Hi Jeff and Bob. Love your videos and appreciate the effort you make in producing them. I have the enforcer 88 in 172cm as my hardpack / groomer ski and whilst i love its attributes on firm snow and chop/crud, it’s not that fun on soft snow/pow. Totally expected. I’m looking for a second ski for soft snow/powder/tree/side piste fun. I’m not into park skiing but do enjoy mini side piste hits. Perhaps wishful thinking, but a ski that I could also put a shift on for some v occasional, short , and lift served tours would be great. I’m 171cm and 72kg, 37yrs old, athletic, and competent skiier. This ski seems really fun and I’m wondering if it’s crazy to put a shift on it or whether other skis would suit my rather demanding requirements?!
I don't think a Shift is at all crazy on this ski. Even if you're being pretty aggressive, the setup will hold up to some strong and playful skiing, albeit not a great park binding. Atomic Bent 100, Line Chronic 101, or Elan Playmaker 101 all make good sense here.
I’m very happy they switched to poplar. I was worried the caruba would be slightly too playful/not damp enough for me. That extra bit of stability in the new model makes me glad I waited to buy the ski. Plus the 2025 graphics are way better than the 2024 version.
How would you compare to the 102 reckoner all mountain skier but looking for a park/ fun ski as I already have a bit of a burly charger ski. New to park but still want to mess around on the mountain
The ARV 100 is a bit more consistent in flex and performance from tip to tail. I like how it has more energy, especially in the tail, to make a fun and energetic ski. I'm a bit heavier and less freestyle oriented, so I struggle a bit more with the Reckoner vs. the ARV.
Hey Jeff and Bob, great review. I am considering this ski and the chronic 101. What would you say are the main differences between the two and what situations you would prefer one over the other? I ski out west typically all over the mountain in the morning but frequently end up in the park in the afternoon. I have some knee issues so not really going big in the park or doing tricks I cant comfortably land and definitely appreciate some forgiveness for any botched landings. I cant find anywhere local to me that demos them so would love any insight you can give. thanks!
Consistency in flex and weight are the two main differences. The Chronic is pretty stiff and thick underfoot, but very flexible and light in the tips and tails. The ARV is consistent in those arenas throughout. I'm impressed with how the Chronic holds up in stronger turns while the ARV has a lot of pep and energy. I would say that the ARV is likely an easier ski on the knees because the heft of the Chronic is pretty apparent.
Heeyyyy thank you for that review ! Still can't decide between Arv100, Bent100 or Revolt104 🫠🫠 I still ride my Arv86 177 2017 (yep, pretty old now) and willing to change. I ski everything with a rather advanced level (all mountain, groomer, pow when there is some, a bit of park and rails aaaand side kick, 360 everywhere and so butters). So, I think all 3 skis match my needs and which is not helping 😂 About size, I'm 176cm 76kg and dynamic/playful skier. What size should I go with ? I feel good on the 177 but I'm a bit scared 179 is too long for fun, 172 on the other end might feel a bit "beginner"... Choosing skis should be a qualified job 😂 Thank you !!
We generally feel that if you get down to 3 skis, that's a win! Also, if you are at this point, to me it makes sense to look at the one in the middle. In this case, that seems to me to be the ARV 100. The Revolt is on the wider and more powder-oriented side while the Bent is lighter and more flexible. You'll get great pep and energy out of the ARV while also having good powder and park performance. I don't think 179 is too long here.
I'm considering buying this one or the last years version with the caruba core. I used to ride mostly on piste but i want to go off track this season. I read that this is a good "allrounder" do you think so aswell?
Yup! The caruba is lighter and a bit more agile, so if you're looking for all-around versatility and a quick ski for 100 mm underfoot, it's awesome. I'd say the 179 is the way to go based more on your weight than your height.
@@SkiEssentialsAm also in the same boat, trying to pick between the 2025 vs 2024 model. It’s been years since I’ve bought new skis and could use some advice on length. I’m 5’10” and 215 pounds. I figured I’d need something longer because of my heavier weight, is that accurate? Any recommendations?
The 100 has a thinner core profile and is about the same weight as the 94, so they're putting more emphasis on the freeride playfulness of the 100 while the 94 feels more like your older 96 for 2025. I think if you're looking for more similar to the 96, then the new 94 is the way to go. For better soft snow performance and a more creative ski, the 100.
The ARV 100 has more pep and energy to it while the Prodigy isn't quite as zesty. That said, there's some more stability and dampness in the Prodigy, which could be considered a positive when it comes to powder.
@@RomanVovk There are variances in weights from ski to ski even within a pair. We see a +/- of about 50 grams in most individual skis, and that's just how it goes sometimes.
Do you still feel that this can be sized up confidently? I’m 178cm and 220lbs my favorite ski is the JJ UL 116 in 185 and I don’t feel it’s too long. I also ski a vision 108 in 183 and love that as well. Thinking about going for this in the 186. Live in the PNW currently skiing an M free 108 in 180 and it’s feels like a tank and I don’t really like it. Also feels short in that length. How would this compare against my quiver and what mount do you suggest. I’m not a park Skiier. I just like fun surfy playful skiing.
Yes. I'd say going longer makes sense for you in this ski. The ARV 100 is a bit more nimble and agile than the Dynastar. Whatever the recommended line is will be great.
@@kevroe I trust the M-Free 108 a bit more when it comes to crud and powder, but the ARV 106 is more nimble and agile. There's more rocker in the M-Free for sure.
Hi Jeff and Bob. Love your videos and appreciate the effort you make in producing them. I have the enforcer 88 in 172cm as my hardpack / groomer ski and whilst i love its attributes on firm snow and chop/crud, it’s not that fun on soft snow/pow. Totally expected. I’m looking for a second ski for soft snow/powder/tree/side piste fun. I’m not into park skiing but do enjoy mini side piste hits. Perhaps wishful thinking, but a ski that I could also put a shift on for some v occasional, short , and lift served tours would be great. I’m 171cm and 72kg, 37yrs old, athletic, and competent skiier. This ski seems really fun and I’m wondering if it’s crazy to put a shift on it or whether other skis would suit my rather demanding requirements?!
I don't think a Shift is at all crazy on this ski. Even if you're being pretty aggressive, the setup will hold up to some strong and playful skiing, albeit not a great park binding. Atomic Bent 100, Line Chronic 101, or Elan Playmaker 101 all make good sense here.
@@SkiEssentialsthanks v much for your reply. Keep up the good work on the videos!
I’m very happy they switched to poplar. I was worried the caruba would be slightly too playful/not damp enough for me. That extra bit of stability in the new model makes me glad I waited to buy the ski. Plus the 2025 graphics are way better than the 2024 version.
Agree on all counts!
How would you compare to the 102 reckoner all mountain skier but looking for a park/ fun ski as I already have a bit of a burly charger ski. New to park but still want to mess around on the mountain
The ARV 100 is a bit more consistent in flex and performance from tip to tail. I like how it has more energy, especially in the tail, to make a fun and energetic ski. I'm a bit heavier and less freestyle oriented, so I struggle a bit more with the Reckoner vs. the ARV.
Hey Jeff and Bob, great review. I am considering this ski and the chronic 101. What would you say are the main differences between the two and what situations you would prefer one over the other? I ski out west typically all over the mountain in the morning but frequently end up in the park in the afternoon. I have some knee issues so not really going big in the park or doing tricks I cant comfortably land and definitely appreciate some forgiveness for any botched landings. I cant find anywhere local to me that demos them so would love any insight you can give. thanks!
Consistency in flex and weight are the two main differences. The Chronic is pretty stiff and thick underfoot, but very flexible and light in the tips and tails. The ARV is consistent in those arenas throughout. I'm impressed with how the Chronic holds up in stronger turns while the ARV has a lot of pep and energy. I would say that the ARV is likely an easier ski on the knees because the heft of the Chronic is pretty apparent.
Heeyyyy thank you for that review !
Still can't decide between Arv100, Bent100 or Revolt104 🫠🫠
I still ride my Arv86 177 2017 (yep, pretty old now) and willing to change.
I ski everything with a rather advanced level (all mountain, groomer, pow when there is some, a bit of park and rails aaaand side kick, 360 everywhere and so butters).
So, I think all 3 skis match my needs and which is not helping 😂
About size, I'm 176cm 76kg and dynamic/playful skier. What size should I go with ? I feel good on the 177 but I'm a bit scared 179 is too long for fun, 172 on the other end might feel a bit "beginner"...
Choosing skis should be a qualified job 😂
Thank you !!
We generally feel that if you get down to 3 skis, that's a win! Also, if you are at this point, to me it makes sense to look at the one in the middle. In this case, that seems to me to be the ARV 100. The Revolt is on the wider and more powder-oriented side while the Bent is lighter and more flexible. You'll get great pep and energy out of the ARV while also having good powder and park performance. I don't think 179 is too long here.
Jeff, where do you mount yours? Thinking about grabbing a pair this season. I just want a ski I can kinda chill on and have fun.
Freestyle line!
I'm considering buying this one or the last years version with the caruba core. I used to ride mostly on piste but i want to go off track this season. I read that this is a good "allrounder" do you think so aswell?
Btw i am 188cm about 70kg if that matters, also what size would you recommend?
Yup! The caruba is lighter and a bit more agile, so if you're looking for all-around versatility and a quick ski for 100 mm underfoot, it's awesome. I'd say the 179 is the way to go based more on your weight than your height.
@@SkiEssentials great, thanks for the quick answer, the channel has been a great help with deciding what ski to buy this season :)
@@SkiEssentialsAm also in the same boat, trying to pick between the 2025 vs 2024 model. It’s been years since I’ve bought new skis and could use some advice on length. I’m 5’10” and 215 pounds. I figured I’d need something longer because of my heavier weight, is that accurate? Any recommendations?
@@benjaminhecht641 I'd go 179 on this ski based on your stats and application.
What are your thoughts on these vs the 94s for this year? I've got some ARV 96s from a few years ago that have been great.
The 100 has a thinner core profile and is about the same weight as the 94, so they're putting more emphasis on the freeride playfulness of the 100 while the 94 feels more like your older 96 for 2025. I think if you're looking for more similar to the 96, then the new 94 is the way to go. For better soft snow performance and a more creative ski, the 100.
What are the main differences between these skis and the Faction Prodigy 2.0? Which one performs better in powder?
The ARV 100 has more pep and energy to it while the Prodigy isn't quite as zesty. That said, there's some more stability and dampness in the Prodigy, which could be considered a positive when it comes to powder.
@@SkiEssentials but is the 2mm difference that big?
@@puciam0n725 Not as big as the difference in dampness and flex vs. the energy of the ARV.
Does it have a Park and Pipe mounting recommendation?
It does! I believe the freestyle line is -3 from center.
@@SkiEssentials ok thanks
what's the real (measured) weigth in 172 mm length of a single ski? information on the web are confused
Just weighed a set of 172's and came up with 1771 g/ski.
@@SkiEssentials thanks a lot mate!
@@SkiEssentialswait, in video you say 1735g for 179cm, how is that possible for shorter 172cm to weight 1771g? I’m confused..
@@RomanVovk There are variances in weights from ski to ski even within a pair. We see a +/- of about 50 grams in most individual skis, and that's just how it goes sometimes.
Do you still feel that this can be sized up confidently? I’m 178cm and 220lbs my favorite ski is the JJ UL 116 in 185 and I don’t feel it’s too long. I also ski a vision 108 in 183 and love that as well. Thinking about going for this in the 186. Live in the PNW currently skiing an M free 108 in 180 and it’s feels like a tank and I don’t really like it. Also feels short in that length.
How would this compare against my quiver and what mount do you suggest. I’m not a park Skiier. I just like fun surfy playful skiing.
Yes. I'd say going longer makes sense for you in this ski. The ARV 100 is a bit more nimble and agile than the Dynastar. Whatever the recommended line is will be great.
@@SkiEssentials how would you say the new dynastar compares next to the new ARV 106?
@@kevroe I trust the M-Free 108 a bit more when it comes to crud and powder, but the ARV 106 is more nimble and agile. There's more rocker in the M-Free for sure.
Hi i'm 175cm and 70kg which length would you recommend?
I'd go 172 in this ski based on your stats.