2021-2022 Salomon QST 106

Ski: 2021-2022 Salomon QST 106, 181 cm

Available Lengths: 167, 174, 181, 188 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 179.9 cm

Stated Weight per Ski: 2080 grams

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 2096 & 2100 grams

Stated Dimensions: 139-105-125 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 138.8-105.1-124.6 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius (181 cm): 22 meters

Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 67 mm / 31 mm

Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 5-6 mm

Core: Poplar + Titanal Binding Reinforcement + Cork Tip/Tail Inserts + Carbon, Basalt, Flax, & Fiberglass Laminate

Base: Sintered

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -8.75 cm from center; 81.2 cm from tail

Boots / Bindings: Dalbello Lupo Pro HD; Dalbello Lupo SP I.D. / Salomon Warden MNC 13

Test Locations: Front Range, CO

Days Skied: 5

[Note: Our review was conducted on the 19/20 QST 106, which was not changed for 20/21 or 21/22.]

Luke Koppa reviews the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Salomon QST 106
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on reddit
Share on email
Review Navigation:  Specs //  First Look //  Full Review //  Bottom Line //  Rocker Pics


Salomon first introduced the QST 106 in 2016, and it was good. Which is why there’s a good chance you’ve seen a lot of them at your local ski hill.

Then, for the 18/19 season, Salomon made some minor tweaks to the QST 106.

But for the 19/20 season, the QST 106 — and most of the other men’s and women’s QST skis — is getting some much more significant updates, and Salomon certainly isn’t downplaying them: “New construction. New technologies. New shape. Already our most award-winning collection three years running, the QST line is all-new for 2019!”

So let’s dive into what’s new with the 19/20 ski, what stays the same, and how the new ski’s design compares to some of the other options in its category.

What Salomon says about the QST 106

“A full-length poplar wood core teams up with a Ti Power Platform in the full sandwich construction. Then we added a tip-to-tail blend of carbon fiber and basalt for increased power and edge grip. A pure flax laminate was placed directly underfoot and we added Cork Damplifier technology in the tip and tail creating an unmatched damp and stable snowfeel. We wrapped all of this up into a new shape that offers smoother turn initiation, better floatation and more confidence at speed in steeper terrain.”

New Construction

The new QST 106 has the same poplar wood core and a slightly tweaked laminate construction with carbon & basalt running tip to tail and flax and titanal underfoot. That’s not too different compared to the 18/19 QST 106, but what is new is the switch from Koroyd in the tips and tails to cork, an update that is supposed to help dampen the ski and reduce tip and tail chatter.

The 19/20 QST 92, 99, Stella 106, Lumen 99, and Lux 92 all get the same updates as the 19/20 QST 106 (updated construction and tweaked shapes).

The QST 118 will feature the new cork inserts in its tips and tails, but the rest of its construction remains the same for 19/20, and so does its shape.

While the QST 106’s updated construction is interesting, what might be even more important is the QST 106’s redesigned shape.

Shape / Rocker Profile

The new QST 106’s shape is basically less tapered than the 18/19 version of the ski.

It still has more tip and tail taper than some more traditionally shaped skis like the Blizzard Cochise and Black Crows Corvus, but the new QST 106 now has a bit less tip and tail taper than skis like the Rossignol Soul 7 HD, Line Sick Day 104, and Dynastar Legend X106.

As we’ve noted in other reviews, taper is useful when it comes to making skis feel nimble and easy to pivot (particularly in soft and / or grabby snow), but that often comes at the cost of stability in rough / firm snow as the effective edge of the ski is reduced. So we’re interested to see the extent to which the new QST 106 gets a bump up in stability.

The new QST 106’s rocker profile is pretty similar to the previous version’s, but now has more tip splay (67 mm now vs. 58 mm) and more tail splay (31 mm vs. 24 mm).

The new ski’s tip and tail rocker lines look similarly deep compared to the previous 106’s, and those rocker lines are still on the deeper end of the spectrum. We were impressed by the float of the old QST 106, and given that the new ski has a pretty similar rocker profile and more surface area in the tips, we have high expectations for how the new QST 106 will float in powder.

Flex Pattern

Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the QST 106:

Tips: 6
Shovels: 6.5-7
In Front of Toe Piece: 7.5-9.5
Underfoot: 9.5
Behind the Heel Piece: 9.5-8.5
Tails: 8

The 181 cm 19/20 QST 106’s flex pattern is similar to the flex pattern of the 188 cm, 18/19 version of the ski, with the tips and tails of the new ski being slightly stiffer. It’s not a huge difference, but it is noticeable. The new QST 106 still has a pretty moderate flex pattern with fairly soft shovels that ramp up smoothly to a strong midsection, and it finishes with a tail that is significantly stiffer than the tip.

We certainly would not call the 19/20 QST 106 some super burly ski, but it’s still pretty strong, so we’re curious to see how well it combines being supportive enough to be skied hard, while being forgiving enough to not punish mistakes.


In addition to the new ski’s updated shape, this is another notable change for the 19/20 ski. The 181 cm 19/20 QST 106 is coming in around 2100 grams per ski, which is heavier than the 188 cm 18/19 version of the ski.

And, for what it’s worth, Salomon is providing a stated weight of 2200 grams per ski for the 19/20, 188 cm QST 106.

The 18/19 QST 106 was pretty light for its size, and given its strong all-round performance, we found ourselves recommending it to a lot of people who were looking for a 50/50 ski that they could use in the resort and for backcountry touring.

The new ski now comes in at a weight that might make it a less easy choice for a 50/50 resort + backcountry ski, but that could boost its performance in the rough snow you’ll encounter inside the boundary lines of a resort.

For reference, here are a number of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for some notable skis. Keep in mind the length differences to try to keep things apples-to-apples.

1605 & 1630 Line Vision 108, 183 cm (19/20)
1642 & 1651 Renoun Citadel 106, 185 cm, (18/19)
1806 & 1862 Armada Tracer 108, 180 cm (19/20)
1848 & 1903 Line Sick Day 104, 186 cm (17/18–19/20)
1849 & 1922 Elan Ripstick 106, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
1913 & 1943 Sego Condor Ti, 187 cm (18/19)
1923 & 1956 DPS Alchemist Wailer 106, 189 cm (17/18–18/19)
1950 & 1977 Blizzard Rustler 10, 188 cm (17/18–18/19)
1996 & 2012 Dynastar Legend X106, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2005 & 2035 Liberty Origin 106, 187 cm (19/20)
2010 & 2018 J Skis Vacation, 186 cm (18/19)
2013 & 2013 Moment Commander 108, 188 cm (18/19)
2018 & 2045 RMU North Shore 108, 185 cm (18/19–19/20)
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 (17/18–19/20)
2036 & 2064 Salomon QST 106, 188 cm (18/19)
2046 & 2120 Black Crows Corvus, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2096 & 2100 Salomon QST 106, 181 cm (19/20)
2112 & 2125 4FRNT MSP 107, 187 cm (18/19)
2143 & 2194 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 184 cm (18/19)
2165 & 2211 K2 Mindbender 108Ti, 186 cm (19/20)
2165 & 2219 Icelantic Nomad 105, 191 cm (19/20)
2182 & 2218 Nordica Enforcer 110, 185 cm (17/18–19/20)
2190 & 2268 Armada ARV 106Ti LTD, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2233 & 2255 Nordica Enforcer 104 Free, 186 cm (19/20)
2241 & 2295 4FRNT Devastator, 184 cm (14/15–18/19)
2250 & 2307 Argent Badger, 184 cm (19/20)
2283 & 2290 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 189 cm (18/19)
2312 & 2386 Prior Husume, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2318 & 2341 J Skis The Metal, 186 cm (16/17–18/19)
2376 & 2393 Blizzard Cochise, 185 cm (15/16–19/20)

Some Questions / Things We’re Curious About

(1) With its new construction, heavier weight, and less tapered shape, we’re very curious to see how the new QST 106 compares to the previous version when it comes to skiing hard and fast in rough snow.

(2) Salomon claims that the new QST 106’s shape makes for easier turn initiation, better float, and more stability at speed. So just how much of a difference will the new ski’s updated shape make in those regards?

(3) The previous QST 106 stood out in part due to the fact that it was pretty stable for its weight, while also being pretty forgiving. So will the new ski, with its heavier weight and slightly stronger flex pattern, maintain that characteristic?

Bottom Line (For Now)

Salomon says that the new QST 106 is supposed to float better, be more stable, and initiate turns better than the previous version of the ski. Based on the new ski’s less tapered shape and heavier weight, those actually seem like reasonable claims to make. We just got the ski on snow and Blister Members can check out our Flash Review linked below for our initial on-snow impressions. Then stay tuned for updates, and let us know in the comments section below about any questions you’d like us to address in our full review.

Flash Review

Blister Members can now check out our Flash Review of the QST 106 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.


Variable Spring Conditions

Luke Koppa (5’8”, 155 lbs): We didn’t get our hands on the 181 cm QST 106 until late this past season, so a lot of our time on it was spent skiing snow that varied from brutally refrozen in the morning to deep, soft slush in the afternoon. While these weird and quick-changing conditions make for challenging skiing, I think they really highlighted the versatility of the new QST 106.

Luke Koppa and Sam Shaheen review the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Salomon QST 106.

On really firm, inconsistent, early-morning snow, the 181 cm QST 106 is definitely not the most stable ski, but I do think its “suspension” (how well a ski absorbs impacts from the snow), is quite good. While it doesn’t track completely unphased through rough snow at high speeds, the QST 106 doesn’t feel nearly as harsh or unpredictable in these conditions as many lighter skis do.

And to clarify, the 181 cm QST 106 does still track pretty well in rough snow, especially if you put it on edge. I think beginners, intermediates, and advanced skiers will be happy with its stability. It’s just not in the same class as heavier, stiffer, longer skis when it comes to very high-speed stability. (We do, however, intend to get time on the 188 cm QST 106 this coming season, so we’ll see how much of a stability bump the longer model provides.)

Beyond suspension and stability, the QST 106’s updated shape does a really good job of allowing both slarved and carved turns. I found it very easy to pivot (just as easy as the 18/19 version), while initiating and holding carved turns better than the previous iteration.

For me, this is important in variable conditions. With a ski like the new QST 106, I can lay it hard on edge when making faster, more aggressive turns, but then I can still easily throw it sideways to shut things down when riding at the edge of control.

Luke Koppa and Sam Shaheen review the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Salomon QST 106.

Sam Shaheen (5’10” 145 lbs): I agree with Luke here. I think the standout quality of the new QST 106 is its suspension (for its weight). One thing I also noticed with this ski is that it did a pretty good job of not getting bogged down in the thick, manky snow that we often end up skiing midday in the spring. Its tips do a good job at planing up over heavy snow rather than trying to slice through it.

Skiing the QST 106 in many types of terrain and varying snow conditions left me impressed by how versatile the ski feels. I never got into a line or snow condition where I said to myself, “I really wish I was on a different ski right now.”


Luke: On groomers, I like the new QST 106 a lot more than the previous version. As we mentioned in our First Look, skis with a lot of tip taper tend to be easy to pivot around, but that often comes at the cost of turn initiation and sometimes edge hold.

The new QST 106, with its less tapered shape, feels like a significantly better carver than the old one. Like many of my favorite skis, all I had to do was put some pressure on the QST 106’s shovels and it would quickly initiate a turn and hold pretty strong through each one. I can think of a few skis this wide that are better carvers, but it’s a fairly small group of skis — all of which are not as loose and playful as the new QST 106. Plus, the new QST 106 feels more energetic coming out of a turn than the previous version, which makes for a more exciting carving experience.

Luke Koppa and Sam Shaheen review the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Salomon QST 106.

The QST 106 feels like a directional ski — I felt like I was getting the most out of the ski (edge hold, energy, & stability) when driving it through the shovels. But if you want / need to ski it centered, that’s totally feasible. The sweet spot on this ski feels very big, and it will accept a variety of stances (it just feels best when driven through the front).

Sam: Though I do agree with Luke here, I think it’s important to state that if you’re looking to spend a lot of time on edge on firm snow, the QST 99 is a better carver than the 106. If you ski a lot of soft and firm snow, then I think the QST 106 makes a lot of sense. But the more time you tend to spend on firm snow, the more I’d look towards the QST 99 or other narrower skis.

Moguls, Trees, and Tight Terrain

Luke: As I noted above, the QST 106 is pretty versatile when it comes to making both slarved and carved turns. It also has a big sweet spot, produces some energy when bent, and the 181 cm version isn’t super heavy. All of this made me like the new version in tight terrain.

In moderately spaced and / or moderately steep bumps and trees, the QST 106 was very easy and intuitive while still being supportive enough to ski quite hard.

Luke Koppa and Sam Shaheen review the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Salomon QST 106.

In really tight, steep, and inconsistent bumps, I would’ve preferred a longer ski, which is a bit odd (I tend to prefer shorter, more rockered skis in bumps). I found myself wishing for more ski to lean into when the bumps were really weird, as the 181 cm QST 106’s shovels got knocked off track in these bumps a bit easier than I expected, given that it tracked pretty well in other conditions.

But apart from those really odd bumps — the ones I tend to ski pretty slowly anyway — the 181 cm QST 106 was a really predictable and intuitive ski in tight terrain. Its tail is supportive enough for me (5’8”, 155 lbs) without feeling very punishing, and it was pretty accepting of both a fairly centered (but not backseat) or forward stance in tight spots.

Sam: I like the QST 106 in a lot of terrain, tight terrain included. But oddly enough, I also agree with Luke in that I wanted a bit more length in weird bumps and variable snow conditions. The shovel felt slightly vague and soft when I would really push the ski hard in tricky, tight terrain. This wasn’t a big deal, but more of a subtle thing that I noticed a few times in particularly difficult terrain (or after I made a particularly bad mistake).


Luke: In terms of being balanced in the air and feeling designed to spin, flip, and ski switch, the QST 106 is not a very playful ski. After all, it has a -8.75 cm mount point and directional shape.

But in terms of energy and a loose / surfy feel, I would call the QST 106 pretty playful. I found it very easy to get the new QST 106 sideways, and also load up its tips or tails before airs.

Luke Koppa and Sam Shaheen review the Salomon QST 106 for Blister
Sam Shaheen on the Salomon QST 106.

So I wouldn’t recommend the QST 106 to people seeking a freestyle ski, but I think it does make a lot of sense for directional skiers who want a ski that’s not “dead” and that can effortlessly switch between carved and slarved turns.

Sam: Yep, I agree exactly.

Who’s It For?

Luke: Just like the new QST 99, I think there are a lot of skiers who will get along well with the new QST 106. So let’s talk first about the people I would not recommend it to:

(1) Your ideal ski day involves seeing how few turns you can make down the mountain, and you like skis that are super stiff, super heavy, and that absolutely destroy everything in front of you. For those people, I’d recommend checking out the “All-Mountain Chargers” section of our Winter Buyer’s Guide.

(2) Freestyle skiers who always ski centered and who want to ski switch and spin a lot. For you, I’d recommend checking out the “All-Mountain Freestyle” section of our Winter Buyer’s Guide.

But if you don’t fall into those two categories, the QST 106 is worth considering.

I think beginners could get along well with it in a shorter length — its sweet spot is big, it is versatile across a wide range of conditions, and it encourages good technique without demanding it.

I think intermediate and advanced skiers are probably the best demographic for the QST 106, since it is pretty easy to ski while also being strong and stable enough to ski pretty hard as you progress.

Then there are expert skiers who don’t want the stiffest ski out there, but who still want a ski with good suspension and that’ll work across a lot of snow conditions.

As for the question of whether it Is a 50/50 backcountry / resort ski, that one is not more complicated than it was with the previous generation of the QST 106 (which was one of our go-to suggestions for that category).

You can definitely use the new QST 106 for touring, and I think it’d be a lot of fun in most backcountry conditions. But it is now significantly heavier than the previous version, and personally, I’d be more inclined to opt for a slightly lighter ski for true 50/50 use.

Bottom Line

The old Salomon QST 106 was a good ski, and so is the new one. With its updated construction and shape, increased stability, and better on-edge performance, we’d say that the new QST 106 is a more capable ski for inbounds use (especially in rough snow) than the previous version, while the previous version — primarily because of its lighter weight — was the better option if you were spending a similar amount of time skiing inbounds and skinning up mountains.

But given that we tend to question how many skiers are actually using a ski like the QST 106 for truly equal parts ski touring and inbounds skiing, we don’t mind at all the design decision to make this ski a bit heavier and a bit more inbounds-capable. And for those reasons, we think a lot of skiers will get along well with this new ski — and arguably even more than the last version.

Deep Dive Comparisons

Become a Blister Member or Deep Dive subscriber to check out our Deep Dive of the QST 106 to see how it stacks up against the previous QST 106, K2 Mindbender 108Ti, ON3P Woodsman 108, 4FRNT MSP 107, Rossignol Soul 7 HD, Line Sick Day 104, Nordica Enforcer 104 Free, Salomon QST 99, Liberty Origin 106, Elan Ripstick 106, G3 ROAMr 108, ON3P Wrenegade 108, Prior Husume, Black Crows Corvus, Moment Commander 108, J Skis Metal, Blizzard Cochise, and Faction Dictator 3.0.

Share this post:
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on reddit
Share on email

Rocker Pics:

Full Profile
Tip Profile
Tail Profile
Top Sheet
2021-2022 Salomon QST 106, BLISTER

30 comments on “2021-2022 Salomon QST 106”

  1. I just tested these at Whistler this weekend. we had a few CM of new snow and these things ripped all over the mountain, In soft snow off hamony bowl, and on the firmer groomers as we approached mid mountain. I would almost say that I liked them more than Nordica Enforcer 93s, but I have to admit that, Blackcomb was really icy and my legs were pretty tired by the time I got back onto them.

    Now my dilemma is: Do I wait until these become available to get a pair, along with shifts? Do I make a run back up to Canada and get this past years pair for a good discount? Do I get the Demo pair of these I saw for sale (188cm) and remount with shifts? (I would like to start touring this spring, hence the shifts) Or, does anyone have a hookup? :-D


  2. I would be interested in a comparison of the 19/20 QST 106 and the 19/20 Liberty Origin 106. Also interested in how it might work as 1-ski quiver. I’m in the PNW. Don’t need a stiff crud-buster, but it still has to be able to handle heavier in-resort variable conditions.

  3. A little bummed about the weight. I foresee these becoming more of a charger ski and less of a 50/50 ski with that much of an increase. I am in the same boat as the other Aaron as I have also been strongly considering these as an all around soft snow 50/50 ski with Shifts. I suppose the good news is that there are an increasing number of skis being made to cover that territory. The 179 Sick Day 104, 180 Armada Tracer 108, and the Moment tour collection are now looking better and better for 19/20.

  4. I have skied both the 181 and the 188 but in very different conditions. The 181 Held up well on a smaller mountain on hardpack and then moved into some non-rhythmic bumps fairly well. When skied on edge underneath you they carved well and the front ends did not seem too short. On a larger hill the 188 were easy to initiate into turns and compressing the tips and tails in deeper snow made the ski more playful and responsive. On lower degree slopes they are easy to smear around and through trees. A really hard charger no not really ….. the tips are a little too forgiving and easy to bring back to you to slowing your speed down but then again I am skiing at roughly 260 so if you are 100 lbs lighter they just may be the aggressive and responsive skis we all look for. I would like to compare these to the K2 MIndbender 108Ti.

  5. To be honest, the new QST 106’s tips don’t look more tapered than those of the Cochise. Very different skis, though, of course.

    • Yeah, it’s not a huge difference, though I’d say it is more noticeable in person. The Cochise’s tips taper to more of a point, but the QST 106’s taper lines do start deeper / closer to the middle of the ski.

  6. How would you rate the pivot on the 188/106 vs the 185/118? I love the quick pivot and ability to navigate tight spaces in the 118, it’s something I really value as get older and can’t point as hard…

    • While the QST 106 is pretty easy to pivot for a ski of its width, it’s definitely not as loose / surfy / pivoty as the 118. As long as you pressure the shovels / tips of the QST 106, it’s quite easy to pivot, but just not on the level of the 118. If you want a super maneuverable ski in this waist width, I’d look to something with more tail rocker like the Icelantic Nomad 105, Moment Wildcat 108, or maybe the Liberty Origin 106.

  7. Curious how much variation there is between weights. Salomon customer service said that the 181 supposedly weights 1840 per ski which I’m guessing is incorrect. Any thoughts on this?

    • That seems pretty out of the ordinary in terms of weight variation — I’d be willing to bet that their customer service rep was looking at stated weights for the old (pre-19/20) QST 106, which probably did come in around 1840 g per ski for the 181 cm length (our pair of the older 18/19, 188 cm QST 106 came in around 2050 grams per ski).

      • Thanks, Luke. I was thinking the same thing. Any thoughts on the QST 106 vs the Atris? Probably going to be mainly inbounds setup with a few days of backcountry tossed in since I have two dedicated bc setups already. Mainly wondering if the QST has deeper rocker lines than the Atris? Kind of hard to tell by the photos.

        • We haven’t yet skied the new Atris so we can’t say anything right now, but the rocker lines between the two aren’t all that different, apart from the Atris having a higher, twinned tail. The depth of the rocker lines looks pretty similar between the two.

  8. I owned the ’18 Atris and now own the ’20 QST 106. Pretty different skis – the ’18 Atris had much more kick/rocker in the tip and tail, softer shovels and likes to be skied from a more centered stance…more of a twin tip ski. The QST 106 is much more directional and likes a slightly more forward, traditional stance. The Atris tips on the ’18 were VERY soft and would get deflected quite bit leaving you at times feeling like you were only skiing on 155cm portion of the straighter/stiffer portion of the ski under foot. The Atris was much more playful but not enough backbone for me in mixed conditions/groomers at the resort. I heard BC made some slight changes in subsequent iterations of Atris but I haven’t skied those. I replaced my Atris with the QST 106 and I love it so much I’m contemplating getting another pair as my go-to touring setup. It has the perfect amount of directionality and backbone but can still be slarved or broken loose at will.

    • I appreciate the input. Ended up snagging a 2019 Atris from a buddy for cheap. I thought I heard that the new model is softer but less sidecut so maybe it’ll feel a little more stable in chop. I’m coming from a Meridian which was plenty stiff for me but a little nerve racking when skiing flat or slow (with kids) so hoping the Atris is a nice compromise. If not, I’ll definitely look into the QST 106.

  9. I could use some help. I have a pair of 188 cm QST 106’s 2018/19 model and I have been finding that the length is just too long for me (5’11” 160 lbs). I ski the QST 99 in 181 and find it much more maneuverable and comfortable for me. I thought the 188 would be better for powder but I just find myself having to exert too much effort to turn especially in more confined areas.
    What I’m wondering is if I want a ski in the 104-110” waste width that is good for powder and easy to maneuver should I just pick up the 181 of this year’s QST 106 or should I be looking at an entirely different ski?
    I like to make big turns in the powder at high speed but I also enjoy the faster stuff in the trees.

    • Blake, I have been skiing the 188s since about January and have had the same issues with the ski feeling really tough to turn. You may have moved on, but at least in my case I think there are two things that make the ski feel difficult to turn:

      1) The recommended mount point feels really rearward to me like there’s all this tip flopping around up front. I find the tails diving in deeper snow despite many reviewers saying how well they float. I think (again this is just for me) the recommended mount point is too far back for people used to modern skis and is pretty imbalanced to the rear making it hard to stay up in pow despite the big shovels staying pointed up. It also makes the turns awkward and the geometry just feels all wrong under my feet.

      2) Something’s off with the tail. I’m not an expert in ski geometry by any means so I’m just guessing here, but despite these skis having some tail rocker I just feel like they’re a big part of the reason these skis don’t want to let you out of a turn, especially in any kind of softer snow or crusted-over snow. Sure, they’re wider skis and on the heavy side, but I have RMU 118s that weigh more and are the same length and I can whip those all over the place.

      I see some other reviewers wondering about moving the mount point who are probably having the same issues I/we have. I’ve seen lots of positive reviews, so I don’t doubt that this can be a fun ski, but I think the mount point could/should be a few cm forward. I wish someone on here had tried it and could comment so I could know if that did the trick. I usually can have fun on almost any ski once I get used to it and I must say that after 3 months of trying to like this one, it’s the least fun ski I’ve been on in decades. I’m hoping that could be fixed by shifting the mount point, but I’m also considering just selling these things at a loss and moving on.

      FWIW: I’m 6’0″ 205lbs and I’m skiing these inbounds and out with G3 Zed 12 bindings and Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro boots

  10. Curious if anyone has messed with the mount point on the 106’s. I set my 188s set up on the line with the shifts and liked it initially, but after skiing it for a bit feel like they might benefit from a slight nudge forward 1 cm or 2??? Feels like a lot of ski out front. Ive done this with other skis and it made some worse and some better, so hopefully someone out there can provide a bit of insight for me before I go moving bindings around.

  11. Advice request!
    I have a few years old Soul 7s (pre HD version) which are likely to be replaced by either these QST106 or Soul 7 HD or Dynastar Legend 106. The Soul 7 has been fine, the tails a bit soft for grip on piste perhaps, but thats not what they are designed for. The typical use is European piste 30%, Euro off piste 50%, and Euro touring 20%. The versatility of a ski to be able to handle work doing relatively easy teaching days in Intro to off piste terrain plus more challenging personal skiing and descents with good standard clients in all snow conditions has been a useful feature of the Soul 7. I have also skied (Alpine and Tele bindings) the Dynastar Cham 97 which I also liked but which had a slightly weird very easy to release feel at the tail of the ski depending on how you weighted it.
    From the 3 skis listed (QST106, Legend 106, Soul 7 HD what are folks experiences and which is the top ski for the terrain and same% for on/off/tour use I tend to do? Thanks for any insights!

  12. Just wondering if you think you’ll ever play around with the mount point on these skis. And if you think bumping it up an few cm’s would make a big difference in the playfulness of the ski?
    I know Luke has done this before with other skis in the past.

  13. Loved these skis up at Whistler after a fresh dump and had a blast all over the mountain – and may buy a pair. However, I kept wishing it was a longer ski or had more control in tighter spots. I could not slow them down consistently as much I wanted when in tight spots. Also on some moguls these were awful (could not keep a line) and yet on others, I loved them.

  14. hello,

    I currently own a pair of Sky 7 HD 180cm, and was considering wider skis such as Soul 7 and QST106 as I am having problems floating in deeper snow. Main use would be as a 50/50 resort/touring(currently using Sky 7 for that), skill level would be somewhere around intermediate, height 172cm weight 72Kg. I would have been more curious of the Soul 7 in 180cm but cant find it in stock anymore.
    As for the QST106 what size would you recommend for me? ​174(asking about this size as I don’t know the effective edge difference between sky7 and qst106) or 181( how noticeable would the 22m radius compared to the 18m on groomers), would like to have tested them but unfortunately that is not an option. Main reasons for QST would be less chatter, better float and availability :D

    Thank you,
    Have a nice day!

  15. Would you rather ski the QST 98 or QST 106 for a 50/50 setup up on the East Coast? Considering putting a Shift binding on it for both resort an backcountry use.
    Why one or the other?

  16. Regarding the previous posts asking about factory recommended mount points: I have been a Salomon fan for many years and have had basically all the Q and QST models over the years. I have resorted to initially mounting any new ski with a demo binding. More often than not, I find my own sweet spot to be a few CM different. Usually forward, but occasionally aft of recommended. I sacrifice some extra holes in the ski when I remount, but I think it’s worth it.

Leave a Comment