You guys/gals have been busy. Love all the new reviews and content. Keep it coming. Can't wait for the category reviews as I think a new Hybrid (resort/backcountry) category will be a fun one....they all are actually. Great stuff!
Perfect review. I went out and got them as this radius/width/front shape/weight is my favorite sweet spot for Free Riding. This is the same idea as DPS Wailer 99 and Ross Souls. You don't need anything else as they will work everywhere for Free Riders.
Hey Bob. I Love the reviews that you and Jeff put together - thankyou for all the great work. I am a similar weight to you but shorter (6ft) and older (60 ish) but pretty fit. I came to skiing late and would describe myself as a decent on piste skier (errs on the cautious side) and I have started exploring powder and moguls over the last couple of seasons. I have a pair of Kendo 88 which I love on piste but would like something wider and less stiff for soft wear snow. Would you go with these or the Elan 96 for that application? I also have a soft spot for black crows.
Thanks! The Ripstick is lighter and more agile, but it's performance is more similar to the Kendo in that it likes to be in a carved turn. I think you'll have better success and more fun on the floaty 98. Black Crows has the Camox at 97 mm which would be awesome--lots of energy and good in softer snow format. More like the QST than the Ripstick.
Love the videos you guys do and I’m wondering what you guys would recommend for someone who wants a 95-105mm underfoot, twin tip for mainly icy east coast.
I'd check out either the Nordica Unleashed 98, Black Crows Camox, or Rossignol Blackops 98. These fall on the narrower end of your spectrum, and that helps with the icy east coast part of the application.
Love the videos. How does the QST 98 compare to the new Rustler 9 in snow, trees, steeps, and carving on the groomers? Last year demoed some Vokyls along with the Mindbender 99ti. When off piste wasn't soft snow conditions, had some trouble with maneuverability in the trees with the Mindbenders. Advanced skier and in my 50's.
Any maneuverability issues will be quickly dispersed with the QST 98. it's about as floaty and agile as it gets for a ski of this width. Rustler is a bit more composed and carvy on the groomers, but I think the QST 98 is a special ski when it comes to soft snow and more adventurous skiing. It's not a bad carver, either, but it's tough to compete with the metal laminates of the Rustler when it comes to energy and edge grip.
I’m a light skier 57kg for 170cm and am actually looking at one of these two. I ski 60 percent groomer and 40 off piste, which one do you think i should get? Also looking to put a shift binding to get into touring.
@@jancker06I’m 5’11 and the 189 qst 98 is a perfect match. Super playful and poppy, floats unbelievably, and rails big arching turns or super quick turns
I bought these last year , with high hopes , but I haven't decided if I will keep them , I'm struggling with the more centre mounting than my Volkl Blaze , but I will keep trying to love them : )
Looking at these or maybe Line Blade Optic 92 for a fun spring ski. Need something easier to turn with sticky spring afternoon snow as well as the "chunky bumpys" I posted on another review with the Enforcer which I own and love for just letting the skis rip but I would love something a little more playful in the conditions I mentioned or skiing with friends that go a little slower.
The QST has more oomph to it and more stability as a result. If you're really looking to up your playfulness and agility, the Blade Optic 92 is a better choice, but if you are looking for a higher ceiling of performance, I'd go with the 98. So fun and smooth!
Thank you guys for all of your amazing reviews, So helpful. But With all of this info im still lost. Im 5’6 185 in good shape. Very aggressive skier. I ride mostly in vermont (Im here for every storm) with 1-2 weeks out west a year. Find my self trying to do everything on the mountain. Love to rip turns of all degrees, hit side hits, But mostly try to powder hunt and find my self is some very tight trees. Im currently skiing a 171 jski all play and just dont love it. Ive been skiing it for 5 years. I just thinks its a little clunky. I want a more nimble ski. In the trees i dont love them. I also dont love The turning on groomers. Is it the skis? do I go to shorter like a 164 ( i used to ski snowblades when i was younger so im not to scared of going small) or do i go narrower underfoot? skis im interested in are qst 98 or 92 (not sure which one would suit me better), husle10, ripstick…. Also open to recommendations. Aka im kinda lost. Any advice I would greatly appreciate. Thank you guys for all you do for this industry.
We often say about the QST 92 is that if you don't know what skis to get, get these. It's great in soft snow, on groomers, bumps, trees--it does it all. Great energy and a lot of fun. I'd go that route and basically I'll guarantee you'll be stoked. I'd go 160 in that one.
Hi guys! Keep up the great work! Your reviews and suggestions are always spot on 👍🏼 How do these QST 98s compare to the QST 92s? I’m in the market for a fun, playful and easy all mountain ski; I’m an intermediate/advanced skier who almost only skied groomers with frontside, carving oriented ski but I want to try some light off piste/powder action in the near future.. what would you guys suggest? Cheers!
There's considerably more rocker and taper in the 98, and this gives it a whole lot of flotation and mobility in softer and deeper snow. The 92 is more all-mountain and versatile with better carving performance. I think that if you're mainly on front side with a bit of adventure, the 92 makes more sense.
Hey there thx for this amazing review. I'm looking to buy qst 98 as i find it suits my needs and think it will suit me well cuz i a light weight skier. I have a really good deal on the 2023 model at 189 length. I am 6'2, 143 lbs advanced. The 183 will probably be preferred given my weight however do you think I could size up to 189?
You can, but your weight is on the concerning side for such a long ski. If you know you prefer longer skis, it should be fine, and if the sting of spending more money for the 183 weighs on you too much, then you'll probably be fine in the 189.
Hi! Looking at the QST 98 and was a little in between sizes. I m 173cm, pretty strong skier, and usually ski skis at my height. Should I consider the QST 98 in 176cm given the amount of rocker or size down a little to 169? What do you think? Also for essentially backcountry (groomer performance is not really relevant) how would you compare those with the Hustle 10 in 172? Thanks a ton!
The weight of the Hustle gives it a big edge in the efficiency department. If you're looking for a backcountry specific ski, I'd look more squarely at that ski. If you don't mind the extra weight, the QST is an exemplary powder and tree ski for its width and is incredibly smooth and composed. I'd go a bit longer to the 176 based on the rocker and shorter radius.
U guys folks are so good at what u do. Keep the girls in the reviews too. I am 5’10” and 210 and skiing 2022 180cm Hustler 10s at Killington. I would consider myself an advanced skier and feel confident except I fear crossing my skis on the ungroomed diamond mogul runs when the moguls get tight and big. Would this ski be more approachable for me to feel I have the right equipment in diamond mogul runs at Killington ? Also what length is best for me ? Thanks!!!!!!
Got the 2024 98 and looking to mount bindings. I like to charge all over, piste, chop, soft snow, trees, switch. Was going to mount at 2.5+ from recommended. Do you think thats suitable for the ski? Thanks.
I'm 5'8" 250lb. Looking to add this to the quiver for tight trees and moguls at Cannon Mtn. Would you recommend the 169 or 176? Thanks for all the informative reviews.
Great choice! One of the best tree skis out there for sure. They ski a bit short, so given your stats, I think it's okay to go up to the 176 in that ski. There's a lot of rocker and taper to go along with a short radius. Personally, I prefer this ski in the longer 189 to the 183, and I don't say that about a lot of skis these days.
No, we haven't skied the Seasons yet. On paper, the Nexus looks like it aligns more with the QST 106 over the 98. I know that similar to Salomon, the Season skis do focus on turning performance and fun, so my guess is that there's a lot of behavioral similarities.
I am 5’11”, 150lb, and an aggressive skier. I mostly ski east coast frontside but am looking at this ski for my west coast trips and (very) occasional east coast powder day. What length would you recommend?
Hesitating for the qst 92 or 98. I am an advanced skier that want a ski that performs well both in medium powder and groomers with some bumps or moguls. Which one would you suggest and what size? I am 173cm
I'd say the 92 will offer you a greater percentage of satisfaction. Sure, in deeper snow, the 98 will float better, but overall for some powder, but realistically more groomers, bumps, and trees, the 92 is a better choice. I'd go 168 in that ski. have fun!
Hello Bob, many thanks for this very insightful video. I'm 6 foot tall and want to buy these qst 98. Do you think I should go for the 183cm or the 189cm ? Thanks in advance and once again, excellent video 😀
Hi. In your opinion, how would you classify these two skis ? Do they differ much from each other? Are these skis intended for the same things? qst 98 vs ranger 96 which do you choose?
Personally, I've never found a connection to the Ranger 96--I think the shovel and initiation of the turn is rather nondescript while the QST 98 is very smooth and fluid from tip to tail. The QST is a better floater, better turner, and a smoother overall performer in my experience, but I sure know people who love the Ranger 96!
Not bad! Salomon actually put out a video when this ski came out featuring their athletes using the 98 in the park, so the capabilities are certainly all there!
Hey guys. I’m torn between this and the unleashed 98! I’m looking for a ski that will do well off piste in the alps, on steeps and in moguls, while also offering some playfulness. Im quite an aggressive skier on piste but looking to progress the playful skiing and like that the qst offers a slight twin for some backward skiing and is maybe more versatile than the unleashed? What do you think?! Or should I be looking at another ski entirely? Many thanks
I think you're in the right zone. The Unleashed has a full length (partial width) metal laminate and more camber, so it's actually a very composed and stable ski in a carved turn. It has more of a turned up tail for sure, so that lends to the freestyle and creative aspect of the ski as well. Where the QST excels is in softer snow and floatation. For a 98, it's one of the best floaters out there due to the dramatic rocker and taper. They're both phenomenal--I happen to prefer the Unleashed because of it's more traditional feel.
The QST feels like a more polished product with more energy, a smoother feel, and a crisper edge. I'd side with the QST in this comparison while the Prodigy has more of a twin tip and freestyle feel.
While it's on the pricey side of the spectrum, the DPS Kaizen 100 comes to mind--generous taper and rocker and a short radius. Also, a bit more of a twin tip, the Dynastar M-Free 99 also shares that rockered and tapered profile to go along with a fun-loving flex and style.
Looking for a soft snow compliment to my Deacon 84s. Interested in these and the Ripstick 96. Thoughts on size? I am 5’9 and 210 lbs. for reference I ski the Deacons in 172. Thanks!
The QST 98 leans a bit more to the soft snow side of the spectrum, and I think that puts it as a more distant complement to the Deacon. The Ripstick has more of a similar character to the Deacon in terms of on-trail performance. Kind of depends if you want a more similar or a more different ski. I think QST makes more sense, and I'd say 176--they ski a bit short and have a shorter radius.
It's on the heavier and non-twin tippy side for primary park from a traditional sense. The Bent gets away with it because it's lighter, and that is more of a typical park characteristic.
The QST 98 is one of the best floating tree skis out there. It's got some more substance in terms of weight than the Kore, but it's an excellent floater for its width. When you get back to the trail, though, the Kore is a lot more precise and carving-oriented, so it mainly depends on where your priorities lie and what percentage of time you're actually needing a floaty 98 in the woods.
For a tree ski that makes tight quick turns and is somewhat decent on groomers would you guys recommend this QST, the bent 100 or the Ranger 96? Let me know, thanks!!
I'm a huge fan of the QST 98 in the trees and is more than decent on the groomers than the Bent 100. You may get slightly more carving performance out of the Ranger 96, but overall I think the QST 98 is an amazing choice for mixing agile turns in the trees and good carving energy on the groomers.
Great review as always. My question is the following : I want to upgrade my older 98s. I love the versatility and shiftyness they provide but would love to have a ski that can hold while carving just a bit better, without getting too stiff with sheets of metal. Would the qst 92 be an answer ? Or are the 2024 98s are a bit more stiff then my older ones ? (2021)
The new 98's aren't as stiff as the older ones. They're more rockered and tapered for sure, so that increases the flotation and soft snow compliance but not really the grip or carving. I think the 92 is the way you want to go within the QST line.
I'm in France for the season and looking to replace my ageing skis in the end of season sales with either the QST98 or the Nordica Unleashed 98.. I can't find anywhere local that has either on rental so I'm wondering if one particularly carves better than the other and do they float about the same? Cheers
The Unleashed is more smooth and stable thanks to the longer camber and the metal laminate. The QST 98 has a shorter turn radius and a shorter effective edge, so while that makes it operate well in shorter turns, the longer carves aren't as smooth.
Pretty similar. Can't go wrong. The QST is a bit better of a floater due to the more dramatic rocker and taper while the Rustler may have a bit more carving potential because of the metal, but overall, they're both fantastic.
Hello! I am 176 cm and 77kg. I skied black crows camox freebird 183cm and ripstick 96 181cm. Would you say this is stronger ski for spring touring (soft snow)? I have tried scott pure mission 98 184cm and they felt too directional for me, but stronger! Thank you!
I'd say the QST is more like the Mission, but with more of a freeride feel. The Ripstick is the liveliest of the group while the QST is the heaviest. If you can deal with some more weight on the climb, you'll be rewarded with the stronger performance.
Hello! The same person writing from my account (that was my gf account). Would it be possible to ride 189 cm QST with my 176 cm and 77 kg. Camox freebird in that length felt long but doable. I was thinking that I would get 10 more cm effective edge and a bit more performance?@@SkiEssentials Thank you for your response!
@@maticnoc2652 You will certainly get more performance, but you'll pay for it when it comes to weight and demand. It seems long, but I'm not here to talk you out of a good time!
Thank you for your answer! One last question. Does very short 102 cm running Length (but stiff - double sidecut) on QST 98 hold on steeper backcountry (not totally icey) conditions?@@SkiEssentials. So far my experience was, that skies that can be stable with higher speeds on slope (inbound) also hold steeper (45 degree) spring terrain better, which would translate into better performance QST 98 compared to Camox freebird, even though Camox freebird has 141 cm Running lenght? (I am not totally sure). Sidecut length is more similar between those skies. For example I have found that BC Justis has also ~100 cm running length but I can feel that it would hold really well on steeper (european alps / dolomites style terrain). In case the running length could present a problem I was looking and regular Camox - It would make stronger ski than Ripstick 96 and freebird version because of more weight or not necessarily (flex?). Thank you for your help!
Thanks for your fine review! Ok, I know wonder wich length i should choose in QST 98? Sure I am 183 cm and 90 kgs but I really like a quick turnable ski as well as a stable ski which also is a floater. And therefore I have the length 176 in mind for QST 98. Would you consider it too weak for me? And if I still long for a shorter ski which is darn quick but stable as well as floatable, which one would you recommend? Many thanks!
@@SkiEssentials Thank you very much for your appreciated answer! One thing more though, how would you consider mounting a Marker EPF 12 binding instead of a Salomon Shift on this ski and length? Would it be too heavy for occasional touring and will impair any of the ski performance properties?
@@fimfengius The main issue with the EPF, and other frame bindings, is the stand height. You are up higher for sure on these frames vs. the lower Shift, and that can make a ski feel a bit twitchy, which I don't think is a lot of fun in deeper snow. On groomers, you could make the argument that a higher stack will lead to better leverage, but in my mind, that's what carving skis are for. I think the Shift offers a better overall performance.
@@SkiEssentials Ok, very valuable. One last question: Would you also feel happy skiing a couloir in France having this set, QST 98 176cm + Salomon Shift bindings?
The 92 is a decent floater and a very energetic carver for on-piste. The 98 is an exceptional floater for its width and a decent carver. It seems like if you're spending most of your time on-trail, the 92 will be a better option, especially if you're playing the percentages.
The ski does not change other than graphics for 2024, so you can read and view our 2023 review here: www.skiessentials.com/Chairlift-Chat/2023-salomon-qst-92-ski-review/
Between these and the rustler 10s for a 80% resort / 20% touring ski on the east coast. Want mogul performance, playfullness as it said here, poppy and lively....if Im on groomers its not my favorite day to be out there anyways but more edge hold less chatter would make it more enjoyable. LMK recs thx!!
The Rustler has a higher performance ceiling while the QST is a bit more accessible and friendly. I think if you're leaning to moguls, playfulness, and pop, the QST is the way to go. Rustler is more alive at speed, and has more of a damp and stable feel as a result. I do think the QST has more to offer you based on your application. Not too chattery, too, which is impressive for a metal-free ski!
Salomon does some interesting things to make it damp and stable such as integrating a carbon and flax weave into the shovel and the tail. They also use cork in the tips and tails to smooth out the ride. Underfoot, they use a harder sidewall material that increases edge grip. While there's no metal laminate that dampens the ski, these other aspects help, all while maintaining a snappy and poppy energy. That said, the skis in this range, like Nordica Enforcer 100 or Blizzard Bonafide 97 that have two sheets of metal are considerably more stable at speed, but less versatile or maneuverable. All depends on where you're spending most of your time on skis, and how fast you go.
I think if you're on the more moderate side of the spectrum when it comes to speed and aggressiveness, the 169 will be just fine--these skis do have some heft to them so a move to the 176 would require some more input and speed on your end to access the top end of the ski's performance. For most skiers at your size, I think the 169 is fine.
I just moved to NoVA and Im looking for a ski that would be great at the resorts close to me in Southern PA. I seem to land on this and the M-Pro 99 based on youre reviews. Any suggestions other than those two I should consider? I will travel 1-2 times out west or to VT and I'm looking to learn how to ski trees better this season. 6'3 225
You're in a good spot, and I'm about the same size as you, and I've loved the QST 98. The M-Pro is awesome, but may be a bit too high-octane for the trees. The QST 98 is an excellent tree ski and can hold its own on the trails. The M-Pro is quite literally the opposite--amazing on trail with a bit more demanding of a character when it gets tight. For another option, check out Blizzard Rustler 9 for kind of a middle-ground choice. All great options!
![mgk - I Think I’m OKAY (with YUNGBLUD) (Sad Version) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7AC1uqQLIg4/mqdefault.jpg)
You guys/gals have been busy. Love all the new reviews and content. Keep it coming. Can't wait for the category reviews as I think a new Hybrid (resort/backcountry) category will be a fun one....they all are actually. Great stuff!
Coming soon!
Extremely helpful review. Thank you!
The new review intro is fresh!
Thanks!
Just got mine!!! Woohoo!!
Perfect review. I went out and got them as this radius/width/front shape/weight is my favorite sweet spot for Free Riding. This is the same idea as DPS Wailer 99 and Ross Souls. You don't need anything else as they will work everywhere for Free Riders.
Right on!
I do like Salomon but I think I like larger turn radius skis because they seam to have more stability..
Hey Bob. I Love the reviews that you and Jeff put together - thankyou for all the great work. I am a similar weight to you but shorter (6ft) and older (60 ish) but pretty fit. I came to skiing late and would describe myself as a decent on piste skier (errs on the cautious side) and I have started exploring powder and moguls over the last couple of seasons. I have a pair of Kendo 88 which I love on piste but would like something wider and less stiff for soft wear snow. Would you go with these or the Elan 96 for that application? I also have a soft spot for black crows.
Thanks!
The Ripstick is lighter and more agile, but it's performance is more similar to the Kendo in that it likes to be in a carved turn. I think you'll have better success and more fun on the floaty 98. Black Crows has the Camox at 97 mm which would be awesome--lots of energy and good in softer snow format. More like the QST than the Ripstick.
Love the videos you guys do and I’m wondering what you guys would recommend for someone who wants a 95-105mm underfoot, twin tip for mainly icy east coast.
I'd check out either the Nordica Unleashed 98, Black Crows Camox, or Rossignol Blackops 98. These fall on the narrower end of your spectrum, and that helps with the icy east coast part of the application.
Love the videos. How does the QST 98 compare to the new Rustler 9 in snow, trees, steeps, and carving on the groomers? Last year demoed some Vokyls along with the Mindbender 99ti. When off piste wasn't soft snow conditions, had some trouble with maneuverability in the trees with the Mindbenders. Advanced skier and in my 50's.
Any maneuverability issues will be quickly dispersed with the QST 98. it's about as floaty and agile as it gets for a ski of this width. Rustler is a bit more composed and carvy on the groomers, but I think the QST 98 is a special ski when it comes to soft snow and more adventurous skiing. It's not a bad carver, either, but it's tough to compete with the metal laminates of the Rustler when it comes to energy and edge grip.
I love the QST ski's. I have the 2023 QST98 in the 189cm length and I have the QST92 in 184cm length. They're awesome!!!!
I’m a light skier 57kg for 170cm and am actually looking at one of these two. I ski 60 percent groomer and 40 off piste, which one do you think i should get? Also looking to put a shift binding to get into touring.
How tall are you? Looking at one of those two sizes for my next pair. Do you prefer one length over the other? Thanks!
@@jancker06 The length of the ski's are perfect for me, I'm 6'-2"
@@jancker06I’m 5’11 and the 189 qst 98 is a perfect match. Super playful and poppy, floats unbelievably, and rails big arching turns or super quick turns
I bought these last year , with high hopes , but I haven't decided if I will keep them , I'm struggling with the more centre mounting than my Volkl Blaze , but I will keep trying to love them : )
Hey what's up with that 370 Suzuki name? Are you an old RM rider? That '76 RM370 was the best! I had a '76 RM250 and loved it. Cheers
Looking at these or maybe Line Blade Optic 92 for a fun spring ski. Need something easier to turn with sticky spring afternoon snow as well as the "chunky bumpys" I posted on another review with the Enforcer which I own and love for just letting the skis rip but I would love something a little more playful in the conditions I mentioned or skiing with friends that go a little slower.
The QST has more oomph to it and more stability as a result. If you're really looking to up your playfulness and agility, the Blade Optic 92 is a better choice, but if you are looking for a higher ceiling of performance, I'd go with the 98. So fun and smooth!
Thank you guys for all of your amazing reviews, So helpful. But With all of this info im still lost. Im 5’6 185 in good shape. Very aggressive skier. I ride mostly in vermont (Im here for every storm) with 1-2 weeks out west a year. Find my self trying to do everything on the mountain. Love to rip turns of all degrees, hit side hits, But mostly try to powder hunt and find my self is some very tight trees. Im currently skiing a 171 jski all play and just dont love it. Ive been skiing it for 5 years. I just thinks its a little clunky. I want a more nimble ski. In the trees i dont love them. I also dont love The turning on groomers. Is it the skis? do I go to shorter like a 164 ( i used to ski snowblades when i was younger so im not to scared of going small) or do i go narrower underfoot?
skis im interested in are qst 98 or 92 (not sure which one would suit me better), husle10, ripstick…. Also open to recommendations. Aka im kinda lost. Any advice I would greatly appreciate. Thank you guys for all you do for this industry.
We often say about the QST 92 is that if you don't know what skis to get, get these. It's great in soft snow, on groomers, bumps, trees--it does it all. Great energy and a lot of fun. I'd go that route and basically I'll guarantee you'll be stoked. I'd go 160 in that one.
Hi guys!
Keep up the great work! Your reviews and suggestions are always spot on 👍🏼
How do these QST 98s compare to the QST 92s? I’m in the market for a fun, playful and easy all mountain ski; I’m an intermediate/advanced skier who almost only skied groomers with frontside, carving oriented ski but I want to try some light off piste/powder action in the near future.. what would you guys suggest?
Cheers!
There's considerably more rocker and taper in the 98, and this gives it a whole lot of flotation and mobility in softer and deeper snow. The 92 is more all-mountain and versatile with better carving performance. I think that if you're mainly on front side with a bit of adventure, the 92 makes more sense.
Hey there thx for this amazing review. I'm looking to buy qst 98 as i find it suits my needs and think it will suit me well cuz i a light weight skier. I have a really good deal on the 2023 model at 189 length. I am 6'2, 143 lbs advanced. The 183 will probably be preferred given my weight however do you think I could size up to 189?
You can, but your weight is on the concerning side for such a long ski. If you know you prefer longer skis, it should be fine, and if the sting of spending more money for the 183 weighs on you too much, then you'll probably be fine in the 189.
Hi! Looking at the QST 98 and was a little in between sizes. I m 173cm, pretty strong skier, and usually ski skis at my height. Should I consider the QST 98 in 176cm given the amount of rocker or size down a little to 169? What do you think? Also for essentially backcountry (groomer performance is not really relevant) how would you compare those with the Hustle 10 in 172? Thanks a ton!
The weight of the Hustle gives it a big edge in the efficiency department. If you're looking for a backcountry specific ski, I'd look more squarely at that ski. If you don't mind the extra weight, the QST is an exemplary powder and tree ski for its width and is incredibly smooth and composed. I'd go a bit longer to the 176 based on the rocker and shorter radius.
U guys folks are so good at what u do. Keep the girls in the reviews too. I am 5’10” and 210 and skiing 2022 180cm Hustler 10s at Killington. I would consider myself an advanced skier and feel confident except I fear crossing my skis on the ungroomed diamond mogul runs when the moguls get tight and big. Would this ski be more approachable for me to feel I have the right equipment in diamond mogul runs at Killington ? Also what length is best for me ? Thanks!!!!!!
I'd go a bit narrower to the QST 92 if you're looking for a bit better mogul performance. The 176 is awesome.
Got the 2024 98 and looking to mount bindings. I like to charge all over, piste, chop, soft snow, trees, switch. Was going to mount at 2.5+ from recommended. Do you think thats suitable for the ski? Thanks.
We found the line to work great. Not sure I'd personally do that, but they're your skis!
Awesome review! What size would you recommend for 6’2” 195lb advanced/expert skier? Thanks!!
It's okay to go a bit longer here--I'd go 189 if you're in the expert realm.
Thank you!@@SkiEssentials
I'm 5'8" 250lb. Looking to add this to the quiver for tight trees and moguls at Cannon Mtn. Would you recommend the 169 or 176? Thanks for all the informative reviews.
Great choice! One of the best tree skis out there for sure. They ski a bit short, so given your stats, I think it's okay to go up to the 176 in that ski. There's a lot of rocker and taper to go along with a short radius. Personally, I prefer this ski in the longer 189 to the 183, and I don't say that about a lot of skis these days.
Hey Bob, do you know how these would compare versus the Nexus Seasons? Currently ski QST 92 and looking to upgrade with some Shifts mounted. Cheers!
No, we haven't skied the Seasons yet. On paper, the Nexus looks like it aligns more with the QST 106 over the 98. I know that similar to Salomon, the Season skis do focus on turning performance and fun, so my guess is that there's a lot of behavioral similarities.
I am 5’11”, 150lb, and an aggressive skier. I mostly ski east coast frontside but am looking at this ski for my west coast trips and (very) occasional east coast powder day. What length would you recommend?
Great choice! I would go 176 in that ski based on your stats and application.
Hesitating for the qst 92 or 98. I am an advanced skier that want a ski that performs well both in medium powder and groomers with some bumps or moguls. Which one would you suggest and what size? I am 173cm
I'd say the 92 will offer you a greater percentage of satisfaction. Sure, in deeper snow, the 98 will float better, but overall for some powder, but realistically more groomers, bumps, and trees, the 92 is a better choice. I'd go 168 in that ski. have fun!
Hello Bob, many thanks for this very insightful video. I'm 6 foot tall and want to buy these qst 98. Do you think I should go for the 183cm or the 189cm ? Thanks in advance and once again, excellent video 😀
I'd go 183, but I don't think they ski particularly long.
Hi. In your opinion, how would you classify these two skis ? Do they differ much from each other? Are these skis intended for the same things? qst 98 vs ranger 96 which do you choose?
Personally, I've never found a connection to the Ranger 96--I think the shovel and initiation of the turn is rather nondescript while the QST 98 is very smooth and fluid from tip to tail. The QST is a better floater, better turner, and a smoother overall performer in my experience, but I sure know people who love the Ranger 96!
Liking this ski for its appeal on groomers. How well can this ski handle some medium sized jumps and maybe a few box/rail slides
Not bad! Salomon actually put out a video when this ski came out featuring their athletes using the 98 in the park, so the capabilities are certainly all there!
Hey guys. I’m torn between this and the unleashed 98! I’m looking for a ski that will do well off piste in the alps, on steeps and in moguls, while also offering some playfulness. Im quite an aggressive skier on piste but looking to progress the playful skiing and like that the qst offers a slight twin for some backward skiing and is maybe more versatile than the unleashed? What do you think?! Or should I be looking at another ski entirely? Many thanks
I think you're in the right zone. The Unleashed has a full length (partial width) metal laminate and more camber, so it's actually a very composed and stable ski in a carved turn. It has more of a turned up tail for sure, so that lends to the freestyle and creative aspect of the ski as well. Where the QST excels is in softer snow and floatation. For a 98, it's one of the best floaters out there due to the dramatic rocker and taper. They're both phenomenal--I happen to prefer the Unleashed because of it's more traditional feel.
Out of the qst 98 and faction prodigy 2 which one is better on groomers/carving and which one would be better in trees?
The QST feels like a more polished product with more energy, a smoother feel, and a crisper edge. I'd side with the QST in this comparison while the Prodigy has more of a twin tip and freestyle feel.
Which skis with similar rocker and taper shape would be a direct competitor to the qst 98??
While it's on the pricey side of the spectrum, the DPS Kaizen 100 comes to mind--generous taper and rocker and a short radius. Also, a bit more of a twin tip, the Dynastar M-Free 99 also shares that rockered and tapered profile to go along with a fun-loving flex and style.
Hi SE! Just bought the 2023 and looking for bindings. Would Salomon Strive 14 GW be a good choice? Thanks!
Yup! Great binding pairing with that ski!
Looking for a soft snow compliment to my Deacon 84s. Interested in these and the Ripstick 96. Thoughts on size? I am 5’9 and 210 lbs. for reference I ski the Deacons in 172. Thanks!
The QST 98 leans a bit more to the soft snow side of the spectrum, and I think that puts it as a more distant complement to the Deacon. The Ripstick has more of a similar character to the Deacon in terms of on-trail performance. Kind of depends if you want a more similar or a more different ski. I think QST makes more sense, and I'd say 176--they ski a bit short and have a shorter radius.
@@SkiEssentials Great, thanks!
Could these be a primary park ski? How would these compare against the Bent 100s in the park?
It's on the heavier and non-twin tippy side for primary park from a traditional sense. The Bent gets away with it because it's lighter, and that is more of a typical park characteristic.
How does this compare to the head kore 93? Looking for something with a bit more float for off piste like trees. I am 173 150lbs.
The QST 98 is one of the best floating tree skis out there. It's got some more substance in terms of weight than the Kore, but it's an excellent floater for its width. When you get back to the trail, though, the Kore is a lot more precise and carving-oriented, so it mainly depends on where your priorities lie and what percentage of time you're actually needing a floaty 98 in the woods.
For a tree ski that makes tight quick turns and is somewhat decent on groomers would you guys recommend this QST, the bent 100 or the Ranger 96? Let me know, thanks!!
I'm a huge fan of the QST 98 in the trees and is more than decent on the groomers than the Bent 100. You may get slightly more carving performance out of the Ranger 96, but overall I think the QST 98 is an amazing choice for mixing agile turns in the trees and good carving energy on the groomers.
Great review as always. My question is the following :
I want to upgrade my older 98s. I love the versatility and shiftyness they provide but would love to have a ski that can hold while carving just a bit better, without getting too stiff with sheets of metal.
Would the qst 92 be an answer ? Or are the 2024 98s are a bit more stiff then my older ones ? (2021)
The new 98's aren't as stiff as the older ones. They're more rockered and tapered for sure, so that increases the flotation and soft snow compliance but not really the grip or carving. I think the 92 is the way you want to go within the QST line.
@@SkiEssentials *add to cart
I'm in France for the season and looking to replace my ageing skis in the end of season sales with either the QST98 or the Nordica Unleashed 98.. I can't find anywhere local that has either on rental so I'm wondering if one particularly carves better than the other and do they float about the same? Cheers
The Unleashed is more smooth and stable thanks to the longer camber and the metal laminate. The QST 98 has a shorter turn radius and a shorter effective edge, so while that makes it operate well in shorter turns, the longer carves aren't as smooth.
@@SkiEssentials thanks for taking the time to reply, your reviews are the best on here.
I currently ski on armada arv94, do you think the qst 92 carves on hard pack better than the arv94 and better in crud?
Slightly better in both arenas.
Qst 98 or new rustler 9 fairly similar? Can I go wrong with either?
Pretty similar. Can't go wrong. The QST is a bit better of a floater due to the more dramatic rocker and taper while the Rustler may have a bit more carving potential because of the metal, but overall, they're both fantastic.
Hello! I am 176 cm and 77kg. I skied black crows camox freebird 183cm and ripstick 96 181cm. Would you say this is stronger ski for spring touring (soft snow)? I have tried scott pure mission 98 184cm and they felt too directional for me, but stronger! Thank you!
I'd say the QST is more like the Mission, but with more of a freeride feel. The Ripstick is the liveliest of the group while the QST is the heaviest. If you can deal with some more weight on the climb, you'll be rewarded with the stronger performance.
Hello! The same person writing from my account (that was my gf account). Would it be possible to ride 189 cm QST with my 176 cm and 77 kg. Camox freebird in that length felt long but doable. I was thinking that I would get 10 more cm effective edge and a bit more performance?@@SkiEssentials Thank you for your response!
@@maticnoc2652 You will certainly get more performance, but you'll pay for it when it comes to weight and demand. It seems long, but I'm not here to talk you out of a good time!
Thank you for your answer! One last question. Does very short 102 cm running Length (but stiff - double sidecut) on QST 98 hold on steeper backcountry (not totally icey) conditions?@@SkiEssentials. So far my experience was, that skies that can be stable with higher speeds on slope (inbound) also hold steeper (45 degree) spring terrain better, which would translate into better performance QST 98 compared to Camox freebird, even though Camox freebird has 141 cm Running lenght? (I am not totally sure). Sidecut length is more similar between those skies.
For example I have found that BC Justis has also ~100 cm running length but I can feel that it would hold really well on steeper (european alps / dolomites style terrain).
In case the running length could present a problem I was looking and regular Camox - It would make stronger ski than Ripstick 96 and freebird version because of more weight or not necessarily (flex?).
Thank you for your help!
Thanks for your fine review! Ok, I know wonder wich length i should choose in QST 98? Sure I am 183 cm and 90 kgs but I really like a quick turnable ski as well as a stable ski which also is a floater. And therefore I have the length 176 in mind for QST 98. Would you consider it too weak for me? And if I still long for a shorter ski which is darn quick but stable as well as floatable, which one would you recommend? Many thanks!
If you prefer quickness and agility, there's nothing wrong with going shorter to the 176.
@@SkiEssentials Thank you very much for your appreciated answer! One thing more though, how would you consider mounting a Marker EPF 12 binding instead of a Salomon Shift on this ski and length? Would it be too heavy for occasional touring and will impair any of the ski performance properties?
@@fimfengius The main issue with the EPF, and other frame bindings, is the stand height. You are up higher for sure on these frames vs. the lower Shift, and that can make a ski feel a bit twitchy, which I don't think is a lot of fun in deeper snow. On groomers, you could make the argument that a higher stack will lead to better leverage, but in my mind, that's what carving skis are for. I think the Shift offers a better overall performance.
@@SkiEssentials Ok, very valuable. One last question: Would you also feel happy skiing a couloir in France having this set, QST 98 176cm + Salomon Shift bindings?
I'm 5'8" and 140 lbs. Upper intermediate skier. Should I go 169 or 176 for this ski?
I'd go 169 in that ski based on your stats and application. Have fun!
The question is 92s or 98s for my first ski mostly on piste west coast like mammoth, tahoe and likely socal slopes as well
The 92 is a decent floater and a very energetic carver for on-piste. The 98 is an exceptional floater for its width and a decent carver. It seems like if you're spending most of your time on-trail, the 92 will be a better option, especially if you're playing the percentages.
@@SkiEssentials thanks 🙏🏼
2024 QST 92 review coming?
The ski does not change other than graphics for 2024, so you can read and view our 2023 review here: www.skiessentials.com/Chairlift-Chat/2023-salomon-qst-92-ski-review/
Between these and the rustler 10s for a 80% resort / 20% touring ski on the east coast. Want mogul performance, playfullness as it said here, poppy and lively....if Im on groomers its not my favorite day to be out there anyways but more edge hold less chatter would make it more enjoyable. LMK recs thx!!
The Rustler has a higher performance ceiling while the QST is a bit more accessible and friendly. I think if you're leaning to moguls, playfulness, and pop, the QST is the way to go. Rustler is more alive at speed, and has more of a damp and stable feel as a result. I do think the QST has more to offer you based on your application. Not too chattery, too, which is impressive for a metal-free ski!
How important is having metal in the ski? I'm considered it won't be stable enough
Salomon does some interesting things to make it damp and stable such as integrating a carbon and flax weave into the shovel and the tail. They also use cork in the tips and tails to smooth out the ride. Underfoot, they use a harder sidewall material that increases edge grip. While there's no metal laminate that dampens the ski, these other aspects help, all while maintaining a snappy and poppy energy. That said, the skis in this range, like Nordica Enforcer 100 or Blizzard Bonafide 97 that have two sheets of metal are considerably more stable at speed, but less versatile or maneuverable. All depends on where you're spending most of your time on skis, and how fast you go.
@@SkiEssentials thank you! This channel is great 👍
5'7" about 185 lbs what length would you reccomend?
I think if you're on the more moderate side of the spectrum when it comes to speed and aggressiveness, the 169 will be just fine--these skis do have some heft to them so a move to the 176 would require some more input and speed on your end to access the top end of the ski's performance. For most skiers at your size, I think the 169 is fine.
As always, great job. I wonder about the flex of your boots? Both of you?
Mainly in a 130 flex boot.
@@SkiEssentialsthank you.
I just moved to NoVA and Im looking for a ski that would be great at the resorts close to me in Southern PA. I seem to land on this and the M-Pro 99 based on youre reviews. Any suggestions other than those two I should consider? I will travel 1-2 times out west or to VT and I'm looking to learn how to ski trees better this season. 6'3 225
You're in a good spot, and I'm about the same size as you, and I've loved the QST 98. The M-Pro is awesome, but may be a bit too high-octane for the trees. The QST 98 is an excellent tree ski and can hold its own on the trails. The M-Pro is quite literally the opposite--amazing on trail with a bit more demanding of a character when it gets tight. For another option, check out Blizzard Rustler 9 for kind of a middle-ground choice. All great options!
This or the Blizzard Rustler 9s for a slightly above intermediate skier that likes to ski everything, 1-2 times a year.
I'd say the slightly lighter and narrower Rustler will be a better overall choice for this application.
om gawd, who at the ADC signed off on these!? great for people that ride their heels and swivel their hips.
Good thing there's a lot of skiers who ski that way!