EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › REQUIEM: 2013 Nordica Enforcer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

REQUIEM: 2013 Nordica Enforcer - Page 2

post #31 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

Good skiers who are heavy enough to flex it, and ski with really active feet fore/aft, also love the Bonafide.   I use quite a bit of tipping, as well as some foot movements fore/aft, and therefore like a ski with a predictable tip to engage, which is what Holiday is talking about.  


Sounds like me, I think.  I'm very comfortable with fully cambered skis, and am used to "working" skis, putting a great deal of energy into them.  So when I demo'd the Mantras and Blizzards, BOTH felt "easy" to me by comparison.  I honestly don't get how the Mantra is "work", as I found it delightfully relaxed compared to what I'm used to.  And the Bones were absolutely butter smooth, felt like I barely had to work them at all.  Just tip and go. The tips were certainly more vague, but I didn't mind; my slalom skis cure that otherwise. Perhaps that's what I'm looking for in an off-piste ski; something that can be easier in the soft stuff, doesn't require high energy in the bumps, and so forth.  Those high energy traits are what I love in a carver, not in a soft snow ski (at least for me).

 

I've tried softer, non-metal skis with either wood or wood/carbon construction, and have found most of them to be noodles for what I prefer.  Maybe it's just my background, preference, and weight, but I've come to the realization that I like metal skis that are on the damp side, fairly stiff, and solid.  Bones, Mantras, E98, Cham 97, and Enforcers all fit that bill, for me at least.  I just gotta test a couple more of these if possible, then pull the trigger (likely not until the Fall though).

 

I find the Enforcer intriguing.  Since they're end-of-life, I doubt I'll be able to demo a pair.  Probably end up passing unless some crazy deal comes along.  But those graphics......UGH........looks like they got beat with the ugly stick all the way down the mountain LOL.

post #32 of 52
Thread Starter 

Hmm. while I fully subscribe to most of what dawgcatching said, I am not sure I agree with his assessment of the rocker profile difference.  Here is the picture of the rocker section for my own Bones and the Enforcers:

 

Here is the tail section, you can clearly see that the Bone has tail rocker, Enforcer does not):

 

 

And while we are at it, here are the pictures of the camber, tip, and tail section.  The green rubber bands were used to hold the brakes so they won't disturb the natural profile of the ski.  Sadly, the graphics advantage of the Blizzards is pretty obvious.  Enjoy.

 

 

 

 

 

post #33 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

Hmm. while I fully subscribe to most of what dawgcatching said, I am not sure I agree with his assessment of the rocker profile difference.  Here is the picture of the rocker section for my own Bones and the Enforcers:

 

Here is the tail section, you can clearly see that the Bone has tail rocker, Enforcer does not):

 

 

And while we are at it, here are the pictures of the camber, tip, and tail section.  The green rubber bands were used to hold the brakes so they won't disturb the natural profile of the ski.  Sadly, the graphics advantage of the Blizzards is pretty obvious.  Enjoy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was getting at more of the functional rocker on the snow, not what it is when unflexed.  There is a pretty drastic difference in flex pattern on each of these, which changes the tip and snow engagement feel.  To me, the Enforcer felt stiff underfoot, but softer at the tip and tail.  Bonafide stiff throughout, doesn't really flex at any point along the ski. 

 

In the first picture, you can also see that the Enforcer is pretty low and then a steep early rise, so shorter tip off the snow. Bonafide is longer after the tallest contact point, not as steeply tipped up. It may play a difference too, meaning that the Enforcer is easier to engage at that upper contact point over the Bonafide.  If you measure rocker height at the upper contact point, the Bonafide should have more rocker than the Enforcer, at least that is how it looks in those pictures.  That point would be about 1-2cm up on the notched edge on the Bonafide. It is where the Enforcer's tip begins it's steep bend, and looks to be twice as much on the Bonafide.  I know I certainly felt a big difference in terms of flex and engagement: the Enforcer seemed to suck up undulations in the snow, the Bonafide more or less bounces off of them, not to mention the "pull me into the turn" at the top is much more pronounced on the Enforcer than the Bonafide on firm snow.  On firm snow, it feels like I don't have much of a tip on the Bonafide, I really have to crank it over to get any bite early. It likes to cruise, low energy, but if I can't get early at the top, I don't get any power out of the ski.   I like the early engagement feel, the same thing Holiday is talking about. 

 

Being that these are 2 pretty similar skis, made by the same company/conglomerate, it is pretty surprising how much different they are.  

 

When testing skis, it was pretty interesting to see how flex played a much more important role than rocker profile in a ski.  

 

Your thoughts, since you own both?  

 

Here is the High-C that I was working on (on a Soul Rider): fairly aggressive (for me) downhill 2 footed release:

 

AppleMark

 

trying to get a pretty early engagement at the top of the turn

 

AppleMark

 

Solid edge angles entering the fall line. 

 

AppleMark

 

Getting ready to set up the new turn, starting to unweight

 

AppleMark

 

Pop! 

 

AppleMark


Edited by dawgcatching - 3/4/13 at 10:59pm
post #34 of 52

Thanks Alexzn, great to see those pics!  I wish more reviews would show the actual profile of skis rather than JUST topsheet graphics.

 

I do see a distinct difference in the tip profile between the Enforcers and Bonafides though.  The Enforcers are more abrupt toward the tip, the Bones are more gradual.  Kinda reminds me of various curves on hockey sticks actually, subtle differences in shape can make a big difference in performance and "feel".

 

The more I learn about ski tech, the more I realize it's about the subtleties. A mad mixture of tech and voodoo LOL to get every variable aligned perfectly to create just the right ski for a given need. 

 

BTW Alexzn, if you feel the pressing need to sell one of those sets due to the similarities (or differences), feel free to hit me up wink.gif

 

 

 

Dawg: I had to read your analysis THREE TIMES (!!!) to get at what you're saying. You sales guys know your $H!t.  It's probably still voodoo to me, but I do think you're on the money about the tips on the Bonafides.  When I tested them, I got the same feeling that there was no tip. Compared to my slalom skis, for example, which are RIGHT THERE in your face, waiting for the hammer to drop. My SL and GS skis want to drive hard right from the get-go, whereas the Bones felt like they were happy to just go for a stroll.  I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing on the Bones, as I did find them very relaxing by comparison.  Not right or wrong, just different I think.

post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnerbob View Post

My SL and GS skis want to drive hard right from the get-go, whereas the Bones felt like they were happy to just go for a stroll.  I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing on the Bones, as I did find them very relaxing by comparison.  Not right or wrong, just different I think.

 

Yeah, I agree.  It is either the feel you are looking for, or it isn't.  That is why there are so many different skis on the market, and why everyone should test before purchasing, just like a car.  I don't know anyone who doesn't test drive their car before pulling the trigger, but everyone seems to think that buying a ski based on a review is a good ideaconfused.gif  Skiing the Rossi E88 and 98 recently, they are going the other direction of a very torsionally solid tip that has very minimal tip rocker, engages powerfully, but wants to engage more than some people would prefer.  Not super relaxing, but very responsive, and also why they have plenty of juice on the groomers.  

 

It is also interesting to see how ski preferences change over time. I likely preferred different skis 5 years ago than I do today, and will prefer different skis again in 5 years time, depending on how my skill level progresses and my fitness regresses!  

post #36 of 52
Thread Starter 

Nice skiing, Dawg!!!

 

Just to clarify- I do not own both skis, the Enforcer was a Starthaus demo (and the Bushwackers in one of the pictures are my brother's ski, so no, we don't have a garage full of Blizzards and Nordicas biggrin.gif ).  Bonafide indeed does not have a distinct flex point, but that's why the rocker integrates with the flex of the ski so well. To me that's a asset.  The Enforcer did feel like a bit more powerful and damper ski.   Rocker profile is an interesting question- on the last run Phil and I switched skis and I was watching the Enforcers on his feet, you really can see the point where the rocker starts, its almost like some of K2 shapes.    When the ski is bent, the rocker blends in very well.  

 

If anything the Enforcer has a bit more top end than the Bonafide (which is rather academic distinction, as both are plenty of ski for any mortal), but the Bonafide has a lot more bottom end (i.e. it can work for a much wider range of skiers.)  I still prefer the Bone for the way it combines the quickness at low speed and stability at high speed.  No other ski I tried does that quite as well.  But if I had to own the Enforcer instead of the Bone, I would not be shedding huge tears.  What I'd like to see is the Enforcer build in a Vagabond shape and 98-ish mm width.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

 

I was getting at more of the functional rocker on the snow, not what it is when unflexed.  There is a pretty drastic difference in flex pattern on each of these, which changes the tip and snow engagement feel.  To me, the Enforcer felt stiff underfoot, but softer at the tip and tail.  Bonafide stiff throughout, doesn't really flex at any point along the ski. 

 

In the first picture, you can also see that the Enforcer is pretty low and then a steep early rise, so shorter tip off the snow. Bonafide is longer after the tallest contact point, not as steeply tipped up. It may play a difference too, meaning that the Enforcer is easier to engage at that upper contact point over the Bonafide.  If you measure rocker height at the upper contact point, the Bonafide should have more rocker than the Enforcer, at least that is how it looks in those pictures.  That point would be about 1-2cm up on the notched edge on the Bonafide. It is where the Enforcer's tip begins it's steep bend, and looks to be twice as much on the Bonafide.  I know I certainly felt a big difference in terms of flex and engagement: the Enforcer seemed to suck up undulations in the snow, the Bonafide more or less bounces off of them, not to mention the "pull me into the turn" at the top is much more pronounced on the Enforcer than the Bonafide on firm snow.  On firm snow, it feels like I don't have much of a tip on the Bonafide, I really have to crank it over to get any bite early. It likes to cruise, low energy, but if I can't get early at the top, I don't get any power out of the ski.   I like the early engagement feel, the same thing Holiday is talking about. 

 

Being that these are 2 pretty similar skis, made by the same company/conglomerate, it is pretty surprising how much different they are.  

 

When testing skis, it was pretty interesting to see how flex played a much more important role than rocker profile in a ski.  

 

Your thoughts, since you own both?  

 

Here is the High-C that I was working on (on a Soul Rider): fairly aggressive (for me) downhill 2 footed release:

 

AppleMark

 

trying to get a pretty early engagement at the top of the turn

 

AppleMark

 

Solid edge angles entering the fall line. 

 

AppleMark

 

Getting ready to set up the new turn, starting to unweight

 

AppleMark

 

Pop! 

 

AppleMark

post #37 of 52

What's new about the Vagabond shape?  It is the different tip/tail rise profile?  I haven't seen many pics around, hard to tell.  I read your review, sounds promising!  At least the graphics are starting to look respectable LOL.

post #38 of 52

The shape differences are subtle. The Vagabond/EC has roughly similar tip rise to an Enforcer but also has a really small amount of tail rise that the Enforcer doesn't have. Also, the Vagabond has a small amount of taper front and back that the Enforcer lacks. The result is that the Vagabond/El Capo skis a little shorter than the Enforcer. In fact, when testing this category @ Mammoth, I was really surprised to learn that I had tested the EC in 185, it really felt shorter/quicker than that (like maybe a 177). When one gets into 107mm skis, it is difficult to balance the conflicting wants/needs that various skiers will have. The Vagabond/El Capo does this waaaaaay better than  most.

 

SJ

post #39 of 52

Coo, thanks SJ.  Wonder if that shape could translate down to the 98mm width?  Sounds like Nordica isn't going there though.  Interesting.

post #40 of 52

^^ In my review of the Vagabond I actually said it feels like a 98mm ski when you're on it, so Nordica may believe an actual 98mm isn't necessary.  At least that seems to be the case for now.

post #41 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

The shape differences are subtle. The Vagabond/EC has roughly similar tip rise to an Enforcer but also has a really small amount of tail rise that the Enforcer doesn't have. Also, the Vagabond has a small amount of taper front and back that the Enforcer lacks. The result is that the Vagabond/El Capo skis a little shorter than the Enforcer. In fact, when testing this category @ Mammoth, I was really surprised to learn that I had tested the EC in 185, it really felt shorter/quicker than that (like maybe a 177). When one gets into 107mm skis, it is difficult to balance the conflicting wants/needs that various skiers will have. The Vagabond/El Capo does this waaaaaay better than  most.

 

SJ

 

I had the same experience; the 185 Vagabond felt shorter and narrower, seemed more nimble than even The Ski (185) at 93 underfoot.  The 185 El Capo certainly felt like its dimensions, I wouldn't be surprised if the 185 Vagabond is still more nimble than the 177 EC.

post #42 of 52
Thread Starter 

I am spending a vast majority of my time on a 98mm ski, and my impression is that the Vagabond feels like a wider ski, but an exceptionally good wider ski.  So, Nordica does have a hole in the lineup at 98, but I believe that hole is plugged by Hell&Back.    

post #43 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

I am spending a vast majority of my time on a 98mm ski, and my impression is that the Vagabond feels like a wider ski, but an exceptionally good wider ski.  So, Nordica does have a hole in the lineup at 98, but I believe that hole is plugged by Hell&Back.    

Yeah, that was my thought too.  Not bad at all for a wider ski, but much wider than I would want to navigate through bumps and on hardpack off-piste. Plus, don't forget the Soul Rider.  It is a way better ski for lighter skiers like myself looking for snap and rebound than the Hell n' Back, which is stable, but can feel too stout and Mantra/Bonafide-ish to me.   Probably you wouldn't be super happy on that ski, though. I do find the speed limit, but it is manageable, and the quickness and load-ability on the tip and tail more than makes up for it! 

post #44 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnerbob View Post

Coo, thanks SJ.  Wonder if that shape could translate down to the 98mm width?  Sounds like Nordica isn't going there YET though.  Interesting.

 

FIFY

 

SJ

post #45 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

Nice skiing, Dawg!!!

 

 

Thanks!  Been trying to improve this year, it is really coming along. Now, if I could only get more than 6-8 hours a week on the hill!  I am mostly just skiing lunch breaks at this point. 

post #46 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by givethepigeye View Post

I'll just add my mini review of the Enforcer (this years model):

 

First, bought it w/o riding it from Start Haus - based on all the feedback, seeing them on professionals feet and the fact that I like skis with metal.  While I do like my 184 Dynastar Legend 94's, I wasn't "in" love with them & and while I do mostly love the 185 Cochise - there are days when I don't.  ie. It really hasn't snowed for a while - very early on a Spring day, etc.  The thought was that I wanted that "one ski" that whenever I got on a plane - I wouldn't be sad that I took it and put it in the bag. I rarely get the chance to bring two pair - as I have my lady's to tote as well.  The equation had been -> if it had snowed recently or in forecast = Cochise, if not = L94. 

 

Enter the Enforcer - seemed to have all the boxes checked - metal, damp, touch of early rise, stiff but not too stiff - 98mm.  They were also not going to make them any longer - so I swallowed deep and bought them (great service from Start Haus - had them mounted, tuned and shipped to JH).  I have skied them in JH (back to back w/ Cochise) and now this past weekend in Vail.  Can only say that they are everything mentioned above by OP and other posters that have skied them.  No speed limit that I could find bombing down groomed runs making GS size turns.  Never once felt unsure.   More angle + more pressure = tighter turn - and they can go to a pretty tight radius and very quick edge to edge. Just rock solid. No problem shutting them down either.

 

Through chopped up crud - no problem - put them on angle and its like it isn't even there.  (think China Bowl after 4-5 inches of fresh the day before or Amphitheater in JH on the way back to Thunder @ noon on a 4-5" day).  Bumps - I'm really not a person that could define the "nuances" of bump performance, other than - I like them here better than the Cochise but might be a factor of width.  

 

I really now have a dilemma on my hands - the Enforcer is pretty close the Cochise for me on almost everything w/ exception of float (not that the Cochise is a "floaty", but mine are @ -1 and the combo mount and tip profile/flex seems a bit be more pow friendly on them + I like them - so.. who knows.  Cochise favors a more centered style - Enforcer a more "pressure on the cuff" style IMHO

 

Solid ski - surprised its going away.  I'm 6'2", 190. owned the Line P100's before the Cochise and L94.  Skied the Girish and loved it but bought the Cochise (go figure).

Adding to above^. 

 

Been out in UT for 3 days burning off my MC pass - these ski's really are great (for me).  Skied groomers early and then off-piste when it softened up (mostly backside and a little baldy shoulder). Super stable at speed, tight or wide GS turns. Did not get bounced by heavy slushy snow late in the day.  Actually thinking of buying another pair for "back up"

post #47 of 52

Still in love with these Enforcers.  Great all-mountain ski for a Spring day in CO.  Now need to figure out the next size up and whether to keep the Cochise or not.

post #48 of 52

Sounds like you gotta sell the Cochise.  Too much overlap and you're not "in love" with the Cochise like the Enforcers.  I'd say sell the Cochise and look at something different for the deeper pow days, then you got a better-rounded setup.

post #49 of 52

I dont know - we may have had a "moment" again on Sun.  I am getting a bigger ski for deeper days - Praxis GPO is kind what I am thinking.  But the Cochise and Enforcers while similar are just different enough that I might keep the Blizzards too.  Enforcers will need to be pryed from my hands after I am gone.

post #50 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by givethepigeye View Post

I dont know - we may have had a "moment" again on Sun.  I am getting a bigger ski for deeper days - Praxis GPO is kind what I am thinking.  But the Cochise and Enforcers while similar are just different enough that I might keep the Blizzards too.  Enforcers will need to be pryed from my hands after I am gone.

 

For what it's worth, I'm planning to get a 98mm ski but still keep my Cochise.  When there's 3-6 inches of snow, the lack of camber and slarviness is a distinct enough difference that I would miss them on those days.

post #51 of 52

Enforcer with a Bodacious... now that'd be a pair of keepers! smile.gif

post #52 of 52

Think Im going to keep them both, for a while..  Adding the Praxis Great Pacific Octopus to the mix for my powder ski.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › REQUIEM: 2013 Nordica Enforcer