ARV 94. That ski is still good in the park, but similarly versatile to the QST 92. Hope that helps!
Great video! When will the 2023/24 QST 92's hit your website?
They're on there now! And on sale! We don't have a lot of size options left for this year, unfortunately but will certainly re-stock this summer.
www.skiessentials.com/2023-salomon-qst-92-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-14-gw-bindings.html
@@jonstubb7893 Apologies! Generally we start receiving those products in early-mid summer.
What would you recommend between the QST 92 and Head Kore 93? Intermediate skier mostly skiing in North Carolina with a trip out west each year
The QST is such a no-brainer of a ski. The Kore takes a bit different of a skier, but the QST can really suit a whole lot of skiers. I'd lean that route.
I am high intermediate and ski mostly in VT with once a year out west. What would you recommend between QST 92 v Rustler 9 2023? I already have a 2022 Ross 86 Ti looking for a more playful ski. or do you think any of these 2 are not significantly different from the Rossy? and should i consider something totally different line the Bents?
It's really difficult to argue against the QST, especially for a VT and western US option. Rustler is great, but there's something about the ease of use and quiet nature of the QST that's hard to pass up.
Hi guys!
I am looking for something fun! Something that can turn quick in the woods (pretty steep) and that has good floating abilities. I'd like to do some butters and park skiing too, but also can hold up well when its icy.
I don't really know if the QST 92 is a good pick. The QST 98 is a bit too slow maybe..? Well I haven't ridden it but that's what people say. So I'm primarily torn between the QST 92 and 98, the black crow camox and the blizzard rustler 9.
Any thoughts?
Thank you!
QST 92 is awesome! Camox has a lot of similar energy, just a bit wider. Rustler goes a step further with the dampness of metal, but overall, the QST 92 is quick, agile, and floaty--just what it sounds like you're looking for.
Hey guys is that a ski I could consider doing some east coast touring on with a Solomon Shift? A little narrow maybe but some of the wider skis seem to be alot harder to flip from edge to edge for me. Getting older and very protective of my sore knee.
Sure! While not the lightest of the group, the QST 92 is a fantastic and versatile ski that is easy to turn and floats quite well.
Awesome review. Now I am undecided again. QST 92 or Bent 90? Thoughts? Are women version identical construction, thinking about picking up a pair for the wife.
Yes same construction for men and women. The QST is more versatile for softer snow conditions, that's for sure. If you're taking park out of the equation, I think the QST is probably a better choice for most skiers. Hope that helps!
Bob, do you have any tips for skiing the bumps? Haven't had much luck with them. Are you supposed to turn into the face of the bump? I watched some videos that said to turn on the top of the bump but the bumps I see in real life in the PNW are about 10x bigger than the bumps in the youtube videos. lol.
I have lots of tips. The first thing I'd say is that there isn't one right/correct way of doing it, mostly it comes down to your level of comfort in given steepness, mogul tightness, and snow condition. There's a lot of improvisation, and mastering that only comes with practice. If you want to improve, seek out moguls in a variety of conditions. Icy bumps are the best to improve your overall skiing with, because they make everything else seem easier. Look for a "line" or pattern in which you can time your turns and take an efficient path down the fall line. Try to stay in that corridor, keeping your shoulders pointed where you want to go. Make sure your hands are the first part of your body down the hill, and never ski past them or let them drag behind you. Pretend like you're holding a big beach ball. Keep your shins glued to the tongue of your boot (not literally). If you're having trouble keeping up with your turns, plant your poles faster and reach down the hill to the top of the next bump. Exaggerate your absorption--bend your knees more than you think you need to when encountering a mogul and keep your back straight and hips square--no hunching! There's a big difference between leaning forward and being forward. Try to keep your head and shoulders still and level while your legs work somewhat independently underneath. Repeat.
As far as where to turn, when you're starting out, it's fine to slide into the face of the bump with the sides of your skis and use that to pivot and turn on. As you progress, you'll take a steeper angle into the face of the bump. Practice, and have fun!
SE/Bob
Thanks a lot, Bob!
Would you guys recommend either the Salomon Strive 14 or the Look SPX 12 GW bindings for the QST 92 ?
I think I'd opt for the lighter Strive over the denser Look. That seems to line up with the ski's intent a bit more.
hey! looking for a good pair of all-mountain ski. i'm really not that of a park rat, i mostly am at home at the piste but go offpiste every now and then. wanted to buy my first pair of twin-tips and am looking at the ARV 96 / Bent 100 (90) but overall feeling a little bit lost because they're all described as park ski and i dont wanna go only park - i still go park but just not that often if you understand me. Any recommendations?
thank you so much!!
Bent 90 or 100 is a perfectly reasonable option! Those fall into a similar category of being technically a directional ski, but capable in the park. Bents lean more towards twin tips than the QST, but still somewhat similar. If you truly want a twin tip, stick with a twin tip! This QST is great, but if you have your heart set on a twin tip, might as well get a real twin tip!
@@SkiEssentials what length would you recommend? I am 176cm, riding a racetiger rc (völkl) 160cm.
Was looking at 166 (eye level) or 175. What is your opinion?
I ski mostly VT at Stratton and do take a few trips out to Alta and Deer Valley each year. Should I go with a 92 or 98. I have to ski some icy groomers but like to be playful and hit trees and moguls
I think the 92 will be plenty. It's considerably more grippy and poppy in VT here, and if you get a good snow day in Utah, then the QST is still a very good floater. For one ski, mainly in VT, I think the 92 has more to offer.
I know this is an older vid but I’ll go ahead and ask… seen these on sale and I’m looking for an all mountain ski in this width that floats well but will be satisfying in groomers too. Currently I use a volkl blaze 106 as powder ski and I love them off trail but even in Utah , once I’m on a groomer I’m not very happy carving, and if I hit ice or harder crud it doesn’t give me much confidence. I was hoping for something that can still float well enough in some pow but at least satisfy me on the groomers. Is this a recommendation? Any other suggestions to fit the bill (Ripstick 96)?
If you find a QST 92 from 2023 on sale, that's a good thing. Ripstick 96 is awesome--a bit more directional and a slightly more engaging carver, especially at higher edge angles.
I’m 14, a pretty good skiier, and trying to decide between these our the 2022-23 Atomic Bent 90. 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.
Hello, very good video! I wanted to know what size ski should I use, I am 1.82 cm tall and I like to ski in trees, freeride and spin in the air. Should I use 168 or 186? Thank you
Do you not want the 176? I'd take that length if I were you.
Isn't that te best selling skis this year as playfully allrounder? I bought this bc of essentials, so can you tell me which boots, and binding you are wearing in those playfully shots of video?
We just were skiing these with a demo binding. Anything with a relatively low stand height would be great. Salomon Strive, Tyrolia Attack, Marker Griffon... all great bindings for the QST. I (Jeff) ski a Speedmachine 130 boot, Bob goes back and forth between a bunch of different boots, but generally is in the 120-130 flex range and a 99-100 last. Boots are pretty darn personal, so I wouldn't just go off what we use.
There are a lot of people who keep their skis 5+ seasons, (lets say 30 days per season), so where would you rate this ski as its longevity?
I can't see any reason why this ski would or would not last that long. Seems like a well-built and sturdy product to me, and the carbon stringers don't seem to lose much energy over time.
What about the mounting point? Do you recommend mounting a bit forward from the recommended line?
Not really--the seem perfect enough on the line.
When you say it’s an east coast ski, what exactly are you meaning by that? I’m an intermediate skier on the west coast mostly skiing at a moderate speed because I’m teaching my kids. I ski mostly northern Ca. Shasta and Tahoe. Will this one work for me? It looks like a fun ski
Certainly can be used anywhere, it's not exclusively an east coast ski by any means. I believe we referenced skiing it in Alta at least once in this review. It's more that in comparison to wider QST models, 98, 106, Blank, the 92 feels like it's a more likely east coast choice. All that said, it sounds like it would be an excellent ski for where you live and how you ski!!
@SkiEssentials -- hey bob, did you ever take the 184's for a test drive? It seems like you really (surprisingly) dug the 176's, but wondering if you had a definitive take after trying the 184's? I'm 6'2'' / 180, so in your general dimensions-ish ... prefer to make shorter turns, go slower, and turn shape definitely 80% skid turns, quick surfing, and 20% carving
Haven't skied the 184 yet! Haven't specifically searched it out either, mainly due to my positive experience on the 176. I do think that if I were to open that 176 up to speed, it'd be pretty choppy if I tried to carve. Based on your application, though, I do think the 176 will suit your needs quite well!
You gave this QST 92 an A in moguls, would you give the QST 98 and A also? and then out of all the skiis that you test between the 2 of you, what skis would get the highest grade for moguls for each of you? I know that they might be different as Bob weighs more, thanks
I think the width, rocker, and shorter turn shape takes the 98 out of the A range and into the B zone. Still pretty good, but for the kind of mogul skiing I like to do, the 92 is considerably better. I love the Bent 90, Elan Ripstick 88, and Volkl Blaze 86 for bumps the best.
Question for anyone! I currently ski on the previous model of QST 92. I adore them on really hard snow to about 5 inches of fresh. But when things get tracked out (even shallower snow), my form falls apart and I feel like I'm being thrown all over the place. Skis seem to have a mind of their own. I'm sure some of it is my lack of experience/ability. I'm a solid intermediate (advanced?), 5'11 168, 56 yrs. old. I ski some black diamonds and a lot of intermediate trails. I'm wondering if it will be better to be on something like the new QST 92s, where I can pick my way through the variable terrain (easier tail release), or to be on something more stiff/stable, like a Stance 90 or Declivity 92 that will plow through the clumps and uneven sections, and I can hold my line without dodging and weaving as much. I should mention, I have Rustler 10's for deeper days. These would be for shallower/uneven terrain and hard conditions. I'd appreciate any advice, from anyone! Thanks!
Firstly, the new QST 92's are considerably more stout than the previous versions and are insanely fun to ski. You can get the stability out of the Stance and Declivity for sure, and maybe going to that more on-piste structure will help add distance between those skis and the Rustler. Love the Stance 90.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks, man! Yeah, I'm leaning toward the Stance 90 for that reason. Makes more sense in my quiver. But those new 92's do look VERY interesting!
How would you compare this to the black crows captis? Which ski is stronger in terms of flex?
The QST is a bit stronger in terms of flex, mainly due to the carbon and flax stringers that run through the ski. Both are poplar core, but the QST has some more additives that make it stiffer from tip to tail. Captis has more of a freestyle profile to it, including more camber and less taper. QST is floatier and driftier as a result of the more progressive shaping. Have fun!
SE
Oh boy is this great!⛷❄️ been waiting for this one. Been wanting these qst. What’s the biggest difference between this and the Rustler 9 especially for east coast skiing?? Also how would these pair / look with those TA yellow bindings ??
Really just the stability and grip underfoot. Rustlers take edge grip to another level, and they have better vibration damping, but they're not as playful or as surfy as these QSTs. Not as quick either. Oh man. QST 92 with the yellow Attack would look SWEET! I hadn't thought of that until you mentioned it. Good match too for performance.
@@SkiEssentialsany chance you could post or send me a pic of them together.
I am thinking of replacing my Rustler 9 ‘s 172cm I am 165 cm tall 143 lbs. I like the original Rustler 9 for softer snow and off piste. I did ski the new Rustler 9 in a 174cm For me I preferred the narrower original ( 92mm under foot). Watching this video I am thinking the QST 92 may me more to my liking. However my length choices are 176 or 168 ? What are your thoughts?
I think this ski goes just fine a bit shorter. The 168 will likely be a better overall choice for you, especially if you're looking for added maneuverability and agility in bumps and trees. The only time you'll miss out on the 176 is in high speed GS style carves. How often are you doing those? That might help guide you in your quest.
I am looking at these vs LINE Blade Optic 92 - have you tried both?
Yes, the Line feels lighter and poppier than the QST, which has a bit more heft and oomph to it. I personally prefer the slightly stouter QST, as it fits my heavier frame, but I've certainly been surprised by the Line's agility and energy.
Is this good for a skier that is a 6 on the scale that skis groomers mostly? Mostly ice conditions
It's incredibly grippy on firmer snow and ice. Even at a wider shape, the QST is pretty stable.
5'5", 160lb, intermediate, northeast rider primarily. Am I going to be sad on a 160? I want it to feel playful but be successful on the whole mountain.
I don't think you'll be sad at all. I skied this thing 8cm shorter than I normally would and had a total blast.
Hi need help pls I’m looking for another set of skis currently
I have ripstick 96 black edition. Im looking for a piste orientated, Ski for hard and compact snow days that are playfull and can handle a little speed I’m a intermediate/ advanced.
Weight 105kg
Height 180
There's a lot to like about the low to mid-80's underfoot skis for this application. I'd take a look at the Volkl Kanjo, Dynastar M-Pro 85, and for more piste-oriented skiing, the Volkl Deacon 84. Have fun!
SE
Are this 92 qst 176 a good start for beginner/intermediate? I am 180/85kg and looking for a my own first pair, mostly for onpiste in all weather conditions and found qst at very great deal. Or better to go to narrower wingman 82?
QST is great--super easy but also has a high ceiling. If this is to be your first pair, I'd go a bit shorter to the 169.
@@SkiEssentials thank you much for a reply! Well, currently almost all skies at sold out and only 176 is available.
But is it too much difference in length? As I understood, the rocker on the top lowers effective length of the ski and it fills as shorter. Maybe I wrong and it is still not fit for a first pair in this size
would be helpful to know height and weight. Not sure If i should go with the 184 or not
Bob is 6/2 225 and he'd take the 184.
What’s the practical difference between 92 and 98 QST??
From a structural perspective, the 98 has cork while the 92 does not. Otherwise, the skis are very much the same in terms of the guts. The 98 has considerably more taper and rocker from a shaping perspective, so it floats better, not just for the width, but due to the profile. On-trail, you get more energy, pop, and zest out of the 92, so if you're looking for a quick, agile, and mobile ski, the 92 is out of this world. The 98 is smooth and fun while the 92 is a little ball of energy.
How does the QST92 compare to the Ranger 90?
The QST is a lot more lively and floaty than the Ranger which is more damp. I didn't find the Ranger to be as engaging, floaty, or fun as the QST, but it is more sturdy.
This skis short because of rocker and its side cut. I would not size down. I got 168cm. I’m 5 6 tall and 140lbs. The ski does pretty well in tight narrow terrains and is stable on groomers. I still feel a bit short on groomers comparing my other skis with similar length.
Overall great ski. Easy, nimble and forgiving. The ski doesn’t fight back to me in hard terrain. One drawback is carving performance on groomers. But that’s not the purpose of this ski.
Great feedback, thanks for sharing!
Base line in Sizing:
1. Relative to your opinion of your choice of ski length; can you define your height, weight & boot length to help us choose what length will work for us.
2. Did both of you find the 176cm worked for both of you?
The more we ski different length skis, the more we realize that there is no formula. Ski sizing is very fluid, with way to many factors to boil down to a firm base line. Normally, if you've narrowed it to one of two sizes, they ultimately both will work great.
@@SkiEssentials Can you simply answer my question?
@@123thekman123 Hi! Just trying to be more insightful because simple answers are hard to come by with intricate and personal sizing options. I will try to answer simply:
1. Bob: 6/2 225, BSL 313
Jeff: 5/10 155, BSL 285
2. Jeff's a 176 pretty much all day in this ski. Bob likes the 176 and found it worked great, but would likely buy the 184 if spending own money.
@@SkiEssentials The data points you describe are very insightful indeed.
Bob's additional 70 lbs./+38%. should "weigh" heavy along with the additional lever arm length of 3 boot sizes larger than Jeff. The confirmation that Bob would buy the longer 184 is valuable to my decision.
The video of their skill/technique levels back-to-back also demonstrate the manageable range of the ski itself.
There is great value to buyers in showing these two different test subjects riding the same size product.
Well done.
Thank you!
What bindings do you recomend with these
We pair those skis with either the Marker Griffon or the Tyrolia Attack 14.
I know the wight and skills matter, but just out if curiosity... looking for an answer to check if I have chosen correct ;) xoxoxo
Thank you
it's a great ski!
7:24 Armada Declivity 82Ti !
Declivity is much better Carver and better at high speed.
@@carterfan80 indeed
I don't find as much freeride influence in that ski, or even the 92. There's some, but not nearly as much. 102 on up is a slightly different story, but then we're in a very different width range.
Curve vs smear?
Thanks
Smear. They carve, but smearing is more of a highlight.
How would these compare to the 2024 rustler 9?
The Rustler has a bit more grip and power to it while the 92 is able to operate at a very high level with a minimum of effort. The Rustler's top end range is slightly higher as a result, but the QST is so incredibly quick and agile for it's width and build. If I spent more time on groomers and carving turns, I'd lean slightly to the Rustler.
I went with the Qst because of the value and forgiveness. The sale price was too good to pass up!
How are these on hardpack?
Not bad! I think it's easy to argue that something like the Stance 90 is better, but the QST 92 is pretty decent for more of a freeride footprint. I've found there to be a lot of energy and pop here, even if high speed stability on hard pack isn't as readily available.
So the qst 92 is made identical to the 98 and skis the same as the 98?? why do you think salomon put this ski in their lineup, when the 98 is almost the same ski but a little wider?
92 is the right width for the snow most people ski. 92 is an out east daily, or an out west intermediate daily. The 98 is a better out west daily for the stronger skier. I've seen experts riding the 92 as a dedicated mogul ski in CO as well.
@@_e5598 basically what he said....plus personal preference
They're not exactly the same, but very close. 98 has cork, and feels more surfy overall, partly thanks to the width. Definitely room for both in their line. I think what you're saying brings up a more profound question in general. You could make similar statements, or rather ask similar questions, about almost every manufacturer. Could there be fewer skis, or fewer SKUs? Maybe, but I personally like having all the options, and if a manufacturer can produce a ton of different skis and still be profitable, it certainly provides a better benefit to consumers. More options is always nice, IMO.
I need new skis and bindings under 500€ all mountain ski for finland
We're putting together an outlet sale with some great ski options--check it out!
www.skiessentials.com/collection/alpine-skis?pf_t_year%5B%5D=year%3A2023%2Cyear%3A2022%2Cyear%3A2020%2Cyear%3A2019%2Cyear%3A2021%2Cyear%3A2012
Fyi, this hard work and time spended, dose work !
Your production values have gone way up since the Jeff in his basement days. Pretty sexy slo mo over the edges. Reminded me of a cooking show going slowly past a forkful of culinary delight.
I recall Bob wanting to get back on the 106 pretty quickly at Alta?
I’m going to take the 2022 version to Steamboat next week. I think I got them for around $400 with bindings from your recent sale. Yea me!
Yes, everyone please look where you’re going. 🫣
Thanks Steve! We've made a significant effort this season to improve product quality. New cameras, new lights, new microphones. Nice to know it's noticeable on your end!
Bob did want to get back on the 106 in Alta, but he was coming off the Stance 84. Bob didn't actually ski the 92 in Alta, just Joe and I (Jeff). So, you're remembering correctly, but it was in response to a different ski. That said, I did prefer the 106 in Alta, but that doesn't mean I wasn't impressed by the capabilities and overall performance of the 92.