Trees
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.
Moguls
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).
Sizing Recommendations
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.
Bottom Line
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
I was pretty excited when I saw this ski come out. I usually skit he Moment PB&J but was looking for something a little narrower and with a more traditional tail for when conditions harden up. Something mostly to blast around groomers on. I was seriously considering the Armada Invictus 95TI but it got really mixed reviews on the conditions I’m looking to ski. I guess the only thing I see here that’s concerning is a little lacking with the shorter turns at slower speed.
One question, I’m 220 Lbs, strong skier. Currently I’m on either LIne Prophet 115 (186) or the previously mentioned Moments (188). This review seriously makes me want to consider downsizing to the 177. Do you think they’d be too short or I’d be real uncomfortable at high speeds? I know there’s really no definitive answer there but just looking for your opinion.
Hi, Don — a “220 lb. strong skier” should have zero problem handling the 185 cm Enforcer – you have 40 lbs. on me, so you ought to have an even easier time bending this ski and getting it to carve at slow speeds (if you’re just sliding around on bases flat at slow speeds, then there isn’t even a question here). Furthermore, if you’ve never felt like your 188cm PBJs were too long, then I think you’ll be just fine with the 185s.
Long and short: I didn’t mean to suggest that this is a cumbersome ski at slower speeds, I mostly meant to convey that if someone is primarily interested in making lots of turns at slow speeds, I don’t think the Enforcer is the best choice.
Perfect…thanks for the clarification! I’m going to try and demo them somewhere but you know how that goes.
What you described was kind of my other train of thought. I have no issue carving the 186 Line Prophet 115’s and they have a decent amount of metal in them. In regards to your other comment, I’ve never felt the PBJs were long at all.
I usually try to keep my size in mind when I read your reviews since I”m a bit bulkier and flex skis easier. I seem to have forgotten this time. Haha!
Thanks a lot for the detailed review. Question for someone who is an intermediate skier primarily on the east coast, do you think these are a good options? Thanks
I am 14 years old and I am skiing the Enforcer 93 on 177 cm, I was about 175 cm when I bought it and I had not problem controlling it, everywhere I went I felt like I had good control, I could blast down groomers and do tight forest runs without losing any control, I haven’t got to ski real deep powder with it yet so I can’t make a full review, I am just saying though that you shouldn’t have any problem with the skis depending on how aggressive you are, And I think this is a good ski to get better in.
Hi Jonathan,
I’ve just spent 4 days on the 93’s in 185cm, and have skied my enforcer 100’s since last March. 6’5″, 210lbs. I find them to be much quicker and more playful than the 100’s, and for me they ski shorter. Agree that in factory tune they hold ice well (NE skier here) but not like my xdrive 8.8’s. Had them both out on boilerplate at Okemo yesterday, spent 3 hrs on the 8.8’s in the am, then on the 93’s in the aft. Initially felt the edge hold lacking after the 8.8’s, but after a run or two I felt comfortable again. As the sun set the death cookies got nice and hard, I would have preferred the 8.8’s. All in all, the 93 is a great ski for softer snow but in a pinch it will not let one down on the steep and icy.
Great review by the way, curious as to why a fellow skier who also owns the 100’s commented that he heard the 93 skis shorter 185 vs. 185. I surely don’t get that sense, thoughts?
The usual excellent, thorough review. Thanks!
Lotsa buzz on the interwebs about mounting both Enforcers at -1 or -2.
Where did you end up on mount for each of them?
Thanks, Tom. I’ve got more days on the Enforcer 100 than on the Enforcer 93, but at no point have I personally ever felt like I wanted to deviate from the line. Mount location is a pretty subjective thing, but both skis feel well balanced to me at recommended. Their mount point of ~8.5 cm behind true center is a little bit forward of very traditional mounts, but not by much. I’m wondering if those saying they wanted to move back are skiing lengths that are too short for them, or the skis they’re coming from are mounted around 10 to 11 behind true center?
I can add some context to the mount discussion. I had the 100’s in March of last year (2015). I’m on the 185’s – I’m 6’2″ and about 180. They ski short IMHO, and I found them to have lot of tail. To be fair, I was coming off 185 Cochise and 185 OG Enforcers. Figured maybe I had mismounted them, checked, confined and they were right on the dimple. I even lined all 3 up (Cochise Enforcer v2 and OG Enforcers) standing on tail and the toe piece (all FKS 14s) on the Enforcer v2 was significantly ahead of the other, I figured “what the heck” – moved them back 15mm and boom, drop the mic, these went from “meh” to “wow”. Just my experience, put a review on Epic, others tried them w/ demos at -1 and liked them better. Still a personal choice and I’d recommend if you demo, try them at both.
Just my $0.02 and worth what you paid for it.
Great feedback just looking at these now RLK. thanks.
Great review. I’ve been eyeing up the Enforcer 100 but now that the 93 has come out I’m thinking it’s probably more suited to my usual ski conditions (Australia – typically icy in the morning, soft in the afternoon, lots of fun off piste areas and the occasional powder day). So time for the typical sizing question… I’m 5’7, 145lbs, expert skier (raised in BC, not Oz). As a reference I’ve skied the Bonafide in a 171 and had a great time but came away feeling it was a bit too stiff for me in some conditions (tight chutes, moguls). It looks from the reviews that a 177cm Enforcer 100 would be spot on but do you feel the Enforcer 93 in a 177 would also be suitable?
Really value your input, I can’t actually find a pair of Enforcers to demo down here!
Wondering if the 2016/17 enforcer 100 exactly same construction as the 2015/16 model?
Demo’d it last year and loved it, very quick, easy and intuitive ski. Would have bought it except for I felt it had a very soft tail. Curious if any changes for this year?
Re: 93’s or 100’s, has anyone tried these on telemark gear? Is there enough tail rise to confidently ski switch on groomers?
RLK, thanks for the info on mounting position.
Having checked them out, the answer to the second question is, no, they are not appropriate for skiing switch. I took them back and got a pair of Line Chronic skis.
Hi Joe,
Best resort tele ski I’ve ever owned!! I just got a pair of these for telemark and mounted them at the factory recommended center with hammerheads (position 4/5). I’m 190lbs and ski pretty hard so I went with the 193s, they are super stable, carve super hard, love to charge, turn quick in bumps and trees and send it hard. They carve up hard pack, push through crud and have great float in powder. I’ve skiied then at Steamboat, Eldora and Winter Park in pretty much every normal condition except boilerplate ice, 12″+ power, and spring snow.
I used to ride an aluminum hardtail mountain bike and switched to steel a few years back, I’ll beer go back, getting on these enforcers is what that switch felt like.
The only two downsides are that they are heavy so I didn’t want to put a touring binding on them. Also, the length makes them sometimes catch a tail in the woods although I’ll probably get used to that. Also, if you don’t like skiing fast then you’ll have to work to slow them down, they want to rip!
Jeff
Ops, forgot to mention, I’m on the 100 waist.
I’ve own the 100s and live in Boulder so those ski areas are my stomping grounds.
Ice unreal. I’m from Michigan and had a really awful day at steamboat boiler plate ice and they were confidence inspiring considering.
Crud and chop where these thrive. Super damp and has enough energy to make you not think about it.
Steeps yes…These love steeps and once again, confidence inspiring.
Groomers just wants to go fast and capable of small radius turns too without thinking.
Powder. Had these in about 12″ at Mary Jane up in Parsen’s Bowl and the trees and did great. That being said my DPS 99 are a better powder specialist but the 100s are more than capable. Just not as nimble and my DPS (a lot less rocketed).
Net net this is my go to for 99% of days and I’ll prob be burried w/ these skis. You just ski without thinking and if you’re a strong skier you’ll love.
One comment. The factory tune is spot on. Don’t detune tips as they lose a bit of that energy and bite.
My height is 178cm and I am looking for replacement fron Nordica Steadfast 178, which replaced my original Nordica Hot Rod Top fuel 182cm, I would like to try Enforcer 93 due to the fact that I am skying 70% of time on-piste
What would be your reccomendation for ski lenght
I’m an advanced skier both alpine and telemark. 173cm tall and 75kg. Plan to add touring binding
Touring Binding Marker Tour F12 EPF to this while still 80% piste.(Åre Sweden) and some off piste deepsnow and touring.
Do you think 169 or 177 size would be best?
Hi Jonathan, This is a great review. I have been skiing Nordicas for at least 15 years and jut love the skis. I am 60 years old, 145 lbs and an expert skiier. I have a read a number of reviews that indicate that the enforcer 100 is too stiff for a lighter weight skiier. At my age I do not need to fight the ski to get it to turn. I rarely ski bumps any more but like steeps, crud, and an excellent powder day. I would very much appreciate you insight into the enforcer 100 or 93 as a ski for me.
Best Regards,
Chris
Chris,
You should demo them. I am 64 years old, 160 lbs., advanced, not expert, east coast skier. I demo’d the 100’s in 177cm length last Feb. on a day that was forecast to be a powder day, but we got overnight rain/ freeze, then a bit of crud instead. Not great conditions for a demo, but I didn’t feel like they were too stiff. They handled the soft clumps and small moguls on the edge of steep trails very well, but were nothing special on the boiler plate. I didn’t have the right conditions to really test them, but certainly didn’t feel like they were too much ski. I am considering them as my bigger snow day skis. We don’t get a lot of powder days here, so I want a 2nd pair of skis that can handle a range from a few inches of fresh snow and slush to powder, and of course, ice. My current skis can do that, but something a little wider might be more fun in more snow. I haven’t decided if this is the right ski yet, but the 100’s I tried were not too stiff. My current skis are Rossi Experience 88’s, in 170cm length, also not a stiff ski.
Jonathon,
A couple of questions on the Enforcer 93. Have you played with the binding location. I have read that the ski might like a +1.5 mount. I am 6′ 210 expert mainly ski Utah. Should I go with the 185 or 193. For reference I love my Bibby Pro in 190. Thanks
Great review, thanks!
You mentioned “But if you value ease and quickness over stability at speed, then there are better options in the ~88-95mm wide range.” I value ease and quickness over stability. What would you recommend that I look at?
I’m 5″9″ 160lbs and I’m a pretty strong skier. I love speed. I’m on the east coast. I’m looking for a good ski for all conditions. Do you think I should go with the 177 or the 169?
Tim,
Have you demo’d anything comparable? I am the same size and weight as you, and an advanced East Coast skier, leaning toward the 177 Enforcer 93. I’ve been unable to find a demo this late in the season where I ski (Okemo in VT). I recently demo’d Blizzard Brahma in both 173 and 180, Volkl Kendo in 177, and Enforcer 100 in 177, and liked all 4. Any one of the 4 could work well for me, though they are all different. People who have skied all of these skis and the Enforcer 93 recommend the 177 for me. I think the 169 Enforcer would be too short.
John
Tim,
Update: I bought the Enforcer 93s, 177 cm, and I’m very happy with them. They are the right size for me. I thought Jonathon’s review was spot on, but I’m a bit smaller and lighter and not the ski Godzilla he is. The 177s seem perfect for me. I also really liked Blizzard Brahmas (tried and liked both 173s and 180s, different, but either size could work for me) and the 177 Kendo. I thought the Brahma was the best carver on boilerplate, Kendo was also a great carver and a bit more playful in softer snow, and the Enforcer 93 was in between. It seems to be good at everything.
John
Hi,
Thank You! Last season you helped me so much choosing my first own ski. Your page helped me find the best ski for being able to teach on European hardpack and still freeride in 16“ of perfect powder. (At least that’s what I figured, maybe you’re rigorously shaking your head right now and wonder how that guy made it as an instructor)
This season I will be at Whistler. Though, I don’t know which conditions to expect throughout the season, since I here different opinions. So I’m unsure which ski would be great for a one-ski-quiver. I kind of feel like my Nordica Enforcer 93 would still be a good fit for instructing at Whistler Blackcomb.
Could you comment on your experience with the conditions at Whistler and what you think of the Enforcer 93’s suitability for this, especially in deeper snow? This would be great!
Thank you so much Jonathan, for your top notch reviews!
Cheers Rico
Hey you mention there are other quicker options for tight trees out there. This is the narrowest ski I’ve demo’d but I’m looking for a west coast tight tree ski. Any recommendations of others I should try? I loved the enforcer 93 in 169 I’m 5’7 150 expert 30yo
thanks!
Hi I am 60 , an instructor and I have the Enforcer 100’s. best ski ever! I moved the binding back 2 cm approx. 3/4″ and wow I really like it. The forward mounting position is to make it easier to ski for ‘everyone’ I know how to ski. works better back.
Forgot to mention, this is not an everyday ski, works best with something under it but is good on groomed. I will be getting the 93. I have Head irally supershapes 76uf for when its not snowing. Fun times 10!
I own two pairs of skis, the enforcer 100 177 (bought first) and the enforcer 93 177 (bought for when I need more edge on icy conditions). My skis before that were Bllizzard Brahmas 173. A strange quiver I know, but as an intermediate skier they feel like very different skis. I take both in my car and choose on the day….is it too icy for my 100s or can I take them…..
The 93s are a very versatile ski, in other than deep powder and probably the most practical and capable one-quiver ski I could find. If I follow better skiers off-piste they are the skis because they are a little faster edge-to-edge. (actually fast enough for anything in my humble experience. If I had one ski it would be them…..but the 100s are the sweetest skis and I like them much more. Better carving, better energy, smooth out crud and bumps. They keep giving that thing where I am going much faster than I think.
Question – I am 42 years old, 6’1” and 180 lbs and have been skiing for 35 years. I am a intermediate-advanced skier. A good bit of groomers, softer un-groomed runs when the conditions allow, and some sparse runs in the trees. Nothing too much with moguls or double black. I do like to go fast I am looking at the Enforcer 93 but I am stuck between the 177 and 185. I skied the Brama 180 last season and liked it. I’m leaning towards the 177 at is it closer to the 180 then the 185. Any thoughts on which I may prefer?
Im surprised about the lack of discussion about mounting point in the text. I have just ordered a pair in 185. The only comments I see prefer to mount back a bit. I like my bibby Pro 190 on the mark and I have mounted most of my skis just on the mark. The last skis I tested was the Peacemakers mounted +1 and for me that was just ridiculous. The skis felt like snowblades. When I read the review for the Peacemaker I see recommendations to go forward at least 2 cm. So if the same people find the E93 mark to be great, would I be better off going back a few centimeters?
Firstly, THANK YOU Blister for all of the informative free content you produce. I love your reviews and I have learned a lot about ski construction, performance and the way they interrelate by reading your 101 articles and your reviews. Big fan of yours right here. I wanted to share my experience with the Enforcer 93 so here goes.
I was looking for a new ski to fill out my resort quiver and I wanted something narrower that was a good carver but still a capable all-mountain ski. Bought the 93 after reading a bunch of Blister reviews on various skis in this class. Maybe the deep-dive would have been a valuable read but I’m not a member so I bought a pair in the 185 cm length based on my comparisons of the reviews. Although I enjoyed some characteristics of this ski I replaced it very quickly. I simply found it lacking when trying to push hard on the ski. I let a friend who weighs about 40# less than me ski it for two days and he felt similarly. I replaced it immediately with the Bonafide in 187 cm and am very happy with the Blizzard (I would have prefered the Brahma for my narrower ski but got a smokin’ deal on the Bone). I will say that for mellow (i.e. SLOW) skiing or lighter (<150#?) skiers, this ski could be great.
A few takeaways (in no particular order) from a 6'0", 200#, expert skier with an athletic (not fat) build.
1) It's been said before but here goes — This ski feels short when mounted on the line — I didn't mount back because I didn't want to put more holes in a ski I hope to sell. Moving the mount wouldn't fix the other problems I had with this ski either.
2) This ski is very easy to overpower if you ski aggressively and are strong or heavy. If you end up in the backseat it can be hard to recover quickly. There just isn't enough strength in the tail of this ski to quickly correct your position.
3) On smooth groomers this ski is a lot of fun. If the groomers are irregular or if they have piles of debris you can't aggressively drive the shovels. They WILL fold up and/or exhibit some hooky behavior at speed. Once again, they just aren't stiff enough to perform well for heavy, strong, or very aggressive skiers.
I bought Enforcer 93 in 193 length with Tyrolia Attack demo binding this fall, Oct. 2019. I have two days on them so far in Dec. 2019. I am an expert skier weighing 210# (muscle, not fat). I don’t like the ski mounted on the recommended line. After one run I moved the demo binding back -1 cm, it felt better. Second day skiing them I moved the binding back -2 cm and like them even more (total off line -2). This ski likes to go fast and if I were younger, and still tele’d, these would kill it dropping the knee. Not a lively ski but it has all the makings of a crud crushing chopped powder ski for 15 minutes after rope drop. The 93s hold an edge on all early season conditions; wind blown ice patches leading to push piles in Colorado. Impressive damp ski but no pop. However, it makes slalom and GS turns so predictably on groomers I just love it.
Stay far away from this ski if you want something even close to an all mountain charger. The tips are silly soft. I feel them move around at speed more than some softer skis (k2’s and armada’s). I read the Blister review and got the impression that it was a forgiving charger. It’s much more forgiving than charger, at least for me. They are extremely easy to ski. I bought the 193cm Enforcer 93 on a Black Friday deal for $270, since I read that it was pretty capable and it was too good of a deal to pass up. By no means is this a bad ski, it’s just not capable for big athletic dudes that ski fast. It’s a ski designed for progressing intermediates. I’m 6’2″ 200lbs for reference, 28YO and skied my whole life.
The only place I think it excels is short radius turns and ease of use. I find my 2019 190cm Moment Wildcats to be much stiffer and more stable at speed and much more predictable, even on firm snow and west coast ice. I’d grab my 118mm Wildcats any day over these, precisely for firm-ish all mountain skiing. Compared to truly capable skis, like Head Monsters or Dynastar Pro Riders, these enforcers are maybe half the stability and charging ability. Within this category, I find my old 186cm On3p Tychoons much better in terms of stability and confidence to charge.
I normally am on skis between 186 and 196cm, but these Nordicas feel too long, sloppy, dead, unwieldy, and just too soft. I constantly get the tips stuck on different undulations in the terrain, they just feel long and sloppy soft. I can’t rage like I can on a true charger. Do yourself a favor and get some Volkl Mantras, 96 or 102. Those are better everywhere for chargers.
Hi Everyone,
I’m looking to pick up a new ski soon and I’m debating between the new Enforcer 94 (which I’ve heard is more accessible), the Rustler 9, and the Ranger 92 Ti and FR. I’m in the NE but potentially moving to Utah, though I won’t find out if I’m being sent there until the spring. If not, I’ll be staying in the NE. I’m a 6′ 170 climber/ex-middling college athlete in the low-advanced range. I do a lot of short radius carving and occasionally do some bumps as these are the areas I think I need to improve in, though I enjoy medium radius carving and messing around in chop/the side of the trails and occasionally opening it up more when the conditions are good. I think the enforcer 94 would be a lot of fun to open up but I’m unsure of whether these would help me improve in my weak areas.
Appreciate any thoughts!