The Enforcer 93 is not the quickest ski out there. Strong skiers will still love the stability this ski provides, and I had no trouble making quick turns in tighter trees. But if you value ease and quickness over stability at speed, then there are better options in the ~88-95mm wide range.
Still, keep in mind that if you are willing to give up some edgehold on ice, I think you can detune this ski and loosen it up quite a bit, leaving you with a supportive ski that is still relatively easy to pivot in tighter spaces.
When A/B-ing the two skis in very firm, very big bumps off Kachina, the 185 Enforcer 93 felt like more ski than the 185 Enforcer 100.
Again, I’m certain that you can play with the tune to loosen this ski up, but I would not call the 185 cm Enforcer 93 an especially “easy” moguls ski. Advanced mogul skiers will be fine with it (and I suspect will like it quite a bit), but others may want to (1) go shorter or (2) go with an inherently quicker ski (probably a ski that has more tip taper and a softer flex).
I haven’t been quick to advise people to downsize the Enforcer 100, but I could see downsizing the 93 if you find yourself on the fence about sizing. It feels to me like the Enforcer 93 is a bit ‘more ski’ than the Enforcer 100. So while I’ve cautioned people against downsizing the Enforcer 100, when A/B-ing these two skis back to back, I found myself thinking that a lot of people would likely enjoy the 177 cm Enforcer 93—and I bet I could have fun on the 177, too, while I have no interest in skiing the Enforcer 100 in a shorter length. (And keep in mind, I was skiing the exact same runs, in the same, firm, bumped-up and fairly gnarly conditions at Taos.)
So if (1) you will be skiing a lot of very firm bumps or (2) you prefer to make shorter turns at slower speeds, I think you can opt for a shorter length without sacrificing too much stability. To be clear, I’m not suggesting that everyone downsize this ski, I’m saying that if you are torn between two sizes, I think you can err on the side of going shorter rather than longer.
Enforcer 100 vs. Enforcer 93
If the single word I used to describe the Enforcer 100 was “smooth,” the single word I would use to describe the Enforcer 93 is “capable.”
Despite the fact that it looks so similar on paper, I wouldn’t say that the Enforcer 93 offers the exact same blend of ease and stability as the Enforcer 100. And that is not a criticism. I like the fact that with the narrower version of this ski, there is an accompanying expectation that it ought to perform better in more difficult and firm conditions.
And notice again that the Enforcer 93 is barely any lighter than the Enforcer 100. So it “is” more ski in that sense: same weight, narrower shape, a bit more camber underfoot, and not much tip taper. That all adds up to ski that ought to track well, and it does.
In short (and so far) I really like the moves Nordica made with the Enforcer 93. I haven’t had it in deep snow yet, but I suspect it will perform well—not as well as the wider and slightly softer Enforcer 100, but pretty well for a 92mm-wide ski.
With the Enforcer 93, Nordica has successfully capitalized on the success of the Enforcer, and now offers two very good all-mountain skis. Depending on where and how you ski, I could see either of these working well as a one-ski quiver, and I could just as easily see either of these skis working well as part of a two- or three-ski quiver.
(Become a Blister Member or subscribe to our Deep Dive to access direct comparisons of the Enforcer 93 to the other skis in its class)
NEXT: Rocker Profile Pics