Ski: 2021-2022 Black Crows Corvus, 188.2 cm
Available Lengths: 176.1, 183.4, 188.2, 193.3 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 187.2 cm
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 2046 & 2120 grams
Stated Dimensions: 138-107-127 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 137.3-106.4-126.7 mm
Stated Sidecut Radius: 21 meters
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 46 mm / 5 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 0 mm
Core: poplar + two 120 cm titanal layers + fiberglass laminate
Factory Recommended Mount Point: -7.9 cm from center; 85.7 cm from tail
Boots / Bindings: Nordica Strider 120 & Head Raptor 140 RS / Tyrolia AAAttack2 13
Test Location: Crested Butte, CO
Days Skied: 9
[Note: Our review was conducted on the 18/19 Corvus, which was not changed for 19/20, 20/21, or 21/22, apart from graphics.]
Intro
Ever since we talked with Black Crows’ head ski designer, Julien Regnier, about the 18/19 Black Crows lineup, we’ve had a ton of requests to review their redesigned Corvus.
We are now reviewing the latest iteration of Black Crows’ big-mountain charger, and we’ll be posting a Flash Review as soon as possible. But in the meantime, let’s take a look at the Corvus’s specs, because there are several aspects of its design that you were probably not expecting.
What Black Crows says about the Corvus:
“This iconic model from Black Crows has had a thorough makeover, with the addition of a reverse camber, a flat underfoot segment and a double titanal plate. This gives the new Corvus better pivoting in soft snow while keeping a very powerful grip on hard terrain. The ski is powerful and grips the ground well. Battle-ready as ever, the Corvus with its new balance offers greater confidence on all types of terrain.”
The two main changes with the new Corvus are the addition of two (120 cm) titanal plates and a switch to a reverse-camber profile. Black Crows is claiming this makes the new Corvus easier to pivot in soft snow, while maintaining good grip when you need it. That all seems pretty reasonable.
Now, let’s get into the details of those design changes:
Shape & Rocker Profile
In terms of its shape, the new Corvus isn’t all that different from its prior iterations. It’s still got a bit of tip taper, not much tail taper, and a fairly average radius (for a 188 cm big-mountain ski) of 21 meters.
While its shape didn’t change much, the Corvus’s rocker profile did, with Black Crows deciding to ditch the rocker / camber / rocker design of past years and switch to a design without camber.
While the new ski is technically “reverse camber,” we’re more inclined to call it “flat with a bit of tip rocker.” Looking at the rocker profile of the new Corvus (see the bottom of this review), the rocker lines are very subtle.
The Corvus’s tip starts to rise a bit early, most of the midsection is completely flat, and the tail has almost no rocker at all.
The reverse-camber, 99mm-wide Black Crows Daemon actually has more exaggerated / deeper rocker lines than the ~107mm-wide Corvus. The Corvus also has pretty low tip splay at ~46 mm, though that does seem to be a theme with some reverse-camber skis (e.g., Parlor Mountain Jay and Volkl 100Eight).
The rocker profile of the new Corvus reminds me most of skis like the old (pre-15/16) Blizzard Cochise, the Volkl Katana, and the Parlor Mountain Jay.
So I wouldn’t expect the new Corvus to be super pivoty like the more dramatically reverse-cambered Moment Meridian or 4FRNT Devastator, but I suspect the Corvus’s flat profile should still make it fairly easy to slide around.
Flex Pattern
Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Corvus:
Tips: 6.5-6
Shovels: 6.5-7
In Front of Toe Piece: 8-9
Underfoot: 10
Behind Heel Piece: 10-9
Tails: 8-8.5
This is a very directional flex pattern, and a pretty strong one. The Corvus’s tips and shovels are pretty easy to bend, but the front ~20 cm of the ski is the only part that I’d call “soft.” After the shovels, the ski quickly ramps up in stiffness around the bindings and finishes with a very strong tail.
The Corvus isn’t the stiffest ski we’ve reviewed, but its flex pattern is still strong, seems like it’ll reward a forward, driving stance and it should appeal to those who want a strong tail for support on landings and / or for finishing turns, etc.
Weight & Comparisons
In what appears to be the continuation of a broader trend (see the Moment Commanders and Faction Dictators), the new metal-laminate Corvus is not coming in all that heavy. In fact, the stated weight for the 18/19 Corvus is almost 300 grams less than the stated weight for the previous (17/18) non-metal Corvus.
At an average weight of ~2083 grams for the 188 cm version, the new Corvus is coming in closer to skis like the Salomon QST 106 than it is to the Blizzard Cochise or ON3P Wrenegade 108.
For reference, here are some of our measured weights for a few notable skis. As always, keep in mind the length differences to try to keep these comparisons apples-to-apples.
1923 & 1956 DPS Alchemist Wailer 106, 189 cm (17/18-18/19)
1996 & 2012 Dynastar Legend X106, 188 cm (17/18-18/19)
2013 & 2013 Moment Commander 108, 188 cm (18/19)
2022 & 2047 Faction Dictator 3.0, 186 cm (17/18-18/19)
2026 & 2056 Black Diamond Boundary Pro 107, 184 cm (17/18-18/19)
2030 & 2039 Rossignol Soul 7 HD, 188 cm (17/18-18/19)
2036 & 2064 Salomon QST 106, 188 cm (18/19)
2046 & 2120 Black Crows Corvus, 188 cm (18/19)
2182 & 2218 Nordica Enforcer 110, 185 cm (17/18-18/19)
2283 & 2290 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 189 cm (18/19)
2312 & 2386 Prior Husume, 188 cm (17/18-18/19)
2318 & 2341 J Skis The Metal, 186 cm (16/17-18/19)
2376 & 2393 Blizzard Cochise, 185 cm (15/16-18/19)
The Corvus definitely isn’t the lightest ski in its class, but it’s still surprising how much lighter it is than other dual-metal-laminate skis like the Cochise.
Some Questions / Things We’re Curious About
(1) While it doesn’t have any camber, the new Corvus doesn’t have much rocker / early rise in its tips and tails, either. So will it feel ultra-pivoty and loose like reverse-camber skis (e.g., 4FRNT Devastator), or more locked-in?
(2) The new Corvus now has two strips of titanal, but it’s not a very heavy ski. So how damp will it feel compared to other all-mountain skis in its class?
(3) The Corvus has pretty low tip splay, but it also has fairly soft shovels. So how will it perform when conditions are soft and / or deep?
(4) Given the shape of the new Corvus, it’s probably tempting to make comparisons to skis like the old reverse-camber Blizzard Cochise and Volkl Katana. But the Corvus is far lighter than those skis. So could it be thought of as a new, lighter, and / or more forgiving version of those skis?
Bottom Line (For Now)
When Black Crows says that the Corvus got a “thorough makeover,” they aren’t lying. And there aren’t many skis on the market right now that share a similar combination of traits. So we’re not sure what to expect, but we’ll soon be getting on the ski soon. So stay tuned for updates, and let us know if you have specific questions that you’d like us to address in our flash review or full review.
Flash Review
Blister Members can now check out our Flash Review of the Corvus for our initial impressions. Become a Blister member now to check out this and all of our Flash Reviews, plus get exclusive deals and discounts on skis, and personalized gear recommendations from us.
FULL REVIEW
Jonathan Ellsworth and I have now each spent time on the redesigned Corvus at Crested Butte, and we’ve come away with some surprising (and positive) impressions.
Soft Chop
Luke Koppa (5’8”, 155 lbs): These are the conditions I think of first when talking about ~107mm-wide chargers. And in these conditions, the Corvus did not disappoint.
While skiing the Corvus during and after some storms at Crested Butte, it provided a solid and predictable platform that let me ski quite fast through soft chop. Its softer shovels were forgiving when I hit firmer patches of snow, but the Corvus still let me blow through the softer piles. The ski never felt harsh to me while skiing fast through soft variable snow, and it tracked quite well.
The Corvus was also surprisingly easy to turn in tight spots; compared to other skis in the “All-Mountain Chargers” category of our Winter Buyer’s Guide, the Corvus feels like it falls on the easier end of the spectrum. This was unexpected, especially given reviewer Alex Mueller’s remarks about the demanding nature of the previous Corvus.
The new Corvus feels quite damp and composed at speed for its weight, but it doesn’t offer quite the same “let’s see how few turns I can make” confidence that several heavier and / or stiffer skis in its class do. For ~95% of the skiers on the mountain, I think the Corvus’s top-end stability will be more than adequate. But if you loved the old metal Katana or reverse-camber Cochise because of how stupidly fast you could go on them, you might be a bit disappointed with the high-speed stability of the Corvus.
Jonathan Ellsworth (5’10”, 175 lbs): I very much agree with Luke here: those few skiers who absolutely insist on best-in-class stability (you know who you are) will want more ski than the new Corvus. But I think the story here for me is just how good the low end of the Corvus is; while the 188 cm model obviously has some material length to it, the ski is very, very easy to pivot in bumps and trees at very low speeds; there’s no metal-laminate ~108 mm wide ski that I can think of that would best the Corvus in this regard, and yet the ski is … let’s say … “quite” solid when mobbing around in chop.
Powder
Luke: I was on the Corvus when they dropped the ropes on Crested Butte’s Headwall, revealing a couple month’s worth of untouched snow, plus a lot of steep, technical terrain. The snow in some spots was waist deep, and I was nervous about how the 107mm-wide Corvus would handle these conditions.
But the Corvus didn’t get bogged down in this deep snow, and floated better than I figured it would. It definitely didn’t float to the top of the deep snow (I doubt any 107mm skis would), but its tips never dove unpredictably and I was able to make both big and small turns down the face.
The Corvus is not a great ski for noodling around in pow on low-angle slopes, but if you’ve got room to let it run or the terrain is fairly steep, the Corvus works quite well in pow.
Crud
Luke: As I alluded to earlier, the Corvus provides very good suspension / damping for its weight, but there are several skis out there that offer a smoother and more stable ride in really rough snow. That said, I still liked the Corvus in crud since it’s (1) pretty damp, (2) fairly light, and (3) pretty easy to turn.
There are plenty of light skis out there that are easy to turn, but they often feel very harsh on firm snow. And there are very heavy, damp skis that smooth out rough snow, but they’re often a lot of work when it comes to making quicker, tighter turns. The Corvus combines a bit of both those categories — it doesn’t feel harsh, but as we noted above, it’s also very manageable at slower speeds. So while I didn’t feel comfortable nuking through crud on the Corvus, it let me make quick adjustments while not feeling nearly as jarring as lighter skis.
Groomers
Luke: I was a bit worried about how the reverse-camber Corvus would fare on groomers, but it again proved to be more versatile than expected. Its fat tips pulled me into a turn as soon as I tipped it over on edge, and its fairly flat reverse-camber profile provided solid edge hold. It didn’t carve up ice very well, but it never unexpectedly slid out on me. And this takes us to one of my favorite characteristics of the Corvus: it’s really predictable and easy to transition from carved turns to feathered ones.
I could drive the Corvus hard and dig in its edges on all but the iciest of groomers, and I could almost effortlessly release it from a turn and break it into a slide to burn speed, spray Sam Shaheen when he wasn’t paying attention, etc.
Because of how easily I could switch from carved turns to feathered turns on the Corvus, I was actually more comfortable skiing it on really firm groomers than some lighter, narrower skis with traditional camber (e.g., Armada Invictus 99 Ti).
If you want to really lay over turns on ice, there are many better skis out there (most of which are much narrower and / or heavier). But if you’d rather have a ski that’s at least predictable on firm groomers — and that performs very well off piste — then the Corvus is a good option.
The last thing to note is that the Corvus, like most other reverse-camber skis, produces almost no energy coming out of a turn. So if a dynamic / poppy experience on groomers is what you’re seeking, this is not the ski for you.
Jonathan: I agree with Luke’s points here, and I mostly just want to underscore how much I liked the way the tips of the Corvus initiated turns. So if vague tip initiation of carved turns is something that bums you out, you won’t be bummed out by the Corvus.
Moguls
Luke: If I stayed centered or forward on it, I really liked the Corvus in bumps. It’s pretty easy to pivot, its shovel is forgiving yet supportive, and it feels like it has a pretty big sweet spot.
When I inevitably got backseat, the Corvus’s tail did feel quite stiff and fairly punishing. It’s definitely not the most difficult or punishing ski I’ve used in bumps, but I wouldn’t recommend it to skiers who often get backseat in bumps. But for skiers with good technique, I think the Corvus is a very good bump ski.
Jonathan: I agree, but I have to say that I have yet to find the Corvus’ tails to be particularly punishing in bumps. If you tend to prefer stiffer, more supportive tails in bumps, then I suspect you’ll appreciate the Corvus.
Looseness
Luke: The Corvus feels easier to slide and pivot than most skis with traditional camber, but it’s not nearly as loose and surfy as reverse-camber skis with deeper tip and tail rocker lines (e.g., Moment Meridian 107 & 4FRNT Devastator). For an all-mountain charger, I think that’s a good thing. The Corvus feels very secure on edge on all but the firmest snow, and yet it doesn’t require much effort to turn in tight terrain.
Jonathan: Yep, I think the rocker profile on this ski is very well done. The result is a loose ski that is still very easy and quick to get on edge. A more exaggerated profile will likely produce more float in deep snow, but for the variable conditions in which I tend to break out a ~108 mm wide ski, I don’t need a more pronounced rocker profile.
Mount Point
Luke: I spent most of my time on the Corvus with it mounted on the recommended line, which was -7.9 cm on our ski. (We confirmed with Black Crows that their recommended mount point is -8 cm back from center.) I got along really well with the ski on that line. I could drive it as hard as I wanted, yet I could also ski it fairly centered when just cruising back to the lift.
I also spent some time on it with the bindings pushed back to around -10 cm from center, and there the ski felt a bit more supportive when pushing it hard, and a bit more sluggish in tight terrain. Since I didn’t feel like I needed “more” ski in front of me at -7.9 cm from center, I preferred that mount point (I’m 5’8”, 155 lbs). But for bigger / more aggressive skiers who ski with a driving, forward stance, you could move the bindings back a bit if you think the recommended line is too far forward for your liking.
Jonathan: I’ve only skied the Corvus on the line so far, and I’ve quite liked it there. Given how light the ski is, I think that I’ll prefer to ski with a more upright stance in chopped snow. But the more you want to try to turn this ski into a bulldozer, the more I’d follow Luke’s advice above.
Who’s It For?
Advanced to expert skiers who value both stability and maneuverability.
The Corvus feels pretty nimble in tight terrain, yet it can also be skied quite hard through soft variable snow. It’s also surprisingly good in fresh snow, making it a solid option for a 1-ski quiver in higher-snow areas, or as the wider ski in a 2-ski quiver for lower-snow areas.
If maximum stability at speed is your only priority, we’d recommend looking to heavier skis (there are several good options in the “All-Mountain Chargers” section of our Winter Buyer’s Guide).
But if you want a ski that’s pretty damp and stable, but also pretty easy to turn at slower speeds and in tighter terrain, the Corvus is worth a very good look.
Bottom Line
The Black Crows Corvus is a versatile all-mountain ski that combines some of the dampness and stability of traditional chargers with a bit of the forgiveness, maneuverability, and low weight of easier skis. That’s a combination we haven’t seen from many other skis, and it makes the Corvus a very good option.
Deep Dive Comparisons
Become a Blister Member or Deep Dive subscriber to check out our Deep Dive of the Corvus to see how it stacks up against the Blizzard Cochise, ON3P Wrenegade 108, Prior Husume, Folsom Hammer, Nordica Enforcer 110, J Skis Metal, Moment Commander 108, Head Kore 105, Faction Dictator 3.0, and Dynastar Legend X106.
You’re right: I’m extremely curious about your comparison to the old Cochise. I’ve always found my original Cochise an exceptional ski for skiing fast no matter the conditions. But, I’ve never enjoyed it because I spend all day trying to get some pop out of the tail – and never find it.
Black Crows’s web site gives -10 cm as the mount point spec… are you sure you’ve measured it right?
Demoed the 183.4 Corvus last April (BC demo day at Grands Montets), and found it very promising (in wet chop with some pockets of wet powder). Surprisingly, it was a better ski for me for those conditions than the 188 cm Anima, mainly the tail felt more supportive than Anima’s tail. Despite it’s reverse camber design, it didn’t have the “slippery” (pivot any time you like) feel of the BC Nocta. Demoed also the Daemon, and to put it shortly, for me, the new Corvus felt like the ski I had wished the Daemon to be. I guess I have to demo the Corvus again…
Hmm, interesting notes about the Corvus vs. Daemon and Anima. You have me intrigued.
And I know that our measurements are correct, at least for how we measure mount point. We list the mount point as a measurement taken from the true, measured length of the ski. I know some companies list their “X from center” number as a measurement from the center of the ski’s sidecut, center of the ski’s effective edge, or other concept of center. But for our measurements, we simply list how far back the recommended mount line is from the true center of the ski.
I had some conversation about mount point with Black Crows concerning a Daemon: They said -8 from center. I took some cord and pulled it straight from tip to tail on the top (not along the base) and than folded that cord in half -> straight pull of half the cord length from tip brought me to exactly 8cm from the mark on the sidewall.
So I think maybe your mark is off? I can not think of BC measuring differently for different skis. And I guess I did what they intended as it was spot on.
btw: I will mount back 1.5cm as I tested the daemon and found it to far forward – maybe this applies to the Corvus, too for some people. I generally mount a little further back than most people.
Konsta – it sounds like you’re a fan of how the Nocta handles? I certainly am. That quick pivot feel allowed me to go up to 190cm and gain stability without ever feeling like they’re too long. Anyway, talking to people and looking for a “slimmed down” version of the Nocta, I came to the conclusion that closest thing is actually the Atris despite it having a little camber underfoot, largely because it has a lot more taper on the tails than the Corvus so they’re easier to release. Just picked up a pair so haven’t put them to test yet, however.
Yes, there are a few things to like about how the Nocta handles: 1) It’s surprisingly stable in soft chop. Very handy in Niseko, where everything is tracked out 5 mins after the lifts open. 2) In soft conditions, I think the flex profile works very well to smoothen the ride. 3) It seems to have surprisingly long effective edge when carving on soft groomers. 4) Yes, that slippery, pivot-any-time-you-like feel. 5) The long turn radius helps to keep the ski stable, and feels quite right to me. I don’t know what else I would want from a japow ski. I’m riding the 190 cm ski, too. Maybe I’ll try to play with a more forward mount point to make it super quick, too (currently on recommended line).
On paper the Völkl Two (which was my previous japow ski) might seem similar, but it feels very, very different on snow compared to the Nocta (Völkl Two seemed to have very short effective edge, and it had a strange stiff but floppy overall feel to it).
Atris is pivoty too, but has a more precise overall feel to it. I need to mount forward from the recommended line to get a feel I like: +1 cm seemed good enough on the 184.0 16/17 version, currently at +1.5 cm on the 189.7, and pondering whether to try to go a little more forward from there. Remember, Julien Regnier (BC head ski designer) said on Blister podcast that he skis the Atris at +2 cm.
Purely guessing, the Folsom Primary Blister edition might the closest thing to a smaller Nocta…
Konsta (or anyone else!)
Quick question for you on the 2018 Black Crow Atris. I currently have the 189 mounted on the line. I’m 6ft 180lbs. Did you notice a huge difference in terms of maneuverability (quick turns, pivot) when you moved the ski up +1.5CM? Or was this done for stability in the air?
I like the 189 length but from time to time I think that maybe I should have sized down to 184CM for increase pivot/maneuverability
Appreciate the help!
Steve
Make sure you’ve tuned/se tunes the tips and tails appropriately before you start messing with mount point. This is my 2nd season on the Atris and I think we’re the same person ( I’m Steve 6’ 190lbs on the 189). The factory tune is basically a razor all the way round the ski and I’ve found this ski to be super tune dependant.
Totally round the edge from tip/tail to widest point if the sidecut. Then just touch the edge with a diamond stone 1-2” into the sidecut and gummy stone the rest to take away the razor edge. It’ll feel like a pivot dream and still be able carve pretty hard on all but the hardest snow.
Thanks Steve B!
I will give your reccomendation a try! Appreciate the help.
Konsta, How did the rocker feel compared to a more cambered ski? I really like the BC Corvus FB which is pretty cambered w/ tip and minor tail rocker. I am super interested in how this change affects the directional, hard pack skiing ability. Very interested in how this would compare to the BC Navis which is 102 vs. 107mm.
Actually, I was a little worried that the Corvus would ski “too long” because the rocker profile is so subtle. I never had to worry about it, and never noticed the softness of the tip (so that came as a little surprise in the Blister flex profile analysis – although soft tips seem to be standard fare on BC skis).
Today, I got to demo the Corvus in hard pack conditions (Grands Montets again), and it was very carvable, and predictable. I do understand that many people would prefer a narrower ski but for me the Corvus could be an acceptable ski for hard pack conditions, too. Very much the allrounder it’s meant to be.
I demoed BTW both the 188.2 and 183.4 lenghts today, and for me the 183.4 is still the perfect length (very agile but still easily capable enough), but the 188.2 was still easy to ski. Nice, just pick the length that best matches your requirements.
Reading this it feels like the’ve done a ski that fits more people and is more fun to ski but unlike the Atris it’s stiffer overall and especially in the tail. Sounds more like the QST 106 but with less taper in the nose!?
Comparisons to the old Cochise seem most appropriate for sure. If it turns out to be a lighter, slightly more maneuverable version of the Cochise that can still charge with authority, Black Crows will have built something special!
I think this is exactly what’s going on here. I have the Daemon and it’s essentially a way lighter, more maneuverable version of the old flat cambered Mantra while still being damp and stable enough to charge and rip groomers (I’m 6’0″ and 215 for and on the 188 for reference). Black Crows is really coming up with some great designs, build quality seems to be fantastic too.
I’m a huge fan of both the 184cm Monster 108 and 194cm Devastators. Without being able to demo, I’m stuck between the new and old version of this ski in the 193 length. On one hand I can see the new version being similar to the Dev, maybe a bit more stability? On the other hand, the old version could be comparable to the M108, although the length difference might make it significantly more work to turn. 184cm M108 has an unmatched combination of stability and maneuverability that I’ve never experienced in another ski.
Anyone have time on both the new and old 193 Corvus? I’m 6.5′ 200 lbs, directional, strong skier.
I skied this ski for 2 days, and couldn’t really adjust to it. It doesn’t remind me of the Daemon at all, despite the similarities. It took more effort to pivot in variable snow, the long flat profile felt like it was resisting this, although the relative light weight made it easier to rather unweight and pivot instead. It is definitely a powerful ski, much more powerful than the Daemon and more inline with the old cochise.
Regarding mount point, I tried a few different spots, I ended up about 1cm forward of the line (fyi I prefer the Daemon behind the line, and generally prefer traditional mount points).
It’s been a while since I skied the old cochise, both 193 and 185, but I don’t recall them being as challenging to ski as the corvus.
I own a pair of 2018 BC Daemons in a 183 and when they came „out of the box“ the rocker profile was pretty subtle similar to that of the new corvus in the profile shots above (deeper rocker lines, but similarly subtle splay). After mounting and skiing it for a day the rocker profile is much more in line with the Daemon profile shots on blister. I have not measured it, but it is a difference noticeable at first glance. A friend of mine had old 4frnt ehps that were flat under foot and out of the box it looked as if they had 0,5 to 1mm of camber which was gone after a day of skiing. It would be great if the blister team could check if you observe similar behavior with the new corvus.
Great review, per usual, and thanks for the update!
Really curious how this ski compares to the Atris. Any insight? Thank you-
Also would love to get some more insight on how the new Corvus compares to the Atris. Any comments guy?
Great review, thanks.
Thoughts on the Corvus as a 50/50 resort/touring ski? Thinking about picking up a pair to mount with Tectons for this purpose (to be honest more of a 70/30 touring/resort ski for me). Kinda reminds me a little bit of the Volkl Nunataq on paper (which I liked), but obviously heavier and with some metal. Flat camber, not too much rise, not too much taper. This type of ski works well IME in weird BS snow.
Seems like it would tick a lot of boxes in this regard. Light enough, pretty good in soft snow, easy enough to pivot in tight places, but can still hold its own in weird snow and function well inbounds
If you’re willing to haul it uphill, I think the Corvus would make for a great 50/50 ski. It performs well across a wide range of conditions, and will certainly feel more stable and composed in tricky snow compared to most lighter, dedicated touring skis. There are plenty of lighter options that would probably be better for long tours, but as always, it just comes down to your priorities. For a more downhill-oriented 50/50 setup, the Corvus + a Tecton or Shift would be a great combo.
Konsta (or anyone else!)
Quick question for you on the 2018 Black Crow Atris. I currently have the 189 mounted on the line. I’m 6ft 180lbs. Did you notice a huge difference in terms of maneuverability (quick turns, pivot) when you moved the ski up +1.5CM? Or was this done for stability in the air?
I like the 189 length but from time to time I think that maybe I should have sized down to 184CM for increase pivot/maneuverability
Appreciate the help!
Steve
Anybody has any comment on what current skis would most closely approximate my favorite skis of all time Volkl Katana 2008 183? Tried the Confessions and they definitely were way too locked in to the line without good ability to scrub speed. Would it be the Corvus above, the Cochise, or the Bodacious? Anybody weigh in on that? Appreciate your thoughts.
Are you sure on the weight?
Black Crows are claiming 4400 grams. That’s a pound heavier than your showing.
Yep, we’re very confident in our measured weights. It’s not unusual for skis to have stated weights that are not the same as the weight of the actual skis you end up with (there are very few skis we’ve reviewed that weigh the exact same as their stated weights).
I get that. It’s just that I actually asked Black Crows directly on the live chat thing on their website. He said 4400/pair.
Someone on TGR had similar numbers to yours so I assume the BC rep was looking at bad info.
Brad I just picked up some 183s and they weigh right around 2000g/ski (one a hair under, one a bit over).
4400 – (2120+2046) = 234 grams diff per pair
234g * 0.0022 lb/g = 0.5148 lb per pair so 0.2574 lb per ski
Seems reasonable
Have been skiing this Corvus with Shifts as an all arounder. Couldn’t be happier. Have a quiver of 9 but that will be cut after time on these gems. Headed to the Swiss Alps and feel these skis will perform on anything thrown my way. Yes they have the recommended line and weight as Blister states. Just get them already – or don’t, so I can hoard them..
The reason I was questioning this is that my goal is to cut the quiver from two to one.
Dude, “quiver of nine”? Seriously? You’re not married are you? :)
I’m looking for a 50/50 ski. 9lbs is already pushing the limit for touring so definitely didn’t want more.
Hi Awesome review. I am currently debating between the Corvus and the Volkl 100eight. I would probably ski 25% backcountry and 75% resort. I’m looking for a ski with a firmer tail not going to do park as I’m more an old school charger. However I dislike the Cochise when demoed feels like 2 planks that don’t turn with a 27 turn radius. I also don’t like the Rustler 11 and other skis where the tips flap in the wind and get scary on icy terrain with no tail support. I demoed the Volkl 100eight and has a great balance I’m looking for in 21 turn radius. The Corvus I haven’t had a chance to demo but seems also would be a great fit for me. What are the pros and cons of the 100eight vs the Corvus. I like the Volkl in 181 but the Corvus is 176 or 183. Does the Corvus ski longer or shorter than the 100eight? I’m 5’10 180 but like to also make quicker turn shapes on groomers as well and have the Bonafide in a 180 that also a good fit for me.
I own both the 2019 Corvus and and 2018 100Eight. Both are fairly equivalent in terms of maneuverability and pivotability. Neither is that demanding. Trees, moguls, jump turning in steeps – same difference. But when you really want to put the pedal to the metal and charge hard, the Corvus wins hands down. The titanal metal makes a HUGE difference in stability and edge grip, especially at high speed, in hard pack or ice, and cruddy, variable terrain. For me, the 100Eight tends to get knocked around too much in those conditions, and I have to ski slower; the Corvus remains stable and predictable and precise, and I can keep going as fast as I can handle.
Great review once again! I’m looking for new skis, mainly aimed for back-country skiing. I live in Finland so the snow here is not that light which makes me wonder, are all these reviews done in US/Canada or have you got experience in northern countries? I’m skiing mostly backcountry at the moment on Rossignol s3 bc skiis but I also like to hit the resort every now and then. Can you tell how well would the Corvus handle backcountry skiing on a bit heavier, not that deep powder snow?
Also, could you point me a ski length, I weight 77kg, and I’m 180cm.
Hey guys, great review.
I’m in the 2016 BC Corvus and 2018 BC Nocta. Love them both. This Corvus helps provide a good deal of suspension which limits the impact on my knees, whereas too many days in mixed snow on the Nocta will leave my knees swollen and in need of recovery. That all being said, the pivot in the Nocta has me wanting something that is a bit more schmeeery in place of the this model of Corvus. Curious if you think this has that dampness/suspension that will support my knees?
Thx guys
I haven’t skied the old Corvus but have the new Corvus and the Noctas. The Corvus have little similarities to the Nocta outside of that awesome when you need it pivot ability. The Nocta can get kicked around a bit in the mixed snow (the 190 helps a bit with that), but I found the Corvus to give a ton of confidence in the conditions that the Nocta struggles to handle. First day out I had them in 5” of new snow in the flatest lighting I had ever skied. By run 3 I had the confidence to open them up because they could handle the chop and odd snow I couldn’t see changing in front of me. The big flat base was awesome on landings and provided way more support than the Nocta (no hate on the Nocta, they can just feel small on landings if it’s not into powder). If you like the Nocta and old Corvus I don’t think you can go wrong here.
The Nocta sold me on reverse camber so I was a sucker for the Corvus this season and so far it’s worked out nicely.
Good review thanks guys.
If in doubt on length for the corvus would you recommend sizing up or down (even though the increments are fairly small)?
I have been skiing the 192 pro rider as a daily driver which i really like everwhere until hitting steep/tight trees. Next trips for me will involve a lot of tree skiing so i’m willing to trade up some stability and dampness (but not all) for agility in tight spaces. Sounds like the Corvus could be a good option and
also sounds like no need to size down for tight turns (which means 193 for me) but was hoping to get your thoughts on how long the 188 skis??
Cheers
I’m looking for a lighter weight Devastator. Could the Corvus fit the bill?
I’ve been toying with the idea of a Corvus or an Atris with Shift setup to replace my Armada Invictus 108 quiver spot to compliment my BC Anima 194s and my dedicated touring skis. I’m looking at a more forgiving option than either of my current setup that will make it easier to ski with my kid, who can ski just about any terrain, but since he’s 9 things go a little slower and it’s hard to goof around behind him in the trees/ get stuck in a plow behind him in the catwalks (knee strain alone here) on the big skis. I also figure it would make a decent 50/50 setup as the Animas are big for those duties.
Any suggestions between these two. This would be my narrow ski in the quiver so groomer carving is also a priority (Atris/ Anima).
6ft 170lbs experienced skier based in the French Alps. I’ve been skiing the 188cm Corvus mounted with the Shift binding and Lange XT 130 Freetour boot and have found that its a nice set up. I’ve skied everything from icy groomers to knee deep powder on it and overall have found it to be a strong and predictable. The only ski I can compare it to is the 13/14 187cm Moment Belafonte. In my eyes the Belafonte is more stable when charging through conditions such as chopped up groomers or shallow fresh snow as well as offering more grip on firm snow/ice. The Corvus however is much better in deeper snow, easier to break away and is more forgiving of mistakes. I find the shape, profile and mount point of the Corvus is more tolerant of a neutral stance than the Belafonte which is good for me as I find a neutral stance much better for skiing through variable snow at speed as I can react to the terrain better rather than just trying to smash through the front of my boots.
In fresh snow and spring conditions i’ve found the Corvus to be very fun. On groomers the only place I really notice the lack of energy out of a turn is coming out of carved GS turns. I’ve found that if the snow is soft or slushy its possible to get some nice rebound out of the ski in shorter turns. While I found the Belafonte to offer better grip on firm snow/ice the Corvus is still very good and I’ve not been in a position yet where I’ve wished for more grip other than rock solid groomers first thing in the morning.
I’ve done a bunch of tours now with the longest being 25km and the most elevation being just over 4100ft. For me those are the limits of what I would want to do on this setup and ideally I’d have a lighter one for anything similar or longer. For shorter tours they’re great. I did however encounter conditions while touring that didn’t suit this ski. On one tour a long, steep bootpack took me to the top of a narrow couloir that started at 50 degrees and mellowed out to 40 for several hundred feet. It was a couple of days after a fresh dump of snow but had been very sheltered from the sun and was still yet to be skied. I’d describe the snow as boot to knee deep, dense/heavy/consolidated powder. Having to make a mixture of jump turns and slow, short turns in this narrow couloir was pretty hard going and I really noticed both the length and stiffness of the ski. A shorter, softer ski would definitely have made things easier. As the slope opened up and mellowed out I still noticed the length and flex of the ski in this dense powder and noticed I was having to work much harder than if I were on a more rockered, tapered ski. I’d agree with Blister that this ski offers good maneuverability but mainly in lighter snow or firmer, spring conditions when you’re on the snow rather than in it. The only conditions I’ve found this ski to suck is in breakable crust. Despite it being a reverse cambered ski the tail rocker is minimal and when combined with the barely tapered tails the skis really get locked into a turn and can take you for a ride. You have to be on it the whole time not to be caught out.
Apart from those conditions I’m thoroughly enjoying the Corvus/Shift combo and think its makes a great 50/50 set up for someone looking for a directional ski with a modern take on a traditional shape.
Hi Jamie,
Are you happy with the length in general? I’m 6’1″/165 and considering the Corvus as a 50/50 for days when I want something heavier than my dedicated touring setup. I like a long ski so I’m wondering if 188 or 193.
Currently on Kästle TX98 and Anima Freebird both in 188.
Cheers
Thanks for the great review and for these useful comments from people. Has anyone had trouble with the tail of the new Corvus being so flat that your tail skin clip is dragging through the snow more than on a ski with more tail rocker? I haven’t mounted bindings yet, but when putting my skins on the ski and laying it flat on the ground (no snow here, it’s summer in the southern hemisphere) the tail clip of the skins is in full contact with the ground and definitely taking some weight. Maybe I need to change to a more minimalist style of tail clip (I’m on G3 skins), or even a twin tip type attachment, given the fairly round tail shape on this ski.
I haven’t skinned on the Corvus, though I don’t think its tail would be much of an issue. One of my favorite touring skis in the MTN Explore 95, which also has a very low tail (same splay as the Corvus), and I’ve never had an issue with skin clips on its tails. I am very rarely putting much pressure on the very end of the tails of my skis while skinning, so I don’t really notice any drag there. And with the G3 clips, I don’t think you’d have to worry about it coming undone, even with the flat, and fairly round nature of the Corvus’s tail (the G3 clips are great).
Thanks Luke, this is great to know and eases my anxiety in committing to a binding install pre next winter. Corvus with a heavier touring binding and MTN Explore with a light one seems like a good backcountry quiver.
I’ve been skiing the Corvus as my every day ski and like it a lot. I skied the old Cochise and Bodacious and Mantra for years. I am now skiing the Kastle MX 89 and 99 for my hard snow skis. But I find the MX 99 to punishing in hard bumps. I’m also getting older and have times of weakness and make mistakes from time to time as a result. I’m looking for ~100 wide ski for every day where conditions are more firm (Corvus is good with any softness). I live in Aspen – so similar to Crested Butte. I demoed the Bonafide, Mantra and Enforcer 100 last year and recall liking the Bonafide the best. Length is sometimes an issue. I found the 180 Bonafide comparable to the 185 Enforcer. I’m 5’8” and 153. I have gone down in length on some of the burliest skis to make them work. Any thoughts?
Hello,
I just picked up last years Corvus and mounted with a Shift. I live in Calgary but we’re fortunate to call Kicking Horse in BC our home hill, so tend to gravitate towards the steeper and softer snow when we can.
After 3 days on the ski, I’m honestly really struggling. It feels ‘dead’ in anything off of the firm snow and sluggish when initiating a turn in the variable stuff. Every review says that the profile makes it pivot easier and that it’s easier to ski, but I’m not feeling it! To be honest, it’s actually pretty nice on the groomers (which is great) but we’re definitely not ‘friends’ in anything else right now! As much as I like to rip it, the steeps tend to require a shorter radius (at least to start with), and right now, it’s just not feeling good there.
Does anyone have any advice to help me make this thing come alive?! In particular I’m wondering about the tune, though I can’t see anything that isn’t normal for me. Any help would be so appreciated!
Thanks,
Greig
@greig I mounted my Corvus +1 from factory and have found them very responsive at speed/wide open conditions. I haven’t found a huge issue with varying conditions. Overall I have really enjoyed the way the forward stance skis.
I have only found the ski to be somewhat lethargic in tight trees/bumps. This ski wants to smash and ski fast, not much for perfect bump form ;)
After a couple of seasons I have to replace my old Blizzard Cochise (very first edition), which I really liked a lot, and I consider to go for the Corvus.
Stability at higher speeds is important but not the most important quality.
Maneuverability, some quickness, good flotation and a bit of looseness are values I would appreciate more. So from what I read in this review the Corvus shouldn’t be a completely wrong choice.
But I’m not sure which length will be best for me (180, 68 kg; advanced). 183 or 188?
I skied the Cochise in 185, and had no Problem (except when I became fatigue after a day the back country) with it length, although the Cochise is much heavier than the Corvus.
I would be thankful for some advice!
Sorry for my English, I’m from Europe (Alps) and therefore English isn’t my native language.
Hi, Christoph
It sounds like either length of the Corvus could be a very good choice. Given that it’s lighter than the old Cochise, I think the 188 cm Corvus would feel more familiar / similar to the 185 cm Cochise overall, but if you want to prioritize maneuverability and quickness, the 183 cm Corvus would be slightly better. It’s definitely a touch decision, so I think the choice on length would just come down to whether you want this new ski to feel very similar to the 185 cm Cochise (in which case I’d recommend the 188 cm Corvus), or if you’d be alright with getting a ski that’s a little bit less stable at high speeds, but that’s going to be easier than the Cochise at slower speeds and when skiing tight terrain like moguls, trees, etc. (in which case the 183 cm Corvus would be a better choice).
Thank you Like for your good advice and of course for the great review. Considering my age, I tend a bit to the shorter length in combination with a Duke PT.
Hi Guys, very interesting material in these comments and feed back from skiers! currently ogling the Corvus in 176, as I am 5,8 and 165. skiing mainly in the Pyrenees where we do not have as much powder as in NW US and Canada I am hopping it will replace my Atris, gone with my son, and perform perhaps better, I ski 70/30 groomers / off piste. from reading all of your comments above my choice was made easier; Armada declivity 102 was a possible, alright for the Corvus then, will let you know how it went next year! all the best Dom