Salomon QST 92 skis

[Highway Star]

To everyone who thinks I'm being a jerk - just trying to provide some context from someone who actually skis two extremely similar skis in the same length as the OP's provided point of reference.

[Guy in Shorts]

Very enjoyable read here. Asking for ski advice on the internet is an opinion based crapshoot. Congrats on the new skis FAST. Bet you like the QST’s more than HS does for his Enforcer’s. Only surefire way to tell if you like a ski is to buy it. Held my tongue until now as my opinion pretty much mirrors HS. Personally I never have been on a Salomon ski that I liked let alone would buy but I love my Salomon boots. Unlike HS I demoed the Enforcer for a couple of days and realized that I would never own a pair. Like both of you I had and loved the Blizzard Brahama’s. Currently on the Renoun Endurance98 in 184cm with a new Faction Dictator 3.0 in 186cm being the challenger for this season. I am the only person I know on either of those skis and tend to be a outlier on my likes. At 260# I like big guy skis.

[f.a.s.t.]

Very enjoyable read here. Asking for ski advice on the internet is an opinion based crapshoot. Congrats on the new skis FAST. Bet you like the QST’s more than HS does for his Enforcer’s. Only surefire way to tell if you like a ski is to buy it. Held my tongue until now as my opinion pretty much mirrors HS. Personally I never have been on a Salomon ski that I liked let alone would buy but I love my Salomon boots. Unlike HS I demoed the Enforcer for a couple of days and realized that I would never own a pair. Like both of you I had and loved the Blizzard Brahama’s. Currently on the Renoun Endurance98 in 184cm with a new Faction Dictator 3.0 in 186cm being the challenger for this season. I am the only person I know on either of those skis and tend to be a outlier on my likes. At 260# I like big guy skis.

My age is a factor too, pushing 60 years old and can't/shouldn't ski as hard and fast as I did when I was in my 20's-30's-40's. The QST 92 is described as fun, lively and playful, that's what I plan on using them for on those warm, sunny days when the snow gets nice and soft, especially in the spring. I think they will work better in powder, moguls and trees than my Brahma and Amp Rictor skis too. They are wider, shorter and much softer, maybe just what an old man needs.

I have two days from last year in mind too. One was skiing at Stowe on a Saturday after a 54 inch Tues-Wed-Thurs snow storm. The front four were all bumped up and the woods in between them all tracked up. It was very sunny and warm and the snow started to set up a little heavy. I was on my Amp Rictors and was loving all that snow, no problems at all. However, I think a shorter-wider-softer ski would have been even better, especially in the woods between the Front Four runs. Kind of the same thing at Killington two weeks later, even warmer and softer. This year, I'll be on the Salomon skis on days like those two from last year.

[Mister Moose]

I've had skis I loved at first turn. I've had skis that were at first mediocre and then grew to like their wide but softened range. I've had skis that were one trick ponies. I've had skis that took weeks to eventually ski them in conditions that made me say, "Oh, so that's what these skis are good at". And I've had skis that were dogs out of the box and never got better.

Many skis are somewhat close to their street rep and reviews, so those have their place. But you still need to ski them and see if they work for you. If they work for you, it doesn't matter what others say. They don't ski the trails/conditions/weight/style you do.

[ANGUS]

The Moose speaks the truth. What works for one may not work for another. Demo. Demo. Demo. Always make friends with the reps. Buy them drinks, lunch and etc. It pays off when you can find the ones that let you run.

[Highway Star]

Bet you like the QST’s more than HS does for his Enforcer’s. Only surefire way to tell if you like a ski is to buy it. Held my tongue until now as my opinion pretty much mirrors HS. Personally I never have been on a Salomon ski that I liked let alone would buy but I love my Salomon boots. Unlike HS I demoed the Enforcer for a couple of days and realized that I would never own a pair.

It's not like I randomly bought the Enforcer. I do pay attention to what is the hottest all around ski of the time and might go out of my way to pick up a pair if I can get a deal, but I have many other quiver skis. I've had pretty good luck with other popular skis, such as the Bonafide, Head Im88, and K2 Public Enemy. I identified that I should certainly be on the 193 Enforcer as I own other 190+ skis and most of them are very substantial, and the 185 would be far too short. I read all reviews available. Got the skis on a killer closeout deal. Tried to get a demo of the 193, in particular to dial in the mounting point as I figured the factory line was too far forward, but had no luck. I got a deal on new STH2 16's and decided to use them on the Enforcer because they were light and matched the ski, and were also well regarded. Paid about $500 for the setup, VERY reasonable.

It was definitely the right call to mount them -2 cm, can't imagine how short they would feel otherwise. The STH2 16's were also a major disappointment, in stock configuration they don't provide anywhere near the lateral stiffness of cranked down toe metal Salomons or my AFD modified FKS with high forward pressure. I had to modify the STH2's heel and toe to eliminate slop and crank up the forward pressure to stiffen the ski under foot, to get it to respond with an acceptable level of precision. Before that they felt like absolute toys. They are an OKish, middling ski, and with the binding mods are acceptable. They are incredibly forgiving in weird soft snow, a solid mixed snow tree ski, and I've done technical lines on them in marginal conditions that I couldn't do on any other ski. For example, I hit the Canyon area landslide to old lower Cascade in 4-6" over ice, in one smooth continuous shot. I feel compelled to be so negative about them because of the overwhelming hype they've received. If you read the Blister review of them, they do point out most of their major negatives, which are then discounted:

http://blistergearreview.com/gear-revie ... enforcer-2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In another side note, this year I picked up a pair of the 192 Stockli Stormrider 95's, '13 model NOS. Total death machine, but hopefully somewhat viable all around in a crush everything context. Very rare ski, I'm sure I'll be happy with them as I have many other great Stockli's. The last of the V8 Interceptors....

[biged]

Looks like everyone is putting too much thought into buying skis. My suggestion, purchase 6 bottles of Foley's, start drinking and go ski shopping online. If you're a member of the skeleton crew you will be surprised when the new skis arrive. In some cases, when you are really lucky two pairs arrive at home a few weeks later.

[hillbangin]

Asking for ski advice on the internet is an opinion based crapshoot.

Asking for advice on KZone is very entertaining.

Opinions are like A**holes - everyone has one

[madhatter]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

[Highway Star]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

[madhatter]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

yet yer too much of a sally to back that assertion up on the snow....

FYI the extreme was far less damp and capable of much quicker turns...much "livelier" in the bumps...

took out my PE 161's for the last few days of spring this year as I have been letting my brother use the extremes and didn't wanna trash em on the rocks...still like em but they really do suck on hard surfaces ( that world cup "snow" was still pretty solid on june 1) they don;t have anywhere near the bump performance my rev85's do either....nonetheless it's still a decent rock ski 12 years later...

[f.a.s.t.]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

yet yer too much of a sally to back that assertion up on the snow....

FYI the extreme was far less damp and capable of much quicker turns...much "livelier" in the bumps...

took out my PE 161's for the last few days of spring this year as I have been letting my brother use the extremes and didn't wanna trash em on the rocks...still like em but they really do suck on hard surfaces ( that world cup "snow" was still pretty solid on june 1) they don;t have anywhere near the bump performance my rev85's do either....nonetheless it's still a decent rock ski 12 years later...

Hey Madhatter, you're a big time bumper. How do you think that QST will perform in the bumps?

[madhatter]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

yet yer too much of a sally to back that assertion up on the snow....

FYI the extreme was far less damp and capable of much quicker turns...much "livelier" in the bumps...

took out my PE 161's for the last few days of spring this year as I have been letting my brother use the extremes and didn't wanna trash em on the rocks...still like em but they really do suck on hard surfaces ( that world cup "snow" was still pretty solid on june 1) they don;t have anywhere near the bump performance my rev85's do either....nonetheless it's still a decent rock ski 12 years later...

Hey Madhatter, you're a big time bumper. I ski bumps whenever I can but "big time" is probably best reserved for the pros and aspiring pros, I have never ski'd in a bump competition) How do you think that QST will perform in the bumps?

I really can't say...fatter underfoot makes it harder for sure...if you can flex them and bash the tips into stuff w/o getting tossed into the back seat then they should be reasonably capable...wide shovels get caught up on each other so that will be a limiting factor regardless, but talking recreational bump skiing where turns are not scored and yer knees don't necessarily need to be locked, as long as you can stay outta the back seat you'll be fine...


personally I don't like a rockered ski at all ( the rev 85 is 20% tip rocker/80% traditional camber, the rocker is barely noticeable) I want the tips of my ski to immediately dig in and and begin a very precise turn not deflect away in the general direction of my intended turn...

[Highway Star]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

yet yer too much of a sally to back that assertion up on the snow....

FYI the extreme was far less damp and capable of much quicker turns...much "livelier" in the bumps...

took out my PE 161's for the last few days of spring this year as I have been letting my brother use the extremes and didn't wanna trash em on the rocks...still like em but they really do suck on hard surfaces ( that world cup "snow" was still pretty solid on june 1) they don;t have anywhere near the bump performance my rev85's do either....nonetheless it's still a decent rock ski 12 years later...

I can't verify the existence of a 161cm K2 Enemy or in either width of the Public Enemy. So I have to conclude you don't know what you're talking about - shocking, I know. Regardless, 161 is hella short.

[madhatter]

I always demo if I can but not EVERY ski is available for demo...laughing at HS cheering the PE ( great ski in it's day) yet denouncing the Extreme ( a far superior rendition of the PE)...

madhatter likes 85 under foot for most conditions, but I'm nowhere near 240 either so float isn't quite so elusive...

The 179 PE was stout and was enough ski for an aggressive 200 lb person. The Extreme was similar but very slightly lighter and softer, available in 179 and 184 max length. Either ski in a 159 size was a great ski for an aggressive 100-120lb man or woman.

yet yer too much of a sally to back that assertion up on the snow....

FYI the extreme was far less damp and capable of much quicker turns...much "livelier" in the bumps...

took out my PE 161's for the last few days of spring this year as I have been letting my brother use the extremes and didn't wanna trash em on the rocks...still like em but they really do suck on hard surfaces ( that world cup "snow" was still pretty solid on june 1) they don;t have anywhere near the bump performance my rev85's do either....nonetheless it's still a decent rock ski 12 years later...

I can't verify the existence of a 161cm K2 Enemy or in either width of the Public Enemy. So I have to conclude you don't know what you're talking about - shocking, I know. Regardless, 161 is hella short.

oh boise here we go again...yep yer right they are also 159's I'll need to ski em again to see if they ski differently w/o those two falsely attributed cm's

yep I'm not 200 + lbs nor am I 6+ feet hence I ski a much smaller ski...I also ski fast and relatively straight down the fall line I don't need a fat ski to keep me afloat, I don't need a long ski to change directions or scrub speed....I do like a ski I can flex hard and get a good amt or rebound out of, I also like a shorter turn radius (13- 14ish)

for most recreational skiers the shortest and softest ski that still performs will provide the most enjoyable ski experience...( not racers, park rats etc but recreational skiers you see most weekends) moderate turn radius under 18 is also going to be more user friendly than a 21 + radius that wants to run and make long turns....stiffer racier skis will only make you work that much harder and require constant effort...big fat skis are great in powder esp if yer a big guy but they are hard on yer knees on hardpack and slow as cold molasses edge to edge...long skis go faster on the race course and similar flat and fast surfaces to a certain extent but become a liability in crowds, bumps, trees and crud...

I'm also pretty much a one quiver guy though I do have a ski use specifically for ski bum and older skis for late spring/ rock skiing, otherwise I'm on the same ski powder days, groomers and spring bump days...

oh yeah and one last thing; unless you actually show up for a ski-off* you have ZERO credibility here...

*( sanctioned or just friendly "beers after" style if you can man up and stop being such a dick)