EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Hell & Back/Enforcer/Steadfast?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hell & Back/Enforcer/Steadfast?

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

I've done some research and it seems like any of these skis might work for me (Bonafides too, but hard to come by).

 

6'6" 185lbs adventurous level 7 skier.  I currently ski 2006 Nordica Top Fuel 178 and 2008 Fischer Watea94 186.  I've never skied a rocker ski of any kind.  I ski almost exclusively out west and will be skiing Tahoe for two weeks, Big Sky for 1 week and Summit County for 1 week this season.

 

I've loved the Nordica's since I got them and they are at least decent in all conditions and excel for me on groomers.  The Fischers are nice as well and obviously have better float in powder.  Both ski's do fine in crud with the Nordica tending to go through the crud and the Fischer going over it most of the time.  The Fischer is pretty good on groomers, but  not in the Nordica's league there.  The only ski I've used that I hated was a 182 Volkl Mantra  2007 model.  It was fine in powder/crud, but it was absolutely unstable on groomers with me driving it(zero problems with the Nordica or Fischer in the same conditions).  I am a better skier now than when I had the Mantra's

 

I ski about 50/50 on/off piste and my off piste abilities while not great are getting better(I tend to alternate between kind of flailing around and looking like I know what I'm doing all in the same run).  I generally don't like really tight spots unless it's low angle(think much of silverado at Squaw for being too tight for me)), but pitch doesn't bother me much and I do like nicely spaced trees(think champagne glades at Vail or much of the John Paul area at Snowbasin).  While on piste I generally like to go fast to moderately fast and I find the longer Nastar type courses fun as well.

 

With that background I would love for others with experience on these ski's to chime in and I'll almost certainly hit up the Starthaus gang while out in Tahoe for a couple demo's.  Thanks for the input.

post #2 of 14

If it were me, I would go for the Hell & Back or even the Nordica Soul Rider.  I have Steadfasts and love them, they're my daily driver.

post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post

If it were me, I would go for the Hell & Back or even the Nordica Soul Rider.  I have Steadfasts and love them, they're my daily driver.

Thanks for the reply and I did some research on the Soul Riders.  They could have potential.  The particular models in the title of this thread look like a demo might be hard to come by in Tahoe, but I'll try.  Soul Rider is now on the list.

post #4 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post

Thanks for the reply and I did some research on the Soul Riders.  They could have potential.  The particular models in the title of this thread look like a demo might be hard to come by in Tahoe, but I'll try.  Soul Rider is now on the list.


I tried the Soul Riders and either the hell n backs or steadfast  and one other ski last year at the gathering demo day at Mt Rose.  My story is that I didn;t understand the rules and skied the soul rider all morning,  It was that much fun in 6 to 10 inches of fresh.  Skied either the Steadfast or Hell N Back a few runs in the afternoon on a bit firmer snow and liked it just fine.   Sorry, senior moment on which one, but pretty sure it was Steadfast.

 

The single largest difference between the two , given the way I ski, was the soul rider had a softer tail that the Steadfast.  There are other differences, that's the one that stands out to me.

 

If were to pick one over the other, I'd probably go with the Soul Rider.  I have other harder snow skis, I don;t have something for that niche.  That's biased for eastern conditions tho. 

 

Give them a try, all of them if you can.

post #5 of 14

ditto that mtcylist...

heck i might even sell my kastle mx78 given they're not used as often (out here in pnw) and the steadfast i find are more versatile, lighter and have an awesome edge grip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post

If it were me, I would go for the Hell & Back or even the Nordica Soul Rider.  I have Steadfasts and love them, they're my daily driver.


Edited by canali - 1/1/13 at 1:32pm
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier_j View Post


I tried the Soul Riders and either the hell n backs or steadfast  and one other ski last year at the gathering demo day at Mt Rose.  My story is that I didn;t understand the rules and skied the soul rider all morning,  It was that much fun in 6 to 10 inches of fresh.  Skied either the Steadfast or Hell N Back a few runs in the afternoon on a bit firmer snow and liked it just fine.   Sorry, senior moment on which one, but pretty sure it was Steadfast.

 

The single largest difference between the two , given the way I ski, was the soul rider had a softer tail that the Steadfast.  There are other differences, that's the one that stands out to me.

 

If were to pick one over the other, I'd probably go with the Soul Rider.  I have other harder snow skis, I don;t have something for that niche.  That's biased for eastern conditions tho. 

 

Give them a try, all of them if you can.

 

 

Thanks Jeff and given that I have some idea how you ski it gives me something else to go on.

post #7 of 14

for the enforcers, are they a very stiff ski (i'm intermediate, yet love the steadfast)

....is the shovel rise/rocker such that you'd go up one size as you would say, the rossi S3?

(i'm overweight for S3, and want more versatile edge for hard pack)...

 

not sure for my weight would i choose 169 or move up to 177 (i've found a pair)

Quote:
Originally Posted by willski4food View Post

I have a pair of the Nordica Enforcers and I think they are one of the best all around ski out there with a bias toward crud and powder.  They rip on the groomers and handle well in deeper snow but are a better construction than the Hell & Back and Steadfast.  Check out skigenie.com for personalized ski recommendations.  


Edited by canali - 1/3/13 at 11:04am
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 

Well I bought the Hell and Back without a demo thanks to the great deal I got on a 2012 pair with a major assist from Philpug and the Starthaus crewicon14.gif

 

If for some reason they're not for me I can sell them for at or very near what I paid, so a fairly low risk transaction me thinks.

post #9 of 14

can't go wrong with philplug/starthaus both for value and imput into a good ski choice..

wish i'd jumped at his fall sales on some of the great deals he was offering.

 

...myself i'm looking at 2011-12 enforcers 

 

just wondering if they always have to be ridden aggressively to truly

enjoy them (sometimes i like to charge, but at other times just to take it easy, esp on more tricky grades)

...ski canada noted they're versatile, but i've read different things on epic.

http://skicanadamag.com/ski-tests/ski-test-2012/nordica-enforcer-2012

 

....loved the med-stiff flex and versatility of my atomic blackeyes (but stupidly sold them)...

trying to get such in a 100ish ski for pnw conditions, intermediate skier.


Edited by canali - 1/5/13 at 12:26pm
post #10 of 14

Here are a couple of clarifications for y'all. The Enforcer is not particularly stiff compared to other 98mm skis. It is probably in the middle to a shade on the middle-stiff side of the spectrum. It IS however, relatively stiff torsionally and it has a flat tail as opposed to a twin or rockered tail. If you ski angles, the Enforcer will dazzle you. If you ski flattish, it will merely be.......really good. The Helen is equally great but is a bit different way. The Helen is lighter and more nimble but not quite as damp or grippy. These are two superb skis and both probably reside in the top 4-5 98mm skis. The issue with the Enforcer is that it is not widely available. Nordica has elected to heavily promote the Hell and Back collection on the merits of "sidecountry" usage. Hence the Helen is more widely available with only a few shops investing in the Enforcer.

 

SJ

post #11 of 14
Skied my new Helens (also purchased from Starthaus) yesterday at Waterville Valley. OMG, I think that I am in love...
post #12 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbinder View Post

Skied my new Helens (also purchased from Starthaus) yesterday at Waterville Valley. OMG, I think that I am in love...

Well that's very encouraging, but are you sure you want to publicly acknowledge this relationship with Helen in a place where Marcia can so easily find outwink.gif

post #13 of 14

thanks for that, sierra jim!smile.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

Here are a couple of clarifications for y'all. The Enforcer is not particularly stiff compared to other 98mm skis. It is probably in the middle to a shade on the middle-stiff side of the spectrum. It IS however, relatively stiff torsionally and it has a flat tail as opposed to a twin or rockered tail. If you ski angles, the Enforcer will dazzle you. If you ski flattish, it will merely be.......really good. The Helen is equally great but is a bit different way. The Helen is lighter and more nimble but not quite as damp or grippy. These are two superb skis and both probably reside in the top 4-5 98mm skis. The issue with the Enforcer is that it is not widely available. Nordica has elected to heavily promote the Hell and Back collection on the merits of "sidecountry" usage. Hence the Helen is more widely available with only a few shops investing in the Enforcer.

 

SJ

post #14 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post

Well that's very encouraging, but are you sure you want to publicly acknowledge this relationship with Helen in a place where Marcia can so easily find out;)

Ha! Marcia is fully supportive of my love affairs with my skis!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Hell & Back/Enforcer/Steadfast?