After watching a ton of your great video content, looking for a new all mountain ski, I finally landed on the 2023 Ripstick 96 which I purchased from your website. Last week I finally got to ski it in crested Butte, CO, and I was super impressed with this ski. We did not have much powder but the little bit I found felt very nice and it also was easy to ski in the trees. What surprised me the most, was how it carved on the groomers. It felt close to my Salomon x-max which I replaced and those are 65 under foot not 96. Thanks again for the great content helping people like me buy skis without testing them ahead of time. This purchase was spot on for me. Keep up the good work!
Thanks to the advice from you guys, I've just ordered these and cannot wait to get hold of them and rip up the French Alps where I ski as often as I can. If I lived in the US, I wouldn't shop anywhere else!! Keep up the great work chaps and thanks again ....
Love your content and reviews. I just started skiing again after a 25 year hiatus. Bought intermediate Nordica boots and rented intermediate 170 k2 skis. Went to Park City with some advanced level friends 20 years my junior and I'm hooked again. Shocked I out-skied the rentals by the 2nd run and find myself as just an older version of the advanced skier I was. I'm 6' 185 lbs and prefer to mix up tight and long turns for fun. I'll jump into moderate moguls but enjoy steep controlled runs mostly. Live out East near you so Ice and crud are a big factor. I really need something that will be all mountain out West (NO POWDER), and STABLE on the ice and crud in the East. I am so stuck between 3 ski choices and have researched them to death. The Atomic Maverick 95 TI in 180, the Elan Ripstick 96 Black Ed in 180 or the Volkl Mantra M6 in 177. Would very much appreciate your expertise and experience to guide me in the right direction. If nothing else, at least to eliminate one of the above. Thanks, Todd...
It's very difficult to argue against the Elan for your stats and application. They're sturdy and stable without being too heavy, they're quick and agile without sacrificing stability, and they're about as versatile as it gets for a true all-mountain ski. For most skiers, if that thing is anywhere near your list, it's a very safe and secure bet. I'd say 180 is the way to go for that ski.
Got a pair of these in 188 and I am skiing better stronger faster more technical than I have in 10 years. 49yo, advanced skier in Washington state. After demo’ing skis all season I found the right ones for me.
Finally got to demo these and was blown away. Impressively fun at low speeds but keeps whispering in your ear to go faster, and only gets more fun as you do. Interested to hear what you guys think of the new ‘24 Wingman Black Edition, from what I felt I think that’s gonna be a hit this year as well! Thanks for all the great info guys, really an invaluable resource
Just got the Green Ripstick 96 , 180cm I’m 183cm - 79kg intermediate/expert skier. Chose them because of good reviews and have spent a week in Aspen skiing mixed terrain. Wow, what a ski! Everyone on the chair asking about them. Great on everything , but at high speed tend to be a little unstable on the tips. Would love to give the Black edition a go! Would probably suit me better Thanks for the review
Hey Skiessentials. Loving your videos!!! I'm really torn between the Ripstick Black 96s, the standard Ripstick 96s and the Dynastar M-Pro 90. I tried the M-Pro last week in lots of fresh snow and some pistes in France and loved them. Now I see your reviews and can't help but wonder how these ripsticks would work for me. I'm 5'11, 170 pounds and expert level skier that likes to do as much offpiste as possible but know pistes are inevitable. I'd also like to get your thoughts on whether to get 172cm or 180cm. Thoughts pls?
Hi Peter! Ripstick is awesome! If you're looking for the uptick in performance, I'd go for the Black Edition--just a bit more damp and stable on the groomers without taking away from the off-piste performance. I'd go with the 180 since they measure about 1.5 cm on the short side. Have fun! SE
Love the videos! I'm likely in the market (saw your end of season sale on them) for these but wanted to get some thoughts. I'm 5'9', 165 lbs, expert skier (46 y/o- "just" old enough to have raced on toothpick 200's in highschool :). Weekend warrior Tahoe Skier these days. Currently have 3 Ski's in the quiver...... Kastle RX12 SLs (176's, roughly 70 underfoot) for hard pack/carving. Rossy Super 7 RD's (190's, 120 underfoot) for full blown pow skis (only take them out in foot+ days- lots of use this season in Tahoe!). Looking for mid 90's underfoot all mountain skis to replace my OLD Volkl Gotama's which I was using as "all mountains". Primary use would be for under 1 foot storms/powder, crud, skied out conditions and trees. Anything hard pack I'd stick with the Kastles (but would be nice to not go back to the car on some days to switch). Looking for something a little soft/playful but the ripstick green reviews have me a bit scared. I'm thinking of these in 180's given they measure short. Thoughts on these fitting in with current line up and length? Anything else I should put on radar? Thanks in advance!
The Black Edition creates a more stable and solid environment from tip to tail, but it's not a wholesale change from the green by any stretch. Most skiers in the expert range who find themselves at speed will likely enjoy the Black Edition a bit more. I'd say the 180 in that ski would be great. If you're looking for other options in this range, also check out the Stockli Stormrider 95, Blizzard Rustler 9, or Nordica Enforcer 94.
Thanks for these great videos guys, just one question about these! I’m really considering this ski, but am torn between it and something with more metal like the m6 mantra or maverick 95. I’m a hard-charger skiing in New Zealand so my main concern is edge grip in icy conditions. I’m worried about how the 96 black would perform here, since in the past I’ve found carbon skis too soft. I’ve also had a look at a pair of these in a shop, and their flex definitely felt much softer than those skis with metal. Any thoughts?
I'd say the Mantra will alleviate any doubt when it comes to edge grip on icy conditions. Maverick is great, but is lighter and more poppy, so it's not as damp as the Mantra. The Ripstick, although slightly more flexible, does a great job using carbon to mimic the feel of metal, but at the end of the day, the heavier, burlier, and grippier Mantra is likely what you're looking for. have fun! SE
What do you guys think of these vs. the Black Crow Serpo? Mostly ski hard groomers in the Midwest, but want something playful for my trips West 2-3 times a year where I like to play around in all kinds of trees and chutes.
The Ripstick is the better all-around performer in terms of versatility. The Serpo has a bit of an edge in the on-trail carving energy department, but other than that, the Elan is a very complete ski.
They look like they carve longer turns very well. But watching several reviews the short quick turns on the look very washy through the tails, rather than engaging and carving in short turns.
Hello, great video! I am 5'7" (170 lb) intermediate skier (good parallel turns and learning to carve at this point); enjoy all mountain terrain, skiing mostly blues and blacks in Colorado and Utah. Would the Ripstick 96 (Regular vs. Black?) be too advanced for me? Also, would you recommend 164 or 172 for me (I usually rent demos around 168)? Any other skis come to mind for me? This would be my first purchase. Would love to demo them but selection is always hit or miss. Also, any recs on bindings? Thanks for any input!
Hi Damon! In my opinion, the regular Ripstick would be better for you. It's slightly softer flexing, which for you, will be a benefit. On the Black Edition, you'd likely be fighting the ski a little bit, which would hinder progression in your carving. For length, 172 should be okay for you. 164 just feels short to me, mostly for your weight. I would worry a little bit about you outgrowing that length relatively quickly, so to speak. While I could bring up other skis, there's not a huge reason to, as the Ripstick should work really well for you as you continue to progress, and is very suitable for the terrain you'll be skiing. For bindings, anything in the ~13 DIN range will be just fine. Marker Griffon 13, Tyrolia Attack 14, Salomon/Atomic Strive 14... those are all good choices.
Is there a lot of difference between Black Crow Serpo and Ripstick 96 Black? I own Moment Wildcat 108 (for powder days, but still a great carver...love this ski) and Serpo for more of the off piste on piste groomer days. Serpo is 93 under foot and all my skis are 174 in length (I'm 5'8" 235). I was considering the Ripstick's for that tweener ski, but not sure if they are too close to the Serpo's. Intermediate advanced skier.
I think it's a bit close in both shape and application. They have pretty similar feels to them, with the Serpo being slightly quicker. To split the difference between your two, on the more playful side, check out Nordica Unleashed 98, Dynastar M-Free 99, or Rossignol Blackops 98. For a more directional option, Nordica Enforcer 100, Salomon Stance 102, Volkl Mantra 102, or Stockli Stormrider 102 will fit the bill.
I have the regular ripstick 106 that I really love but I need a second pair for the regular days when there’s no fresh snow and it’s icy! I was thinking of the ripstick 96 Black edition or the kendo 88. Do you think the kendo will be fun in moguls?
For it's on-piste ability, I've had a lot of fun and success on the Kendo in the bumps. I'd say that's a slightly better option as a different ski than the 106 that you already have.
Great job again, I think I narrowed down between Elan Ripstick black and 2024 new Stance 90 , I ski Head Supershape imagnum want a second ski for new snow greater than 3 to 4 inches and bumps what’s your thoughts .I ski the west from AZSNOWBOWL to Colorado
If you have the Magnum, I'd take the Ripstick over the Stance in order to increase the distance between your skis. The Elan still turns quite well, so there's no real loss by going with the wider ski here.
I seem right between sizes on the Ripstick 96 Black. I am 5' 10.5" and 165lbs. I am torn between the 172 and the 180 sizing. I have been skiing about 5 seasons and can comfortably ski blacks in my local resort, albeit with not always the best technique and sometimes find myself in the back seat in difficult conditions (moguls, chop, etc). I suppose that puts my skill between intermediate and advanced. My application is 80/20 resort/backcountry ski. My local resort conditions, although in Idaho, are generally 3" less of powder, if not chopped up moguls and/or ice at times. I would like to have it closer to 50% backcountry, but for now it's somewhere in between
Consider this: Ripstick skis measure about 1.5 cm shorter than stated, so that 180 is more like a 178.5 while the 172 is really a 170.5. I think this puts you more in line with the 180 vs. the 172 based on your stats and application. They're pretty light and agile so you don't really have to size down to access maneuverability.
Definitely more playful. If you're looking to complement your Mindbender 99, you might as well get the regular Ripstick as that's even more playful and overall stability shouldn't be a major issue at that point. Does that make sense to you?
Do any of your videos show one of your skiers on the Ripstick Black 172cm? Truthfully, I get more information by watching the turns on video than hearing about build and materials. I currently ski on an older pair of Rossignol Banit B3's 176cm. Say what you want but they are great carving skis. I am 5'8" 185 lbs. 56 year old former ski instructor thinking about going shorter for tighter turn radius on Colorado steep and deep as well as trees and bumps. Your thoughts?
I prefer watching to listening as well--I mainly skip through all the talking of our own videos just to get to the skiing! I can't recall having the 172 in the Black Edition on film--mainly just the 180 and 188. For your stats and application, I'd recommend the 172 in that ski .
Hi....excellent videos, thank you. I'm 5'8 and 185....ha ha still losing some. Skiing all my life, (advanced to expert)....Coming from and older Head with the chip in it at 180cm.......Loved it...but now time for upgrade. Last year I tried the Kore 93 170-something. After may hours of study, I'm falling in love with this Ripstick. Question, I'm leaning towards the 172s.....I'll be in the bumps and some leaning to more woods and some pow. So what size would you recommend. Should I go back to the 180s, will the 172s do good in pow and kill the bumps? thanks
what binding would you put on these? would you consider to use something like a shift on these in order to use it for some downhill oriented touring as well or would you prefer to have a dedicated downhill binding on it like the marker griffon 13
Either would work. There's a ton of versatility in this ski. It's not the lightest for touring, but light enough to justify a binding like the Shift and have it be kind of a 50/50 or 60/40 resort/touring ski. Of course, also perfectly appropriate as just an alpine ski, in which case the Griffon would be just fine, or a Tyrolia Attack, Salomon Strive, Look Pivot, etc.
@@silversurfer5400 I believe you mean the 188, not 186. Either way, they do measure a bit short, so in my experience, the 188 does ski more similar to the 186 Serpo in terms of length. If you're cool with that ski in the 186, I'd go ahead and fire up the 188. If you have felt that Serpo was too long, the 180 should be okay, but likely on the shorter side.
Should i get the black or a blade optic 96 for 100$ less in sale? Looking for a softer snow ski for eu conditions, that complements my elan amphibio 16 ti (73mm carving ski). I’m 5’11 160 pounds. Thanks in advance! Love your reviews
Totally! The wider shovel stays right on top making this ski a very well-rounded ski in a multitude of conditions and terrain. The 106 Black Edition is a better pure floater, but you're giving up some versatility with that ski.
Question, I’m skiing Enforcer 94’s 172’s, I’m 6’1” 145-150lbs, at times I’m loving them, at times they seem like too much ski for me, I’ll be 73 soon, how would the Ripstick black be for me?
Really great skis! They have the overall character of the Enforcer in terms of a high-end performance ceiling, but are quite a bit more manageable and maneuverable. I'd go with the 172 in that ski as well. Have fun! SE
At 6'2" and about 210lbs, intermediate to advanced skier; living in New England and mostly skiing here but wanting to try out west asap; would you get the Ripstick 96 Black edition in 180 or 188cm? Was also planning to put the Marker Duke PT 16 Bindings on them. Thanks for a great channel and standing by for your suggestions/recommendations.
95 or 100 mm brake, depending on what binding you go with. Always hard to go wrong with a Look Pivot, which would be the 95, although some people don't love the Pivot for various reasons, one of those is often price. Tyrolia Attacks would be just fine (95), or Marker Griffon/Jester (100). We're also quite impressed with the new Salomon/Atomic/Armada Strive binding, and with those you'd be looking at the 100 mm brake. All perfectly good bindings and perfectly appropriate on the Ripstick 96 Black.
demoed the 96 green edition in 180cm last season I frikkin loved this ski. I want the black edition but just can't justify it... too much overlap with my current set of skis. The RipStick 96 is just such a fun ski and just works well all over the mountain 😀
Ok here’s a question for you… if I replaced my 2020 wingman 86 cti with the Ripstick 96 black edition… would I be sad ? Lol I do have a head e magnum for front side carving (which is incredible btw).
@@c6moneypit8 Would you be sad? Hmm... I don't think so. Would you miss your Wingman sometimes? Sure, but as you know, the Ripsticks are just so much gosh darn fun that most of the time I think you'd just be grinning ear to ear. You're obviously giving up some carving precision and edge to edge quickness, but your Magnum should satisfy that... so, it feels like a reasonable thing to do...
Hi guys,interested in your thoughts on the rs 96 blk vs. the Rustler 9? Moving back to the east and looking for a more sensible daily driver than a 106. I am 6ft 200 lbs and currently own j skis metal 186 and chetler 120 in 190 (home mtn was Whistler). I feel confident that the 188 ripstick would be good but wonder what you think of 180 vs 188 in the rustler 9's? Thanks
It's just a bit grippier of a feel underfoot in the Rustler, but the stability overall ends up being about the same. I would feel confident with the 188 in either of those skis, honestly. Perhaps price and availability will sway your final decision.
I’m wondering how the Ripstick 96 Black would compare to the new Fischer Ranger 96. The Ranger has some metal but you describe the Ripstick Black as feeling like it has metal without actually having any. And both being fairly light and energetic. Looking for a damp stable ski for Vermont hard pack but still one that’s fun…… thoughts?
HI Gary! Personally, I haven't had an awesome experience on the Ranger, while I'd say the exact opposite for Ripstick Black. I love how the ski pulls you into the turn and has excellent energy at the tail end. Ripstick is a fantastic mogul ski and works great in trees and softer snow--it's one of the best skis in that terrain that I've been on, and is impressive on groomers as well. On paper, the Ranger should be damper, and I've certainly talked to skiers who absolutely love it, but in my experience, the Ripstick is a clear favorite. SE/Bob
Hi Skiessentials, wanted to get your thoughts. Ive been doing a lot of online research as to what i should get. Im 5'11" and 225-230lbs. I would call myself a more advanced than intermediate skier. I mainly ski in australia, so has to be able to handle groomers, and being australia, we get ice and slush often. But id also like to make the most of fresh dumps when we get them. Everything about the 96 Black sounds right for me, except i wonder if they are too soft for my weight. would you agree? Elan's calculator seemed to think i was better off with the wingman 86 Ti.. Im not after a ski to set records with, i just like to send it down the mountain in a reasonably fast, but still playful manner. Should someone like me carrying a few too many lbs be looking somewhere else maybe? Any advice would be much appreciated, including ski length! Cheers!
I'm 225 and haven't found many weak spots with the 96 Black, especially in the longer 188 as I'm 6/2. The only part I find soft is the very end of the tip but only in deep or soft snow. Other than that, the skis are pretty darn sturdy, and I have no qualms about skiing them aggressively in any type of situation. You can go with Wingman 86 for sure, but that'll limit the soft snow performance by quite a bit. I find the 96 Black to be more than capable of a carver on anything but the firmest of snow conditions. For your height and application, I'd advise the 180 in that ski. Have fun!
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for your reply regarding ripstick length. Starting to think the 96 regular rip-stick in 180 may preclude the need for a 176 Ranger 102, both with Look pivots. Both in the quiver or just one? And if only one, which would you choose? Thank you!
I’m 5’11 150 at 17 but I am still growing a lot and putting on a lot of muscle and I want a ski to grow into as well. Should I get the black or green. And what size?
The Black Edition of the Ripstick 96 gets so much high praise, I was wondering if there were anything about the normal green 96 that you like more than the Black Edition?
Personally, as a larger and more aggressive skier, there is not, but for likely the majority of skiers, the 96 Green is more than enough ski, and I do like it and enjoy it, I just don't think it's a better choice for me at 6/2 225. SE
Haven't skied the blacks but owned the greens. One thing i heard from others was that the stiffness of the blacks took away from the soft snow performance. Not that it was necessarily bad, just that the green had more flex making it feel smoother and more natural in powder.
@@AllenSmithe I think that soft-snow performance is dependent on the skier size and aggressiveness. At 6/2 225, I think the Black Edition works better for me in softer snow as well as firmer stuff.
I'm 6/2 225 and had no issues with the 96 Black in the 188. Except the shovel in heavy soft snow. I don't love the vapor tip inserts in that application. All other zones and realms, the ski is plenty rugged.
Hello from Arapahoe Basin, Colorado. I have the option of purchasing the Elan Ripstick 96, Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition or the Atomic Maverick 95TI. I am 60 years old, 5'2" and 165 pounds. I am an advanced skier who mostly prefers carving short S turns on-piste. I ski in the western states - mostly Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah. Wondering the best option for my conditions and skiing preferences/ability? Please come visit A Basin. I'll get lift ticket for you and a friend.
For carving shorter turns, I'd say the Ripstick 96 makes a lot of sense. You can bend the whole thing so it's easier to access the entirety of the sidecut.
The M-Pro has a much stiffer and more responsive tail that really does a great job of gripping tight to the snow, especially firmer stuff. It's super-versatile as well, but not quite in the same way as the Ripstick that can really do everything well. For us here in Vermont, the Dynastar makes a bit more sense for one ski to have while if you ski in snowier areas, the Ripstick is a stronger option.
Almost. The Black Edition also has Carbon Line Technology which is a larger horizontal carbon laminate that is full-length along the inside edge, extending to full width underfoot. Fits in with the Amphibio profile nicely.
Both are great. Ripstick Black is going to feel a little more agile and playful, and with that comes a little more versatility. Mantra is definitely still the more precise ski and with greater torsional stiffness and edge grip. If you value precision and responsiveness over versatility, Mantra will generally be the way to go.
THANK u!!! But a allready fck up...i am gettin 180...so lets goooo omg ...the only thing that keeps me up is they are 177 cm for real...wish me luck👀🙈👌⛷️
@@pitfit7772 how are you finding the 180s? I’m similar to you although a bit lighter at 75kg. Currently on Rossi Experience HD 88s @ 172cm and trying to decide what length Ripstick to pull the trigger on
Love watching you drive and “rip” these skis Jeff. Some great turns in the bumps. Well done pal!
Thanks, it's all about the skis!
After watching a ton of your great video content, looking for a new all mountain ski, I finally landed on the 2023 Ripstick 96 which I purchased from your website. Last week I finally got to ski it in crested Butte, CO, and I was super impressed with this ski. We did not have much powder but the little bit I found felt very nice and it also was easy to ski in the trees. What surprised me the most, was how it carved on the groomers. It felt close to my Salomon x-max which I replaced and those are 65 under foot not 96. Thanks again for the great content helping people like me buy skis without testing them ahead of time. This purchase was spot on for me. Keep up the good work!
Great feedback, thanks for sharing!
Thanks to the advice from you guys, I've just ordered these and cannot wait to get hold of them and rip up the French Alps where I ski as often as I can. If I lived in the US, I wouldn't shop anywhere else!! Keep up the great work chaps and thanks again ....
Glad you like them!
Love your content and reviews. I just started skiing again after a 25 year hiatus. Bought intermediate Nordica boots and rented intermediate 170 k2 skis. Went to Park City with some advanced level friends 20 years my junior and I'm hooked again. Shocked I out-skied the rentals by the 2nd run and find myself as just an older version of the advanced skier I was. I'm 6' 185 lbs and prefer to mix up tight and long turns for fun. I'll jump into moderate moguls but enjoy steep controlled runs mostly. Live out East near you so Ice and crud are a big factor. I really need something that will be all mountain out West (NO POWDER), and STABLE on the ice and crud in the East. I am so stuck between 3 ski choices and have researched them to death. The Atomic Maverick 95 TI in 180, the Elan Ripstick 96 Black Ed in 180 or the Volkl Mantra M6 in 177. Would very much appreciate your expertise and experience to guide me in the right direction. If nothing else, at least to eliminate one of the above. Thanks, Todd...
It's very difficult to argue against the Elan for your stats and application. They're sturdy and stable without being too heavy, they're quick and agile without sacrificing stability, and they're about as versatile as it gets for a true all-mountain ski. For most skiers, if that thing is anywhere near your list, it's a very safe and secure bet. I'd say 180 is the way to go for that ski.
Just ordered them from you guys! Looking forward to getting them on snow.
Super jealous... I'm fighting the urge to impulse buy these things!
You're going to LOVE them!
do it.
you had me sold at quad rod
Got a pair of these in 188 and I am skiing better stronger faster more technical than I have in 10 years. 49yo, advanced skier in Washington state. After demo’ing skis all season I found the right ones for me.
You are not alone! Glad you found something you love!
Finally got to demo these and was blown away. Impressively fun at low speeds but keeps whispering in your ear to go faster, and only gets more fun as you do. Interested to hear what you guys think of the new ‘24 Wingman Black Edition, from what I felt I think that’s gonna be a hit this year as well!
Thanks for all the great info guys, really an invaluable resource
Great feedback, thanks for sharing!
Just got the Green Ripstick 96 , 180cm I’m 183cm - 79kg intermediate/expert skier. Chose them because of good reviews and have spent a week in Aspen skiing mixed terrain. Wow, what a ski! Everyone on the chair asking about them. Great on everything , but at high speed tend to be a little unstable on the tips. Would love to give the Black edition a go! Would probably suit me better Thanks for the review
it's a very interesting difference, for basically the same ski. Let us know what you think about the Black!
Hey Skiessentials. Loving your videos!!! I'm really torn between the Ripstick Black 96s, the standard Ripstick 96s and the Dynastar M-Pro 90. I tried the M-Pro last week in lots of fresh snow and some pistes in France and loved them. Now I see your reviews and can't help but wonder how these ripsticks would work for me. I'm 5'11, 170 pounds and expert level skier that likes to do as much offpiste as possible but know pistes are inevitable. I'd also like to get your thoughts on whether to get 172cm or 180cm. Thoughts pls?
Hi Peter!
Ripstick is awesome! If you're looking for the uptick in performance, I'd go for the Black Edition--just a bit more damp and stable on the groomers without taking away from the off-piste performance. I'd go with the 180 since they measure about 1.5 cm on the short side. Have fun!
SE
Love the videos! I'm likely in the market (saw your end of season sale on them) for these but wanted to get some thoughts. I'm 5'9', 165 lbs, expert skier (46 y/o- "just" old enough to have raced on toothpick 200's in highschool :). Weekend warrior Tahoe Skier these days. Currently have 3 Ski's in the quiver......
Kastle RX12 SLs (176's, roughly 70 underfoot) for hard pack/carving. Rossy Super 7 RD's (190's, 120 underfoot) for full blown pow skis (only take them out in foot+ days- lots of use this season in Tahoe!). Looking for mid 90's underfoot all mountain skis to replace my OLD Volkl Gotama's which I was using as "all mountains". Primary use would be for under 1 foot storms/powder, crud, skied out conditions and trees. Anything hard pack I'd stick with the Kastles (but would be nice to not go back to the car on some days to switch). Looking for something a little soft/playful but the ripstick green reviews have me a bit scared. I'm thinking of these in 180's given they measure short. Thoughts on these fitting in with current line up and length? Anything else I should put on radar? Thanks in advance!
The Black Edition creates a more stable and solid environment from tip to tail, but it's not a wholesale change from the green by any stretch. Most skiers in the expert range who find themselves at speed will likely enjoy the Black Edition a bit more. I'd say the 180 in that ski would be great. If you're looking for other options in this range, also check out the Stockli Stormrider 95, Blizzard Rustler 9, or Nordica Enforcer 94.
Thanks for these great videos guys, just one question about these!
I’m really considering this ski, but am torn between it and something with more metal like the m6 mantra or maverick 95. I’m a hard-charger skiing in New Zealand so my main concern is edge grip in icy conditions. I’m worried about how the 96 black would perform here, since in the past I’ve found carbon skis too soft. I’ve also had a look at a pair of these in a shop, and their flex definitely felt much softer than those skis with metal.
Any thoughts?
I'd say the Mantra will alleviate any doubt when it comes to edge grip on icy conditions. Maverick is great, but is lighter and more poppy, so it's not as damp as the Mantra. The Ripstick, although slightly more flexible, does a great job using carbon to mimic the feel of metal, but at the end of the day, the heavier, burlier, and grippier Mantra is likely what you're looking for. have fun!
SE
What do you guys think of these vs. the Black Crow Serpo? Mostly ski hard groomers in the Midwest, but want something playful for my trips West 2-3 times a year where I like to play around in all kinds of trees and chutes.
The Ripstick is the better all-around performer in terms of versatility. The Serpo has a bit of an edge in the on-trail carving energy department, but other than that, the Elan is a very complete ski.
They look like they carve longer turns very well. But watching several reviews the short quick turns on the look very washy through the tails, rather than engaging and carving in short turns.
The 88 works better for the short quick turns than the 96, I think.
Hello, great video! I am 5'7" (170 lb) intermediate skier (good parallel turns and learning to carve at this point); enjoy all mountain terrain, skiing mostly blues and blacks in Colorado and Utah. Would the Ripstick 96 (Regular vs. Black?) be too advanced for me? Also, would you recommend 164 or 172 for me (I usually rent demos around 168)? Any other skis come to mind for me? This would be my first purchase. Would love to demo them but selection is always hit or miss. Also, any recs on bindings? Thanks for any input!
Hi Damon! In my opinion, the regular Ripstick would be better for you. It's slightly softer flexing, which for you, will be a benefit. On the Black Edition, you'd likely be fighting the ski a little bit, which would hinder progression in your carving. For length, 172 should be okay for you. 164 just feels short to me, mostly for your weight. I would worry a little bit about you outgrowing that length relatively quickly, so to speak. While I could bring up other skis, there's not a huge reason to, as the Ripstick should work really well for you as you continue to progress, and is very suitable for the terrain you'll be skiing. For bindings, anything in the ~13 DIN range will be just fine. Marker Griffon 13, Tyrolia Attack 14, Salomon/Atomic Strive 14... those are all good choices.
Is there a lot of difference between Black Crow Serpo and Ripstick 96 Black? I own Moment Wildcat 108 (for powder days, but still a great carver...love this ski) and Serpo for more of the off piste on piste groomer days. Serpo is 93 under foot and all my skis are 174 in length (I'm 5'8" 235). I was considering the Ripstick's for that tweener ski, but not sure if they are too close to the Serpo's. Intermediate advanced skier.
I think it's a bit close in both shape and application. They have pretty similar feels to them, with the Serpo being slightly quicker. To split the difference between your two, on the more playful side, check out Nordica Unleashed 98, Dynastar M-Free 99, or Rossignol Blackops 98. For a more directional option, Nordica Enforcer 100, Salomon Stance 102, Volkl Mantra 102, or Stockli Stormrider 102 will fit the bill.
I have the regular ripstick 106 that I really love but I need a second pair for the regular days when there’s no fresh snow and it’s icy! I was thinking of the ripstick 96 Black edition or the kendo 88. Do you think the kendo will be fun in moguls?
For it's on-piste ability, I've had a lot of fun and success on the Kendo in the bumps. I'd say that's a slightly better option as a different ski than the 106 that you already have.
Great job again, I think I narrowed down between Elan Ripstick black and 2024 new Stance 90 , I ski Head Supershape imagnum want a second ski for new snow greater than 3 to 4 inches and bumps what’s your thoughts .I ski the west from AZSNOWBOWL to Colorado
If you have the Magnum, I'd take the Ripstick over the Stance in order to increase the distance between your skis. The Elan still turns quite well, so there's no real loss by going with the wider ski here.
I seem right between sizes on the Ripstick 96 Black. I am 5' 10.5" and 165lbs. I am torn between the 172 and the 180 sizing.
I have been skiing about 5 seasons and can comfortably ski blacks in my local resort, albeit with not always the best technique and sometimes find myself in the back seat in difficult conditions (moguls, chop, etc). I suppose that puts my skill between intermediate and advanced. My application is 80/20 resort/backcountry ski. My local resort conditions, although in Idaho, are generally 3" less of powder, if not chopped up moguls and/or ice at times. I would like to have it closer to 50% backcountry, but for now it's somewhere in between
Consider this: Ripstick skis measure about 1.5 cm shorter than stated, so that 180 is more like a 178.5 while the 172 is really a 170.5. I think this puts you more in line with the 180 vs. the 172 based on your stats and application. They're pretty light and agile so you don't really have to size down to access maneuverability.
Looking for a more playful/smeary ski to pair with my K2 MB 99ti. Would this be that much more playful and better through the trees?
Definitely more playful. If you're looking to complement your Mindbender 99, you might as well get the regular Ripstick as that's even more playful and overall stability shouldn't be a major issue at that point. Does that make sense to you?
Do any of your videos show one of your skiers on the Ripstick Black 172cm? Truthfully, I get more information by watching the turns on video than hearing about build and materials. I currently ski on an older pair of Rossignol Banit B3's 176cm. Say what you want but they are great carving skis. I am 5'8" 185 lbs. 56 year old former ski instructor thinking about going shorter for tighter turn radius on Colorado steep and deep as well as trees and bumps. Your thoughts?
I prefer watching to listening as well--I mainly skip through all the talking of our own videos just to get to the skiing! I can't recall having the 172 in the Black Edition on film--mainly just the 180 and 188. For your stats and application, I'd recommend the 172 in that ski .
Hi....excellent videos, thank you. I'm 5'8 and 185....ha ha still losing some. Skiing all my life, (advanced to expert)....Coming from and older Head with the chip in it at 180cm.......Loved it...but now time for upgrade. Last year I tried the Kore 93 170-something. After may hours of study, I'm falling in love with this Ripstick. Question, I'm leaning towards the 172s.....I'll be in the bumps and some leaning to more woods and some pow. So what size would you recommend. Should I go back to the 180s, will the 172s do good in pow and kill the bumps? thanks
I think the 172 is the way to go, especially if you're looking to get the maneuverability in the bumps and trees. Very fun skis!
what binding would you put on these? would you consider to use something like a shift on these in order to use it for some downhill oriented touring as well or would you prefer to have a dedicated downhill binding on it like the marker griffon 13
Either would work. There's a ton of versatility in this ski. It's not the lightest for touring, but light enough to justify a binding like the Shift and have it be kind of a 50/50 or 60/40 resort/touring ski. Of course, also perfectly appropriate as just an alpine ski, in which case the Griffon would be just fine, or a Tyrolia Attack, Salomon Strive, Look Pivot, etc.
@@silversurfer5400 I believe you mean the 188, not 186. Either way, they do measure a bit short, so in my experience, the 188 does ski more similar to the 186 Serpo in terms of length. If you're cool with that ski in the 186, I'd go ahead and fire up the 188. If you have felt that Serpo was too long, the 180 should be okay, but likely on the shorter side.
For a 5‘9 intermediate guy would you got with the 172 or the 180
Thanks keep up the great work
I'd go 172 based on your stats and application. have fun!
Should i get the black or a blade optic 96 for 100$ less in sale? Looking for a softer snow ski for eu conditions, that complements my elan amphibio 16 ti (73mm carving ski). I’m 5’11 160 pounds. Thanks in advance! Love your reviews
I love the RS Black, and I'd pay $100 more for it for your application. Nothing wrong with the Blade Optic, but the Elan is pretty special.
thank you so much for the review can you ski CRUD and Powder with these skis?
Totally! The wider shovel stays right on top making this ski a very well-rounded ski in a multitude of conditions and terrain. The 106 Black Edition is a better pure floater, but you're giving up some versatility with that ski.
Question, I’m skiing Enforcer 94’s 172’s, I’m 6’1” 145-150lbs, at times I’m loving them, at times they seem like too much ski for me, I’ll be 73 soon, how would the Ripstick black be for me?
Really great skis! They have the overall character of the Enforcer in terms of a high-end performance ceiling, but are quite a bit more manageable and maneuverable. I'd go with the 172 in that ski as well. Have fun!
SE
At 6'2" and about 210lbs, intermediate to advanced skier; living in New England and mostly skiing here but wanting to try out west asap; would you get the Ripstick 96 Black edition in 180 or 188cm? Was also planning to put the Marker Duke PT 16 Bindings on them. Thanks for a great channel and standing by for your suggestions/recommendations.
thanks! I'd go 188. I'm 6'2 225 and find this length to be perfect. The 180 feels short to me.
Looking to buy a pair of these 96 Blacks. What width ski brake/binding would be best?
95 or 100 mm brake, depending on what binding you go with. Always hard to go wrong with a Look Pivot, which would be the 95, although some people don't love the Pivot for various reasons, one of those is often price. Tyrolia Attacks would be just fine (95), or Marker Griffon/Jester (100). We're also quite impressed with the new Salomon/Atomic/Armada Strive binding, and with those you'd be looking at the 100 mm brake. All perfectly good bindings and perfectly appropriate on the Ripstick 96 Black.
Jeff, just noticed you are quoted on Elan's website for this ski.
Pretty cool, right?
Would these complement the Deacon 84 for soft/deeper East Coast days and annual trips out west?
Yes! Quite nicely, in fact!
@@SkiEssentials Thank you! Any thoughts on length? I am 5’9 and approx 200 lbs. I ski the Deacon 84 in 172. I am torn between 172 and 180 for these…
demoed the 96 green edition in 180cm last season I frikkin loved this ski. I want the black edition but just can't justify it... too much overlap with my current set of skis. The RipStick 96 is just such a fun ski and just works well all over the mountain 😀
That was our take on the 96 the first time we got on it. Very impressive what Elan is able to do with carbon and no metal!
SE
Ok here’s a question for you… if I replaced my 2020 wingman 86 cti with the Ripstick 96 black edition… would I be sad ? Lol I do have a head e magnum for front side carving (which is incredible btw).
@@c6moneypit8 Would you be sad? Hmm... I don't think so. Would you miss your Wingman sometimes? Sure, but as you know, the Ripsticks are just so much gosh darn fun that most of the time I think you'd just be grinning ear to ear. You're obviously giving up some carving precision and edge to edge quickness, but your Magnum should satisfy that... so, it feels like a reasonable thing to do...
Hi guys,interested in your thoughts on the rs 96 blk vs. the Rustler 9? Moving back to the east and looking for a more sensible daily driver than a 106. I am 6ft 200 lbs and currently own j skis metal 186 and chetler 120 in 190 (home mtn was Whistler). I feel confident that the 188 ripstick would be good but wonder what you think of 180 vs 188 in the rustler 9's? Thanks
It's just a bit grippier of a feel underfoot in the Rustler, but the stability overall ends up being about the same. I would feel confident with the 188 in either of those skis, honestly. Perhaps price and availability will sway your final decision.
I’m wondering how the Ripstick 96 Black would compare to the new Fischer Ranger 96. The Ranger has some metal but you describe the Ripstick Black as feeling like it has metal without actually having any. And both being fairly light and energetic. Looking for a damp stable ski for Vermont hard pack but still one that’s fun…… thoughts?
HI Gary!
Personally, I haven't had an awesome experience on the Ranger, while I'd say the exact opposite for Ripstick Black. I love how the ski pulls you into the turn and has excellent energy at the tail end. Ripstick is a fantastic mogul ski and works great in trees and softer snow--it's one of the best skis in that terrain that I've been on, and is impressive on groomers as well. On paper, the Ranger should be damper, and I've certainly talked to skiers who absolutely love it, but in my experience, the Ripstick is a clear favorite.
SE/Bob
@@SkiEssentials thanks so much Bob
Hi Skiessentials, wanted to get your thoughts. Ive been doing a lot of online research as to what i should get. Im 5'11" and 225-230lbs. I would call myself a more advanced than intermediate skier. I mainly ski in australia, so has to be able to handle groomers, and being australia, we get ice and slush often. But id also like to make the most of fresh dumps when we get them. Everything about the 96 Black sounds right for me, except i wonder if they are too soft for my weight. would you agree? Elan's calculator seemed to think i was better off with the wingman 86 Ti.. Im not after a ski to set records with, i just like to send it down the mountain in a reasonably fast, but still playful manner. Should someone like me carrying a few too many lbs be looking somewhere else maybe? Any advice would be much appreciated, including ski length! Cheers!
I'm 225 and haven't found many weak spots with the 96 Black, especially in the longer 188 as I'm 6/2. The only part I find soft is the very end of the tip but only in deep or soft snow. Other than that, the skis are pretty darn sturdy, and I have no qualms about skiing them aggressively in any type of situation. You can go with Wingman 86 for sure, but that'll limit the soft snow performance by quite a bit. I find the 96 Black to be more than capable of a carver on anything but the firmest of snow conditions. For your height and application, I'd advise the 180 in that ski. Have fun!
@@SkiEssentials thank you for your feedback!
If you found the Black edition in the 180 cm a bit too much ski, would go to the black edition in the 172 length or the non black in the 180?
Keep the length the same, dial back the build.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for your reply regarding ripstick length. Starting to think the 96 regular rip-stick in 180 may preclude the need for a 176 Ranger 102, both with Look pivots. Both in the quiver or just one? And if only one, which would you choose? Thank you!
I’m 5’11 150 at 17 but I am still growing a lot and putting on a lot of muscle and I want a ski to grow into as well. Should I get the black or green. And what size?
I'd go with the Black Edition in the 180 if you're still growing. Have fun!
SE
The Black Edition of the Ripstick 96 gets so much high praise, I was wondering if there were anything about the normal green 96 that you like more than the Black Edition?
Personally, as a larger and more aggressive skier, there is not, but for likely the majority of skiers, the 96 Green is more than enough ski, and I do like it and enjoy it, I just don't think it's a better choice for me at 6/2 225.
SE
Haven't skied the blacks but owned the greens. One thing i heard from others was that the stiffness of the blacks took away from the soft snow performance. Not that it was necessarily bad, just that the green had more flex making it feel smoother and more natural in powder.
@@AllenSmithe I think that soft-snow performance is dependent on the skier size and aggressiveness. At 6/2 225, I think the Black Edition works better for me in softer snow as well as firmer stuff.
Are these skis smooth and nibble to?
Smooth, 100%. They are nimble too, but I feel the need to ad an asterisk as they're not quite as nimble at a Ripstick 96 non-Black-Edition.
Are these still good for heavier skiers? 215-220lbs?
I'm 6/2 225 and had no issues with the 96 Black in the 188. Except the shovel in heavy soft snow. I don't love the vapor tip inserts in that application. All other zones and realms, the ski is plenty rugged.
Hello from Arapahoe Basin, Colorado. I have the option of purchasing the Elan Ripstick 96, Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition or the Atomic Maverick 95TI. I am 60 years old, 5'2" and 165 pounds. I am an advanced skier who mostly prefers carving short S turns on-piste. I ski in the western states - mostly Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah. Wondering the best option for my conditions and skiing preferences/ability? Please come visit A Basin. I'll get lift ticket for you and a friend.
For carving shorter turns, I'd say the Ripstick 96 makes a lot of sense. You can bend the whole thing so it's easier to access the entirety of the sidecut.
Can you compare these 96 black with Mpro 90 thxs
The M-Pro has a much stiffer and more responsive tail that really does a great job of gripping tight to the snow, especially firmer stuff. It's super-versatile as well, but not quite in the same way as the Ripstick that can really do everything well. For us here in Vermont, the Dynastar makes a bit more sense for one ski to have while if you ski in snowier areas, the Ripstick is a stronger option.
Just to clarify , black has two more carbon rods vs 96, all else the same
Almost. The Black Edition also has Carbon Line Technology which is a larger horizontal carbon laminate that is full-length along the inside edge, extending to full width underfoot. Fits in with the Amphibio profile nicely.
Black or mantra 6 ?
Both are great. Ripstick Black is going to feel a little more agile and playful, and with that comes a little more versatility. Mantra is definitely still the more precise ski and with greater torsional stiffness and edge grip. If you value precision and responsiveness over versatility, Mantra will generally be the way to go.
Hi...
I am 175cm 82kg intermed to advanced skier 70% on groomers, 70 + days on skis...172 or 180 lenght?🤫Thanks...kep up good work🎿💪
I'd go 172 in that ski. They're pretty stable so no real need to size up. Have fun!
SE
THANK u!!! But a allready fck up...i am gettin 180...so lets goooo omg ...the only thing that keeps me up is they are 177 cm for real...wish me luck👀🙈👌⛷️
@@pitfit7772 how are you finding the 180s? I’m similar to you although a bit lighter at 75kg. Currently on Rossi Experience HD 88s @ 172cm and trying to decide what length Ripstick to pull the trigger on