Ski: 2021-2022 Blizzard Rustler 9, 180 cm
Available Lengths: 164, 172, 180, 188 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 178.3 cm
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 1863 & 1894
Stated Dimensions: 127.5-94-117 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 127.2-93.4-116.5 mm
Stated Sidecut Radius: 17 meters
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 76 mm / 30 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~2 mm
Core: Poplar/Balsa/Beech/Paulownia/ISO (Synthetic) + Partial Titanal Layer + Carbon Tips / Tails + Fiberglass Laminate
Factory Recommended Mount Point: -7.7 cm from center; 81.4 cm from tail
Boots / Bindings: Nordica Strider 120, Dalbello Lupo 120 SP I.D. / Marker Griffon Demo
Reviewers:
- Luke Koppa: 5’8”, 155 lbs
- Sam Shaheen: 5’10”, 140 lbs
Test Locations: Crested Butte & Arapahoe Basin, CO
Days Skied: 8
[Note: Our review was conducted on the 18/19 Rustler 9, which was not changed for 19/20, 20/21, or 21/22, apart from graphics.]
Intro
For the 18/19 season, Blizzard has expanded their men’s and women’s freeride lines, adding the narrower Rustler 9 and Sheeva 9 to complement the current Rustler 10 & 11 and Sheeva 10 & 11.
We’ve really enjoyed our time on both the Rustler 10 and 11, though for slightly different reasons. The Rustler 10 is a playful, poppy all-mountain ski that excelled at more moderate speeds and while making smaller turns. Meanwhile, the Rustler 11 feels like more of a big-mountain ski that we could push quite hard given its fairly low weight.
So, how does the Rustler 9 compare to its wider siblings, and where does it fit in to the category of ~95mm-underfoot all-mountain skis?
Rocker Profile
All of the Rustler’s have similar-looking rocker profiles, with the widest Rustler 11 having the deepest rocker lines and the most tip and tail splay.
On the other end, the Rustler 9 has considerably shallower rocker lines and a bit less tip and tail splay, which makes sense given that it is a narrower ski and needs to be a bit more firm-snow oriented.
Compared to other skis in this class, however, the Rustler 9 has pretty deep tip and tail rocker lines, and a lot of tip splay. The tail of the Rustler 9 is less splayed out than the Rustler 10 (30 mm vs. 40 mm), but the Rustler 9 still has significantly more tail rocker and tail splay compared to more traditional all-mountain skis like the Blizzard Bonafide or Nordica Enforcer 93.
Flex Pattern
Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Rustler 9:
Tips: 7
Shovels: 7-8
In Front of Toe Piece: 9
Underfoot: 10
Behind Heel Piece: 9-8
Tails: 8-7.5
The flex pattern of the 180 cm Rustler 9 feels extremely similar to that of the 188 cm Rustler 10. Both skis have pretty round flex patterns that smoothly transition from fairly soft tips and tails (though they aren’t noodly) to a strong midsection.
Compared to the Blizzard Brahma and Bonafide, the Rustler 9 is slightly softer in the tips / shovels, and more noticeably softer in the tails.
Sidecut Radius
While we don’t put much stock in stated sidecut radius numbers, it’s worth touching on the Rustler 9’s sidecut radius (17 m for the 180 cm) because of our experience with the Rustler 10.
Even after a detune, the Rustler 10 (19 m radius for the 188 cm) felt pretty limited to small- and medium-radius turns, and felt fairly hooky when trying to make big turns at high speeds. Interestingly, we did not feel like the Rustler 11 (21 m radius for the 188 cm) exhibited any of the same behavior, and we found it to be comfortable making all sorts of turn shapes.
So we’ll be experimenting with the Rustler 9 as we put together our full review to see how it handles a variety of turn shapes and speeds.
Weight
Like the Rustler 10 and 11, the Rustler 9 is fairly light for its size.
But compared to other skis in its class, the Rustler 9 isn’t as comparatively light as the Rustler 10 & 11. This is likely due to the construction differences between the skis. The Rustlers all incorporate a partial sheet of titanal, and the wider the ski, the less titanal is used. (If you look at the skis, you can see that the titanal extends farthest down the ski on the Rustler 9, and is a bit shorter on the Rustler 10 & 11.)
For reference, below are some of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for a few notable skis. Keep in mind the length differences of these skis to keep things more apples-to-apples.
1585 & 1586 Head Kore 93, 180 cm (17/18, 18/19)
1680 & 1707 Line Sick Day 94, 186 cm (17/18, 18/19)
1839 & 1842 Black Crows Orb, 178.3 cm (17/18, 18/19)
1863 & 1894 Blizzard Rustler 9, 180 cm (18/19)
1864 & 1882 Armada Invictus 89Ti, 187 cm (18/19)
1869 & 1894 Atomic Vantage 90 Ti, 184 cm (18/19)
1896 & 1919 Dynastar Legend X96, 186 cm (17/18-18/19)
1920 & 1940 Volkl Kendo, 177 cm (17/18, 18/19)
1931 & 1932 DPS Foundation Cassiar 94, 185 cm (18/19)
1943 & 1968 Liberty VMT 92, 186 cm (18/19)
1950 & 1977 Blizzard Rustler 10, 188 cm (17/18, 18/19)
1966 & 1973 Liberty Origin 96, 187 cm (18/19)
1997 & 2001 Blizzard Brahma, 180 cm (17/18, 18/19)
2049 & 2065 Volkl Mantra M5, 177 cm (18/19)
2053 & 2057 Atomic Vantage 97 Ti, 188 cm (18/19)
2062 & 2063 Rossignol Experience 94 Ti, 187 cm (18/19)
2114 & 2133 Nordica Enforcer 93, 185 cm (17/18, 18/19)
2115 & 2149 J Skis Masterblaster, 181 cm (17/18, 18/19)
2124 & 2137 Blizzard Bonafide, 180 cm (17/18, 18/19)
2171 & 2176 Head Monster 88, 184 cm (18/19)
This list is pretty wild, mostly because of the huge number of skis that are coming in well under 2000 g per ski. The times they are a changin’.
One other thing to note is that the 180 cm, 98mm-wide Blizzard Bonafide — which is the direct counterpart to the 180 cm, 94mm-wide Rustler 9 — is more than half-a-pound heavier per ski. And since we suspect that quite a few people will be wondering whether they ought to go Bonafide or go Rustler 9, now would be a good time for you to decide whether you’re more in the “I like weight” camp or the “I prefer light” camp.
Some Questions / Things We’re Curious About
(1) Blizzard makes a few all-mountain skis in the 88-100mm range, so we’re curious to see how different or similar the 88mm-wide Brahma, the 94mm-wide Rustler 9, and the 98mm-wide Bonafide all feel, and which skiers will get along best with each of them.
(2) As we noted above, the Rustler 10 felt most comfortable when making small- or medium-radius turns, so how will the Rustler 9 feel when it comes to making different turn shapes?
(3) The Rustler line is designed to be a bit more playful than Blizzard’s “all-mountain freeride” line (e.g., Brahma, Bonafide, Cochise, & Bodacious), so just how playful will the Rustler 9 feel? And how much will that playfulness come at the cost of some stability on firm snow?
Bottom Line (For Now)
The Blizzard Rustler 9 looks to bring more firm-snow performance to the Rustler lineup. By the specs, it seems like the Rustler 9 should share the same playful feel of the other Rustler skis while doing a bit better on days when it hasn’t snowed in a while.
We’ve now spent some initial time on the Rustler 9, and Blister Members can check out our Flash Review using the link below. As we prepare our full review, let us know about any questions you’d like to see us address in our full review.
Flash Review: Blizzard Rustler 9
Blister members can now read our initial on-snow impressions in our Flash Review of the Rustler 9.
(Learn more about Blister member benefits, and become a Blister member)
FULL REVIEW
Sam Shaheen and I have now each spent several days on the newest addition to Blizzard’s Freeride lineup, the Rustler 9. From the slushy, wide-open bowls of A-Basin, to the clean groomers and long bump runs at Crested Butte, we’ve had this ski in a pretty wide range of conditions. So we’re going to discuss what makes it stand out, but before we dive in, here’s what we said about the Rustler 9 in our 18/19 Winter Buyer’s Guide:
“The Rustler 9 is the newest addition to Blizzard’s Rustler lineup, and it’s a fairly versatile one. It’s a pretty playful ski with a rocker profile that makes it easy to slide around, and it has a snappy, energetic flex pattern. But it’s also not a flimsy noodle; it has a fairly stout midsection with a titanal layer that runs through the middle of the ski, and that’s paired with a sidecut radius that begs you to lay over quick, tight, high-angle turns. If you think skis like the Blizzard Bonafide or Volkl Mantra feel a bit too demanding or too lifeless, then the Rustler 9 could be a good call. It’s not as stable at high speeds as the Bonafide or Mantra, but if you tend to stick to moderate speeds and / or like to make tighter turns, then you should check out the Rustler 9.”
Playfulness
Luke Koppa (5’8″, 155 lbs): Like the Rustler 10 and 11, the Rustler 9 falls in between true freestyle skis (e.g., Faction Candide 2.0, J Skis Allplay, etc.) and more directional all-mountain skis (e.g., Blizzard Bonafide, Volkl Mantra, etc.).
And as someone who’s not spinning all that much, I’m a fan of skis like the Rustler 9. Its rocker profile and fairly round, not-too-stiff flex pattern make it easy to slash and pop off features. But at the same time, it allows you to drive the front of the ski like you would on a more directional ski (and that you might not be able to do on a center-mounted freestyle ski).
Sam Shaheen (5’10”, 140 lbs): Yep, Luke nailed it. The Rustler 9 is a very playful directional ski. For people who like to jump, slash, and pop around the mountain, but who aren’t concerned with spinning, flipping, or jibbing, the Rustler 9 hits a good middle ground.
Groomers
Luke: Some skis take a bit of time to get used to, especially when it comes to how they carve. But like the Rustler 10 and 11, I felt comfortable carving turns on the Rustler 9 on my first run. If I tipped it over on edge at all, its tips felt like they were eager to pull me into a turn. Once in a turn, the Rustler 9 offered pretty good edgehold on fairly soft groomers, though I’d want something with less rocker for those oh-so-fun days where all I’m doing is attempting to carve on sheets of ice.
One aspect of the Rustler 9 that I really like is how it is both very energetic and fairly damp through its midsection. Cranking out tight turns rewarded me with lots of energy coming out of a turn, but the middle of the ski still felt pretty strong and stable.
While it was a lot of fun to make small to medium-sized turns on the Rustler 9, it did exhibit a bit of hookiness when I tried to open up my turns. As a rough estimate, I’d say the ski started to feel a bit twitchy once I tried to make turns that were reaching GS size. Any turns smaller than that, and it felt great. But when I opened things up, it seemed as though the tips of the ski were gently (or in really big turns, not so gently) urging me to put the ski back on edge and slow things down. In less ambiguous terms, the edges of the Rustler 9’s tips seemed to catch on the snow at high speeds and nudged the front of the ski across the fall line in an attempt to get it back into a tighter turn.
So if you stick to moderate-sized turns — and particularly if you really enjoy cranking out smaller turns — the Rustler 9 is a lot of fun on groomers. But if you like to really mob down groomers with big, arcing turns, then you might want to consider another ski.
Sam: I pretty much agree with everything Luke says here. The only thing that I would like to add is a note on the top end / overall power of the Rustler 9 on groomers.
While it does feel quite comfortable on edge, its easy turn initiation and snappy, lightweight feel don’t make for a ski with a high top end. At higher speeds — especially if the ski isn’t on edge — the Rustler 9 can feel pretty squirrely. When I push the ski hard, it can feel a bit overpowered — it doesn’t take an ex-racer to overpower the shovels on this ski.
That said, I think the majority of people won’t have an issue overpowering this ski. But if you’re the type of skier that likes to drive a ski very hard, I’d recommend something a bit stiffer and heavier.
Moguls & Tight Terrain
Luke: The Rustler 9 has fairly deep tip and tail rocker lines and a forgiving flex pattern, and as a result, it felt very easy to slide, pivot, and slash through bumps and trees. Overall, the ski felt very forgiving, and I never worried about it punishing me when I got too far backseat.
Of skis in the ~95mm range, the Rustler 9 is one of the easier skis I’ve used when it comes to maneuvering through narrow spots. And at the same time, it’s still a blast on groomers, which is something I definitely appreciate. I don’t like one-dimensional skis.
At 5’8”, 155 lbs, I was pretty happy with the 180 cm Rustler 9. However, I think bigger skiers would probably appreciate the 188 cm version, since the Rustler 9 doesn’t have extremely stiff tips or tails, and I could see larger and / or more aggressive skiers overpowering the 180. Though like the Rustler 10, just because you go with a longer length doesn’t mean that you should expect a much stronger, more stable ski. We don’t suspect that a longer length is going to change the forgiving, playful nature of the ski.
Sam: I think the Rustler 9 shines in tight terrain and moguls. At slower speeds (which I’m usually skiing at in these conditions) the Rustler 9 has a lot of rebound and feels light on my feet. Jump turning in steep trees or zipper-lining bumps feels natural and intuitive. And I found the ski to be forgiving enough to feel comfortable skiing pretty hard in variable terrain.
Off-Piste Snow
Luke: If I stuck to fairly controlled, smaller turns, the Rustler 9 again felt intuitive and pretty easy in inconsistent, off-piste snow. The tip rocker helped keep the ski from getting bogged down, and the moderate flex pattern and tail rocker made it easy to release from a turn.
That said, if I tried to straightline through grabby snow, I again noticed the Rustler 9 wanting to pull me into a turn and be on edge, rather than run bases-flat through the snow. So again, stick to small to medium-sized turns, and the Rustler 9 feels great. But when you get it up to higher speeds and try and make larger turns, the Rustler 9 can start to lose its composure.
Sam: I’ll reiterate what Luke said. The Rustler 9 feels like it wants to be in a turn, pretty much always. In variable snow and chop, this can make the ski feel a bit twitchy. I imagine a bit of detune on the tips could mellow this out a bit, though we experienced a similar sensation on the Rustler 10, even after detuning its tips and tails. Just know that in variable snow, the Rustler 9 calls for a dynamic and active style, and it doesn’t want to go straight and blast through variable snow like some other skis in the category.
Who’s It For?
Luke: Beginner to advanced skiers who want a narrower ski that’s easy to turn, has lots of energy, but that’s also still fairly stable on edge. Skiers who like to make big, fast turns and who are more concerned with high-speed stability than they are with playfulness and slow-speed maneuverability should look to heavier, more directional options. But if you want a playful ski that feels pretty comfortable in all conditions and that won’t punish you for mistakes, the Rustler 9 is worth a look.
Bottom Line
The Blizzard Rustler 9 is an intuitive, playful, and forgiving ski that should work well for a pretty wide range of skiers. From beginners who are learning how to put a ski on edge to advanced skiers who like to carve tight turns and bang out mogul laps, the Rustler 9 is an approachable, versatile ski.
Deep Dive Comparisons: Blizzard Rustler 9
Become a Blister Member or Deep Dive subscriber and check out our Deep Dive of the Rustler 9 to see how it stacks up against the Blizzard Bonafide & Brahma, Volkl Mantra M5, Black Crows Orb, Atomic Bent Chetler 100, K2 Pinnacle 95, and more…
Thank you for the review! How does the Rustler 9 do in deep snow?
I’m debating between it and the Rustler 10 for a 50/50, turn-happy ski for low to moderate speed skiing, mostly to hike off to the side of a resort to find fresh, to head into (sometimes tight) trees, or to take through moguls at low-to-moderate speeds. Mostly West Coast skiing. I want to float off at the sides when it’s deep, but I also have a dedicated powder ski so I don’t need the Rustler for super deep days, so as long as it floats decently well I would prioritize something that I can hike with (as I have no other touring ski), and that can do moguls (currently the Metal is my best ski for that vs. the Bibby and a Head Rev 85).
Also I tried to renew my membership but for some reason there’s a shipping charge? I’ll try again and see if that’s disappeared.
Did you ever decide between the Rustler 9’s and the Rustler 10’s? I’m on the fence between the two and I’m not sure which ones to buy.
After some thought I went with the Meridian Tour. Haven’t gotten it mounted yet though so no feedback yet.
I just got off two days on this ski and it’s a turn monster – running straight at high speeds is not where you want to be, nor trying to make **fast** GS or larger turns. This was a big debate I had in the mid-90s range, because I’m a big-GS ski type person historically and skiing primarily with my developing 12yo is really the only thing that in recent years has made pushing around a bunch of stiff heavy metal at slow speeds unfun (and why I wasn’t considering the Enforcer 93, Experience 94, Bonafide or Mantra – no one says those skis are playful lol). So, two years ago I ditched a Rossi E100 for a Rossi Storm (twin-tip, all camber, no metal 94mm if you don’t know it) and had a blast just ripping around at slower speeds. BUT that ski wasn’t made to be directional or carve much at all. So go to the Rustler 9 thinking I’ll get some carve back at those lower speeds and it delivers. Super playful, great edge, loves to slash and smear off features – really fun as a resort ski. I didn’t spend time in bumps on it but I imagine it’d be just fine – feels nimble and light. You CAN load it and get energy and pop out of it – but you have to be deliberate as it’s more of a smooth turner that (if you have or want to better develop some carve skills) makes for a steezy ride. I rode it in 6″ of two-day-old cut-up pow and later in the day sun-baked mank/crud and it worked fine in the pow but got tossed around a little in the heavier stuff and liked a more-deliberate and slower approach. I think it’ll be phenom in spring corn, but for pow, day-after or crud conditions will go to my bigger/wider/burlier skis for sure. A great east-coast one-ski quiver I’d guess (with that speed limit in mind). Out west here it fits the bill for me (better than the Storm) – but has it’s speed limitations. I’m 200# on the 180, with a Dalbello Krypton 130. You don’t need that much HP to drive this thing – I *could* overpower it, but that was trying pretty hard and way beyond anything I’d do on a normal ski day. Also to note: you can have a TON of fun on this ski just laying it over at high angles and riding the edges with minimal energy thrown at it – it’s very well balanced tip to tail. I was carrying speed down groomers just arcing turns at hand-drag angles, looking 50 yards and two turns ahead. Tip pressure just tightens things up a bit and getting back doesn’t have bad consequences – it’s that stable, damp and predictable under you – and it’s super sweet when it comes under you and you just lay it over into the next arc. REALLY confidence-inspiring ski. I forgot how fun having a turn machine in the quiver can be (or that a 94mm could really be a turn machine at less than big speeds). Worth a demo if you’re in that mid-90s predicament.
Great review, also interested is the float offpiste vs other skis in same width, sickday 94, mantra etc
Cheers
Hi,
I’m looking for an all-mountain ski which would fit my level (lower intermediate) and can grow with it. I am looking at the Rustler 9 (188cm)and the SickDay 94(186cm)?
Which one would you recommend given I’m 6’7″ and ~158lbs, not an aggressive skier, skiing more on groomers, but would explore off piste more? I like the idea of the SickDay 94 light and playful, but don’t know how it would perform on groomers especially towards end of the day., also the Rustler maybe too much of ski for my weight/skill. What’s your take on it?
thanks!
Can anyone draw a comparison of the rustler to the original scott punisher (2010). I loved this ski, it was easy to ride, playfull, arved well and was still powerfull enough to ride hard in every situation. Do you think the rustler 9 can deliver the same thing for me at 6’2 and 210lbs with a rather aggressive skiing style? Btw. I don’t much care for the powder performance, I’m looking at the rustler as a ski for groomer days.
I’d also appreciate this comparison. I’m 6’2 and 190lbs and had the 2010 Punisher at 182cm. Absolutely fantastic ski and I’ve been looking for something which is close to replicating it.
We haven’t had anyone on both the Punisher 110 and Rustler 9 (or Rustler 10 or 11), but based on the first line in Garrett Altmann’s review of the Punisher 110, I think it’s safe to say they’re not very similar. Garrett, who is one of the best skiers I’ve seen and who competed on the FWT, called the Punisher 110 “the best ski I’ve ever used in chop and crud, period.” Having seen how hard Garrett skis and having used all of the Rustlers, I would not say that they any of them are remotely close to the Punisher 110 in terms of stability. I imagine that all of the Rustlers are a lot easier to ski at slower speeds vs. the Punisher 110, and probably much easier to carve very tight turns on groomers, but if what you loved about the Punisher 110 was how stable it was in variable conditions, I would not recommend any of the Rustlers. Based on the Punisher 110’s specs and Garrett’s review, the closest comparison I can think of is the Rossignol Black Ops 118, which is probably the best chop ski I’ve ever used. But the Black Ops is wider, heavier, and has a much more forward-mounted platform. The Folsom Hammer might also be worth a look, but it’s significantly heavier and its reverse-camber profile makes for a pretty different on-snow feel. The Scott Scrapper 115 shares a similar shape, but it’s way lighter than the old Punisher 110 and definitely doesn’t feel as composed and stable in rough snow. Unfortunately, I can’t think of any current ski that seems like it’d feel really similar to the Punisher 110, but if anyone has found one, please let us know. Cause reading Garrett’s review again, it seems like a ski I’d really like.
Thanks for the reply Luke but I think there’s been a misunderstanding… Raptor-30 and I are referring to the original Punisher from 2010 with an 89mm waist.
Ah, my bad. I saw 2010 and for some reason thought 110 (apparently the Buyer’s Guide is still not letting me get enough sleep…). Unfortunately, I don’t think any of us at Blister have experience with that Punisher, so hopefully someone else might be able to chime in.
I love the sound of this ski. Trying to decide on length, I am 6.0, 200 lbs, do you recommend 180 or 188? Tight trees and bumps is where I like to spend most of my time,
Cheers
Hmm, my initial thought is the 188, but what skis / lengths have you used in the past? And would you consider yourself a beginner, intermediate, advanced, or expert skier?
Hi Luke – I consider myself to be advanced/expert. My all-mountain skis are in the low to mid 180s. Groomer skis in the high 170s. There’s a fair amount of rocket on this ski so 188 should not be a problem but it be less enjoyable in the bumps/trees and tight spaces than the 180? I ski in the east and the woods I ski most of the time as tight as they get….thanks!
Gotcha, then I think the 188 is the way to go. Due to how much rocker it has and how light it is, I don’t think the 188 will feel like “too much” ski.
Hey all!
Just thought I’d toss my 2 cents into this having demo’d both the 180 and 188 at Deer Valley. I’m 6’0″ and 170-180lbs.
Tldr: Imo the 180 is easier in moguls and tight trees due to length but the 188 is a better all around ski for dudes of our build. To add an opposite direction to Luke’s comment the 180 felt like too little ski for me personally.
First off groomers, I could rail the 188 harder on groomers and it didn’t feel like the tips or tails would slide out in me unlike the 180. The ski wanting to hook into a shorter turn is there for both lengths but is manageable, just annoying.
I definitely had to hop and pull up the tails more in steeper trees on the 188 than the 180. On flatter tighter trees they skied very similar with the 188 needing just a bit more effort to stay forward and keep the tails from feeling hooky. Both skied zipper line and junk moguls just fine, the 180 was more forgiving but I think it’s length thing.
As for powder, crud busting, or slush I think it’d be a 188 good ski but would have some deflection as someone said above. The 180 would 100% have its lunch eaten in those conditions with me on it. The rocker makes the tip feel softer when skiing than hand flexing in the shop which I think contributes to this heavily.
The ski in the air is a ton of fun and I found the 188 much more stable than the 180 and I was able to send some transition lips at speed with confidence. The 180 just didn’t have the little extra weight or length to smooth things out. Also shifties were super easy to pull off which was nice.
Cheers
How would the rustler 9 compare to something like the ranger 94 fr? Guessing the ranger has a bit more range and ability to manage higher speeds.
Yep, we actually compared those two in our Deep Dive of the Ranger 94: https://blisterreview.com/deep-dive/deep-dive-fischer-ranger-94-fr
But you’re basically on the right track — the Ranger is a bit more stable, but not as loose and definitely not as forgiving.
Hello, This ski has caught my interest. I am just coming off 15 years of snowboarding and switched to skiing, which I am loving. Live in the Sun Valley Area and looking for a forgiving all mountain ski. I want to ski more chopped pow and crud, and do not want too stiff a ski, do not consider myself a hard charger at this time. I am 5’8″ at 150. I was thinking the 172? Any help here or suggestions on size or another ski would be appreciated.
Thanks, JB
HI Jerome- I’m looking at this ski right now too, and I also live in the Sun Valley Area. I couldn’t wait to see what replies you got as I need an all-mountain for out here and something for chopped pow and crud specifically. I’m deciding between 2 sizes as well. So bummed no one replied to you. Did you end up buying them? And, if so, what has been your experience?
Thanks – Hollis
Hey, I know that blizzard added some weight into the new rustler 10 as you mentioned but do you know if they did the same in the 9? Thanks!
As far as we’ve been told by Blizzard, the Rustler 10 was the only Rustler that got heavier for 19/20.
Hi guys,
I would like to replace my Faction CT 2 184cm by Rustler 9 188cm. I rode my CT2 last 2 sessions and now I need more aggressive a stiffer ski than CT2 is. Basically I am looking for stiffer CT2. Do you think Rustler 9 is a good choice? I will use it mainly on groomers and on the hard pack for freeriding I have a wider ski.
I really appreciate your opinions and everyone´s feedback.
Thank you guys!
Hi guys,
I would like to replace my Faction CT 2 184cm by Rustler 9 188cm. I rode my CT2 last 2 sessions and now I need more aggressive a stiffer ski than CT2 is. Basically I am looking for stiffer CT2. Do you think Rustler 9 is a good choice? I will use it mainly on groomers and on the hard pack for freeriding I have a wider ski.
I really like to ski fast and on the CT2 are quite snappy tips and tail at higher speeds, but I really like its playfulness and versatility. When I carefully read your review Ruster 9 seems like a great option for replacing. I used to be a park skier so this is a big change for me thats why I need to know your opinion.
I really appreciate your opinions and everyone´s feedback.
Thank you guys!
Hi,
I would consider myself an intermediate/advanced intermediate skier. I am definitely not a speed burner. I am 5’7 and weigh around 175 lbs. I am torn between the rustler 9 164 (seems short) and the 172 (seems long). Thoughts on length for my skill level?
Josh, given you classify yourself as intermediate/advanced I’d recommend upsizing. I’m the same build as you and as demoed the 19/20 version of the 172cm earlier this season. I’d consider myself more on the advanced end of the spectrum, but as Luke and Sam said above, even beginners can handle it. I actually demoed and bought the 172 for my dad, who isn’t quite as aggressive as I am. Depending on your age and attitude and where you ski, the 164 will be too short if your skills progress. The deep tip rocker lines make it feel shorter than it’s length, and not super burly flex makes it pretty easy to ski.
Looking for some guidance.
My initial pair of skis were 2004 Rossignol – Bandit B2 76mm underfoot & 190cm. In 2017 I went with Dynastars’s 2016 Powertrack 79 with a length of 173cm because I didn’t know any better. I made a mistake with that last purchase which I’m looking to rectify. I’m an advanced skier that enjoys single black runs and I spend time on groomers and really working hard at getting proficient in the bumps. I don’t spend a lot of time off-piste because I’m way too heavy for these skis. I’m 6’1″ & 300+ pounds. I’m late 50’s but can ski all day. With my current ski offering 79mm underfoot I can not stay on top of powder, curd you name it. I’m leaning towards the Blizzard 9 but the 10 interest me too. Possibly I would ski more off-piste if I didn’t feel like I was in quicksand. I’m thinking no matter which ski I choose the length should be 188cm and 94mm or maybe the 104mm underfoot with the 10’s at 188cm. I ski around 20 times per year I only ski out west. What advice could you offer ?
Hey guys,
Awesome review. Stuck in a tough place between these and the K2 Mindbender 90 TI’s. (For ref I’m 6’1 ~185 so def on the bigger side). Primarily east coast skiing but looking to gain more confidence on moguls / tighter terrain and probably do 1-2 trips out west to get some actual good snow. Been skiing for about 3.5 seasons so I’m hesitant to get myself into something as hard charging as the mindbender TI range but realize that my size may overshadow that factor. Thoughts? (or am I overlooking another 1 quiver ski).
Thanks!
Have you had a chance to play with the rustler 9s mount point as you did with the 10s? I have had several pairs of 10s and 11s and absolutely love them. I’m looking into the 9s for firmer conditions and am curious as to how they would ski 1 – 2cm forward of the recommended line
Torn between purchasing the 9 or 10…
If you had to give one reason why someone would choose the Rustler 10 over the 9, (or vice versa) what would it be? Just flotation, or is there much of a performance difference between the two?
While the two feel really similar, in my mind, it mostly comes down to whether you want to prioritize performance on mostly firm snow, or a soft snow / mix of soft and firm snow. Basically, the 9 is a bit easier to get on edge while carving firm snow and offers slightly better edge hold, while the 10 is a bit easier to slash and pivot around in mixed or softer / deeper conditions. So I’d opt for the 9 if I was going to be mostly using it on firm conditions, while I’d go with the 10 if I was going to use it on both firm and soft conditions, particularly a fairly equal mix of firm and soft snow.
That helped me to settle on the R10, thanks Luke!
Hi Luke and Blister Team, Thanks for the great review. I just purchased the 2022/23 Rustler 9s, 180cm. I’m 6’0″ and 170lbs. Advanced skier, enjoy the bumps, glades, everything off-piste. I am about to take these to a shop and get them mounted with some Look STX 12s. I am having a tough time finding the manufacturer’s recommended mount point online via Blizzard’s site. Is -7.7cm (as you said in your review) from center still the recommendation for the 2022/23 version of the Rustler 9? Not sure if they are the same as the 2021/22 version. Thanks for your help!