Elan Ripstick 106 vs. Blizzard Rustler 10

Im not sure which would be better, but my friend has the ripsticks and absolutely loves them, says the asym sidecuts make ripping groomers a blast and theyre pretty manouverable in the trees, a super solid charging ski, they seem to be like a more badass version of the volkl mantras, im not sure about the other skis, but according to my friends thoughts on the ripsticks, id go with those

Both are fun, playful skis with similar weight and flex. The Rustler 10 is a touch stiffer underfoot making it better in crud and for carving. Both are light for their width, so neither is a charger.
Between the two, I’d slightly favor the Rustler 10. Playful but solid underfoot. I have the stiffer, heavier Rustler 9 and it rips.

Very close comparison so it might come down to the better deal you can get on one. Same price, I’d go for the Rustler 10.

**This post was edited on Dec 27th 2018 at 10:55:09am

Both are fun, fairly light skis that you can still ski pretty hard for how light they are. Main difference I've noticed is that the Rustler 10 doesn't love making really big, long turns — feels like the sidecut wants to pull you back across the fall line if you try to go straight and fast on them. If you tend to stick to smaller or medium-sized turns, then both could work. They have a pretty similar on snow "personality" — both encourage skiing hard but light on your feet, finding transitions, slashing turns when you need to, and they'll both still carve pretty well on groomers.

Do not put an AT binding on skis you will mostly use in bounds. They will ski like shit unless the snow is soft and forgiving.

Armada tracer 108 /thread

Rum_HamDo not put an AT binding on skis you will mostly use in bounds. They will ski like shit unless the snow is soft and forgiving.

This is so far from true, if he is referring to a frame binding, I skied on a frame binding inbounds almost every season even using it as a comp ski and never new the difference.

jclearlyThis is so far from true, if he is referring to a frame binding, I skied on a frame binding inbounds almost every season even using it as a comp ski and never new the difference.

Assumed he was referring to tech bindings which will ski like shit in anything but perfect snow. Frame bindings aren’t great either but will be serviceable.

patagonialukeBoth are fun, fairly light skis that you can still ski pretty hard for how light they are. Main difference I've noticed is that the Rustler 10 doesn't love making really big, long turns — feels like the sidecut wants to pull you back across the fall line if you try to go straight and fast on them. If you tend to stick to smaller or medium-sized turns, then both could work. They have a pretty similar on snow "personality" — both encourage skiing hard but light on your feet, finding transitions, slashing turns when you need to, and they'll both still carve pretty well on groomers.

The review on Blistergear mentioned the “doesn’t love long turns” issue on the Rustler 9 as well which I haven’t found on mine after fixing the factory tune issues.

I noticed my pair had a few edge high sections (common on Enforcers skis too) from the factory along with it being quite base high in other areas. I noticed a touch of instability especially over rougher terrain/mixed snow when bases were flat. Light stone grind to flatten the base, reset the edges and it’s very stable at higher speeds now. Can do shorter turns with ease but more than happy to long, high speed GS turns even with its 17m radius. Agree with the “comes alive at speed” comments that man reviewers mention about the Rustler 9.

Makes me wonder how many pairs of Rustlers are leaving the factory with bad tunes.

I think the Ripsticks are some of the best skis that money can buy right now. Super easy to turn, and so light it feels like you are just flying all over the place.

Thank you for the answers guys! They were very useful, I decided to go with the Ripsticks mounted with the Salomon shift MNC bindings.