I demo'd the 179 length 99's recently at Mammoth Mountain, and everything you guys are saying is true. Honestly a bit too much on groomers at times when I got tired later in the day but STABILITY for days and super predicable edging, it always held an edge on the packed powder that Mammoth usually has and the loose stuff later in the day. I'm 5'6 and a chubby 190 (should be 170 or so, hehe), I've always skied aggressively and these were dirt simple to ski.
All I have is the Enforcer 104 Free so I would be interested to see how that compares to the 99.. My guess is that 99 is probably more similar to my Stormrider 88s and Stormrider 105 because of the dampness and the flatter tails.. The tails probably release out of a turn easier with the 99 since they are round and the Stormriders are square.. My guess is that the Stormriders would initiate the turns easier since they are a little softer.. Ooo.. I didn't know that they now have more tail rocker.. It looks like you all had a good time on those skis..
I love the shape of the Enforcer and everything I don't like about it is what makes it great and I keep going back to it as my go to ski. I wish there was an alternative that was much lighter but had the grip under foot. I think the Santa Ana would be more in that direction but it's still a heavy ski with less metal, would the Unlimited do that?
Unlimited 104 maybe, but the narrower ones just feel a bit more flimsy. I'd take a look at Head Kore 97 for a lighter weight carbon-powered ski or the Atomic Maverick 95Ti for a lighter ski with two sheets of metal.
Hi Skiessentials. Loved the video and read through the questions here and am convinced about getting the '25 Enforcer 99s. I'm 6'0 225lbs and have recently always demoed Enforcer 100s in 186. I noted the comments about you being 6'2" and adapting well to the 179s. I've never skied the shorter versions. On groomers, I'm often carving hard at over 40mph and have been impressed with the stability of the 186s. So I'm wondering what will feel different if I size down? And what do I gain? I'm primarily a big mountain West and Europe skier. 55 yrs. old. Thanks!
I do think if you're in bigger and more open terrain, there's still a lot to like about the longer lengths. Since we're dealing mainly with narrower trails and smoother snow, we really like the slightly shorter arc of the smaller ski. Also, because it's a sturdy build, there's not a whole lot of need to size up to access performance. I am still more impressed with the stability of the longer ski, but I'm not skiing all that fast all the time, so personally, the shorter ski makes more sense.
Great information as usual. I'm currently on a 2019 Fischer Ranger 102 in a 177cm that I use as a one ski quiver, 155lbs and ski at Snowbrid in Utah. I'm looking for something to replace my Ranger as a one ski quiver, would like a ski that cuts through the crud and carves a little better and high speed compared to my Ranger 102 which is really like otherwise. Would this new Enforcer 99 be near the top of your list for a replacement? What other skis would you recommend? Armada Declivity 102 and the Volkl M6 are two I'm looking at in addition to the Enforcer 99.
You're in the right zone for sure. The Enforcer 99 is a very complete ski and will certainly carve better than the Ranger without too much of a drop in off-trail performance. The Declivity is a very silent and energetic ski with a lighter feel than the Enforcer or the Mantra--it's more like the Fischer in terms of flex, but it does have great energy especially out of the tail. The Mantra is the title holder for being the most precise and reactive--this ski is a very sharp and active carver. If you're looking for the ultimate in on-trail performance, this is it. I do think the Enforcer has a lot of upside here.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for the detailed reply. When I talked to a knowledgeable local ski shop (Lift House) in December about the 2024 Enforcer they felt like it lacked a little bit of energy and responsiveness compared to my Fischer Ranger 102 FR and the Mantra which put me off a bit. I tend to like skis that give all of the energy put into them back to the skier which I feel like my Fischer Ranger 102 FR does. The Armada Declivity 102 TI was not on my radar back in December so I did not ask them about it and they don't carry Armada. Do you think the Armada Declivity 102 TI will cut through crud and carve better than my Fischer Ranger 102 FR or will they be similar? If similar that narrows it down to the Enforcer or Mantra, if it does perform better in crud and carving on groomers then it just may be the ski for me. Thanks again!
I thnk this would have been way more useful being on the new 89s in those conditions, or at least one of each and swapping over to compare......? I reckon Jeff definitely looks more comfortable and smoother on firmer snow with narrower skis 😉
Would we have had more carving success and edge grip on an 89 in these conditions? Yes, that's certainly fair to say. It is also worth a deeper look, though, as to how the 99 fares in typical firm and icy conditions and terrain, and I think this video accomplishes that. Also, Jeff thinks it's totally funny that as a park skier who used to ski on wide twin tips all the time, that he's now more known for carving and narrow skis.
Would you pick this over the 94 for a one do-it-all type of ski? I guess the 94 would be better on groomers but this 99 seemed to hold up very well carving groomers. And the extra width on these 99s would be nice on the softer snow as well as ripping through crud. Hard pick for sure 🤔
Jury is still out but I must say that I've loved them both, mainly for the same reasons. I really enjoy the added tail rocker of the 99 as it adds a new dimension to a ski that I already quite enjoy. I know it is of little help, but when I'm on the 94, I want the 94, and when I'm on the 99, well, I guess I want that one.
Great review. How would you compare the new 99's soft snow performance and manoeuvrability with the previous model of the 104? (2025 99 v 2024 104 Free)
The new 99 is moving closer to the 104 Free in terms of soft snow performance and mobility. The tail rocker and forward mount point make it feel more swively than before--something the 104 Free could do pretty well given the heft and power. I still think the 104 Free is a better powder and crud ski, but if on-trail carving comes anywhere near this comparison, I'm taking the 99.
I remember you guys talking about how good Enforcers 100's are (were) in pow. If I recall correctly, Bob once said that he loved these in two feet of pow (apologies if I am wrong). So if I'm one of those crazies who thinks that a 100 should be, a good width for 99% of powder days, is this new 99 something that I would enjoy as the top end of a two-ski quiver?
I think the 99 fits that bill quite well. I did enjoy my Enforcer 100's in deep snow for sure, which was especially impressive given the weight and flatter tail. Now that the skis are a bit more playful, I think it's going to boost the soft snow capabilities, although there are certainly better pure floaters out there.
Question as an Enforcer 100 owner who loves them. I see you mention the easier turning BUT it's still a high performance ski. I am thinking of adding another ski to my two ski quiver (I have ON3P Billy Goat Tours for climbing/AT as the second ski) ...BUT for just "slow chunky messy chopped up crap" I think these would do better per your review than my 100s but by no means be a night and day difference? I would love your recommendation for a fun cruiser that hops through moguly conditions or a ski that can be a good choice when I ski with people that go a bit slower that won't kill my legs trying to slow down. I am a fit guy but also over 50 so that is another thing.
So taking a bit off the top of the Enforcer, but still at 102, I'd say something like the Armada Declivity 102 or the Head Kore 99 would be a lot of fun.
I tried the Armada last year and they were a little dead feeling but you are the second person that recommended the head Kore 99. I run Kore 120 boots so there's that. I thought your recommendation would be for something narrower underfoot but I don't have a problem with my 100s and the 110 ON3Ps so maybe just stick with a wider ski there too? I've read that the Kore 93 is a great ski for what I was referring to. Thoughts? @@SkiEssentials
Enforcer 99 vs last years Enforcer 104 free? Im looking into the 179 in both for my next ski. Nordica lists them as the same weight. They seem very similar. Are the new 99 updates worth it over the 104 free? This is going to be an east coast snowier day ski. Thanks!
I'm a huge 99 fan. I think the move to the increased tail rocker and forward mount point makes a huge difference. The 104 excels more in high speed open zones with crud and broken snow, and it also carves very well for a 104. The 99 is a special ski, though, as it is a bit easier to maneuver in tighter spaces and now has a more playful character to go along with its already rock-solid groomer/carving performance.
Do you think this new 99 has better hard snow performance to the outgoing E100’s? I have the 100s and they seem like the tip flaps a lot at high speeds and while hard carving.
Personally, I had a lot of success on this 99 in firm snow. I think it's close to the 100 for sure. It's also easier to ski, so getting about the same level of performance with less work was one of the highlights for me.
I know this was a review of the 99, but since you were switching back and forth between the 99 and the new 104, curious what differences you noticed - if any. Currently in the '25 104 185, but really wondering if I would have been/would be happier with the 99 179 for overall less weight and ease on my knees long term. CO intermediate skier - mostly groomers - 195lbs 6'4. Switched from the prior 104 Frees at 179 and the 185 just seem so much longer to me now.
I think heft is the big difference here--the 104 just feels like a lot of ski still while the 99 is more agile than the 100 used to be. We're noticing a big uptick in the on-trail and powerful feel of the new 104 while the 99 hasn't lost a step but has gained some mobility, and I think that's a good thing. I think most skiers who don't know exactly what they're looking for will be happier on the 99's moving forward. It's also okay to go shorter, as I've settled in nicely to the 179's and I'm 6/2 225.
Thanks! Last week, I pulled the trigger on the 99s in 179 from Ski Essentials - looking forward to getting back on the 179s and a narrower waist width.
How do these compare to the Mindbender 99? I love my Mindbenders but would like something with more energy and pep. I’m considering these enforcers, and potentially the Rustler 10s (although the Rustlers aren’t quite as damp).
I do think the new Enforcer gets an uptick in that energy that you're looking for. With a more forward mount point and a stiffer flex with more rocker, the Enforcer feels like a totally different ski. The Rustler is a bit more sluggish with a driftier personality. In that ~100 mm zone, I'd also check out the Kastle Paragon 101 and the Head Kore 99.
I've got carvers and eastern all-mountain covered. My western all-mountains are older N. Enforcer 100's with Marker Griffins. They've been better than great at almost everything and okay in deep powder. I'm thinking of replacing them. Are the new Enforcer 99 and 104 really noticeably better? Which is better for me? I rarely get to do floaty powder, so if I were picking blindly I'd probably get the 99's. But, what about when I do get some heavenly powder? Also, I've heard you say the newer Griffins are easier to get back into on the slope. Are these as good as the Tyrolia Protector Attacks on my eastern skis?
For skis, I think the new 99 is certainly the more direct replacement, and we find that with the added tail rocker, they're easier to ski in powder, debatable whether they're better floaters. The 104 will be able to handle more crud and chop, but they're still heavy, so I don't see a big difference in true powder performance. I think the 99 will be the safe bet here. Griffon's are a bit easier to use, but they won't have the same safety ceiling as the Protector. Depends on how concerned you are with lateral release--I can't find a performance difference here.
@@SkiEssentialsThanks. I'm leaning toward the 99's. Do you carry them? How about the Protectors? I am a physically fit experienced 77 year-old at about 179cm tall. My current Enforcer 100's are 169's (about eye high). The new 99's come in 173cm (about eyebrow high) and 179cm. 173 is probably slightly more agile; the 179 might float a little better and might be more stable at speed. Which do you recommend?
@@steveliberman3000I'd go to the 173. While we have combos pre-set for skis, this bundle is more a la carte. I'd call 877-812-6710 and see if customer service can work a deal. www.skiessentials.com/products/2025-nordica-enforcer-99-skis-0a448400?ski%2520size=173 www.skiessentials.com/products/2024-tyrolia-protector-attack-13-mn-bindings?color=matte%2520black&brake%2520size=95%2520mm
Hi. I am 173 cm tall and I got my hands on a pair of Enforcer 99 179cm. I don't have bindings for them, I did not get to test them yet, and I don't think I will have the chance to do so until next winter. I am wondering if I should keep them or resale them because they seem a bit too long. Do you think a guy my height can manage those?
The Enforcer has more grip and power, especially on ice. When you get the Unleashed up on edge though, it's a very capable carver, especially in clean and round turn shapes.
I'm surprised by Bob's comments but he know his stuff. I own a 24 Rustler 9 186 and swapped skis with a buddy who has E100, 185. We both came away saying the R9 is more ski and stiffer torsionally and underfoot. His have 75 days and may be bagged but shouldnt be. I found the E100 smooth as butter but the engagement was too far back on the ski, had to get it tipped over more to get it to bite and it skied short. Didnt lack stability. The updates make total sense to me and I suspect I would be smitten with an E99 or new 104. I would not take and E100 over my R9's. I'm your height and 185lbs I wouldn't dream of going shorter than 185 for a ski I expect to ski the rockies with and do everything. At Stowe or smaller Eastern Mtn sure 179.
Seems like a wide ski for Stowe. Any noticed advantages over choosing the 88/89 or the 94? I’m a 5’4” 165lb advanced skier at Sugarloaf seriously looking at this ski at the 172cm length. Thoughts?
The wider ski is heavier, so even though it is wider, there's barely any difference in edge grip/ice performance. However, the wider ski will handle crud and high speeds better. The 89 will be quicker edge to edge and if you want something a little more energetic through turns, I'd recommend that. However, the 94 will be much more versatile and still do great on ice.
There are edge grip and torsional stiffness advantages for the narrower Enforcers, as well as just a preference component. I think one of the main points that we wanted to highlight in this video was that the 99 fares quite well on firm snow and hard pack. If a 99 can do that, and also be capable for softer snow, crud, and powder, then that really highlights the true versatility of the ski. As a skier, you should be asking yourself how much of a sacrifice are you willing to make to increase your grip while decreasing your versatility, or some form of that equation that makes sense for where you ski, how you ski, and what you prefer out of a ski.
Would this particular ski work as a one quiver all mountain ski and be versatile enough to ski all snow conditions from groomers to tree skiing powder etc? I generally think that a 99 ski underfoot is a good width ski to tackle most snow conditions. Your opinion on this issue would be most appreciated. Great videos and fantastic skiing guys. ⛷️ I’m really envious as I would love to be in the mountains skiing as the weather in Australia is bloody hot.
Better than they used to be! Easier to turn and with an easier tail release. Still hefty and pretty stiff, so not the floatiest or smeariest of skis out there, but given how well they carve on-trail, pretty decent tree performance!
Looking at this, I think we can all breathe a sigh of relief that the "new wood guy" isn't an issue.
Looking PHAT!!!! ❤❤
Matt's a really good Skier! Nice turns bud! 😊
Great fun watching you guys having fun out there. Winning!
I watch all the vids, this is my favorite format.
That looks awesome skis and skier too !
I demo'd the 179 length 99's recently at Mammoth Mountain, and everything you guys are saying is true. Honestly a bit too much on groomers at times when I got tired later in the day but STABILITY for days and super predicable edging, it always held an edge on the packed powder that Mammoth usually has and the loose stuff later in the day. I'm 5'6 and a chubby 190 (should be 170 or so, hehe), I've always skied aggressively and these were dirt simple to ski.
Great fun. Great review. Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Great skiing guys!
I feel like Jeff should be on the 172 for Enforcers. Especially since he sizes down on the Ranger. Would be an interesting test.
All I have is the Enforcer 104 Free so I would be interested to see how that compares to the 99.. My guess is that 99 is probably more similar to my Stormrider 88s and Stormrider 105 because of the dampness and the flatter tails.. The tails probably release out of a turn easier with the 99 since they are round and the Stormriders are square.. My guess is that the Stormriders would initiate the turns easier since they are a little softer..
Ooo.. I didn't know that they now have more tail rocker..
It looks like you all had a good time on those skis..
I love the shape of the Enforcer and everything I don't like about it is what makes it great and I keep going back to it as my go to ski. I wish there was an alternative that was much lighter but had the grip under foot. I think the Santa Ana would be more in that direction but it's still a heavy ski with less metal, would the Unlimited do that?
Unlimited 104 maybe, but the narrower ones just feel a bit more flimsy. I'd take a look at Head Kore 97 for a lighter weight carbon-powered ski or the Atomic Maverick 95Ti for a lighter ski with two sheets of metal.
Hi Skiessentials. Loved the video and read through the questions here and am convinced about getting the '25 Enforcer 99s. I'm 6'0 225lbs and have recently always demoed Enforcer 100s in 186. I noted the comments about you being 6'2" and adapting well to the 179s. I've never skied the shorter versions. On groomers, I'm often carving hard at over 40mph and have been impressed with the stability of the 186s. So I'm wondering what will feel different if I size down? And what do I gain? I'm primarily a big mountain West and Europe skier. 55 yrs. old. Thanks!
I do think if you're in bigger and more open terrain, there's still a lot to like about the longer lengths. Since we're dealing mainly with narrower trails and smoother snow, we really like the slightly shorter arc of the smaller ski. Also, because it's a sturdy build, there's not a whole lot of need to size up to access performance. I am still more impressed with the stability of the longer ski, but I'm not skiing all that fast all the time, so personally, the shorter ski makes more sense.
Great information as usual. I'm currently on a 2019 Fischer Ranger 102 in a 177cm that I use as a one ski quiver, 155lbs and ski at Snowbrid in Utah. I'm looking for something to replace my Ranger as a one ski quiver, would like a ski that cuts through the crud and carves a little better and high speed compared to my Ranger 102 which is really like otherwise. Would this new Enforcer 99 be near the top of your list for a replacement? What other skis would you recommend? Armada Declivity 102 and the Volkl M6 are two I'm looking at in addition to the Enforcer 99.
You're in the right zone for sure. The Enforcer 99 is a very complete ski and will certainly carve better than the Ranger without too much of a drop in off-trail performance. The Declivity is a very silent and energetic ski with a lighter feel than the Enforcer or the Mantra--it's more like the Fischer in terms of flex, but it does have great energy especially out of the tail. The Mantra is the title holder for being the most precise and reactive--this ski is a very sharp and active carver. If you're looking for the ultimate in on-trail performance, this is it. I do think the Enforcer has a lot of upside here.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for the detailed reply. When I talked to a knowledgeable local ski shop (Lift House) in December about the 2024 Enforcer they felt like it lacked a little bit of energy and responsiveness compared to my Fischer Ranger 102 FR and the Mantra which put me off a bit. I tend to like skis that give all of the energy put into them back to the skier which I feel like my Fischer Ranger 102 FR does. The Armada Declivity 102 TI was not on my radar back in December so I did not ask them about it and they don't carry Armada. Do you think the Armada Declivity 102 TI will cut through crud and carve better than my Fischer Ranger 102 FR or will they be similar? If similar that narrows it down to the Enforcer or Mantra, if it does perform better in crud and carving on groomers then it just may be the ski for me. Thanks again!
I thnk this would have been way more useful being on the new 89s in those conditions, or at least one of each and swapping over to compare......?
I reckon Jeff definitely looks more comfortable and smoother on firmer snow with narrower skis 😉
Would we have had more carving success and edge grip on an 89 in these conditions? Yes, that's certainly fair to say. It is also worth a deeper look, though, as to how the 99 fares in typical firm and icy conditions and terrain, and I think this video accomplishes that.
Also, Jeff thinks it's totally funny that as a park skier who used to ski on wide twin tips all the time, that he's now more known for carving and narrow skis.
Would you pick this over the 94 for a one do-it-all type of ski? I guess the 94 would be better on groomers but this 99 seemed to hold up very well carving groomers. And the extra width on these 99s would be nice on the softer snow as well as ripping through crud.
Hard pick for sure 🤔
Jury is still out but I must say that I've loved them both, mainly for the same reasons. I really enjoy the added tail rocker of the 99 as it adds a new dimension to a ski that I already quite enjoy. I know it is of little help, but when I'm on the 94, I want the 94, and when I'm on the 99, well, I guess I want that one.
Thanks for the reply! Should probably demo them since they seem to be great options both.
Great review. How would you compare the new 99's soft snow performance and manoeuvrability with the previous model of the 104? (2025 99 v 2024 104 Free)
The new 99 is moving closer to the 104 Free in terms of soft snow performance and mobility. The tail rocker and forward mount point make it feel more swively than before--something the 104 Free could do pretty well given the heft and power. I still think the 104 Free is a better powder and crud ski, but if on-trail carving comes anywhere near this comparison, I'm taking the 99.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks and very helpful.
I remember you guys talking about how good Enforcers 100's are (were) in pow. If I recall correctly, Bob once said that he loved these in two feet of pow (apologies if I am wrong). So if I'm one of those crazies who thinks that a 100 should be, a good width for 99% of powder days, is this new 99 something that I would enjoy as the top end of a two-ski quiver?
I think the 99 fits that bill quite well. I did enjoy my Enforcer 100's in deep snow for sure, which was especially impressive given the weight and flatter tail. Now that the skis are a bit more playful, I think it's going to boost the soft snow capabilities, although there are certainly better pure floaters out there.
Question as an Enforcer 100 owner who loves them. I see you mention the easier turning BUT it's still a high performance ski. I am thinking of adding another ski to my two ski quiver (I have ON3P Billy Goat Tours for climbing/AT as the second ski) ...BUT for just "slow chunky messy chopped up crap" I think these would do better per your review than my 100s but by no means be a night and day difference? I would love your recommendation for a fun cruiser that hops through moguly conditions or a ski that can be a good choice when I ski with people that go a bit slower that won't kill my legs trying to slow down. I am a fit guy but also over 50 so that is another thing.
So taking a bit off the top of the Enforcer, but still at 102, I'd say something like the Armada Declivity 102 or the Head Kore 99 would be a lot of fun.
I tried the Armada last year and they were a little dead feeling but you are the second person that recommended the head Kore 99. I run Kore 120 boots so there's that. I thought your recommendation would be for something narrower underfoot but I don't have a problem with my 100s and the 110 ON3Ps so maybe just stick with a wider ski there too? I've read that the Kore 93 is a great ski for what I was referring to. Thoughts? @@SkiEssentials
Enforcer 99 vs last years Enforcer 104 free? Im looking into the 179 in both for my next ski. Nordica lists them as the same weight. They seem very similar. Are the new 99 updates worth it over the 104 free? This is going to be an east coast snowier day ski. Thanks!
I'm a huge 99 fan. I think the move to the increased tail rocker and forward mount point makes a huge difference. The 104 excels more in high speed open zones with crud and broken snow, and it also carves very well for a 104. The 99 is a special ski, though, as it is a bit easier to maneuver in tighter spaces and now has a more playful character to go along with its already rock-solid groomer/carving performance.
Do you think this new 99 has better hard snow performance to the outgoing E100’s? I have the 100s and they seem like the tip flaps a lot at high speeds and while hard carving.
Personally, I had a lot of success on this 99 in firm snow. I think it's close to the 100 for sure. It's also easier to ski, so getting about the same level of performance with less work was one of the highlights for me.
I know this was a review of the 99, but since you were switching back and forth between the 99 and the new 104, curious what differences you noticed - if any. Currently in the '25 104 185, but really wondering if I would have been/would be happier with the 99 179 for overall less weight and ease on my knees long term. CO intermediate skier - mostly groomers - 195lbs 6'4. Switched from the prior 104 Frees at 179 and the 185 just seem so much longer to me now.
I think heft is the big difference here--the 104 just feels like a lot of ski still while the 99 is more agile than the 100 used to be. We're noticing a big uptick in the on-trail and powerful feel of the new 104 while the 99 hasn't lost a step but has gained some mobility, and I think that's a good thing. I think most skiers who don't know exactly what they're looking for will be happier on the 99's moving forward. It's also okay to go shorter, as I've settled in nicely to the 179's and I'm 6/2 225.
Thanks! Last week, I pulled the trigger on the 99s in 179 from Ski Essentials - looking forward to getting back on the 179s and a narrower waist width.
How do these compare to the Mindbender 99? I love my Mindbenders but would like something with more energy and pep. I’m considering these enforcers, and potentially the Rustler 10s (although the Rustlers aren’t quite as damp).
I do think the new Enforcer gets an uptick in that energy that you're looking for. With a more forward mount point and a stiffer flex with more rocker, the Enforcer feels like a totally different ski. The Rustler is a bit more sluggish with a driftier personality. In that ~100 mm zone, I'd also check out the Kastle Paragon 101 and the Head Kore 99.
I've got carvers and eastern all-mountain covered. My western all-mountains are older N. Enforcer 100's with Marker Griffins. They've been better than great at almost everything and okay in deep powder. I'm thinking of replacing them. Are the new Enforcer 99 and 104 really noticeably better? Which is better for me? I rarely get to do floaty powder, so if I were picking blindly I'd probably get the 99's. But, what about when I do get some heavenly powder? Also, I've heard you say the newer Griffins are easier to get back into on the slope. Are these as good as the Tyrolia Protector Attacks on my eastern skis?
For skis, I think the new 99 is certainly the more direct replacement, and we find that with the added tail rocker, they're easier to ski in powder, debatable whether they're better floaters. The 104 will be able to handle more crud and chop, but they're still heavy, so I don't see a big difference in true powder performance. I think the 99 will be the safe bet here. Griffon's are a bit easier to use, but they won't have the same safety ceiling as the Protector. Depends on how concerned you are with lateral release--I can't find a performance difference here.
@@SkiEssentialsThanks. I'm leaning toward the 99's. Do you carry them? How about the Protectors? I am a physically fit experienced 77 year-old at about 179cm tall. My current Enforcer 100's are 169's (about eye high). The new 99's come in 173cm (about eyebrow high) and 179cm. 173 is probably slightly more agile; the 179 might float a little better and might be more stable at speed. Which do you recommend?
@@steveliberman3000I'd go to the 173. While we have combos pre-set for skis, this bundle is more a la carte. I'd call 877-812-6710 and see if customer service can work a deal.
www.skiessentials.com/products/2025-nordica-enforcer-99-skis-0a448400?ski%2520size=173
www.skiessentials.com/products/2024-tyrolia-protector-attack-13-mn-bindings?color=matte%2520black&brake%2520size=95%2520mm
Hi. I am 173 cm tall and I got my hands on a pair of Enforcer 99 179cm. I don't have bindings for them, I did not get to test them yet, and I don't think I will have the chance to do so until next winter. I am wondering if I should keep them or resale them because they seem a bit too long. Do you think a guy my height can manage those?
Seems a bit long to me, but I'm not here to talk you out of a good time if you know you prefer longer skis. I'd say 172 is a better fit.
In your opinion, does the new Enforcer 99 or the Unleashed 98 carve better?
Definitely the Enforcer. The Enforcer has more metal, is heavier, stiffer, and has a flat tail.
The Enforcer has more grip and power, especially on ice. When you get the Unleashed up on edge though, it's a very capable carver, especially in clean and round turn shapes.
6’0” 205lb, advanced skier, mostly ski Rockies but some east coast. Would you recommend 179 or 185 length?
I'd personally go 179--I love this ski in the slightly shorter length. I'm 6/2 225 and have found no stability issues on the 179.
Thanks!
I'm surprised by Bob's comments but he know his stuff. I own a 24 Rustler 9 186 and swapped skis with a buddy who has E100, 185.
We both came away saying the R9 is more ski and stiffer torsionally and underfoot. His have 75 days and may be bagged but shouldnt be. I found the E100 smooth as butter but the engagement was too far back on the ski, had to get it tipped over more to get it to bite and it skied short. Didnt lack stability.
The updates make total sense to me and I suspect I would be smitten with an E99 or new 104. I would not take and E100 over my R9's.
I'm your height and 185lbs I wouldn't dream of going shorter than 185 for a ski I expect to ski the rockies with and do everything. At Stowe or smaller Eastern Mtn sure 179.
Are you you getting Salomon departs ?
Hopefully we'll ski them at the end of March and will certainly let the world know!
Seems like a wide ski for Stowe. Any noticed advantages over choosing the 88/89 or the 94? I’m a 5’4” 165lb advanced skier at Sugarloaf seriously looking at this ski at the 172cm length. Thoughts?
The wider ski is heavier, so even though it is wider, there's barely any difference in edge grip/ice performance. However, the wider ski will handle crud and high speeds better. The 89 will be quicker edge to edge and if you want something a little more energetic through turns, I'd recommend that. However, the 94 will be much more versatile and still do great on ice.
There are edge grip and torsional stiffness advantages for the narrower Enforcers, as well as just a preference component. I think one of the main points that we wanted to highlight in this video was that the 99 fares quite well on firm snow and hard pack. If a 99 can do that, and also be capable for softer snow, crud, and powder, then that really highlights the true versatility of the ski. As a skier, you should be asking yourself how much of a sacrifice are you willing to make to increase your grip while decreasing your versatility, or some form of that equation that makes sense for where you ski, how you ski, and what you prefer out of a ski.
Would this particular ski work as a one quiver all mountain ski and be versatile enough to ski all snow conditions from groomers to tree skiing powder etc? I generally think that a 99 ski underfoot is a good width ski to tackle most snow conditions. Your opinion on this issue would be most appreciated. Great videos and fantastic skiing guys. ⛷️ I’m really envious as I would love to be in the mountains skiing as the weather in Australia is bloody hot.
I think this 99 is about as versatile as it gets. For how well it carves, it's also very successful in off-piste and adventurous skiing.
How are these in the trees?
Better than they used to be! Easier to turn and with an easier tail release. Still hefty and pretty stiff, so not the floatiest or smeariest of skis out there, but given how well they carve on-trail, pretty decent tree performance!
I wish I could get those 25 minutes of my life back. East coast groomers for an all mountain ski review😂😂😂
You didn't like all the "couloir" footage? We did it like 5 times!
first