Ski: 2024-2025 Völkl Peregrine 80, 177 cm
Available Lengths: 162, 167, 172, 177, 182 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length (straight-tape pull): 178.1 cm
Stated Weight per Ski (177 cm; w/o binding): 1990 grams
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski (177 cm; w/o binding): 1941 & 1968 grams
Stated Dimensions: 126-80-109 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 126-79.5-109 mm
Stated Sidecut Radius (tip / waist / tail; for 177 cm): 27 m / 15 m / 23 m
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 35.5 mm / 10.5 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 6.5 mm
Core Materials: poplar/beech + titanal (partial layer) + carbon stringers + fiberglass laminate
Base: sintered P-Tex 2100
Factory Recommended Mount Point: roughly -11 cm from true center (mounted w/ system binding)
Bindings Used: Marker Lowride XL 12 TCX GW
Ski: 2024-2025 Völkl Peregrine 82, 177 cm
Available Lengths: 162, 167, 172, 177, 182 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length (straight-tape pull): 178 cm
Stated Weight per Ski (177 cm; w/o binding): 1990 grams
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski (177 cm; w/o binding): 2000 & 2016 grams
Stated Dimensions: 128-82-111 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 128-81.5-111 mm
Stated Sidecut Radii (tip / waist / tail; for 184 cm): 27 m / 15 m / 23 m
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 37 mm / 12 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: 6 mm
Core Materials: poplar/beech + titanal (partial layer) + carbon tip stringers + fiberglass laminate
Base Material: sintered P-Tex 4504
Factory Recommended Mount Point: roughly -11 cm from true center (mounted w/ system binding)
Bindings Used: Marker Lowride XL 13 FR GW
Test Locations: Taos Ski Valley, NM & Crested Butte Mountain Resort, CO
Boots Used: Lange Shadow 130 LV, Atomic Redster CS 130, Armada AR ONE 130, phaenom fs 01 120
Days Skied (total): ~20
Intro
For the 2024-2025 season, Volkl revamped most of their frontside / piste-oriented lineup. Their longstanding Deacon collection was replaced by their new Peregrine skis. Or, rather, it was partially replaced and partially rebranded.
Many of the Peregrine skis feature the same construction as prior Deacon models, but there are two brand-new skis — the Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82. They essentially replace the Deacon 80 and Deacon 84, respectively.
We’ve been spending a lot of time on these new Peregrines over the past two seasons, and now it’s time to dive into how they compare and what sorts of skiers should have them on their lists.
First, if you want the full rundown on these Peregrine skis — and Volkl’s other new 24/25 skis — check out our video with them from Blister Summit 2024:
Construction
The Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 feature very similar overall constructions (and similar designs in general). They both have poplar / beech wood cores, some sort of metal layer, and Volkl’s “Tailored Carbon Tips,” which consist of precisely aligned carbon layers to optimize torsional stiffness near the end of the ski.
The two differ in a few key areas. First, the Peregrine 82 uses Volkl’s “Tailored Titanal Frame,” which debuted on the Volkl Mantra / Secret and consists of segmented layers of titanal that are meant to put more metal where it’s needed (e.g., underfoot and near the edges) and less where it isn’t. The longer lengths of the Peregrine 82 also feature a bit more metal than the shorter ones, in an effort to make the ski perform similarly for skiers of different sizes.
The Peregrine 80 uses a simpler layer of metal, Volkl’s “Titanal Band,” which is a solid strip that mostly covers the middle of the ski (rather than the edges).
The Peregrine 82 also gets a slightly higher-end P-Tex 4504 base material, while the Peregrine 80 has a P-Tex 2100 base.
Lastly, the Peregrine 82 comes with Marker’s Lowride 13 FR binding, while the 80 has a Lowride 12 TCX binding.
Shape & Rocker Profile
These skis feature pretty traditional shapes and rocker profiles. I.e., they’re mostly cambered and don’t have much early tapering at their tips or tails.
Flex Pattern
Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Peregrine 80:
Tips: 8.5-9
Shovels: 9-9.5
In Front of Toe Piece: 9.5
Underfoot: 10
Behind the Heel Piece: 9
Tails: 9
And here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Peregrine 82:
Tips: 8.5-9
Shovels: 9-9.5
In Front of Toe Piece: 9.5
Underfoot: 10
Behind the Heel Piece: 9.5-9
Tails: 9.5
Like many performance-oriented carving skis, and also similar to Volkl’s Mantra skis, the Peregrine 80 and 82 are quite stiff overall. However, while their tips and tails are notably stiff compared to most other skis’ tips and tails, the middle of these Peregrines isn’t completely unbendable.
The Peregrine 80 and 82 feel almost identical while hand-flexing them, with the 80 feeling just a little bit softer around the tail.
Sidecut Radius
We have both of these skis in 177 cm lengths, and they share the same stated sidecut radii. They both utilize Volkl’s “3D Radius” concept, which means their sidecuts blend long radii at the tips and tails with a much tighter radius underfoot. For the 177 cm lengths, Volkl’s lists the sidecut radii as 27 m (tip) / 15 m (underfoot) / 23 m (tail).
Weight (and Comparisons)
The Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 are very similar in terms of weight. The 82 is a tad heavier, but neither is particularly light or heavy for a piste-oriented ski around this width.
For reference, below are some of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for a few notable skis. As always, keep in mind the length and width differences of each ski listed to keep things more apples-to-apples. Also, note which of these measured weights includes a given ski’s binding plates.
1627 & 1640 Head Kore 87, 177 cm
1675 & 1732 Folsom Spar 78, 177 cm
1701 & 1706 Rossignol Forza 70D V-Ti, 173 cm
1724 & 1735 Parlor Warbird, 178 cm
1724 & 1749 Black Crows Octo, 179.3 cm
1728 & 1750 Renoun Atlas 80, 177 cm
1796 & 1838 Black Crows Mirus Cor, 178 cm
1808 & 1834 Northland AM-178, 178 cm
1823 & 1853 Atomic Maverick 88 Ti, 184 cm
1832 & 1841 K2 Disruption 78Ti, 177 cm
1833 & 1849 Shaggy’s Brockway 90, 180 cm
1837 & 1854 Fischer The Curv GT 85 Redefine, 175 cm
1906 & 1907 Dynastar M-Cross 88, 184 cm
1911 & 1917 K2 Disruption 82Ti, 177 cm
1915 & 1937 K2 Mindbender 89Ti, 182 cm
1940 & 1949 Kästle MX84, 176 cm
1941 & 1968 Volkl Peregrine 80, 177 cm
1960 & 2004 Kästle MX88, 181 cm
1999 & 2060 Line Blade, 181 cm
2000 & 2016 Volkl Peregrine 82, 177 cm
2003 & 2011 Head Supershape e-Magnum, 170 cm (w/ binding plates)
2008 & 2015 Folsom Spar 88, 182 cm
2025 & 2028 Meier Quickdraw, 181 cm
2045 & 2057 Rossignol Arcade 88, 178 cm
2047 & 2056 Blizzard Anomaly 88, 182 cm
2058 & 2079 Stöckli Montero AR, 180 cm
2096 & 2154 Nordica Steadfast 85 DC, 179 cm
2112 & 2116 Folsom Spar Turbo, 182 cm
2121 & 2147 Head Supershape e-Titan, 177 cm (w/ binding plates)
2199 & 2211 Head Supershape e-Rally, 177 cm (w/ binding plates)
2235 & 2236 Elan Wingman 86 CTi, 184 cm (w/ binding plates)
2225 & 2248 K2 Disruption MTi, 175 cm (w/ binding plates)
2271 & 2273 Fischer The Curv GT 85, 175 cm (w/ Fischer M-Track plates)
2286 & 2299 Fischer RC One 82 GT, 180 cm (22/23–23/24)
2432 & 2445 Fischer RC4 The Curv, 185 cm (w/ binding plates)
For the 2024-2025 season, we’ve partnered with Carv to use their Carv 2 sensors and digital ski coach app to not only learn more about our own skiing technique, but also add more useful info to our ski reviews. Here, you’ll see us reference some of the data that the Carv 2 sensors record and analyze while we’re skiing. Check out our announcement to learn more about how Carv works, why we’re excited to use it as a tool for our reviews, and how to get a discount on your own Carv setup.
FULL REVIEW
We started spending time on the Volkl Peregrine 80 and 82 back at Blister Summit 2024, then took them to Taos in the spring, and have continued to ski them at Crested Butte Mountain Resort throughout the 24/25 season.
All of our reviewers who tested them have gotten along quite well with them, and here, we’ll expand on what makes them stand out in the piste-oriented category and what sorts of skiers ought to have them on their radar.
Turn Initiation & Turn Shapes
Luke Koppa (5’8”, 155 lbs / 173 cm, 70 kg): Overall, I find both the Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 to be very intuitive to carve. They’re well-executed takes on the concept of a do-it-all carver. They also feel quite similar in many regards, but we’ll specify when we’re talking about one or the other.
The Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 generally perform best at similar speeds and like to make similar turn shapes. Looking at my Carv data, my best runs on them tend to be on intermediate “blue” runs between roughly 18–26° in slope angle, where I can maintain an average speed of around 25-30 mph (40-48 kph). In those scenarios, Carv says my average turn size tends to be between roughly 11-15 meters. On the Peregrine 80, I tend to average just slightly shorter turn sizes (11-14 meters) than the Peregrine 82 (13-15 meters).
In practice, the turn shapes feel very similar on both, but one of the main differences between these two skis is that the Peregrine 82 feels like just a bit “more ski.” By that, I mean it needs a touch more force / skier input to bend, feels more locked in and powerful once on edge, and finishes turns with a bit more precision.
The Peregrine 80 doesn’t feel that much softer when skiing it, but it’s easier to break free from a carve when you feel like it, and I think I tend to break its tail free just a bit earlier than the 82 when trying to bend both skis into as tight a carve as I can. The Peregrine 82 feels like it wants to finish each carve a bit more cleanly.
Jonathan Ellsworth (5’10”, 180 lbs / 178 cm, 81.5 kg): I laid out more of what I found to be the differences and nuances between these two skis in our Flash Review, so check that out if you want to see my more granular take on these two skis. But in the interest of not repeating myself — and having talked to Luke a lot about these skis and read the entirety of this review — I want to say here that I very much agree with Luke’s review of these skis. I’m a bit heavier than Luke, but I can happily ski both of these skis, and the differences between them are subtle — but there are differences. (That said, personally, I’m a bit surprised by how similar these two skis feel. I think most people who got on these would emerge with their personal favorite between the two, but there is quite a bit of overlap here.)
Luke: As for how they feel when initiating a carved turn, I’ll try to sum it up, but I’d label this tangent as “some potentially interesting info” rather than “objectively good or bad traits of these skis.” Both skis provide feedback from their shovels once you start driving them, even just a little bit. As soon as you get them on edge, though, most of their edge hold and power transmission feels like it’s coming from the middle half or third of the ski.
However, this isn’t a case of a ski that’s “a story of two halves,” where it has really vague-feeling tips that you can barely feel and a distinctly different, far more precise-feeling midsection. I find the Peregrine 80 and 82 much more intuitive to carve than skis that do fit that description (i.e., vague tips, precise middle or back half), since the Peregrines’ edge hold builds up progressively from tip to tail — it’s just that they do so quite rapidly.
Rather than feeling my weight and force buildup slowly shift toward the middle of the ski as I work toward the apex of the turn, these Peregrines make me feel like I’m utilizing the stout midsection of the ski very early on in the turn. If you’ve skied any of Volkl’s recent Mantra models, they exhibit a somewhat similar sensation when initiating a turn.
Again, I wouldn’t worry too much about how this impacts how well these skis will work for you, but I find it interesting to examine how differently various carvers behave / feel throughout various stages of a turn.
Overall, both the Peregrine 80 and 82 can make short (but not slalom-level) and medium-size turns when pushed hard. They also feel pretty calm and predictable when making bigger, Super-G-size(ish) turns at modest edge angles, though the Peregrine 82 feels a bit more composed when taking that approach.
The more aggressive you are or the more precise and powerful you want your skis to feel, the more I’d lean toward the Peregrine 82. If you want a slightly less committing and more accessible ski, the Peregrine 80 might be the better call.
Jonathan: I definitely agree with the previous paragraph, and I’d read it again if you are considering these skis.
Edge Hold, Energy, & Suspension
Luke: The Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 have both provided reliable edge hold in everything from slush to fully refrozen corduroy on spring mornings.
If I don’t feel like committing to a proper carve, both are predictable to skid and slide. When I do want to push myself and lay down more aggressive carves on really firm snow, the Peregrine 82 is the better option — it just feels a touch more locked in from tip to tail.
However, if I’m feeling apprehensive and want to ease into a carve, unsure whether I really trust myself to execute it, the Peregrine 80 is a bit more friendly. As I noted earlier, the 80 is more predictable when I want to modulate between a legit carve and a more cautious skid. On the Peregrine 82, its edge hold feels a bit more “on or off,” with a less intuitive transition between a locked-in carve and a skid.
What I’ve described in the previous paragraph is most noticeable in properly firm, arguably icy conditions. In our typical mid-winter snow at Crested Butte Mountain Resort, I can confidently carve high-edge-angle turns on both skis unless I’m on a very steep run that’s been fully scraped off by the end of the day.
Jonathan: I have to admit, I can’t say that I’ve felt what Luke is laying out above in this section. So far, the more pronounced difference to me is that the Peregrine 82 feels a bit stronger, a bit smoother, and might get the nod with respect to edge hold — but here, playing with the tune of these two skis could change this pretty dramatically. (A less-sharp Peregrine 82 will certainly not offer the edge hold of a freshly-tuned Peregrine 80. I’m now trying to keep myself from writing “obvs” here.)
Luke: As for energy, both produce an exciting rebound at the exit of a hard-carved turn. The Peregrine 82 probably has a slight edge there, but I’d put both on the more energetic end of the spectrum of all-round carvers. Especially if you’ve got a groomer with lots of rollers, it can be a blast to time them with the apex of each carve, catching air afterward and diving into the next turn.
They also both offer pretty nice suspension when dealing with rough or variable on-piste conditions. The slightly heavier Peregrine 82 is, unsurprisingly, a bit more planted when hitting those conditions at speed, but I definitely wouldn’t call the Peregrine 80 harsh or chattery.
Jonathan: I agree. But also, Luke is sounding awfully clinical in this review, no? So what I want to say about all of this is that these skis are pretty f—ing awesome, and I personally am a very, very big fan of the Peregrine 82. This is a strong ski that does not feel overwhelming, it offers very good edge hold, I like its suspension, and it has never exhibited any type of weird or quirky behavior. In other words, it’s a ski that inspires a lot of confidence to go ski hard and fast and try to hit high edge angles. For an “all-conditions carver,” or a bit of a more firm-conditions-oriented carver … I like everything about the Peregrine 82. And (while I’m not speaking for Luke here), I will now place it among my personal reference skis in this category.
Luke: For the turn shapes and speeds they prefer, I think both skis have nicely matched ride qualities — they don’t feel dead or sluggish when carving tight turns, nor do they feel twitchy and unpredictable when making slightly bigger ones.
Jonathan: Agreed. While there are a ton of flavors of frontside skis and “recreational carvers” and “all-conditions carvers” and “fun carvers” out there, these Peregrine skis represent a pretty perfect execution of one type of flavor.
Off Piste Use
Luke: I view the Peregrine 80 and 82 as “all-conditions carvers,” rather than “all-mountain skis.” There’s nothing stopping you from taking them off groomers, but if you plan on regularly spending more than 10-20% of your time off piste, I think you’d be better off on a slightly more all-mountain-oriented ski (such as Volkl’s excellent Mantra series).
In widely spaced moguls, I can work these Peregrines through them as long as I drive their shovels and deliberately unweight their tails. Same goes for smooth, predictable chalk.
But in tighter bumps, grabbier snow, or otherwise more challenging off-piste conditions, I’d much rather be on a different ski.
Jonathan: Yeah, I’m just not skiing these off piste. If I needed to do so to get from one groomer to the next, that would be fine. But there are a billion better other options out there than skis like these for all-mountain skiing.
Who’s It For?
Luke: Both the Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 are excellent skis, and certainly worth a look for intermediate through expert skiers seeking a groomer ski that’s enjoyable to carve on the slopes and in conditions that fill the middle of the bell curve.
I.e., these are not our top picks if you want to make as many turns as possible on very low-angle runs. Nor are they ideal if you want an ultra-stable rocket ship that you can push as hard and as fast as possible while arcing Super-G turns.
But, with decent technique, both are easy to get on edge at moderate speeds. And if you take a more aggressive approach, both reward that with an energetic rebound at the end of each turn.
The Peregrine 80 is slightly more accessible and forgiving, allowing you to ease into (and out of) turns with less commitment required. The Peregrine 82 needs a bit more skier input, but in turn, it provides slightly better composure and precision.
Bottom Line
The Volkl Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 are both excellent, well-rounded additions to the “all-conditions carver” category. They are intuitive to get on edge and can make a variety of medium-sized turns. They feel the most exciting when you bend them into tighter ones, but remain predictable when you don’t feel like hitting your maximum edge angles.
Our Deep Dives, Winter Buyer’s Guide, & Flash Reviews
BLISTER+ members and those who purchase our Digital Access Pass can check out the Deep Dive comparisons linked below, where we compare a given ski, bike, etc. to a whole bunch of other comparable products in its class. Don’t have access? Get our Digital Access Pass to read all of our Deep Dive comparisons, as well as our Flash Reviews, where we provide our initial impressions as soon as we start testing gear.
Or, even better, become a BLISTER+ member to get that + the best worldwide Outdoor Injury Insurance, exclusive deals and discounts on skis, personalized gear recommendations from us, access to our annual Winter Buyer’s Guide, and much more.
On that note, you can also get more of our thoughts on these two skis and 300+ others in our 2024-2025 Blister Winter Buyer’s Guide. BLISTER+ members already have access, or you can purchase the guide on its own to get the the print copy + digital version at no extra cost, or the digital-only edition.
Deep Dive: Völkl Peregrine 80 & Peregrine 82
We compare the Peregrine 80 and Peregrine 82 to the Nordica Steadfast 85 DC, Stockli Montero AR, Elan Wingman 86 CTi, Fischer The Curv GT 85, Rossignol Arcade 88, Kastle MX84, Head Supershape e-Rally, K2 Disruption 82Ti, Head Supershape e-Titan, Atomic Maverick 88 Ti, and Dynastar M-Cross 88.
Blister’s Flash Reviews and Deep Dives are accessible to those who purchase one of our paid subscriptions
To get our comprehensive Deep Dives and our initial, unfiltered reports on new gear, become a member and receive many other services, deals, and discounts.
If you’re already an active member, please log in.
(If you’re already logged in and a member in good standing and seeing this message in error, please refresh this page in your browser.)
Flash Review: 24/25 Volkl Peregrine 80 & Peregrine 82
Update 12.4.24: Luke Koppa and Jonathan Ellsworth have both spent time A/B testing these new piste skis from Volkl, and now, Jonathan adds his own take on how they compare.
Blister’s Flash Reviews and Deep Dives are accessible to those who purchase one of our paid subscriptions
To get our comprehensive Deep Dives and our initial, unfiltered reports on new gear, become a member and receive many other services, deals, and discounts.
If you’re already an active member, please log in.
(If you’re already logged in and a member in good standing and seeing this message in error, please refresh this page in your browser.)
2024-2025 Blister Digital Winter Buyer’s Guide
350+ skis, 65 boots, and 280+ pages of honest, accurate product reviews and comparisons. Order our 24/25 Winter Buyer’s Guide or become a BLISTER+ member to read the Digital Guide NOW.
If you’re already a Blister Member or have purchased the 24/25 Winter Buyer’s Guide and are seeing this message, please log in and then refresh this page.
How does the Peregrine 82 compare to the deacon 84 which is currently my go to for all conditions carving when I don’t want to be on my slalom skis.
Also, i like the deacons so much that I want a similar feel in a twin tip for freeride/freestyle coaching on firm days. The only ski I can think of is the nordica unleashed 98 in this regard. Thoughts?
faction ct 1.0
I tried the Peregrine 82 at 184 cm and loved it. It reminded me a lot of the old Volkl AC50 in terms of overall power and edge grip as well as that tendency that Luke notes to “push you back” into the middle of the ski unless you really fight to drive forward and tighten the turn. In that respect it’s reminiscent of a lot of racing skis.
The only reason I chose another ski to add to my quiver as a “wide carver” is because I refuse to buy skis with gratuitous system bindings. I’m OK with racing plates that force you into a specific binding mount pattern (because supporting arbitrary screw patterns compromises the design of the plate and you end up with some thick and heavy metal abomination like the Derbyflex) but there’s just no point to it for a ski like this IMO.
I don’t think it can make a “Super-G-like turn” (say, a 1.5-2G turn at 35-40 meter radius at 60 mph) to save its life though.