Moguls (Surprise #3)
A few weeks later in some BIG bumps with deep troughs at the bottom of Alta’s High Rustler, the El Capos were surprisingly easy to handle at slower speeds. Here, the metal made them feel pretty damp (I wasn’t getting bucked around at all) while the relatively soft tips and tails never got hung up in the troughs or bumps.
The Belafontes wouldn’t have fared as well trying to neatly pick my way through the bumps at slower speeds. My style on them would have been faster, with more bashing of bumps and less precision-work. So despite a ton of similarities in design, the El Capo isn’t a Belafonte. Why?
The Flex Pattern
I’m probably guilty of assuming that, if a ski has metal in it, it better be able to rage. The El Capo is an example of a ski that utilizes metal to achieve a different end, and despite my assumptions and the corresponding surprises, I can easily see how Nordica produced exactly the ski they set out to build.
The El Capo transitions pretty abruptly from being stiff underfoot to quite soft at the tips and tails—much softer through the tail than, for example, the Belafonte.
If that story sounds familiar, it’s because it’s a very similar story to the Nordica Helldorado, another metal ski with relatively soft tips and tails. And if you were looking for a short way to sum up the El Capo, calling it a Helldorado with a flatter tail isn’t the worst you could do.
So the pros and cons of the El Capo overlap a good bit with the pros and cons of the Helldorado. And if you like the flex pattern of the Helldorado but also like the idea of a less “loose” version of that ski, you’ll like the El Capo.
Groomers
The metal and traditional camber underfoot of both skis make them really snappy and fun on groomers, though I found that the El Capo preferred to make quick, shorter slalom-style turns as opposed to larger GS turns. (I found the Helldorado happy to make either turn shape.)
That the El Capo prefers to carve shorter turns makes some sense, despite the fact that it doesn’t have a tiny sidecut radius (25 meters); given that the tips and tails go soft, neither produces a lot of power or support. The ski’s stiffness is more centered, so the heart of the ski is similar to that of a shorter slalom ski. The soft tails aren’t generating much power, and you can’t just lay on these shovels and count on them to stabilize the ride.
The ski’s energy and stability come from a relatively short area underfoot, so the most effective technique is to work the center of the ski, not the extremities. And if you do, the result is a very good, snappy ride on groomers.
Chop & Crud & Moguls, Quickly Revisited
So the El Capo doesn’t have a particularly powerful tail (though the less you weigh, the more you may disagree), so they don’t provide the support of a ski like the Belafonte. But they are also easier to turn at slow speeds than the Belafonte. So this will be a very good thing or a very bad thing, depending on what you want your skis to help you do: turn easy at slow speeds, or destroy the mountain at high speed.
And to clarify about the El Capo (and this is similar to the Helldorado), if you get back a little on the ski (e.g., your hips are in line with your heels), you’ll be well supported. But get back a little farther (e.g., where your hips are behind your heels) and you will struggle to get back to the center of the ski. And that’s why when raging in chop, the El Capo isn’t forgiving, because it has a smaller supportive sweet spot than a Belafonte, Katana, or Cochise. So if you just want to go rage all over the mountain and beat up the terrain rather than navigate it (El Capo), then the Belafonte or Cochise is almost certainly the better choice.
So, Who’s The El Capo For?
1) As noted, anybody who likes the flex pattern of the Helldorado and likes the sound of a less surfy version, this is your ski.
2) Advanced and strong intermediate skiers who like to carve short, quick, slalom-style turns on groomers, but who are also looking for a solid ski (with metal) that isn’t terribly demanding at slower speeds, and is easier to turn in tighter trees and big bumps than a Belafonte. They will appreciate this ski’s flex pattern.
3) Expert, precise skiers who make few mistakes, don’t need a ski to do the work for them in bumped-up terrain, and wish they could find a ski with dimensions similar to a Cochise, but with traditional camber underfoot.
Bottom Line
The Nordica El Capo is a beautiful, well-constructed ski, with a flex pattern that I suspect will be a bit polarizing. It’s definitely not for everyone, but hopefully this review will help to get the right type of skiers on it, and I’m looking forward to getting other Blister reviewers on it in the fall.
If you’re looking for a conventional charger, I’d look elsewhere. But if you like the sound of the El Capo’s pretty unique combination of design decisions, then this is your ski, because I can’t think of another ski quite like it.
You can now read Brett Carroll’s 2nd Look of the El Capo.
NEXT PAGE: ROCKER PROFILE PICS
Pretty disappointed to read this review – I was really liking the look of the El Capo if it had been pretty much a Cochise with camber. Any opinion on the Vagabond (same as the El Capo but no metal and lighter core)? Could make a good soft snow touring option.
I hear you, Lorne, and I’m with you. Change the flex pattern, and I could see this becoming one of my favorite skis. Having said that, there are lots of people who like the flex pattern of the Patron / Helldorado, and I bet those folks like this ski.
As for the Vagabond, I haven’t skied it yet, but would like to. I do know a couple of other people who have, and who have said it skis well. My 100% pure speculation: if the Vagabond is roughly the same (softer) flex pattern in the tips and tails as the El Capo, but a bit less stiff underfoot as the El Capo (given the lack of metal), seems like the Vagabond might feel like it has a less abrupt flex pattern, and in turn, a larger sweet spot. I.e., it might have a more uniform flex pattern than the El Capo? I don’t know, but I’d really like to find out.
It seems like it just needs a stiffer tail. would going up to the 193 help some of the speed and crud issues? I know sometimes companies up the stiffness as the size goes up, and the extra ski couldn’t hurt in busting through the chop.
Hey, Ryan – personally, I’d prefer to see the El Capo’s stiffness underfoot go less soft, less abruptly, through the tail and tips. But again, Nordica created a pretty similar flex pattern with the Helldorado, so they are clearly going for a particular feel here (read: not pure charger). If you read my Helldorado review, in that instance, I note that I’d personally stick with the 185 over the 193, because I didn’t feel like the extra length of that ski accomplished what you’re proposing with the El Capo. (I.e., the flex patterns of the 185 and 193 felt very similar.) So I think you’re right to some degree, but if the 193 keeps the same flex pattern / the same transitions, the longer El Capo won’t be a traditional charger, either.
After demoing the ski (193, I’m 6’0 160lbs) I would agree with the review totally, really stiff underfoot and weird everywhere else. I usually like twin-shaped chargy skis, but not this one. I love to ski moguls but I am the back-seat-funk type and I just never felt supported enough on this ski, and not enough stability to freeski as I like. I could bump bump’s faster on my Blizzard zeus 185 (severely underrated ski). It carves pretty good though, switch as well. The base also seems really soft to me,I scored a rock coming down and it ripped to the core about a foot long, but that is a demo ski that has been ground down.
Really disappointed to hear that the Enforcer replacement has a soft tail. One of the things that made it such a great ski was it’s big stiff tail. I don’t understand the direction Nordica is going with skis that can’t help you out if you get knocked into the back seat.
I did a full day demo on the 185 cm El Capo’s today at Whitefish MTN resort, I think your review was right on. I enjoyed them on the groomers, they lay down nice predictable turns-frankly felt like a nice intermediate level groomer ski. I had a lot of trouble getting them through soft chop and slightly skied out pow runs… I just kept thinking I needed more ski-stiffer tips and tails. It felt like the ski didn’t want to finish the turn. I’m used to flexing (driving) my skis at the bottom of the turn and using that flex to pop me into the next turn and I really couldn’t do that very well or predictably on these skis. I went back to my 2011/2012 Nordica Hot Rod’s and was back in my happy place.
I was under the impression that the 2014-15 El Capo had changed significantly from 2013-14. The new model has a full length titanium layer and a second one that just goes under the camber. The old one only had titanium under the camber. This is from talking to the Nordica Europe reps at the end of last winter having just demoed the 14-15 prototype and liking it lots for skiing hard in a variety of snow types. I have never ridden the 13-14 model.
Would someone be able to confirm whether I’m mistaken here? I am probably going to buy the El Capo based on what I found when I tested the prototype last winter, but I’d reconsider this if they had changed it to a ski that is only titanium underfoot. Has anyone handled this year’s production models? Thanks.
Interestingly, if you want to make a ski more docile, and you have too much tail, it works better, at least for me, to move the bindings BACK. This way the ski’s center is farther ahead of you, and you can ski it more forward, on the ball of your foot, also allowing some ankle action to take up some of the shock.
The farther forward on the ski, the more you have to sit back to ski on the center, which puts you on your heels and beats up your knees. I firmly believe that the popularity of back seat skiing is the best thing that ever happened for knee replacement surgeons. It started with ski racing, where some jetting off the tails helps increase speed through the gates.