2022 Salomon QST 98 Ski Review with SkiEssentials.com
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 мар 2021
- Another new QST for 2022! The QST 98 features a lot of the same shaping concept and technology we talked about in the new QST Blank review, but in a narrower, more versatile width.
Written Review: www.skiessentials.com/Chairli...
![Eminem - Tobey (feat. Big Sean & Babytron) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9xn0OHEZZ8Q/mqdefault.jpg)
After much research and a big thank you to SkiEssentials, I just bought the 189cm Salomon QST 98 skis. My son chose the Armada Stranger but I was hoping he'd choose the Mfree 99. We can't wait to ski them this weekend in the PNW!!!
Thank you to Jeff and Bob!
I've had two trips up the mountain this past week and we got dumped on!! First trip was a couple inches of fresh snow over slightly soft groomed snow and boy was that fast and fun!!! Second trip out was fresh powder over groomed snow. Anywhere from 2-4" to 4-6" of fresh pow depending on which side of the mountain I was on. The QST98 did it all for me!! I'm so happy with these ski's, they'll become my 1 ski quiver and will replace my ARV106 and Sick Day 94's. I live in the PNW fyi. Thank you!!!
Yay! Thanks so much for providing your feedback! Sorry we didn't reply to your first comment in a timely manner, but sounds like all is well. That QST 98 is such a fun ski. How does your son like the Stranger? Pretty unique, but I've skied it a handful of times and always enjoy it.
Volkl 98eight has always been my go to ski in this waist width
Love the QST line
I so appreciate your detailed reviews!!! I have the Rossignol Experience 84 and have been looking to add a second ski for light powder days and some resort touring (east coast). I prefer playfulness and quick turns over speed. Would you recommend QST 92 or QST 98?
I'd go with the 98. The tail shape works better in powder, and since you'll be using them on some powder days, I think that's nice to have. It's also a very playful and quick turning ski, more tail rocker than the 92. Feels like a better complement to your Experience 84 for sure.
GREAT CREDIBLE and INSIGHTFUL REVIEWS. Ski Essential and you two have set the bar for ski reviews in 2023. I know you are driving clicks to the site. I look forward to the 2024 reviews reviews, when do you see the new reviews being posted?
Thanks Eric!
We'll be trickling 2024 long-form reviews out during our summer, but our big ski test with all the 2024 skis we carry will be published later in the summer.
Just bought these with Salomon Warden 13's on them. Super stoked but now I have to wait untill Christmas to try them out in France (we live in The Netherlands). Anyway, thanks for the excellent review. It helped a great bit to choose out of many great ski's (Bent Chetler 100, M-Free 99 etc.)
Sweet setup! Should be a lot of fun for that French terrain!
So I pre-ordered the 98s and they should be coming in soon. But, I recently stumbled upon a deal on a set of Stance 96s that I simply couldn’t pass up. So now I will have a set of Stance 96s and QST 98s. Do you think that these skis will compliment each other well as a 2-ski quiver, or do you think that they’ll be too similar?
Great review! How do you feel these compare to the Head Core 99 and Elan Ripstick Black Edition 96?
Closer to the Ripstick, in my opinion, but still different. The amount of tail rocker is really the biggest difference and changes the ski's personality. The QST has more of a surfy/slarvy feel than either of those skis, although the Ripstick has some of that too. The Kore feels a lot more precise. Stiffer, less rocker, and lighter. Black Editions have more vibration damping and feel more powerful. QST is the best in soft snow out of that group, at least in my opinion.
Hearing you talk about how maneuverable they are and almost being a twin tip, would you say they have any similarities in feeling with the Rustler line from Blizzard? Great review as always by the way, I hope you guys never stop doing these.
Actually, yeah, I'd say there are a lot of similarities between the new QST 98 and a Rustler 10. Both have quite a bit of tip and tail rocker, both strike a nice blend of stability and maneuverability. They do feel a little different, but they accomplish very similar things.
@@SkiEssentials Could you elaborate a bit more on the differences on their "feels"? I'm trying to decide which would be better for me.
Great review, thanks. Can you say more about stability and dampness? I'm a west coast skier, looking for a new daily driver, something versatile that can handle a mix of soft and firm conditions off-piste. Have been skiing Rustler 10s this season, fun ski in right conditions like soft bumps, but not super versatile, and tips get a little chattery. Cheers
I guess what I'd say is for a ski with this much tip and tail rocker, it's pretty darn stable, and the construction definitely gives it a damp feel. That said, it's still a lot of rocker, so it's not crazy-stable at speed like a stiffer ski with more camber would be. I do think it has more vibration damping than the Rustler overall, especially in the tips and tails.
Hello and thanks for this review! :)
I am definitely thinking of buying a pair of 98s.
I am 5'10, 159 pounds. Because of the rocker I am not sure whether to buy the 176 or 183.
I am skiing in Europe (French or Swiss Alpes most of the time) in any snow condition. I was then wondering which pair would you advise? I am advanced skier and love playfulness and powder (I spend half on pist and half off I would say) . But 183 isn't to long for playing on regular slopes?
Thanks a lot and have a good day 🤙
Hi Hadrien! I (Jeff) am about your size exactly and preferred the 183 cm length in the QST 98. The rocker profile is so long in this ski, it's very manageable in longer lengths, then you also benefit from the increased float in soft snow. Should work great for you.
Awesome review! Given the big changes in shape and rocker, in your opinion what type of terrain/style of skiing would you prefer the 98 vs the 99, and vice versa?
I think the only scenario where I might prefer the 99 would be on groomers or chopped up open bowls. Places where the longer effective edge would come in handy. Even in those situations, however, the 98 is still really good considering they took away a lot of camber... Like we talked about, it feels stronger underfoot, although I would still understand someone preferring the 99. That's basically why I think it's so cool they kept the 92 and 106 the same for now, you can kind of focus on which shape you like best.
@@SkiEssentials great, thank you! I'm guessing they increased all of the lengths by 2cm partially to help offset the shorter edge from rocker changes. Since I'm 172cm I think it'll be a toss up between the 174cm 99 or 169cm 98.
Great detailed review! Thanks for that!
I got my hands on a pair of 183 cm with a 50% discount (couldn't not but at this price point). I'm 5'9" and around 180 lbs, thus I kind of anticipate the skis to be a bit too long. What do you think?
You should be just fine on that length! I'm a similar size, around 5'10, but lighter, and the 183 is my preferred length in the QST 98.
Hey Jeff & Team! Excellent review & great videos!! NEED YOUR ADVICE PLEASE! I'm an intermediate Skier, 155 lbs, 5'9" / 175cm. I've only ever skied on my current 176 Rossignol Exp 76Cl skis I tried demo 169cm QST 98 and felt they were a huge upgrade. My Question is how would the QST 98 compare to the Nordica Enforcer 94 or 100 skis you've reviewed? I've never tried the Nordica's... I'm in British Columbia and ski approx 20 days at Cypress Mountain and 5 days in Whistler - THANKS FOR YOUR HELP & ADVICE!
Hi Timir! Overall, the QST 98 is a much more playful ski than the Enforcer 94 or 100. There's a lot more tail rocker in the QST 98, which allows for easier edge release and easier maneuverability in soft snow. On the other hand, Enforcers are more powerful when you're skiing fast, especially noticeable on firmer snow conditions. Two full sheets of metal provides a ton of vibration damping. If we're comparing skis to the Enforcers, Salomon's Stance 90, 96, and 102 are better comparisons. Similar use of metal, similar vibration damping and power, and similar applications. The QST 98 would be a better comparison to the new Nordica Unleashed 98. Hope that helps!!
Hello, I enjoy your reviews very much. I am from Canada, I am 5.7 and 165 lbs advanced skier and often ski in Mont-Tremblant. I am thinking of picking up a pair of QST 98 but not sure which length is more appropriate, 176 or 183? which size would you recommend? Thanks a lot.
Hello! I expect 176 cm will be plenty. I'm 3 inches taller than you and generally prefer the 183, but I imagine if I was 3 inches shorter, I'd want the 176. Hope that helps!
Great review guys, really great. Thanks.
Thanks for watching!
Hi enjoyed your review Presently skiing on the Q 106 and enjoyed it.I am a west coast skier and looking to change.I noticed that the trend out here is leading to a narrower ski.My question is would the 98 be as easy to turn and be better in tight spots and bumps but not as good in crud and powder or not a big difference Thanxs anxiously waiting your comment Ken
Yeah, the 98 to the 106, you're going to gain some quickness, most noticeable on firm snow and in tight, technical terrain, including bumps. The biggest difference is float in powder and how the ski tracks through choppy snow. The 98 will get caught up in chop or crud more easily, although it still does quite well. Just don't go too short, that can make both of them kinda twitchy.
Hi Jeff, great reviews and thank you so much. I'm a 5' 9" 185 lbs strong intermediate skier ( I mostly ski Revelstoke, all over )I'm looking to buy the QST 98....but, my qst 106 is 181 cm, my qst blanks are 178 ( feels so playful, but slighty short ).............so, should I go 176 ( kind short , lots of tip and tail rocker) and 183 ( feels kind long ) I ski lots under trees lines and I'm always looking for fun skiing....not to crazy about ripping groomers.......What do you think? Thanks!
That's a tough one for sure. I can, however, speak directly to the fact that I personally prefer the 183 length in the QST 98 and I'm pretty darn close to your size. An inch taller, but 25 lbs or so lighter. I feel like you'd have a better time on the 183 than the 176, unless you really want it to feel short and quick. I just found the 183 was so maneuverable with its long rocker lines that I never felt like I needed to go shorter, and we skied it in some pretty tight terrain. Hope that helps!
Hi, I’m looking into getting the qst 98s for the upcoming season. I’m 6’ 1” 185 pounds and like to ski pretty hard. I’ll be skiing mostly southern VT groomers, glades, moguls which can be sometimes a little tight. In between the 183s and 189s, but wanted to see what would be recommended Thanks
Hey Zach! I think I would go 183 cm if I were you... I'm mostly just focusing on where you ski. In skiing the QST 98 here at Stowe, I loved the 183 cm in our woods. Bob preferred the 189, but he's more like 6'2" and 225, so I'm not convinced that length is necessary for you. 183 cm feels like it will have plenty of stability, while being easier to flick around and more maneuverable in our trees.
Looking to transition from full rocker snowboarding to skiing (I have a decent amount of skiing experience just never owned a pair). Any thoughts on if these skis would be a strong candidate? I try to get into trees and powder as much as possible when conditions allow otherwise will be on groomers.
Hey Ross! Yeah, these would be a great choice. In general we've found that snowboarders transitioning to skiing typically do really well on a ski with a good amount of tip and tail rocker and/or a twin tip shape. They're also fantastic in the trees.
I was thinking of mounting +2-3cm to get more centered for small jumps, side hits, and maybe butters. How far forward can you mount these from recommended without compromising the feel of the ski? Also planning on doing a bit of sidecountry/backcountry touring in them.
Hi Ryan!
I'd say the +3 is about the limit without making it feel too centered. There's a definite freestyle application to these skis, though, and we love them for both directional and park skiing.
Great review! I would be very interested if you could talk about the differences between the QST 98 and the Ranger 102 FR. Another ski that I think could be in this group is the 2022 Liberty Origin 101with VMT.
Yeah good questions. Those are all fairly similar skis. The Ranger feels the quickest, I think, or at least the most responsive. It's light, but has a lot of torsional stiffness in the tips and tails, so it's playful, but very reactive too. The QST has the most pronounced rocker profile now, so the surfiest out of that group, but also very strong right underfoot. I'd say the new Origin is closer to the Ranger in overall performance. More similar shape and also a very responsive ski, although the addition of VMT has give it a little more power.
hi boss I was debating between these or the Liberty Origin 96s, what would you reccommend? I am a intermediate to advanced skiier but want something fun and playful that feels light and is easy to turn. I was also looking at Armada ARV 86 but was told its a park ski? What would you choose if you had too I want to get a bit into the park but will be spending most of my time on groomed trails. Thank you and hope to hear back soon!!
Hello! ARV 96 would be more appropriate as an all-mountain ski than the 86. That ski compares more closely to the QST 98 and Origin too. The Origin will feel the lightest and quickest. Most energetic, very snappy flex pattern. The QST feels surfy and smeary with the long rocker profile, but it's also the most stable at speed in this group, which is interesting. The ARV would be the best in the park, but not as good as the other as an all-mountain ski, in my opinion. Not as responsive as the Origin, not as smeary or stable as the QST, but great in the park if you want to up the performance there. Hope that helps!
Hi guys. Jeff mentioned how similar this is to the mfree99! Advice on making a choice between these 2? Thanks!
The M-Free 99 feels like it has more freestyle influence in its design, so that's a good place to start. It's certainly designed to be a twin tip, while the QST 98 kind of just happens to be close to a twin tip based on the rocker profile. I also think the QST 98 is a little more stable at speed, while the M-Free feels lighter on your feet, so a little easier to throw around. Overall, certainly similar, but there are differences too.
Hey fellas ! Big fan of page and reviews are bar none. Question: looking for my first ski purchase and a 1 ski quiver. Mainly ski out west but live in NC. I’d say I’m coming into my advance stage of skiing. I have like and demoed this ski in 183, Armada 102 Declivity 180. Loved both skies and how playful they were. Was going to try and demo bent chetler 100 and the Dynastar MFree 99 before my ultimate decision. I’m 6’0 around 195 lbs and pretty athletic (former soccer player). Curious to know what your thoughts were and where my path forward should / could be on first purchase ! Thanks !!
You'll likely find the M-Free and BC 100 to be more playful than the others--perhaps to a fault? If playfulness is your goal, then these two are fantastic choices, but not quite as strong or burly as the 98 or 102. I think the QST 98 is a great blend of these attributes, so if you're looking to split the difference of all of them, I'd go that route.
I bought the M-Free 99, super playful
Where on earth do you have powder at this moment of the year? I'll go live there! Or was it a pre-made video that you are only posting now?
The skiing footage in this video is from a bunch of different days within about a 2 month period. Those powder shots were from mid-February. Some of it was shot as recently as yesterday, but we have more spring-like conditions in Stowe right now.
Hey :) Im 6.4 (95kg) and have been Skiing for about 12 years. Iam mainly on the piste but also enjoy some off piste action and want to start learning some freestyle stuff to have more fun on the piste (80% on piste 20% not) should I go with the 183 or the 189? Thank you!
I'd go 189. The rocker combined with your size makes that a pretty good choice.
Tip shape, early taper remids me of my old JJs
I saw the Qst 98 in the shop the other day and gave i a quick hand flex. The Qst 99 ticked so many boxes for a lot of skiers, I'm not sure the 98 will do the same. It's an interesting ski and I will try the 98 next winter for sure.
I think it's going to be important for skiers to demo it, or maybe people will feel more confident as more feedback comes out. I was hesitant about it at first, but I think it's still a ski that can check a lot of boxes for a lot of skiers.
Hi! Thank you so much for such a detailed review! I’m a intermediate skier that like to be playful and is getting more comfortable on varied terrain. I’m 5.11ft tall. My only pair of skis (the ones I learned to ski on) are a 2016 183 Vokl kendo 88 underfoot. I was hoping you could help me decide on which length I should get?! Thank you so much you guys rock!
For the QST 98, I'd go with the 183 in that ski--you'll get all the stability and flotation you need as well as a nice short turn radius! Have fun!
SE
@@SkiEssentials thank you guys! I guess my only concern is that I feel like current kendo’s are “too long” for me but I also don’t want to get a short ski and feel like I’m missing on the performance or outgrowing it too fast. :/
I currently have the Rossignol Black Ops Sender 103, I live in Washington State, I'm looking at this Ski and the QST 92, which one would be a good choice to add to my quiver. I need on that is good for groomers when there isn't any hidden staches of pow to ski. I like the more twin tip 98 just don't know if it will be a good choice considering I already have 103. I have watched both reviews still don't know which one would fit better.
I'd go with the 92 just to give you more distance between your skis. If you get the 98, you'll always wonder which one to grab, but with the 92, that decision will become a lot more clear. It's a great floater for a 92 as well, so even if there's lurking powder, that 92 will stay right on top, all the while delivering a solid edge grip and an energetic turn. Have fun!
SE
I wonder how the QST 98 compares to the QST 99 from 2017/18. Could you give me some info? Because I LOVE my QST 99 17/18 but would appreciate a similar feel but a little more playfull. Looks like it would complete my 3ski-quiver with a brahma 88 and BC120 for softer snow when I want to have fun (and also for touring)
There are a couple major differences in my opinion. The first is the rocker profile. This new ski has much more pronounced rocker lines both in length and amount of splay. That definitely increases maneuverability and overall playfulness. Construction has changed over the years too. The newest skis have the best vibration damping and feel smoother than any QST to this point. You'd notice that in addition to the change in rocker. The ski is quieter, but still has some pop and energy to it too. QST 98 would be a perfect ski to round out your quiver IMO.
I wrote this comment on another video , just trying to get attention and quick response , Is Fischer Ranger 94 FR a better performing ski compared to these skis on groomers? how do u rate riding Ranger 94 Fr on groomers and these skis ? I feel like Fischer 94 fr provides more stability and speed due to having longer effective edge, so basically my question is which would u prefer on groomers these skies or ranger 94s?
Just replied to your other comment, but leaving it here for others to see as well:
That's actually an interesting comparison. I would say the Ranger feels more precise and more responsive on a groomer, yes. Stability, however, is harder to describe. The QST feels stronger right under your foot, enough so that it provides quite a bit of stability despite the shorter effective edge. Probably the most surprising thing about it. It's actually hard for me to answer which I prefer on groomers... Both have their merits. If I'm looking to ski at moderate speeds and make lots of pretty turns, probably Ranger, but the QST is a lot of fun and you can actually let them run a little more than the Ranger, IMO.
Hi I bought the QST 99 Salomon skis and I had many skiers ask me bout them , they are great in Powder Fab Carvers an absolutely superb ride 😊
Thanks for sharing!
Hi Jeff, I will purchase the QST98 this month but I hope you can help me choose the best fit for me. I am 187cm, 80kg, strong intermediate/advance skier in groomers, beginner / intermediate in the trees. I am not sure if the 183s will feel short or the 189s will feel long. Can you help me to decide the best length? I live in Japan, so the snow here is mostly soft. Thanks!
Hey Ibon! I think I replied to your question already, maybe on another video? My instincts are to go with the 183 cm. Considering you're still learning in the trees and off-piste, I think it makes sense to stick with the shorter length. That will be more maneuverable and more forgiving and I don't expect it to lack float or stability at your size and ability level.
Arigato Jeff-san! I did order the 183`s so I am glad I choose according to your recommendation. Your reviews and feedback it´s highly appreciated. Thanks! Hope to see you one day here in Japan, you deserve a good round of sake!!
hey jeff. 6'0, 190lb-200lb advanced aggressive skier on groomers, and intermediate skier off piste. Im currently 26 years old and have been using 2015 Dynastar PowerTrack 79 (173cm) for the last 8 years or so. They're not a bad ski on the groomers and i can still ski them pretty hard, but they are horrid off piste. No rocker in tail at all, completely flat, and the skis are very heavy. Any time i try to dip in the trees or tighter terrain i always find the tail catching and making it very difficult to turn. The specs on that ski are 122/79/103 with a 14m turn radius. I'm heavily considering the QST 98 in the 183cm, i think it will be a great fit for what I want to do in terms of off piste manueverability with the rocker tail while not sacrificing much downhill performance. Other skis i have considered have been the Blizzard Rustler 10s, but for $150 less i think the QST provides a great value. Any other skis you might recommend for me? Live in Las Vegas, going to be going to lot of ski resorts in utah/ca/co and may want to do some backcountry in future (Lee canyon here in las vegas has a great BC setup). Thanks!
We certainly agree that the QST 98 is one of the most well-rounded skis we've seen in a while. Nice and turny on the trail, but floaty and fun in the trees and powder. I'd also check out the Line Blade Optic 96 and Fischer Ranger 96. Maybe one of those will strike a chord, but for the most part, it's hard to go wrong with the QST 98. Have fun!
SE
I have always toured on twin tips in the past. How would these be with a shift binding on them?
Not the lightest ski in the world, but perfectly appropriate to pair with a Shift as a versatile crossover resort/AT ski.
Hello, can you tell me what is differernt between factory recommendet and +1,5 from factory? Is still good for carving? Any top dive? Side cut and some like that. And is true that factory is - 7.5? Blister told that - 8,5 thank you
Hello! I just found them to be a little more playful from a freestyle/freeski/park perspective at that spot. Better at skiing switch, more balanced for spinning, but I didn't experience any tip dive or major downsides in overall skiing performance. Still carves well too. I measured it out to be 7.5 back from true center a while back. Interesting that Blister was different. Not sure which one of us got it wrong, maybe we were measuring different lengths? Hope that helps!
Hello! Have you moved the bindings closer to the center than recommended?
Yup! We played around with that quite a bit and it certainly is something you can do (and a lot of skiers have already). I wouldn't ever go center mount, but I liked their performance a few cm forward and I believe some Salomon athletes have gone even further than that.
Hi there- I’m a good intermediate skier- 5-10 - 225 pounds - was looking at the 177 in these - most of my time will be on grommers over here in NZ - do you agree
I wouldn't completely rule out the 183 cm length at your size. I (Jeff) typically prefer lengths in the 177-180 range, but found the 183 cm worked better for me in the QST 98. It has such a long rocker profile, it's very manageable in longer lengths and feels quite short if you don't size up. What length and in what ski have you skied in the past? I'm just concerned the 176 cm would feel short at your weight.
Should I get the Atomic Bent Chetler 100 or the QST 98. I ski in tahoe and will be skiing anything on the mountain.
Both are a lot of fun! Either would work just fine. The QST is a little looser, more slarvy/smeary. The Bent Chetler is more responsive and more energetic too. Hope that helps you decide!
6'7" 275lbs, am I too big for the QST 98? if yes, is there a similar type ski that would work better? Rented the 98 in 189 and loved it in the trees/bumps (which is what I'm looking for) but felt a bit short on piste. Mostly skiing with the kids who take me into trees, bumps, park and side hits.
The fact that it has a shorter turn radius is likely the culprit, rather than just the length, so other skis in that size may feel totally different. I'd take a look at the Armada Declivity 102 in the 188 www.skiessentials.com/2023-armada-declivity-102-ti-skis-w-marker-griffon-13-id-bindings.html. I also like the Atomic Maverick 100 Ti in the same length: www.skiessentials.com/2023-atomic-maverick-100-ti-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-14-gw-bindings.html
excellent ...what's the difference with the rustler 9 or rustler 10 ?
Between the QST 98 and Rustlers? I think it's fair to say the Rustlers have a little more bite underfoot and aren't quite as surfy/playful as the QST. The Rustler 10 is certainly the closer comparison and in the grand scheme of things is fairly similar (similar width, similar rocker, etc.).
Fantastic reviews, Guys! You're like skiing superheroes! I've been skiing QST 92s for a couple seasons. They've been really great for me on everything from very hard to about 4 or 5 inches of fresh powder. Recently, I skied during a stormy weekend at Mammoth. There was a lot of tracked out, deep (8-12 inches), heavy, fresh powder. I was getting thrown all over the place. I thought I was a strong intermediate or entry-level advanced skier, judging from how I ski on better snow. I can handle all blues and many black diamonds. But my form fell apart in those conditions. It got ugly. Could I expect noticeably better performance from QST 98s in those conditions? Or am I just a sh*tty skier?! Or do I want something more powerful that will not get thrown around? I'm not a speed demon. I like making short/medium turns for the most part. 5'11", 168. I'm trying to decide between QST 98, Enforcer 104 Free, Bent Chetler 100, or New Ranger 102. Are those good choices to maintain control in deeper crud/tracked out powder, for my level? Thank you for your help!! I'll take a suggestion from anyone knowledgeable too!
Thanks for the kind words, Keith!
If you're planning on keeping the 92, then you can go a bit wider than the 98 as a complement. The QST 106 is an obvious choice, sticking within the family. If you're ditching the 92 and getting one pair, then the 98 makes more sense. It has more rocker and taper, to go along with the wider body, making it one of the best floating 98's out there today. You won't get the same all-around performance out of the more playful BC 100, while the Enforcer 104 is on the other side of the spectrum in terms of power. Ranger 102 is a great choice, combining the metal underfoot for power and stability with more playful forebody and tail for softer snow and flotation. Overall, though, I love the QST 98 for a huge variety of conditions and terrain, and while I can't guarantee it will make you a better skier, it's certainly a better option for those days that require more ski. I'd keep it between the 98 and the Ranger 102 at this point. Have fun!
SE
@@SkiEssentials Thanks so much for the input! And fortunately, you reinforced the direction I was heading. I'm pretty sure 183 would be the ideal length for the QST 98, but how about the Ranger? Same?
@@keithcoulouris2431 Yeah, I would stick with the 183 there too. The 176 skis quite short in the Ranger 102, IMO. At least it would feel short for your size.
@@SkiEssentials Great, thanks!
What do you all prefer more - mindbender 99ti or this?
Thanks for the great content!
My dynastar legend 96 😁
Probably this just because I'd take any salomon over any K2 regardless. I find that most K2 stuff just disintegrates after a few days
@@peterpetering1342 I'll have to demo a set of those!
@@ianholmquist8492 Interesting. Looks like I need to do some demo'ing of some Salomon skis.
They're both great, but different. The QST 98 is kind of like if you took the Mindbender 99 and the Reckoner 102 and combined their performance. More maneuverable than the Mindbender, but more stable than the Reckoner.
I love watching your videos. I have a question for you guys. I’m curious what’s the flex of your boots?
Both are generally using a 130 flex boot unless specifically boot testing something else.
@@SkiEssentials thank you for the reply. I was curious in context of whether or not boot flex stiffness affects how some skis react. For example, using a 130 flex boot on softer skis.
I like more stable play full skis do you think that this is a good pair ?
The QST 98 is one of the best skis out there for blending playfulness and stability.
Hi so My friend is looking at the QST ripper is the ripper the same as QST 98 just shorter? Also would the ripper fit him because he is 5’7” and a half and he will be buying the 167 and he is 15 years old
HI Leo!
It's close--no C/FX, Edge Amplifier, or Cork in the Ripper. That said, it's likely a fine choice for that tweener skier. Have fun!
SE
Jeff,
Can’t decide to pair this or the unleashed 98 with a Dynastar 108 m-free. Which do you prefer between the Qst 98 or unleashed 98? I’m out west and am around bobs size.
Not only for the park application, but also the stability and energy in a carved turn, I'm likely going with the Unleashed 98. The QST 98 is awesome, but it's a lot more like the M-Free 108, just narrower. The Unleashed offers more of a difference.
Hello, I am a skier of 5'11 "and 163lbs, I have a good level of skiing, I want it as the only ski, I am doubting between 183 or 189 what length would you recommend? Thank you
I would go 183 cm if I were you. I'm very close to the same size... maybe half an inch shorter, but about the same weight. 183 cm felt perfect to me. Bob was on the 189, but he's much bigger than both of us.
Hello ,I currently have a pair of QST 92 177 and looking to get a QST 98 upcoming season. I’m 6’0 165lbs intermediate/advance skier ,mostly ski in California groomers and some powder, what size would you recommend 176 or 183 Thanks
Hello! I would go 183. Longer rocker in the 98 compared to the 92 you own and it is quite manageable in longer lengths. I think it would provide a better complement to your existing skis in the 183 length. More float, more stability, but still manageable and maneuverable without feeling fatiguing.
@@SkiEssentials thanks
How would you compare it with the DPS Wailer Alchemist 100?
Similar maneuverability as it has a similar shape, but the QST has a smoother feel. More stable at speed and more vibration damping.
How does the QST 98 compare to the new Volkl Mantra M6?
Very different skis. The QST 98 has a lot more rocker and taper than the Mantra. More playful, more maneuverable, etc. The Mantra is much stronger at speed and has better edge grip, but not nearly as playful or as easy to ski as the QST.
How would you differentiate it from the Holyshred 192?
Longer rocker, by quite a bit, so feels surfier and more maneuverable than the Holyshred. The Holyshred does feel a touch stronger, however. Heavier on your feet, but more vibration damping.
Do you recommend mounting at recommended or pushing forward to +1 or +2?
Recommended worked great for me!
Would you say 92 or 98 for someone working on turns in moguls and trees but 70% east coast skiier vs 30%of time in powder at deer valley and alta?
I think I answered this on another thread, but I think the 92 makes more sense for 70% VT skiing. Still a great soft snow ski, maybe lacks a bit in the surface area department compared to some of the fatties out there today, but for a 92, it's an awesome floater.
Aa serious question i wanna know. Which ski comparing the qst 98 or the bentchetler 100 is best in the slope for carving, best in park? and best in the offpist/powder?
My headache for the past week trying to figur it out which one to buy. Please help! Skiing on k2 poacher right now and want a similar ski but better in the pist.
Hi Jakob! For carving, it's hard to say one is better than the other, they're just different. The QST will feel stronger at high speeds, so if you like making big arcs and high speed carves, it's the better ski. On the other hand, the Bent Chetler is more responsive and more rewarding when carving at slower and more moderate speeds. Comes across the fall line more easily, but doesn't have as much stability. I would say the Bent Chetler is better in the park as it's lighter and quicker. In deep snow, I prefer the QST with its longer rocker and more pronounced taper shape. It floats better and feels more smeary. Hope that helps!
How would you compare this ski to the Rossignol Holy Shred as all mountain skis?
In my opinion, the biggest difference is the amount of rocker. The QST 98 has A LOT of rocker, both in length and splay. That makes it very maneuverable and quite surfy for a ski in this width range. Super fun in soft snow, but a shorter effective edge on firm snow. The Holyshred has less rocker and a slightly stiffer flex as well. Feels stronger and more damp, especially at high speeds, but requires more skier input and can be more fatiguing in technical, tight terrain. Hope that helps!
@@SkiEssentials Thank you, that is really helpful! Which one would you recommend for more of groomers and some off piste, as opposed to the other way around?
How would you compare this to the Black Crows Camox?
Actually pretty similar. The rocker profile is longer in the QST, which really exaggerates its smeary, slarvy, playful side. Camox has longer effective edge, so a little more responsive I suppose, but overall they're relatively similar.
I’m looking to replace my soul 7, I live in CO, advanced/expert but not so young anymore. Are these a good option? Also, 5’9’ (145#) 174 cm?
Yes, we talk about that comparison all the time as there are many Soul 7 fans out there looking for a replacement. I'd say 174 is right on the money. Have fun!
How would you compare them with M free 99 and which one do you feel better on piste?
There's more of a freestyle feel in the M-Free 99, while the QST is decidedly more freeride--it's a better floater and a better carver, while more creative skiers may find more in common with the M-FRee. On-Piste, I'd take the QST--it's quite sturdy!
Wawwo it's awesome ....👍👍👍👍👍🔥🔥🔥
Jeff, is this QST 98 it feels loser that the QST blank? Thanks......
They're very similar in overall "looseness." I would probably give it to the Blank, however, just because the greater surface area allows for easier edge release in softer snow. I will say the QST 98 is one of the "loosest" skis in its width range.
when will these go on sale and how much will they be?
QST 98 should be available sometime around August 1st, maybe a little bit before then. They'll be $599, pretty reasonable if you ask me.
Merci. De. Vos. Beaux. Partage
How long do you want these skis to be, as in where should it be on ur face
Hi Jacob! For an advanced/expert level skier, on a ski like the QST 98 with the amount of rocker it has, it's not uncommon to go as tall as you or even longer. For a more intermediate level, I would say forehead range is probably a safe bet.
where is the rec mountpoint on this ski? Do you know where the center of camber at?
Great questions! I just went to work on the 189 cm ski with a tape measure. Measured tip to tail length is 188 cm. The recommended mount point is about 7.5 cm back from true center, 101.5 cm back from the tip of the ski. Tip rocker measures out to be 47.5 cm, tail rocker 44.5 cm. Center of the camber is about 1.5 cm back from true center, or 6 cm forward from the recommended mount point. So, that's probably the limit to how far forward you could mount the bindings. For reference, I've been skiing the 189 cm length about 1.5 cm forward from the recommended spot. I'd go further forward if I could, but I have a 285 mm BSL, so am limited to how far forward I can move a demo binding. I run out of heel track really quickly. Another thing to consider if going more centered with a mount is the Double Sidewalls. That extra ABS material is pretty much centered around the recommended mount point, so going a full 6 cm forward might be pushing it... You'd have a lot more of that material behind your binding than in front of it, which might feel weird, but not something I've been able to test so far.
@@SkiEssentials thanks alot for taking the time to answer my question. I rode Magnus 102 in 176cm -2.5cm for three years and now looking for a ski with similar shape but won’t be used in park as much. My thought is going -4cm from true center, I hope it works :)
@@athanasiosikonomi6030 I think 4 cm back will be really good.
A
Hey 👋 im 6.4 and interested in this Skin. I have been skiing for about 12 years now mostly only 1-2 weeks every year. I am mainly on the piste but want the versatility to go everywhere. And yeah I mostly don’t go full send. Should I go for the 183 or 189?
Thank you
189! Great skis!
atomic bentchetler 100 or qst 98 which is better? i ride allmountain
Both are great. The Bent Chetler is more energetic and responsive. The QST 98 is smoother, both in terms of vibration damping at speed and how it releases the tail edge to skid or smear.
I'm 6ft 2 210lbs intermediate to advanced skier...which size should I get?
I'd say the 183 is the way to go based on your stats and application. The 189 might feel a bit too long.
How do you compare it to a bc 100
To me they feel quite a bit different, actually. The Bent Chetler has longer, higher camber and a more energetic flex pattern. It's has more pop and snap to it. The rocker in the QST is a lot longer, which gives it a more drifty, smeary feel. Interestingly, I also think the QST feels a little more stable, but that feels somewhat subjective. To me the biggest difference is the rocker/camber profile.
@@SkiEssentials thank you
How does the qst 98 compare to Rossi Sky7?
There's definitely some similarities in the shape, which translates to similar maneuverability in tight, technical terrain, but the QST 98 definitely feels stronger and more damp. The construction gives it a much smoother feel than the Sky 7 had.
Sounds good. Might be a option when it is time for new skis.
J adore
Its shaping reminds of a Soul 7?
Definitely some similarities, although longer tail rocker than the Soul had. The construction also feels quite a bit different. QSTs are smoother, more vibration damping.
Hi, i'm 6'1 190lbs should i go for the 189 ?
I think this ski is okay to size up on if you're in the middle. Go for it!
is this ski a good woods ski?
One of the best on the market right now in my opinion! Extremely agile in the trees.
QST op
Flax is better vibration dampening than Fiber Glass. About 50% better.
I miss the old graphic
Oh I really like the new skis! I think they look better in person than on a screen.
Lots of ads!!😥
Thanks for the heads up. Should be better now.
If you are using a PC, maybe try Adblock for RUclips. No ads.
Definitely thinking about picking up a pair of these. Any suggestions on length? I'm 5'11 and an intermediate/advance skier, 190lbs. TY!
I think 183 cm would be best. That should provide plenty of float and stability, but still be easy to control. The long rocker lines in the QST 98 makes it ski a little short.