I'd just like to thank BOB for the great review! 60 year old returning skier/patroller (after 20 year hiatus) 6' 250 lbs. I was really struggling to find skis that gave me confidence again. I was looking and demoing a number of skis over the past year and after Bob's review, I bought these (for stiffness, but also lightweight, playfulness / turning ability). After just two days on the snow, these skis gave me a new level of enthusiasm. My confidence level has gone way up. They're stable, carve well, I can slash turns, pivot, and they handle great in sub-optimal snow. This years Midwest snow has been somewhere between slush and ice during a warm/cold year, and these skis have been GREAT! Thanks !! I've referred a ton of people to you. THANKS and keep up the great reviews!
I demoed these Kore 93 skis in a 177cm along with several other competitors at Snowshoe West Virginia this weekend. I have my dedicated carving skis and pow skis but missing a true all mountain ski. I stayed away from these because of the light and stiff combo causing concern for some people. Up to this point I was almost sold on a Ripstick 96 (green or black lol), love that ski. I tend to lean towards aggressive carving so I wanted my all mountain ski to not leave me wanting in that department. My first run on the Kore 93 blew me away. I was carving it like it was a bigger version of my e magnums… and smeared short turns, skiing chop, fast carving transitions, ice patches, these did it all! If you always grab a powerful carving ski for fresh morning groomers and are looking for a true all mountain ski that lets you still carve hard when the slopes get into “less than ideal” territory, try these out. 1st time I’ve ever demoed a ski, then purchased without hesitation. Love these skis!
That's also how I feel about my Kores. My 180 Ripstick 96's are snappy and fun in soft snow but they've washed out on me on hardpack and ice. I just can't trust them on piste. The 184 Kore 93's are stable and can carve on hardpack and ice. They hold an edge nicely!
I bought these skis last year from Ski Essentials. 170 cm but 91 mm under foot. I'm only 140 lbs but find them so responsive that it was a little scary on my first run on them. I love these skis and have skied everything from moguls to hard pack to fresh snow on them over at Mt Hood Meadows. I found no speed limit and yet they are so light. Best on groomers and < 6". When skiing fast they work best to stay in the front seat or else it may throw you in the back seat in a heart beat. I can't wait to get back on them this season.
6”4” 220. X racer. I am finding my self skiing my 2012 volkl mantras more than my 2022 kore 93. I just like the dampness and the edge grip of the mantras. Especially in late season with the spring frozen crud with the 5cm of fresh on top. The mantras power through and the kores chatter on early morning crud.
I find this to be a fair assessment! There's always been stuff the Mantra can do that a carbon-powered ski like the Kore cannot. It does work the other way, as well, with the Kore being easier to move quickly, and most skiers find them less tiring.
You are absolutely right on the kore being less tiring. That’s why I got them in the first place. I absolutely can not start the season on my 190cm 2011 Katana. I could literary make 5 or 6 turns on them and need to stop. I need to build up strength with the lightest ski I could find.
I picked up a 184 in the season end frenzy. Stunning price. I have 4 days on them in variable conditions. My HEAD Supershapre Titans are still better in hard, rough conditions, but these KORE 93s are as Bob says. Super lite, dreamy carvers, surprisingly damp. Just what I was looking for after two new knees. Easy going, but can still kick it up a notch when you want to go.
Getting these skis soon and I got a bit worried if the 191 model is a bit too lenghty, I'm 20y/o, 6'3 and 175lbs. Never raced, but have been skiing for a long time and would certainly use these for patroling and some touring among of course skiing in both on- and off-piste. It'll just be quite the challenge to find the 184s near me if that's what would be recommended!
I have a full season (28 days) on pair of Kore 93 and really like them. I love these on the groomers but find it a little challenging to release the rear of the ski on the bumps in the trees; perhaps a little too stiff for my experience level and size (5'10" and 200lbs). Do you have a recommendation for a ski that might be a little easier to release the tail than the Kore 93? I kind of feel that when my technique improves the Kore's will be the go-to, but at the moment it might be a little aggressive for the off piste days.
Totally understandable! Kore 93 is pretty darn stiff, especially in those tighter spots. Check out Salomon QST 92 or Line Blade Optic 92--both of these skis have great energy and grip, but are a lot more interesting in off-trail capacities.
I don't think over head high works well with these skis unless you really know you want to go that route. As such, based on your stats and application, I'd go with the 170.
Hello I am 1m78, 80 kg, I did ski racing for 8 years when I was younger (now 28) and I am looking for new all mountain skis but I am hesitating between the serpo and head kore 93. I am a 60% groomers and 40% off-piste in the alps. I like the weight (for potentially free rando with shift binding) and low ski radius of the kore but I am bit worried about the stiffness at my weight and as I am less agressive in my ski as before.
I think if you have a race background and can get a ski on a high edge angle, the Kore won't feel too stiff. Heavier skiers like me have an easier time, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. I'd lean to the Kore.
Hi thanks for these great reviews. I am 6'3 and 178 pounds; looking for all terraing skis. I ski about 80-90% groomers, rest off piste. Have been skiing for 20 years, and 'advanced', so between intermediate and expert. Are the Kore a good choice, and if so, the 177 length? Thank you!
Love the Kore! I'm 6/3 225 and ski the 184 in the 93 but I'm also comfortable on the 177. If you're at all hesitant, I'd go with the 177 as these skis can be skied a bit shorter.
Vs. the 93, the Kore 87 skier skis mainly on groomed trails and loves bumps. The 93 skier mixes it up a bit more, leaning more to the 50/50 side of the spectrum when it comes to on/off trail.
Hi. I have just blown the sidewall of my Ripstick 96, and I am looking for an upgrade. I love how fast, responsive, and fun the Ripstick is, but I want something more stable when carving, still great off-piste, as well as easy to ski in the trees and bumps. I am an advanced/expert skier who also skis with 2 small kids. I am 6' tall, 150 lbs. I ski 40 days a year in the Colorado front range. Do you have any suggestions?
I think you're in the right zone with something like the Kore 93. I'd also look to something with at least partial metal in it for carving smoothness. K2 Mindbender 89 Ti, Armada Declivity 92, or Fischer Ranger 90 are all worth a look.
@@sethmandell1691 I prefer the consistency of the flex in the Armada. The Ranger is stable underfoot but lighter and softer in the tips and tails. For a heavier and taller skier like myself, this puts the Ranger at a disadvantage for me. The Declivity is incredibly stable, smooth, and precise from end to end.
I am 5'9 200lbs and only been on skis a few runs but have really been taking to it well and liking it alot. I have been renting a pair of dynastar m-free 90's and loving them and I am looking for my first personal set of skis. I seem to tend to turn pretty short and aggressive most of the time. Would this be a good ski compared to the m free and do you think I should go 163 or 170?
Been using Head Rock n Roll 180cm for a few seasons now, (great ski, terrible graphics) but they're getting pretty beat up, shape and profile looks very similar to the Kore 93 but I wouldn't describe them as stiff or light. Would the Kore ski similarly to the old Rock n Roll? Don't really want anything to stiff or challenging as TBH I struggled in tight trees as I got older (60+yo 6' 170lbs) so was thinking 177cm max might work better for me.
Probably not, especially since the Kore is on the dramatic side when it comes to being both stiff and light. If you're looking for something more manageable in the low-90's, check out the Salomon QST 92, Line Blade Optic 92, or the Volkl Blaze 94--all great accessible skis that excel in trees without giving up too much on-trail. High 170's is a good place to be for your stats and application. have fun!
Hi, advanced intermediate here , skis mainly in the northeast. 5'6 150 pounds. Looking to go off piste from time to time. Trying to decide between the kore 93 , blaze 94 or the rustler 9. Plan on buying the demo sale versions shortly. What would you recommend?
I'd say get the Rustler! It's a great on-trail ski that makes a nice round turn, but it's also very pivoty and easy to turn when you get more adventurous.
After watching this review, I'm in the same boat as Bob. My kids are improving greatly and I need something to keep up with them in the bumps, trees, and everything else. I'm 5'8" 250 looking at this as a ski to add to the quiver. I am looking into the rustler 9, kore 93, maverick 95, and ripstick black. Our home mtn is Cannon with some scattered trips around vermont and maine. Any recommendations?
I think if you're spending a lot of your own time on the groomers, I like the sound of the Maverick due to the metal. Good grip, excellent versatility, and not a handful for kid skiing. I'd say 172 is a good length in that ski for your stats and application.
@@SkiEssentials I have a ski that can keep up with them and groomers. I should have been more specific sorry. I’m looking for some thing that can handle the tight trees and the tight bumps.
Hey! Im a 80% groomer and 20% off piste skier who weighs 90kg, im trying to decide between declivity and kore.. what do you think its better? Greetings from Portugal!
Personally at 100kg, I like the stiffness of the Kore. I feel I can bend it and get the amazing energy out of the carbon. I love the Declivity, but the Kore lines up better with what I'm looking for in a ski while keeping it very light.
The Ripstick is more flexible overall, and especially in the shovels. This makes it slightly more playful, and even a bit more so when you factor in the spoonier tip shape for flotation. On the groomers, the stiffness of the Kore makes it stand out, and especially the consistency of it.
Hi guys, I am planning to pick up a pair of these skis soon, but have a question on the sizing. I’m 220 lbs and 5’ 10” at 24 years old. I raced in high school and would consider myself an advanced skier. Do you think the 184s would be too much length for me considering the stiffness of the ski? Thank you!
Hi, I am looking to buy these skis and have a question on length. I am 6’1 190lbs and an advanced/expert skier. I am looking for all mountain skis to mostly do trees and groomers with a small amount of park. I am not sure whether to get the 177 or 184s. I’m not sure how much of a difference it makes and how much the extra length will help or hurt. I know they are light so maybe the extra length could add stability at higher speeds. I just don’t want to lose too much of the quick turning you can do with 177s. Thanks in advance for the help!
I'm 6/2 225 and had a lot of success and happiness on the 177 in these skis. I ultimately opted to get the 184 for myself, but I am taller and quite a bit heavier than you. I would have been totally happy on the 177, especially if the focus was on trees and bumps. They're stiff, so the shorter sizes do hold up to bigger skiers and more aggressive skiing. I think the 177 has more upside based on your stats and intended application.
I'm 5'5", 140lbs and I'm looking for an upper intermediate all mountain ski that can be highly maneuverable on the frontside when I corral the kids. I'm between either the Kore 93 and the Mindbender 90C, both in 156cm lengths. Would you recommend one of these, or are there any others I should consider? Should I be looking for something with metal? Thx!!
The K2 is more maneuverable from a pliability standpoint while the Kore is light and agile, but very responsive and stiff. I think for your level and application, the K2 makes more sense than the Kore--no real need for metal in a ski as carbon applications have gotten a lot more sophisticated and useful over the years.
I'd just like to thank BOB for the great review! 60 year old returning skier/patroller (after 20 year hiatus) 6' 250 lbs. I was really struggling to find skis that gave me confidence again. I was looking and demoing a number of skis over the past year and after Bob's review, I bought these (for stiffness, but also lightweight, playfulness / turning ability). After just two days on the snow, these skis gave me a new level of enthusiasm. My confidence level has gone way up. They're stable, carve well, I can slash turns, pivot, and they handle great in sub-optimal snow. This years Midwest snow has been somewhere between slush and ice during a warm/cold year, and these skis have been GREAT! Thanks !! I've referred a ton of people to you. THANKS and keep up the great reviews!
Thank you! Love the Kores!
I demoed these Kore 93 skis in a 177cm along with several other competitors at Snowshoe West Virginia this weekend. I have my dedicated carving skis and pow skis but missing a true all mountain ski. I stayed away from these because of the light and stiff combo causing concern for some people. Up to this point I was almost sold on a Ripstick 96 (green or black lol), love that ski. I tend to lean towards aggressive carving so I wanted my all mountain ski to not leave me wanting in that department. My first run on the Kore 93 blew me away. I was carving it like it was a bigger version of my e magnums… and smeared short turns, skiing chop, fast carving transitions, ice patches, these did it all! If you always grab a powerful carving ski for fresh morning groomers and are looking for a true all mountain ski that lets you still carve hard when the slopes get into “less than ideal” territory, try these out. 1st time I’ve ever demoed a ski, then purchased without hesitation. Love these skis!
Awesome! That's kind of how I feel about my Kores!
That's also how I feel about my Kores. My 180 Ripstick 96's are snappy and fun in soft snow but they've washed out on me on hardpack and ice. I just can't trust them on piste.
The 184 Kore 93's are stable and can carve on hardpack and ice. They hold an edge nicely!
I bought these skis last year from Ski Essentials. 170 cm but 91 mm under foot. I'm only 140 lbs but find them so responsive that it was a little scary on my first run on them. I love these skis and have skied everything from moguls to hard pack to fresh snow on them over at Mt Hood Meadows. I found no speed limit and yet they are so light. Best on groomers and < 6". When skiing fast they work best to stay in the front seat or else it may throw you in the back seat in a heart beat. I can't wait to get back on them this season.
Awesome! I love mine as well.
6”4” 220. X racer. I am finding my self skiing my 2012 volkl mantras more than my 2022 kore 93. I just like the dampness and the edge grip of the mantras. Especially in late season with the spring frozen crud with the 5cm of fresh on top. The mantras power through and the kores chatter on early morning crud.
I find this to be a fair assessment! There's always been stuff the Mantra can do that a carbon-powered ski like the Kore cannot. It does work the other way, as well, with the Kore being easier to move quickly, and most skiers find them less tiring.
You are absolutely right on the kore being less tiring. That’s why I got them in the first place. I absolutely can not start the season on my 190cm 2011 Katana. I could literary make 5 or 6 turns on them and need to stop. I need to build up strength with the lightest ski I could find.
I picked up a 184 in the season end frenzy. Stunning price. I have 4 days on them in variable conditions. My HEAD Supershapre Titans are still better in hard, rough conditions, but these KORE 93s are as Bob says. Super lite, dreamy carvers, surprisingly damp. Just what I was looking for after two new knees. Easy going, but can still kick it up a notch when you want to go.
Very nice!
Getting these skis soon and I got a bit worried if the 191 model is a bit too lenghty, I'm 20y/o, 6'3 and 175lbs. Never raced, but have been skiing for a long time and would certainly use these for patroling and some touring among of course skiing in both on- and off-piste. It'll just be quite the challenge to find the 184s near me if that's what would be recommended!
I'd go with the 184--the 191 is pretty long.
I have a full season (28 days) on pair of Kore 93 and really like them. I love these on the groomers but find it a little challenging to release the rear of the ski on the bumps in the trees; perhaps a little too stiff for my experience level and size (5'10" and 200lbs). Do you have a recommendation for a ski that might be a little easier to release the tail than the Kore 93? I kind of feel that when my technique improves the Kore's will be the go-to, but at the moment it might be a little aggressive for the off piste days.
Totally understandable! Kore 93 is pretty darn stiff, especially in those tighter spots. Check out Salomon QST 92 or Line Blade Optic 92--both of these skis have great energy and grip, but are a lot more interesting in off-trail capacities.
Thanks for this great review! I'm an advanced skier (5'9" 180). Which length do you recommend?
I don't think over head high works well with these skis unless you really know you want to go that route. As such, based on your stats and application, I'd go with the 170.
Hello I am 1m78, 80 kg, I did ski racing for 8 years when I was younger (now 28) and I am looking for new all mountain skis but I am hesitating between the serpo and head kore 93. I am a 60% groomers and 40% off-piste in the alps. I like the weight (for potentially free rando with shift binding) and low ski radius of the kore but I am bit worried about the stiffness at my weight and as I am less agressive in my ski as before.
I think if you have a race background and can get a ski on a high edge angle, the Kore won't feel too stiff. Heavier skiers like me have an easier time, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. I'd lean to the Kore.
Hi thanks for these great reviews. I am 6'3 and 178 pounds; looking for all terraing skis. I ski about 80-90% groomers, rest off piste. Have been skiing for 20 years, and 'advanced', so between intermediate and expert. Are the Kore a good choice, and if so, the 177 length? Thank you!
Love the Kore! I'm 6/3 225 and ski the 184 in the 93 but I'm also comfortable on the 177. If you're at all hesitant, I'd go with the 177 as these skis can be skied a bit shorter.
Who would be better served with the Kore 87 - and why? 😊 Thanks.
Vs. the 93, the Kore 87 skier skis mainly on groomed trails and loves bumps. The 93 skier mixes it up a bit more, leaning more to the 50/50 side of the spectrum when it comes to on/off trail.
Hi. I have just blown the sidewall of my Ripstick 96, and I am looking for an upgrade. I love how fast, responsive, and fun the Ripstick is, but I want something more stable when carving, still great off-piste, as well as easy to ski in the trees and bumps. I am an advanced/expert skier who also skis with 2 small kids. I am 6' tall, 150 lbs. I ski 40 days a year in the Colorado front range. Do you have any suggestions?
I think you're in the right zone with something like the Kore 93. I'd also look to something with at least partial metal in it for carving smoothness. K2 Mindbender 89 Ti, Armada Declivity 92, or Fischer Ranger 90 are all worth a look.
@@SkiEssentials If I had to choose between the Declivity and the Ranger what would you do? What are the main differences?
@@sethmandell1691 I prefer the consistency of the flex in the Armada. The Ranger is stable underfoot but lighter and softer in the tips and tails. For a heavier and taller skier like myself, this puts the Ranger at a disadvantage for me. The Declivity is incredibly stable, smooth, and precise from end to end.
I am 5'9 200lbs and only been on skis a few runs but have really been taking to it well and liking it alot. I have been renting a pair of dynastar m-free 90's and loving them and I am looking for my first personal set of skis. I seem to tend to turn pretty short and aggressive most of the time. Would this be a good ski compared to the m free and do you think I should go 163 or 170?
I think it's a great option--I own a pair and love them. I'd say the 170 will give you more overall satisfaction.
Been using Head Rock n Roll 180cm for a few seasons now, (great ski, terrible graphics) but they're getting pretty beat up, shape and profile looks very similar to the Kore 93 but I wouldn't describe them as stiff or light. Would the Kore ski similarly to the old Rock n Roll?
Don't really want anything to stiff or challenging as TBH I struggled in tight trees as I got older (60+yo 6' 170lbs) so was thinking 177cm max might work better for me.
Probably not, especially since the Kore is on the dramatic side when it comes to being both stiff and light. If you're looking for something more manageable in the low-90's, check out the Salomon QST 92, Line Blade Optic 92, or the Volkl Blaze 94--all great accessible skis that excel in trees without giving up too much on-trail. High 170's is a good place to be for your stats and application. have fun!
Hi, advanced intermediate here , skis mainly in the northeast. 5'6 150 pounds. Looking to go off piste from time to time. Trying to decide between the kore 93 , blaze 94 or the rustler 9. Plan on buying the demo sale versions shortly. What would you recommend?
I'd say get the Rustler! It's a great on-trail ski that makes a nice round turn, but it's also very pivoty and easy to turn when you get more adventurous.
After watching this review, I'm in the same boat as Bob. My kids are improving greatly and I need something to keep up with them in the bumps, trees, and everything else. I'm 5'8" 250 looking at this as a ski to add to the quiver. I am looking into the rustler 9, kore 93, maverick 95, and ripstick black. Our home mtn is Cannon with some scattered trips around vermont and maine. Any recommendations?
I think if you're spending a lot of your own time on the groomers, I like the sound of the Maverick due to the metal. Good grip, excellent versatility, and not a handful for kid skiing. I'd say 172 is a good length in that ski for your stats and application.
@@SkiEssentials I have a ski that can keep up with them and groomers. I should have been more specific sorry. I’m looking for some thing that can handle the tight trees and the tight bumps.
@@CaptV23I still don't think Maverick is wrong, but if your emphasis is on trees and bumps, then I'd take a sharper look at the Rustler.
Thank you! Are you going to be doing a demo day at stowe this winter?@@SkiEssentials
@@CaptV23It's demo day every day at our Pinnacle Ski and Sports retail location on Mountain Road in Stowe!
Hey! Im a 80% groomer and 20% off piste skier who weighs 90kg, im trying to decide between declivity and kore.. what do you think its better? Greetings from Portugal!
Personally at 100kg, I like the stiffness of the Kore. I feel I can bend it and get the amazing energy out of the carbon. I love the Declivity, but the Kore lines up better with what I'm looking for in a ski while keeping it very light.
How does the stiffness/playfulness compare to the ripstick 96 black.
The Ripstick is more flexible overall, and especially in the shovels. This makes it slightly more playful, and even a bit more so when you factor in the spoonier tip shape for flotation. On the groomers, the stiffness of the Kore makes it stand out, and especially the consistency of it.
Hi guys,
I am planning to pick up a pair of these skis soon, but have a question on the sizing. I’m 220 lbs and 5’ 10” at 24 years old. I raced in high school and would consider myself an advanced skier. Do you think the 184s would be too much length for me considering the stiffness of the ski? Thank you!
Yes, I'd lean to the 177 in that ski. They ski really well in shorter lengths.
Hi, I am looking to buy these skis and have a question on length. I am 6’1 190lbs and an advanced/expert skier. I am looking for all mountain skis to mostly do trees and groomers with a small amount of park. I am not sure whether to get the 177 or 184s. I’m not sure how much of a difference it makes and how much the extra length will help or hurt. I know they are light so maybe the extra length could add stability at higher speeds. I just don’t want to lose too much of the quick turning you can do with 177s. Thanks in advance for the help!
I'm 6/2 225 and had a lot of success and happiness on the 177 in these skis. I ultimately opted to get the 184 for myself, but I am taller and quite a bit heavier than you. I would have been totally happy on the 177, especially if the focus was on trees and bumps. They're stiff, so the shorter sizes do hold up to bigger skiers and more aggressive skiing. I think the 177 has more upside based on your stats and intended application.
I'm 5'5", 140lbs and I'm looking for an upper intermediate all mountain ski that can be highly maneuverable on the frontside when I corral the kids. I'm between either the Kore 93 and the Mindbender 90C, both in 156cm lengths. Would you recommend one of these, or are there any others I should consider? Should I be looking for something with metal? Thx!!
The K2 is more maneuverable from a pliability standpoint while the Kore is light and agile, but very responsive and stiff. I think for your level and application, the K2 makes more sense than the Kore--no real need for metal in a ski as carbon applications have gotten a lot more sophisticated and useful over the years.
Thank you! @@SkiEssentials
Are the 2023 Head Core 93 the same as 2024 (minus top sheet)?
Yup! 2025's too!