2019-2020 Moment Deathwish Tour

Ski: 2019-2020 Moment Deathwish Tour, 184 cm

Available Lengths: 174, 184, 190 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 183.4 cm

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 1660 & 1680 grams

Stated Dimensions: 138-112-129 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 136-111-128 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius (184 cm): 25 meters

Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 66 mm / 64 mm

Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 3 mm

Core: Palowonia/Ash + Carbon & Fiberglass Laminate

Base: 4001 Durasurf

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -5.0 cm from center; 86.7 cm from tail

Boots / Bindings: Scarpa Maestrale RS / Fritschi Vipec Evo 12

Test Locations: Grand Teton National Park, Teton Pass, Grand Targhee Backcountry, WY; Stout’s Mountain, Idaho

Days Skied: 12

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Moment Deathwish Tour
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

Intro / Background

If you’re a frequent reader of Blister, you might be aware of how much I like the standard Moment Deathwish as a 1-ski quiver here in the Tetons. I’ve talked a lot about it through two years’ worth of quiver articles, and my comparisons of other skis often discuss how they perform relative to the Deathwish. I really, really like that ski.

I also really, really like backcountry touring, and spend well over half my time on skis doing it. But for the last few years, I’ve really struggled to find a ski that comes in at a touring-friendly weight, but that I also enjoy in as many conditions and scenarios as the standard Deathwish.

I’ve liked a few touring skis, but I’ve never loved any of them as much as I love skiing the Deathwish inbounds. Astute readers might find that notion pretty weird,  since Moment has made a 106mm-wide, tour-layup, triple-camber ski for years. It was even called the Deathwish Tour 106. But 106 is just a tad narrow for a daily driver for me, and a partner’s experience with a too-light, too-soft, not-damp-enough Deathwish Tour 106 kept me away.

In the meantime, last winter I tried touring on a multitude of skis, swapping bindings over and over again while trying to find something that worked for everything from big consequential days in Grand Teton National Park, to deep pow days off Teton Pass, and jib days out the back of Grand Targhee. In fact, when Moment teased the all-new Deathwish Tour that I’m reviewing here, I was actually skiing an old, retired pair of the standard Deathwish as my touring ski. So you could say I was just a bit excited about Moment’s promise of a real Deathwish Tour — i.e., a ski that had the same design as the standard Deathwish, but with a lighter, more touring-friendly construction and slots for skin tail clips.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Moment Deathwish Tour, Grand Teton National Park, WY. (photo by Julia Tellman)

I started getting on the new Deathwish Tour near the end of last season, and was able to ski it in a huge variety of conditions — from deep pow, to some of the more exposed and scary mountaineering lines I’ve skied.

And so … is it the dream ski I’ve been waiting for? How does it compare to the regular Deathwish? And what kinds of skiers will like it most?

What Moment says about the Deathwish Tour

“Honestly, the decision to redesign the Deathwish Tour came from some pretty simple reasoning. Instead of letting people fall in love with the Deathwish then making them choose a different ski for touring, we figured it made more sense to just give them what they want: a lightweight, skin-ready version of the original Deathwish. So we shaved a couple pounds off, tweaked the tip and tail to accept skins, and here we are. As if that wasn’t enough justification, this new version also happens to slot perfectly in between the Wildcat Tour 108 and the Wildcat Tour.”

That’s a pretty simple and straightforward description, and I fall squarely into the target demographic of this new ski.

Shape / Rocker Profile

The Deathwish Tour has the same exact rocker profile as the standard Deathwish, and an extremely similar shape. (The only changes are at the ends of the tips and tails to make them work better with skins.)

The Deathwish Tour has a pretty deep tip rocker line, and a deeper-than-average tail rocker line. It’s also got a lot of tail splay (the standard Deathwish is, afterall, part of Moment’s “Freestyle” collection).

The middle of the ski is where things get different. The Deathwish uses Moment’s “Triple Camber” design, which features rocker in the tip and tail, camber underfoot, and then two “micro-camber pockets” in front of and behind the bindings. Here’s a photo of the original Deathwish that shows the ski decambered.

Moment Deathwish, Decambered, Blister Gear Review
Moment Deathwish, Decambered Rocker Profile

The shape of the Deathwish Tour is less radical. It’s got some tip and tail taper, but not a crazy amount — we’d call it slightly more tapered than average.

Flex Pattern

Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Deathwish Tour:

Tips: 7
Shovels: 8
In Front of Toe Piece: 9
Underfoot: 9
Behind the Heel Piece:9
Tails: 8

This is a strong, pretty round flex pattern. The tips are a touch softer than the tails, but the difference isn’t very big and the rest of the ski is quite strong. It feels extremely similar to the standard Deathwish, with the Tour maybe being a touch softer in the tips.

Weight

The standard Deathwish is already pretty light for its size, and the Deathwish Tour substantially lighter. An average weight of 1670 grams per ski puts it in line with other dedicated touring skis like the Amplid Facelift 108, Line Vision 108, and Atomic Backland 107.

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.

1476 & 1490 K2 Wayback 106, 179 cm (18/19–19/20)
1477 & 1482 G3 FINDr 102, 184 cm (17/18–18/19)
1547 & 1551 Black Diamond Helio 105 Carbon, 185 cm (17/18)
1562 & 1566 Scott Superguide 105, 183 cm (17/18–18/19)
1605 & 1630 Line Vision 108, 183 cm (19/20)
1606 & 1641 Blizzard Zero G 105, 188 cm (19/20)
1642 & 1651 Renoun Citadel 106, 185 cm, (18/19)
1642 & 1662 Atomic Backland 107, 182 cm (18/19–19/20)
1660 & 1680 Moment Deathwish Tour, 184 cm (19/20)
1706 & 1715 Volkl BMT 109, 186 cm (17/18–19/20)
1720 & 1747 Line Sick Day Tourist, 186 cm (16/17)
1733 & 1735 Blizzard Zero G 108, 185 cm (17/18–18/19)
1745 & 1747 4FRNT Raven, 184 cm (16/17–18/19)
1752 & 1771 Amplid Facelift 108, 189 cm (18/19–19/20)
1755 & 1792 Line Sick Day 104, 179 cm (17/18–19/20)
1814 & 1845 Elan Ripstick 106, 181 cm (17/18–19/20)
1825 & 1904 Black Crows Corvus Freebird, 183.3 cm (17/18–19/20)
1843 & 1847 Head Kore 105, 189 cm (17/18)
1848 & 1903 Line Sick Day 104, 186 cm (17/18–19/20)
1849 & 1922 Elan Ripstick 106, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
1898 & 1893 Armada Tracer 108, 180 cm (18/19)
1913 & 1943 Sego Condor Ti, 187 cm (18/19)
1923 & 1956 DPS Alchemist Wailer 106, 189 cm (17/18–18/19)
1941 & 1965 Fischer Ranger 108 Ti, 182 cm (17/18–18/19)
1950 & 1977 Blizzard Rustler 10, 188 cm (17/18–18/19)
1970 & 1979 Atomic Backland FR 109, 189 cm (17/18)
1980 & 2016 Liberty Origin 106, 187 cm (17/18–18/19)
1980 & 2019 Moment Deathwish, 184 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)
2022 & 2047 Faction Dictator 3.0, 186 cm (17/18–18/19)
2026 & 2056 Black Diamond Boundary Pro 107, 184 cm (17/18–19/20)
2030 & 2039 Rossignol Soul 7 HD, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2036 & 2064 Salomon QST 106, 188 cm (18/19)

FULL REVIEW

Uphill Performance

We’ll start the on-snow portion of this review like most backcountry tours, with how the ski does going uphill.

In a word? Awesome.

Moment managed to make the Tour version of the Deathwish impressively light. It’s only about 100 grams heavier per ski than the Salomon MTN Explore 95 that had previously been my “super light and fast” setup.

As you’d expect from a ~1670-gram ski, the Deathwish Tour is easy to haul uphill. Moment gives their touring skis a different tip and tail shape that help skins stay on, which is something I appreciate.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling hauling up the Moment Deathwish Tour, Grand Teton National Park, WY. (photo by Bria Gillespie)

The other big thing I noticed with the Deathwish Tour is how light it feels on my back. I spent a lot of time boot packing with this ski, often while hanging on to steep, firm slopes with crampons, an ice axe, and a Whippet. In situations like that, I really appreciate and notice a light ski that’s not yanking my back around.

When it comes to skinning, I think the Deathwish Tour is really nice. In my experience, Triple Camber skis have slightly better edge grip on icy skin tracks than regular rocker-camber-rocker skis, and my time on the Deathwish Tour confirmed that. It slipped marginally less while side-hilling in challenging conditions than the Atomic Bent Chetler 100 I was touring on before.

Powder and Soft Snow

My first day on the Deathwish Tour was on Stouts, an aesthetic peak on the Idaho side of Teton Valley. We were blessed with near-perfect conditions — deep, slightly dense pow up top that then turned to hot pow for the bottom quarter. In this sort of snow, the Deathwish Tour is a blast.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Moment Deathwish Tour, Stouts, ID. (photo by Julia Tellman)

I love skiing the regular Deathwish in deep pow. I think it floats very well for its width, and is really easy to slash and jib. That said, it definitely suits a more playful, balanced style, and more directional skiers might find that it’s easy to bury the tips if you try to drive them too hard in deep snow. After all, the Deathwish and Deathwish Tour have a recommended mount point of -5 cm from center.

The Tour version takes the standard Deathwish’s performance in pow and amplifies both the upsides and downsides. The Deathwish Tour is so light on your feet that it begs to porpoise and pop out of soft snow. I found myself airing small humps bigger than I would on almost any other touring ski, and ended up spinning the Deathwish Tour on my first lap. The only touring ski I’ve been on that’s more fun in powder is the (wider) Atomic Bent Chetler 120. But again, if you’re an aggressive directional skier and you tend to drive your shovels really hard in pow, there are better options.

On a bit firmer but still soft and consistent snow (corn, hot pow, etc.), the Deathwish Tour holds an edge well when driven hard, but is still very easy to pivot and slash if you adjust your stance to be just slightly more upright. It’s very easy to get going very fast on this ski, but it’s also easy to shut it all down fast when you need to. In summary, the Deathwish Tour is a really fun powder touring ski, particularly if you ski with more of a centered, playful style. But unlike some superlight fat skis, the Deathwish Tour is still fun in conditions that aren’t perfect.

Variable Snow

Variable snow is the bane of many lightweight skis. They just don’t have the damping and mass to smooth out abrupt transitions in snow quality. While the Deathwish Tour isn’t some miracle ski, in my experience, I think the Deathwish Tour punches well above its (very low) weight.

It’s not in the same class as the regular Deathwish when it comes to stability in variable conditions, and that’s no surprise. But if I had to put it into numbers, I’d say the Deathwish Tour skis more like a ski that’s ~100-200 grams heavier. For its weight, the Deathwish Tour doesn’t deflect that easily, has great edge hold, and is very predictable.

No, you’re not going to be fooled into thinking you’re on an inbounds charger — or even the standard inbounds Deathwish — when you’re skiing rough, chopped up snow. But the Deathwish Tour also feels much more composed than a ski of this weight has the right to be.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Moment Deathwish Tour, Teton Pass, ID. (photo by Julia Tellman)

In these conditions, both the regular Wildcat and the Wildcat Tour beat the Deathwish Tour when it comes to stability and damping / suspension. Similarly, the Atomic Bent Chetler 100 is much more damp (and ~200 g heavier), although the Deathwish Tour’s wider width keeps it from getting bogged down a bit better than the narrower Bent Chetler 100.

Firm, Rough Snow

Lucky for you, I’ve skied a bunch of truly terrible snow on this ski. Excursions up the Middle Teton and the Fallopian Tube yielded frozen, chunky, coral reef — the sort of high-consequence, low-fun skiing that makes me grimace through my teeth.

But while making a collection of terrible, loud, bumpy turns in these awful conditions and sliding into the next safe zone, I found myself exclaiming again and again “I can’t believe how much I love this ski.” It’s so damn predictable.

If you’re at all familiar with its inbounds sibling, you’re completely prepared for how the Deathwish Tour will react to any given conditions. I’ve never been on a touring ski that felt this safe and consistent in no-fall terrain.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Moment Deathwish Tour, Grand Teton National Park, WY. (photo by Julia Tellman)

Now, part of this is due to the fact that I’ve spent a lot of time on the Deathwish and am very familiar with how it skis. But I’d also attribute a lot of that confidence in bad snow to its triple camber. I’ve found that triple camber offers a more tenacious edge hold than anything else I’ve skied on super firm snow, even compared to a narrower ski like the Salomon MTN Explore 95. But on the flip side, it’s also much easier to consistently disengage the ski from its edge to initiate a turn. Instead of jumping to initiate the turn, I can just pivot my hips gently. That’s great when you’re looking over a cliff at the edge of your line and you’d really rather not jump.

Of course, plenty of people aren’t going to want to bring their 112mm-wide, ~1670-gram ski on super steep, firm, consequential lines. But I think the Deathwish Tour does really well in these conditions, particularly for how wide it is.

Deathwish Tour vs. the Standard Deathwish

Right before I got the Deathwish Tour, I was skiing the regular Deathwish with the exact same boots and bindings. The only thing I changed in my setup was the ski itself, which let me make some good comparisons without too many variables.

What I found is that I sacrificed less downhill performance than I’d expected given how light the Deathwish Tour is. I only really noticed the difference at high speeds in firm, variable snow, and on imperfect landings — the Tour version doesn’t stomp as hard on landings as the standard Deathwish does. It also requires a touch more finesse to keep it from going squirrely.

Conversely, the Deathwish Tour is much, much easier to spin.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Deathwish Tour for Blister
Cy Whitling on the Moment Deathwish Tour, Grand Teton National Park, WY. (photo by Dan Rogers)

In my experience, the biggest key to getting along with a touring ski is … familiarity. I need to be able to predict how a ski is going to react in any situation, before I’m on top of some no-fall zone. It’s hard to accomplish that though, because the best way to build familiarity with a ski is to ski it inbounds a bunch, and I hate skiing touring skis inbounds (the Deathwish Tour is no exception, which I’ll discuss below).

The Deathwish and Deathwish Tour fix that dilemma for me. If you have skied a regular Deathwish inbounds, the transition to the Deathwish Tour will be seamless. You can just jump on the ski and go climb something big and scary, knowing that your touring ski will behave almost identically to your inbounds ski.

I think Moment has really dialed in their tour-construction skis. They have a consistency with their inbounds counterparts that adds a lot of value for skiers looking for a way to ski the same way in and out of bounds. I’ve experienced this with both the Deathwish and the Wildcat. Moment shaves off a bunch of weight in the touring versions, without losing any of the predictability and familiarity of the inbounds ski. It takes so much guessing out of the equation, and it’s commendable.

Is the Deathwish Tour a 50/50 Ski?

Nowadays, it seems like everyone wants everything to be a 50/50 ski that they can slap a burly touring binding on and go ski in and out of bounds.

The Deathwish Tour is not that ski. Please, don’t do it.

This is a very light touring ski — please don’t put a heavy touring binding on it. You’ll hamper its uphill performance, and will be disappointed by how well it holds works inbounds.

While we’d say this for basically all skis as light as the Deathwish Tour, in this case, I think it makes even less sense to ski the Tour inbounds, because the regular Deathwish is already pretty light. If you really need a 50/50 ski, put a Shift binding on a regular Deathwish — this will make for a really cool travel setup that will ski well inbounds, and won’t be a chore to haul uphill.

And, related note: the Wildcat Tour 116 is a really cool 50/50 ski. The Deathwish Tour is a really cool touring ski.

Who’s It For?

Well, the first group is obvious: anyone who likes the Deathwish, but wants to walk uphill. If you like the Deathwish and want to earn your turns, go buy the Deathwish Tour. It’s the same sort of quiver killer, but it goes uphill better. I could (and probably will) happily ski only a Deathwish and Deathwish Tour for a season at any given mountain range in the world. They cover my needs perfectly.

However, I think plenty of folks who don’t have experience with the regular Deathwish will also get along with the Tour. If you’re a less directional / more playful skier looking for a 1-ski touring quiver, the Deathwish Tour should be on your shortlist. It floats well in pow, wouldn’t feel out of place at a booter session, and is also surprisingly capable on steep, skimo-style lines (provided you don’t mind using a wider ski for this).

Who should not get the Deathwish? People whose absolute top priorities are stability and composure at speed. For you, I’d recommend checking out more directional touring skis like the Blizzard Zero G 105, Volkl BMT 109, or heavier skis like the Moment Commander 108, RMU North Shore 108, and maybe the Faction Dictator 3.0.

But if you’re looking for a ski that’s light on the uphill, stable for its weight on the down, and that will let you play around in a really wide range of conditions, the Deathwish Tour makes a lot of sense.

Bottom Line

It’s been a few years coming, but Moment has finally applied their touring-layup to their classic Deathwish and managed to create a touring ski that carries most of the original’s performance and predictability in a much lighter package.

The Deathwish Tour is the most versatile touring ski I’ve ever been on, and the most confidence inspiring. The Deathwish Tour has raised my own personal bar for what a good backcountry ski should be, and that’s the highest praise I can give. Aggressive, directional skiers should look elsewhere, but anyone else who’s looking for a versatile, playful, 1-ski backcountry-touring quiver should have the Moment Deathwish Tour on their shortlist.

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

Rocker Pics

(Note: rocker pics are of the standard Deathwish, which shares the same exact rocker profile as the Deathwish Tour)​

Full Profile
Full Profile
Tip Profile
Tail Profile

20 comments on “2019-2020 Moment Deathwish Tour”

  1. Cy, thanks for the great review.

    You were pretty high on the Bentchetler 120 as your touring ski in a prior review. If you had a two ski touring quiver, something 90-100mm underfoot and something 110-120 underfoot for the Intermountain West, would you go Deathwish Tour instead of BC 120 for the bigger ski? Why?

    Second, for those of us that have never skied a Deathwish, what’s the learning curve like for the triple camber?

    Lastly, will Blister do a deep dive of progressively mounted touring skis this year? The list is growing quickly of touring skis with mount points of -2 to -5 cm from true center.

    • Dan,

      I can’t answer your last question, but here are my answers to the first two.

      I’m still super high on the BC 120. For a two ski touring quiver I’d actually do a Deathwish Tour as my “narrow” ski and the BC 120 as my wide one (probably the 192 cm version though.) I have no real desire to go narrower than the DW Tour in the backcountry. After skiing it in some terrible, firm, spring snow, I really like the width. I think Triple Camber gets me enough edge grip that I can go wider than usual for a mountaineering ski. That said, I like wider skis than most. If you wanted a narrower option, I’d probably go with the Moment PB&J, or the BC 100 in the 181 cm length. I haven’t skied the PB&J (although I really want to) but by the numbers, it looks like a great do-it-all spring touring ski (or light inbounds ski). I’ll go into more depth in the fall in our Quiver piece, but for my uses at least, the DW Tour is better complemented by a fatter ski with Shift bindings.

      The learning curve for me was exactly five inbounds runs. I played around with posture and skiing style, tried making different shaped turns, and tried initiating turns from different parts of the ski. After those five runs I felt good on the ski, and then from there I have just continued to dial in my technique. My partner demoed the Deathwish and it took her about 6 turns to figure out triple camber. For more newschool, centered skiers, I think it’s pretty intuitive.

      • Cy,

        Do you know if there is a significant enough performance difference in soft snow mounting at -6cm rather than the recommended -5cm that you would recommend that to someone coming to the DWT from a more traditional mount point of 8-9cm

        Or is it simply a matter of adjusting to a more neutral centered style of skiing and the recommended line and design of the ski helps to keep the tips up in pow.

        I’m very interested in the DWT as a backcountry quiver of 1, and honestly my biggest concern is moving to that more forward mount coming from slightly less progressive mount of 8cm

        • Andrew,

          Feel free to mount it at -6, I don’t think it will really hurt performance and may feel a touch more familiar to you.

          Personally, I have both my tour and inbounds DW mounted at -4 cm instead of -5 where Moment recommends because that’s where the first pair of DW I ever skied was mounted. That said I don’t feel like it would hurt moving a cm or two from where Moment recommends on this ski.

          I skied the deepest days we had in the Tetons last winter on the standard DW mounted at -4 and had no issues with tip dive at all, but I’m also a pretty centered skier. So for someone coming from a more traditional mount like yourself, -6 should feel great.

  2. I realize the waist widths are different, but how does the DW Tour compare to the K2 Wayback 106 as a potential quiver of 1 light touring ski?

    • Hey Jeff,

      I haven’t skied the Wayback 106, but a few things are telling:

      DW Tour mount: -5 cm
      WB 106 mount: -13 cm

      That alone says a lot about what kind of skier these skis are oriented toward. The Wayback is a much more traditional touring ski for directional skiers. The Deathwish is meant to be much more jibby and playful.

      Another big thing to note is the overall profile. The Wayback has a pretty traditional tip rocker profile, the DW has a much more twinned profile, it skis great switch. I can’t imagine skiing the Wayback switch.

      So I’d argue that these are two very different skis, for two very different kinds of skiers, and as such you can’t really make a fair comparison. Do most of your skis have a profile that looks like the Wayback, with mount points in the -10 range? If so, take a look at the WB 106 or another directional touring ski. Do you jib and spin around the mountain? Do you ski with an upright, centered stance? Then something more playful like the DW (or really any of Moment’s touring skis) might be up your alley.

  3. “This is a very light touring ski — please don’t put a heavy touring binding on it. You’ll hamper its uphill performance, and will be disappointed by how well it holds works inbounds.”

    Why is the Deathwish Tour worse as a 50/50 ski than the Wildcat Tour? It’s true the Wildcat Tour weighs more but it is also a materially larger surface area.

    • Hey Mark,

      Weight is definitely a big part of it. Basically, the Wildcat Tour is significantly more stable and damp in the sort of high-speed, low quality snow style of skiing you’re likely to get inbounds. I’m totally fine doing a full inbounds day on that ski. I really would rather never try that on the DW Tour.

      Another part of this is that I think the regular Dearhwish is a great 50/50 ski, that works better over the conditions you’re likely to see for a ski getting equal time inbounds and out. So I think putting a heavy binding on the Tour means that you miss out on how rad and light and fast it is uphill, while also getting sub-par inbounds performance. It would be like putting 35” Super Swamper Tires on a Corvette, it seems cool in theory, in practice you end up with the worst of both worlds.

      • The thing that surprises me about your aversion to the DW T in bounds is that it’s close to the same density as the WC T per cm^2. I also think they have very similar core constructions. Because I tend to think of the benefits of mass as being partly related to density, which could be totally wrong, I would have thought the DW T vs. DW and WC T vs. WC would be pretty similar feeling because of the core material and density. Maybe that’s too much theory and I’m trying to use physics to drive my corvette? Asking partly because the odds of my ever being able to do this test for myself are pretty small.

        • I’m gonna go with physics driving your corvette haha! I get the line of reasoning you’re coming from, and it makes sense, but on snow, my experience doesn’t bear that out. I’ve found that I’m way more sensitive to changes in weight than I am to changes in surface area. I notice when a ski is a few hundred grams lighter or heavier, I barely notice when it’s 4 mm wider (I mean, two mm on each side of the ski? That’s a tiny amount…)

          I think part of that comes from the fact that a lot of how a ski does in rough snow is related to its inertia. A heavier ski is less likely to get bucked around, regardless of its size, because there’s more of it trying to remain in motion at the original vector.

          This is very much conjecture, but I think another reason I disagree with the weight to surface area argument is the fact that as a percentage of the total, the weight and width change differently. For example, comparing the DW Tour, and the Wildcat Tour, with some really rough numbers, when you jump up from the DW to the Wildcat Tour you get an 8ish percent change in weight, and a 3ish percent change in width. So you’re going to notice the added stability of that weight more than you’ll notice the size jump. Maybe.

          Anyway, all nerdy conjecture on the “why” of it all, but I stand by my assertion that the DW Tour is a great touring ski, and the Wildcat Tour is a good touring ski that’s also a great 50/50 ski!

          • It does make sense – I realized after I wrote this that there is actually a bigger change in weight between the Deathwish stock and touring cores than the Wildcat ones. That is surprising to me and somewhat counter-intuitive.

            My non-academic curiosity comes from the fact I own a Wildcat 108 Tour which I set up with shifts and used happily in and out of bounds. Maybe I’d be better off with lighter bindings on it? Though I’ve found I like the ski, I wouldn’t use it in bounds if I regularly traveled with 3 skis. The shifts also reflected non-familiarity with touring so I wanted something that was as similar to alpine as possible.

  4. One of my favorite reviews yet :-)
    Unfortunately, since I have a MTN 95 and Bibby Tour (and a Commander 108 as resort ski) there is no room for a Moment Dead Wish.

    However, I am thinking about replacing my super fat Völkl Kuro with a resort powder destroyer. I am thinking about the Black Crow Nocta, Völkl Revolt 121 or the Moment Commander 128. There are not many skis wider than 120 or with full rocker anymore. (DPS Lotus 124 is out due to price). If any one wants to wight in, you are happy to do so. I used to be a more directional skier but as I get older I become slower and try to make more turns to get more out of the hill :-)

  5. Here is the obligatory question about sizing (184 vs 190 cm). I’m 6’2” 175-180 lbs. Cy, I think I’m not too far off from your height/weight. Obviously you are digging the 184. Should I be thinking of possibly sizing up to the 190, or do you think the 184 work well for me?

    My current touring ski is a QST 106 188cm. It’s great on the down, but can feel a bit too long for me on the skin track — particularly when it comes to kick turns and tight spaces. Granted, different skis and rockers. And my skinning technique is not as strong as it could be. But that leads me to shy away from anything longer in a touring specific ski.

    I know sizing questions can be difficult at the margins. I tend to fall in the height/weight range where it can sometimes be a tough call. Thanks.

    • Yeah… Hard question!

      We’re the same weight, and you’re an inch taller than me. I think either length would work for you, but here’s a few things to consider: I’ve never once wanted to be on the longer DW or DWT, the 184 mounted at -4 cm is perfect for me all over the hill. However, I definitely dug the 181 cm QST 106 over the 188 as a touring ski. Where are your QST’s mounted? If they’re at like -8 cm, a 190 DW at -4 is going to feel like a similar or shorter amount of ski on the way up.

      Second, no matter how you cut it, the DWT is going to feel like “less” ski on the way down than the QST. It’s just a lot lighter. I think the DWT outperforms the QST in everything but fast, cut-up chop, but it’s going to take an adjustment to your style to figure out the DWT.

      All that to say: Follow your heart. I’ve never regretted sizing down with my touring skis, but I also prioritize maneuverability over flat out speed. I rarely straight line stuff and I’d rather make many small slashing turns than carve huge arcs. So if you want to go fast and take chances on the down, size up to 190, or consider the 184 cm Wildcat Tour. Otherwise, DWT in a 184

  6. Hey,

    I don’t suppose you, (or anyone at Blister,) ever had a chance to compare this to the older death wish tour? The renamed underworld at 106mm. Curious, as Moment talks about that ski being a “sacrifice” and I wonder how different it actually is, other than the 6 mm width change.

  7. Any ideas of how this ski would compare to the 4frnt raven? I had pretty much settled on the raven as a do it all touring ski that handles itself well in marginal snow but this ski sounds like it might fit the bill at a lower weight. Thanks for your thoughts.

  8. I think I need a pair of DW tour. The only hiccup for me is I like flatter tails on my touring skis, like on Hojis or Ravens. When on steep and occasionally exposed switchbacks, i stick the tail of uphill ski into the now under my other ski. This way I’m not doing the splits, and I’m anchored in a way too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p9LygCIHqA Pretty hard to do that with a lot of tail splay and twin tip.

    I think the DW will be more fun to rip on but the Raven will handle those super steep switchbacks better.

    • Hey man, I’m super interested in the raven as a everyday touring ski. What’s been your experience with it? Any place it particularly shines or struggles?

Leave a Comment