2021-2022 Atomic Bent Chetler 120

Ski: 2021-2022 Atomic Bent Chetler, 184 cm

Available Lengths: 176, 184, 192 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 182.6 cm

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 1710 & 1744 grams

Stated Dimensions: 143-120-134 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 142.4-119.5-132.7 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius: 19 meters

Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 61mm / 58 mm

Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~4 mm

Core: Karuba + Carbon Fiber Stringers + Fiberglass Laminate

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -2.9 cm from center; 88.4 cm from tail

Blister’s Recommended Mount Point: On the line

Boots / Bindings

Test Locations: Niseko, Japan; Front Range, CO; Teton Backcountry, WY; Sun Valley, ID

Days Skied (Total): ~45

[Editor’s Note: Our review was conducted on the 18/19 Bent Chetler 120, which remains unchanged for 19/20, 20/21, and 21/22, apart from graphics.]

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Atomic Bent Chetler 120, 18/19 Graphic
Review Navigation:  Specs //  First Look //  Full Review //  Update 12.17.18 //  Bottom Line //  Rocker Pics


Chris Benchetler’s pro model has been a staple in Atomic’s ski line for years, and while it’s gone through many subtle changes in shape, rocker profile, and construction, the Bent Chetler has always been clearly designed as a playful ski for deep powder. For the 2018-2019 season, Atomic again tweaked the Bent Chetler, and as you’ll see further down, there are some interesting changes. It’s also worth noting that Atomic introduced a Bent Chetler 100 — a narrower, slightly more directional version of the 120, and you can check out the full review of that ski here.

Shape and Rocker Profile

If you’re familiar with the previous iterations of the Bent Chetler, there won’t be much surprise here. The rocker profile of the new Bent Chetler 120 looks very similar to the last version we tested (albeit with slightly less tip / tail splay).

Flex Pattern

Tips 6-6.5
Shovels: 7-8
In Front of Toe Piece: 9-9.5
Underfoot: 10
Behind Heel Piece: 8-7
Tails: 5.5-5

The Bent Chetler 120’s flex pattern seems to match it’s playful rocker profile. The tips are fairly soft, and rather surprisingly, the tails are even softer. Or perhaps that isn’t surprising, given how frequently Chris Benchetler and Nick McNutt land switch in deep pow. We’re eager to see how those softer tails deal with landings / getting knocked backseat.

Blister reviewer Sam Shaheen is heading to Japan this Tuesday, where the conditions have been pretty epic — even by Japan’s standards. He’s going to be taking two skis with him: the new Bent Chetler 120 and the 17/18 / 18/19 Blizzard Spur (yes this is incredibly cool, and yes, we all hate him right now). When comparing the two skis, we were very surprised by how similar their flex patterns feel. The most noticeable difference is in the tails, where the Spur is stiffer. In the past, it would have seemed pretty crazy to talk about comparisons between the Blizzard Spur and the Atomic Bent Chetler, but that seems less crazy now. So, we’re looking forward to comparing these in their ideal testing grounds, as well as many other playful pow skis.

Mount Point

At 2.9 cm from center, the Bent Chetler 120’s mount point is definitely on the playful side, and is in line with previous generations of the ski. This is one of the major differences between the Bent Chetler 120 and Blizzard Spur, who’s mount point is 7.8 cm from center.


This is the most noticeable change between the new Bent Chetler 120 and the previous versions of the ski. At around ~1730 grams for the 184 cm, the Bent Chetler 120 is very light, especially considering it’s ~120 mm wide. This is even more interesting since the older versions of the ski were not very light — our pair of 192 cm 2014-2015 Bent Chetler’s weighed in at around 2500 grams, which made it one of the heaviest skis we’ve ever reviewed. The current 17/18 version of the ski has a stated weight of 2100 grams for the 185 cm, which is still nearly 400 grams heavier than our pair of 18/19 Bent Chetler 120’s. So, the new Bent Chetler 120 continues the trend of the ski getting lighter, but this time it’s a much bigger leap.

Atomic attributes the weight savings to a new lightweight Karuba core, and a redesigned version of the brand’s “HRZN Tech” inserts, which are beveled near the tips and tails in order to create more surface area and better float in deep snow. Previous skis like the old Bent Chetler and Backland FR 109 used a solid plastic tip spacer that spanned the whole width of the ski, but the new version of this technology is much smaller and molded directly into the ski. With the forward mount point, overall low weight of the ski, and the lighter HRZN Tech tips / tails, we expect the new Bent Chetler 120 to feel very light in the air.

For reference, here are a few of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for a few other notable skis in this category.

1710 & 1744 Atomic Bent Chetler 120, 184 cm
1970 & 1979 Atomic Backland FR 109, 189 cm
2083 & 2097 Line Magnum Opus, 188 cm
2103 & 2100 Moment Bibby / Blister Pro, 184 cm
2183 & 2190 Black Crows Anima, 188.4 cm
2212 & 2215 Armada ARV 116 JJ, 185 cm
2228 & 2231 Blizzard Spur, 192 cm
2297 & 2317 K2 Catamaran, 184 cm
2408 & 2421 ON3P Kartel 116, 186 cm

So, the Bent Chetler 120 is very light, especially compared to other skis in the same category. It’s even significantly lighter than the narrower Atomic Backland FR 109, which is actually marketed as a touring ski, while the Bent Chetler had never been specifically aimed toward touring. We’ve mounted the Bent Chetler 120 with the new Atomic / Salomon Shift MNC binding, and will be commenting on how it performs in and outside the resort.

And by the way, given that we’ll be comparing the Bent Chetler 120 to the Blizzard Spur, it’s worth noting that while the Spur is much heavier on the scale, that ski felt incredibly light to us on snow, so we’ll definitely be reporting back on how similar or different these two skis feel.

Bottom Line (For Now)

The new Atomic Bent Chetler 120 looks like it will still be a playful and surfy pow ski, and we’re very interested to see how it’s low weight affects its on-snow performance. Again, Sam leaves Tuesday for Japan, so we’ll be getting the ski on snow very soon. Stay tuned…

Flash Review: Atomic Bent Chetler 120

Blister members can now read our initial on-snow impressions in our Flash Review of the Bent Chetler 120.

(Learn more about Blister Member benefits, and Become a Blister member)


Cy Whitling: After Sam spent time on the new Bent Chetler 120 in Japan (which you can read about in his flash review) and Colorado he sent the ski to me in the Tetons, where I was able to get it in a wide variety of conditions, and I came away very impressed. The original Bent Chetler was part of the playful powder ski revolution, but by this season, it had become just another jibby, playful pow ski in a market full of similar options. But the changes to the new 18/19 Bent Chetler 120 put it in a slowly-emerging category of playful powder skis that are comfortable both in and out of bounds.


Cy Whitling (6’1”, 180 lbs): The Bent Chetler 120 is (obviously) a powder ski, and while I started skiing it after the deepest days of the season were behind me, I still had the opportunity to get it out in some fresh stuff. And in fresh snow, this ski is a blast. It planes easily, is maneuverable at low speeds, and does so while being surprisingly stable at higher speeds. Sam noted that he experienced a bit of tip dive when he tried to ski it with too much of a forward stance, and I’d agree with him there. This isn’t the sort of ski that stays on top of the snow no matter what you’re doing. It planes well, and easily, but at my size and at the ski’s recommended, forward mount (-2.9 cm), I was able to bury the tips if I got too far forward on the ski. So if you’re a directional skier who doesn’t really spin and likes to drive the shovels of your skis, I’d recommend moving the mount back at least a cm or two from recommended — or checking out some more directional options in this class. But otherwise, I’d recommend mounting the Bent Chetler 120 on the line and appreciating this nearly-center-mounted pow ski for what it is: a pow ski designed for spinning, buttering, and all-around playful skiing in soft snow.

At slower speeds and / or in tight terrain, I was really impressed by how easy and maneuverable the Bent Chetler 120 was. I felt like I was never having to muscle the ski around, but rather, it always responded immediately to even slight input (which was especially nice on a few ridiculously overgrown exits).

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120, ft. his dog, Jolene. (photo by Julia Tellman)

Usually, skis that are as intuitive and easy as the Bent Chetler 120 at lower speeds have a tendency to get squirrely when things open up. But so far, I’ve been surprised by how well this ski bucks that trend. I haven’t done any crazy straight lines on it, but when I did open things up, I didn’t feel like I was on a 1750 gram ski. The Bent Chetler 120 is confident at speed so long as the snow is consistent, and you stay pretty centered.

Sam Shaheen (5’10”, 140 lbs): I completely agree with Cy here. The Bent Chetler 120 really feels at home in powder. It prefers a neutral stance, but I think it still has a pretty large sweet spot. That said, in deeper snow, the 184 cm version doesn’t have all that much tip due to that more centered mount, so it was certainly possible to get the tips to dive if I drove the ski hard through the front of my boots.

But that’s not what this ski is about. I have the most fun skiing the Bent Chetler 120 from a neutral stance, breaking the tails free to slash and slarve around while looking for things to jump off. The Bent Chetler 120 is definitely not the strongest or most damp jibby pow ski out there, but it sure is fun (and way lighter than those more stable skis).

Soft Snow

Cy: I actually started my time on the Bent Chetler 120 on a spring day at Sun Valley, ID, skiing baked corn and soft groomers. I originally intended to just take a lap or two on it and then swap to a more appropriate ski, but I was shocked by how much fun I had on the Bent Chetler 120 in these conditions, and ended up skiing the full day on it. In soft snow, the Bent Chetler 120 is a ton of fun. It’s easy to slash and slarve, it’s fun to pop off the tiniest lips, and it chatters surprisingly little at speed. It doesn’t have quite the chunder-absorbing suspension of a heavier ski (like the previous version of the Bent Chetler), but the Bent Chetler 120 punches above its weight when it comes to stability.

Sam: As long as the snow is a bit soft, whether that’s a few days after a storm or on a sunny corn / slush day, the Bent Chetler 120 still feels comfortable. It tracks surprisingly well and is super responsive, which makes for a really fun combo. It’s incredibly easy to ski while still being able to be pushed pretty hard — qualities that are shared by a lot of my favorite skis (e.g., the Rossignol Soul 7 HD and Blizzard Rustler 11).

Sam Shaheen reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120, Niseko, Japan.

Firm Snow

Cy: Firm, inconsistent snow is the Bent Chetler 120’s weak point. It’s a powder ski, and it’s a very light powder ski, so it’s no surprise that it’s a handful when trying to ski fast through firm, inconsistent snow. I felt like my ankles and calves were getting a heck of a workout when I tried to go fast and make big turns on firm snow on the Bent Chetler 120. But at slower speeds, the ski felt totally manageable, and actually pretty fun. It’s not the kind of ski you’d want to use for hucking into a sketchy landing, but it is the kind of ski that makes popping off every ice chunk worthwhile / fun.

Sam: Yep, I think Cy is spot on here. This ski only weighs ~1750 g — it isn’t a firm- or variable-conditions tool. That said, I was extremely surprised by how hard I could push the Bent Chetler 120 on firm, consistent groomers. If for some reason you want to drive the ski hard through the shovels on firm, smooth, groomers, the Bent Chetler 120 feels quite precise with good edge hold — though it’s certainly not the most damp or stable ski out there.


Cy: If someone other than Atomic had released the Bent Chetler 120 this year, I would have called it serendipitous. However, it seems as though the launch of the new ski coinciding with the launch of the new Shift MNC binding was no accident — this is a match made in heaven.

I skied the Bent Chetler 120 with the Shift binding, and I’d be hard pressed to find a binding I’d rather have on it. This is a fun ski inbounds, but its light weight doesn’t really pay off there. It’s capable inbounds, and I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it to someone looking for a light, resort-only powder ski. But that does miss out on a lot of this ski’s potential.

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120, Grand Targhee Backcountry, WY. (photo by Julia Tellman)

Where this ski really shines is on tours where you’re (a) looking for trouble (e.g., cliffs and booters) and / or (b) deep snow. The Bent Chetler 120 is a joy on the skin track thanks to its low weight, and paired with the Shift binding, it’s a great recipe for taking tricks you learned in the resort to the backcountry. The Bent Chetler 120 is light and easy to spin, and as long as the landing is reasonably fresh / soft, it feels stable and confident in mandatory-stomp situations.

The Bent Chetler 120’s surface area-to-weight ratio is outstanding, which makes it a really good option for touring on deep pow days. It’s also really easy to ski, especially in tight spaces, which is something I really appreciate in a touring ski. For me, the crux of a day often comes after we’ve skied the line and we’re headed back to the trailhead cold, hungry, and tired. I really appreciate it when touring skis are easy to keep headed in the right direction as I mow down aspens and try to avoid deadfall. The Bent Chetler 120 excels at this.

Sam: I 100% agree, the Shift binding + Bent Chetler 120 combo is incredible. The day I sent this ski and Shift binding to Cy was a very sad day for me.

Personally, I think this combo is a perfect 50/50 setup for mid-winter pow. For some resort pow days, I would probably want a bit more mass for the afternoon once all that pow got chopped up, but I definitely don’t want more mass on the way up for my touring days.

UPDATE: 12.17.18

Cy Whitling: Since we published our review of the Bent Chetler 120, I’ve continued to ski it with Atomic’s Shift MNC binding as my primary touring setup. I really wasn’t planning on doing so initially, but after a few early season tours on this combo I was hooked and have been hard pressed to take anything else out with me. So, after spending more time on the ski in the full spectrum of conditions, here’s an update on the Bent Chetler 120’s durability, versatility, and what type of skiers I think will like it most.

Best Use & Binding Choices

This is a ~1720 gram ski, and I’d argue that anyone (short of Atomic athletes) who’s setting it up as a purely inbounds, alpine-only ski is not using the ski to its fullest potential. Sure, it does well in firm conditions, but only for its weight. It’s not a crud-busting charger, and it’s not meant to be. But it is a very light ski that’s a dream on long skin tracks and long descents with reasonably good snow.

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120. (photo by Julia Tellman)

I hate the word “synergy,” but the Bent Chetler 120 and the Shift binding could be a write-in for its dictionary definition. They work together perfectly. The Bent Chetler 120 is confidence inspiring during the big airs and high speeds that necessitate the consistent release and elasticity of an alpine binding, but it’s also light enough to take on long skin tracks where pin bindings make the most sense on the uphill. This setup is, in my opinion, the coolest thing the ski industry has come up with in the last four years.

So if you’re considering touring with the Bent Chetler 120, I highly recommend it. And if you’re considering just slapping an alpine binding on it for inbounds days, I’d urge you to take a second glance at other options. For most skiers, a slightly heavier ski like the Moment Wildcat / Blister Pro, ON3P Kartel 116, or even the old version of the Bent Chetler will offer more inbounds versatility and a more damp ride in poor conditions.


Here in the Tetons I’m used to skiing something in the 102-108 mm range as my backcountry daily driver. I love having a big ski for those deep days, but I’ve found that I tour less on super-deep days due to avalanche hazards anyway, so the increased versatility of a narrower ski suits me well. In addition, a lot of our tours have gnarly exits: creek beds full of downed trees, alders, and terrible snow. And in those conditions, I prefer the slow-speed maneuverability of a smaller ski. So knowing all of this, I didn’t expect to be grabbing the Bent Chetler 120 every time I headed out the door.

But this year I’ve toured on it almost exclusively — from big days in Grand Teton National Park to small jaunts in the side country. And I don’t regret a moment of those experiences. This ski is so maneuverable and predictable in bad snow and tight terrain. It’s incredibly easy to billy-goat your way out of almost any situation, and when the conditions are good, it’s awesome to have a ski that floats as well as the Bent Chetler 120.

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120. (photo by Julia Tellman)

I’ve recently been putting in some bigger couloir days on this ski in variable conditions, and I keep coming home impressed with its performance while making small, powerful, high-consequence turns, in bad snow. I much prefer the Bent Chetler 120 over the skis I’ve used for this in the past, including the ON3P Steeple 102, Atomic Backland FR 109, and Sego Big Horn 106. So, if you’re considering the Bent Chetler 120 but usually tour on something slightly narrower (e.g., 105-110 mm), I’d recommend keeping the Bent Chetler 120 on your radar.

If you, like me, tour because you want to ski good snow but you might ski some bad snow to get to it, this ski does the job very well. Based on my previous preferences for touring, I should be on its little sibling, the Bent Chetler 100, but even after spending a fair amount of time on that ski, I don’t think it will make it into my truck as often as the 120. This ski is much more versatile than its weight and width suggest.


Since this ski is so light, I was worried that I was going to tear it apart quickly. My touring skis get beat up — we have plenty of rocks and trees here, and I don’t always do the best job of not skiing over them. However, so far I’ve been really impressed with the Bent Chetler 120’s durability.

I’ve had at least five days where I’ve come home convinced I must have core-shotted the ski, and have yet to find anything other than surface scratches. A couple days ago we put in a slog fest in GTNP and ended up skiing almost a thousand feet of fully faceted snow over a boulder field on the way out. I scraped over more rocks than I can count, and have no real damage to show for it — the BC 120’s bases and edges are still in great shape.

Cy Whitling reviews the Atomic Bent Chetler 120 for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Atomic Bent Chetler 120, Grand Targhee Backcountry, WY. (photo by Julia Tellman)

I did manage to delaminate one of the Bent Chetler 120’s tips in a small segment about 1.5 cm wide, by 0.5 cm deep. I epoxied and clamped this and have had no issues since. This was the result of skiing directly into a downed tree, going pretty fast. I think the impact that caused that small delamination would have damaged pretty much any ski.

All in all, the Bent Chetler 120 has held up well over 30+ backcountry days, in the hands of a skier who is not kind to his gear.

Who’s It For?

Cy: The Bent Chetler 120 is fine as an inbounds-only powder ski for lighter skiers or those accustomed to skiing pow on more center-mounted skis. And it’s capable enough in mixed conditions that I wouldn’t fault anyone for mounting a pair of alpine bindings on it (just keep in mind its low weight), but I do feel that anyone who does that is seriously missing out. There are plenty of pow skis that are about as fun as the Bent Chetler 120 inbounds (and many that will do better in heavy chop / and firm conditions). But there are very few pow skis that are this great on the skin track.

The Bent Chetler 120 is a seriously light ski for its width, and it stands out even more when you consider how many skis with this playful of a shape and rocker profile weigh this little. So it’s the perfect tool for anyone looking to take their inbounds jibbing outside the resort. If you’re looking for a playful powder touring ski, the Bent Chetler 120 is worth a serious look, and if you’re looking for a playful 50/50 ski, we think it’s the ski to beat in this category.

Bottom Line

Chris Benchetler’s skis have long been the go-to choice for skiers who want to ski like the Nimbus crew (e.g., lots of butters, slashes, spins, etc.). But most of that sort of skiing happened inbounds. Over the last few years, that generation has been growing up and discovering the backcountry, moving to lighter and more uphill-capable gear. The new Atomic Bent Chetler 120 perfectly reflects that movement.

Not all of us have sleds or helicopters to drop us at the top of our lines, but many people still want to huck, spin, and butter in untracked ski-porn pow. The Bent Chetler 120 is, for now at least, the best tool available for that task, and it comes in at a weight that makes skinning for that fresh snow a realistic endeavor.

Very well done, Atomic.

Deep Dive Comparisons

Become a Blister Member or Deep Dive subscriber to check out our Deep Dive of the Bent Chetler 120 to see how it stacks up against the Moment Wildcat & Wildcat Tour, Armada ARV 116 JJ, ON3P Kartel 116, previous Atomic Bent Chetler, Bent Chetler 100, Folsom Trophy Carbon, Faction Candide 4.0, and more…

Share this post:

Rocker Pics:

Full Profile
Tip Profile
Tail Profile
Top Sheet
Previous slide
Next slide
2021-2022 Atomic Bent Chetler 120, BLISTER
2021-2022 Atomic Bent Chetler 120, BLISTER

59 comments on “2021-2022 Atomic Bent Chetler 120”

  1. Can’t wait for this review!!!!! I’m off to japan today with a pair of 191cm k2 catamarans. I’m hoping you guys will get a chance to get on this length also as it would be awesome to hear your thoughts on the ski compared to the 184cm.

  2. Hi guys

    Thanks for preview!

    Will these very light skis fit for heavy skiers with weight over 190 lbs or these skiers need to use more heavy skis?

    Best regards,

  3. @Markus. I demoed the 100 today (180cm) and it was very light both physically and when skiing.

    Also skied the enforcer 100 (177cm) and kore 93 (180cm). The Chetler 100 felt similar in weight to the Kore 93, much lighter than the Enforcer 100. If i had to guess I would say ~1700 grams per ski. Though all 3 are very different skis, the Chetler 100 was the most stable out of the mix for me. Enforcer was nice ski too though. The Chetler also felt like it wanted to be in the air and would be super stable on landings. What was cool is that it carves remarkably well and i didnt see any signs of tip flap. Very fun ski overall.

    I have a few skis 105+ underwaist, so was looking for something ~100 underfoot. The Chetler seems to be a great option for me as a “do it all ski” aside from deep days. You can tell this ski would float very well too.

    Btw conditions were tough for the demo, heavy rain all day, some slush, alot of melting ice, but overall very hard ski surface in general. I felt most confident on the bent chetlers. Top speed was ~45

  4. How much does the 192 weight? And how does the 184 and 192 feel compared to the Magnum opus Swing weight wise, especially in the air for rotations and flips

  5. Hi guys, what do you think about touring uphill with the Bent Chetler 100? As far as I could read it’s just about 1550-1600gr, so must be fine for that too, right? Any characteristics that speak against it? Thanks!

    • Hi Krys,

      We have actually been spending a good deal of time touring on the Bent Chetler 120, so we’ll definitely be talking about that in our full review, which will be dropping in the next few weeks.



  6. Thoughts on the Bent Chetler 120 vs. the Line Pescado as a 50/50 pow ski to throw a pair of shifts on next season?

    Would be used for pow touring and occasional inbounds pow days in the PNW (i.e. high moisture-content snow). Also probably slushy spring days. Looking for something very surfy and fun in pow that also isn’t too awful for skiing shitty snow on the way back to the trailhead or chopped-up crud in the afternoon at the resort.

    5’8, 165 lbs, directional skier. Would likely mount the BC at -2cm or -3cm.

  7. Hey guys, did you get a chance to test out the 192s alongside the 184s? I’m a fairly aggressive yet playful skier at 5’9” 170lbs, and I’m debating which size to go with. I’d go 184, but the shortness of it worries me for deeper stuff (such as my upcoming japan trip), and the weight drop for this years model makes the 192 seem much more of a viable option compared to previous years 192s. I already have a pair of the backlands 117s in 186 which are a blast, if that helps.

  8. Same question as MJones above. Would be interested in a comparison between 192 Bent Chetler vs 180 Pescado.
    6’0, 200 lbs directional skier. 50:50 use with shift bindings.
    How far do you guys think you can move back with the bindings on the Bent Chetler? Even 4-5 cm for directional use.

  9. Hi Blister,

    I’d be really excited to hear how the Bentchetler 120 compared to the ARV 116 JJ UL. They seem to have a comparable weight, and profile, but I think you only demo’d the ARV 116 JJ from last year? Did you demo the ARV 116 JJ UL and if so how did it compare to the Bentchetler 120?

    • Hey Mike,

      Internal communication from last week:

      Cy: “Hey, guys, I just checked out the ARV 116 JJ UL at my local shop, and it seems like it’s basically a Bentchetler 116? Can we get a comparison pair STAT!?”

      So, no guarantees, but it sure seems similar, and hopefully we’ll have a comparison up early this season!

      • Hey CY,

        Many thanks for getting back to me so quickly with that internal report. Yeah that’s awesome news, I look forward to your review. I was almost set on getting it, but I must admit that after reading your glowing appraisal of the Bent 120 and seeing how much weight it shed, I’m completely 50/50. I checked out the various stats from the JJ Zero last year with the guys from Sooth (engineer specialists that test skis) and if it’s similar, but lighter, it seem’s that this year’s JJ UL has real potential. I’ll check them out side by side in the store before making a decision on which one to buy and I eagerly await your report.

        Kind regards,


  10. Dear Cy, than you for really nice review! May I kindly ask for your suggestion?
    I am 189cm tall, 79kg, prefer forward stand. For freeride/touring (with stress on downhill performance) I have V-werks Katana 184 with Marker Baron frame binding. I like the Katanas especially for it’s ability to drive almost anything from powder to hard pack. But in powder, it really does not flow (at least for me), and it is not particularly playful. And Baron is quit heavy. Now, with new Salomon Shift binding, I started to think about new ski for touring (still with stress on downhill performance). Bent Chatler 184cm looks very tempting. I tend to assume that it could flow better and would be more playful especially considering I am quite light skier. Would you agree? If you compare BC120 with VWerks Katana? Or any other tip? Thank you very much, with best regards, David

  11. Cy, thank you for the comment: “I’ve found that I tour less on super-deep days due to avalanche hazards anyway”. Too often all we hear is: “yeah, bro, I was ripping waist deep pow out-of bounds” and similar. It’s great to hear a safer/more realistic statement for a change.

    On a different note, how about a match with the Tecton? After all, this skis is so nice and light, but even inbounds, you are not skiing it hard in bad conditions, so why not save some more weight and have easier transitions with the Tecton?

    • You nailed it. I ski this inbounds and out on a Tecton and it’s a dream. Transitions on Tecton are awesome, and I don’t notice them being any different from alpine bindings when skiing groomers and bumps back to the lift, let alone the pow this ski is intended to rip.

  12. Curious on the shift binding…does it work with different boots? One AT and another alpine that are slightly different boot sole lengths?

      • Thanks tjaard…that’s essentially my question…can anyone who has experience with the binding weigh in on that…not sure if the binding is ‘that’ adjustable. Would love for it to work with both pairs of my boots rather than having to use my AT boot in-bounds…

      • Just wanted to thank you for the review. I bought this exact set up because of it and am beyond stoked.

        I’m not a ninja (solid advanced living in interior BC) and don’t jump much but these ski easily, turn on a dime and are just plain fun, everywhere.

  13. Hey there all,

    A bit of advice requested…

    I’d say I’m an advanced-ish skiier with aspirations (on course to clock 100+ days again this year), 6’3″ and about 86kg with gear. I’ll ski wide planks on any terrain on Whistler Blackcomb as long as there has been about 5-10 overnight, largely trees, bowls and then the leftover chop, which is mostly all that will be left by about 10/1030 am on any day with half decent snow. I muck about riding switch but when things are serious I am just into going forwards.

    In terms of powder Skis that I’ve put a lot of time in on, I had some 2013 Rossi S7’s in 188 mounted factory recommended and also some 2012 Super 7’s that are mounted about -0.5 from factory (to accommodate Marker Tour bindings). Loved the S7’s as they were easy to ski in tight stuff, but got a bit squirrely going quick on run outs and the tips would dive in deep snow. The Super’s I like and have kept and am still on now as the titanal means they are better at busting through chop, though I still get the tips diving a bit when things get deep and pushing the scoops. Also they’re pretty tired and maybe not that long for this world, hence looking to get a new powder ski that’ll see me through for a few years and that I can tour on until a full tech setup is in my budget. Both the above skis in 188 dealt fine with getting amongst trees and that.

    The BC is a ski with some reputation and people rave about them, several mates on 2017 and 2018’s in particular. Things like the chill to ski, acceptable on harder / groomed snow, playful all make them sound like a good time and like my experience on the S7. So the 192 2019 BC seems to fit the bill, especially with their touring prowess as well.

    However, they have sold so well that there are no 192 left in the demo fleet at WB as they have gone straight out the door, so all I’ve been able to do is ride some borrowed 2017 185s. Those felt like there was no ski in front of me and didn’t deal well with chop, unsurprisingly, and also even with the 185 I wasn’t a fan of the amount of tail behind me as my style leans towards flexed forward in the boot, making me think about a -1 mount. However, the 192 length of the ski and messing with the factory recommended mount concerns me as I’ve never been on anything that big and am unsure how I’ll get on with the tight stuff, and maybe their chop handling capability lingers in my mind too.

    What would people’s thoughts be on the above? Persevere to try some elsewhere? Other ski suggestions?

    PS love the reviews on this site, keep it up!!

  14. Hi Guys,

    a bit torn between the 184 and 192. 6 ft, 185 lbs, will mount with the shifts. If i wasnt going to be using these skis in Touring mode id probably get them longer since they seem easy to turn anyway with all that rocker. But since I will be using the shifts on them I am a bit torn. Help me pull the trigger please :D

  15. Heya
    Torn between the 192cm and 184cm versions (mounted with Shift Binding for 50/50 use). 6ft, 185lbs skier in Switzerland. I think if I was mounting this with Alpine bindings I’d probably tend to the longer one. Anyone got any suggestions to help me pull the trigger on this purchase :D Also, great review guys. These are super helpful.

  16. Hey Walter,

    I am 175cms and max 65kgs and went for the 192 with shift, grew up ski racing in VT. After that a 5 year stint in JH. Many 150+ day seasons…ymmv.

    1) Are you fit?
    2) How good a skier are you?
    3) What type of skier are you?
    4) Where will you be skiing these most of the time?

    Sure we could always expand on this, but it’s a start

    Long skis truck, short skis suck

    • “If I can intimidate I will certainly intimidate you, for I am an adrenaline junky” – GP
      No, not trying to intimidate, just that most people dont give enough info when they post a comment like Walter did. If we know nothing about you, how are we suppose to give advice?

  17. My 18/19 Bent Chetler 192cm have the Factory Mount on -2,5cm from true center. I know, the topsheet is sometimes a little off, but my old 12/13 Bent Chetlers were at -2,5 too. How comes, you have -2,9? Also Benchetler and Durtschi wrote, that its -2,5.

    Im asking, because I bought my pair and had to remove a binding to mount a shift. To have at least 1cm between the hole centers, I will be only able to mount them on -1,9 or -3,75cm from center. To decide which would be better I would like to know where the “real” factory line supposed to be.

    • Thoughts on how this ski skiis with a tech binding like marker alpinist? I already have x2 powder skiis for resort, moment wildcat and bc Anima, so would like a full tech setup to save weight… Wondering if this width too much a pin?

  18. Does anybody have a preference of touring skins to use with the 120 benchetler? I have been browsing lately and did not really see any answer to which was the best fit.

  19. Answer to the 184 vs 192 question— I recently bought some 192’s reluctantly, I thought they’d be too long for me. Good news, they ski short! I ski 185cm nordica enforcer 93 when it’s cold/groomers, and line SN 100mm 179cm later in the day. I am 195-200lbs, 5’ 10”, older skier having fun. I love going fast, carving turns, hitting the moguls and getting a little air. Trying to get better skiing switch to watch my kids, gonna take some work for sure.
    I compared these 192’s to my other skis and they are quite shorter (effective edge). Skied them 2 days in fresh snow just after getting them and I was BLOWN AWAY. Fun, fast, amazing float, flickable, light. I had the best 2 days on these things—powder, chop, tight trees, moguls. think monster truck. Tails feel long To me since I’ve never skied a more center mounted ski, but the float and foregiveness and playfulness is almost indescribable. So glad I snatched them up. Thanks SMR in Flagstaff, AZ. MK

    • Haha – I demoed the 184s, thatought they were AMAZING, fast through the trees, floaty but WHERE are the tips?! They didn’t ski short but they LOOKED like they skied short – the tip float is there but the flared base is like the bow on a boat – rad!
      – 192! I bought the 192 because I knew I could handle more ski – the 184 was soooo awesome and fast and floaty but I thought more couldn’t hurt! It (sorta) did! Dang!
      Not as responsive through the trees and I didn’t need the extra length. I am 6’2 190.

      I’d say that short is the way if you want quick, floaty, and super playful skis. If you have a place to open up a have pow turn, like Vail’s back bols on pow, then go longer. To have an absurd boat float on a ski that is snappy and playful, go shorter… :)

  20. What you think of mounting cast touring to it ? It’s a heavy binding so it’s interesting to hear what you think :)

    • Atomic told us that the construction has not changed since the 18/19 version we tested, but we will see if we can get our hands on a pair of the 20/21 model. That said, we doubt a 100-140 g weight difference per ski would significantly change our impressions in this review, apart from a subtle change in how light they’d feel on the uphill. Hoping to be able to confirm that later this season.

          • I see. Quite big difference though. Almost 300g from 184 to 192, but on the other hand they are pretty wide so 8mm longer means quite a bit more material.

            Mounted mine with the new ATK FR14. Sooo stoked on this setup.

            • hey markus, youre happy with the atk fr14 on the BCs so far? did you mount them on recommended? thinking of buying the same setup but the 184.

  21. Hi Blister, just a friendly heads up on a data typo. Easy to fix (on this webpage anyway).

    TYPO: On this webpage, notice “Available Lengths: 176, 184, 190 cm”. Notice “190” should be “192”. Also, notice this same typo error is displayed in all the Winter Buyer’s Guides since 18/19. (Might be too late to fix the pdf Guides?)

  22. Can a 2021 bentchetler 120 in a 184 handle hard snow and groomers as well as a 2019 super 7 HD ?….Im thinking of mounting a tech binding like the dynafit rotation 2.0 on these for longer powtours.

  23. If I love the current 190cm Line Sir Francis Bacon but find the 186cm Outline too short, should the 192cm Bent 120 be high on my list for deep days in the resort?

  24. Hey just want to offer up a reaction to these skis from an intermediate wannabe advanced skier. I bought a pair of these on close out last year (bases mostly on this review) and have been enjoying them inbounds in fresh but not super deep pow. ABSOLUTELY love them. To me having the float is a major confidence booster for steep drops and tree runs. I compared back to back with my all mountain skis and hands down these helped me conquer runs that I otherwise ate it on. I find I prefer them even when it’s not deep enough to really justify them cause they’re just freaking fun to ski. I Think it will be an awesome back side / snow day ski for a two ski quiver. Just wanted to throw this out there for all those like me just breaking into the world of a multi-ski quiver.

    Thanks to the blister folks for these badass reviews.

  25. I love these skis, 4 years as a daily driver. I have two different pairs.

    Both pairs have binding rip-outs during the 2nd season. The soft wood cores just do not hold up to many days of hard skiing. I take care of my skis, dry them at night, promptly repair all core shots. But around 60 days in the bindings start falling off. Happened to both pairs around the same time. So far i’ve had four different rip-outs.

    They’re the most fun ski i’ve ever ridden, but don’t expect them to last long.

  26. Any updates from blister on this article?
    5 years already since the first review, these changed,(oh, yes they are different from the first generation-heavier and stronger in the shovels), new design… please?
    Thanks, in advance!

Leave a Comment