2024 Blizzard Rustler 9 Ski Review with SkiEssentials.com
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- We've had a lot of fun testing the new Rustler 9 this season. From groomers, to trees, to park, it remains a highly versatile ski. The changes implemented for 2024, in our opinion, enhance its abilities across the board.
Written Review: www.skiessentials.com/Chairli...
0:00 - Intro
3:30 - Construction
7:45 - Flex Pattern
9:35 - Shape
12:30 - On-Piste Performance
19:45 - Skidded Turns
21:30 - Off-Piste Performance
26:05 - Park Performance
30:00 - Mount Point
31:00 - A Nod to Peacemakers and Gunsmokes
Great you've done a review so fast about 2024 Blizzard Rustler, well done! Love each single video you produce, best ski reviews content out there in the whole universe.
Wow! Definitely sending this comment to the bosses!
Great review as always guys! Love the breakdown of construction, shape and skiability!! Cheers 🍻
Thanks, glad you liked it!
Great review! Blizzard really knocked it out of the park (no pun intended). I'm a directional skier and the new Rustler 9s have pretty much pushed out my Ripstick 96 Black Editions as my Tahoe daily driver (still hanging onto my Ripstick 106 Black Editions for deeper days). The tip/tail rocker, the metal and added weight of the Rustler 9s seem to smooth out chopped up groomers and variable off-piste a bit better than the Ripsticks. I'd give the Ripsticks the slight edge on groomers, but the Rustlers much quicker and pivoty in the bumps and trees. The Ripsticks seem a little twitchy when pushed and get bounced around in variable conditions, while I feel I can ski Rustler 9s more aggressively.
Totally. Great feedback! Always found that Ripstick to be such a capable on-trail ski in a carved turn while the Rustler makes slightly different turns, but really takes the off-trail performance to the next level.
@nashvegas631 Great info. I was less than impressed with the ripsticks. I actually hated the green ripstick; floppy, chattery, didn't hold a carve very well, and to top it off only do sharp turns. I am still looking for a Blizzard 9 to Demo. I might just buy one if I can't find one, I think it might become my tree ski.
Great review! You guys really do a great job of reviewing the a ski's capabilities and characteristics, but the unique twist that Ski Essentials adds is the skier body type and skiing style as it relates to the ski. As a watcher of many companies ski reviews you want to think the reviewers experience will be yours as well. We forget sometimes as skiers there are such nuances as skier body type, skiing style and level of aggression, etc. I truly respect and appreciate the input you guys provide regarding ski reviews because you share your experiences open and honestly while embracing your differences as skiers. Great stuff!
Thanks, Cam!
The more we do it, the more we realize that these choices become so incredibly subjective and a big focus of what we do is highlighting those differences. I always say that skiing is a million different things to a million different skiers, while Jeff likes to say that there are no wrong answers.
Thanks for the feedback!
SE/Bob
Hey guys, very thorough and useful. Couldn’t ask for a better review. Now, for someone like me who isn’t sure whether to switch to Rustler 10, I can’t wait to see your next complete review of the new R10. Great stuff you guys.
Will definitely be a priority this winter, although we'll likely wait for some decent snow in order to get the most out of our time. Until then, keep in mind that there's only 6mm difference in waist widths now!
Your reviews are the best 🎉❤
Thank you!
Great review as usual. I’ve watched more (of your) ski reviews this season than any other year, and I’ve bought more skis this year than any other year…
I’m beginning to think there’s a connection! 🧐
Ha! This all sounds good to me!
I've watched all vids about Blizzard Rustlers since ages ago you've started reviewing them. I really feel what you'r saying about how they changed and all these tiny details you cover. That's such an amazing experience to know that much about a ski like that. I've recently bought a pair of Rustler 10 for my girlfriend and just skied them for a change for couple of days. They really felt great in all kind of applications: tries, jumps, drops, switch skiing, even groomers. The only thing I felt about older model of Rustler 10 is that they chatter a bit when you push them really hard and they are less length than your height. So I would say for charging hard you should buy length equals to your height or even +4-5 cm longer to have this much smoother experience. I've also shifted bindings around 3cm forward and I can kinda say that probably on these skies you should not go more then 3-4 cm forward from recommended mounting point, cuz in the older version you need to kind measure the metal peace and mounting points rather than the whole ski, because tips and tails rocker length is quite different and you don't want to get to way far over the sidecut, otherwise charging, carving and fast skiing would be impacted in some way.
I have the Original Rustler 9 in the 172 cm length and I am 165 cm tall 145 lbs. I love them an find that they ski short because of the rocker in the shovel and tail. I also ski the Brahma 88 Trueblend Wood Core in the 171 cm. The Brahma’s are definitely more stable at speed but the Rustler 9 is more playful in variable conditions. I believe rocker, tip shape/ contact point and skier weight are also important factors when considering ski length.
I love your guy's reviews! You give a lot of info! There is one thing that would be helpful to me & maybe others, your stats! You have your watermark grapic in the bottom left of the screen. I would like to see also, (left and right bottom of screen); your names, height, & weight when talking about ski lengths especially. Example: @13:00 you two give your own thoughts, opinions, perspectives based on your body size to ski length ratio but we don't know your personal stats! Deciding a ski length would be easier with information to compare our personal size to you guys' because we don't all have the time/opportunity to demo multitudes of skis like you guys do. 😅
Thanks! 😁🤙
We say it lots of times in our videos--must have missed it this time. For the future: Bob=6'2 225 Jeff=5'9 160
So much choice out there right now - I feel as though you can't really go wrong with most of these ~90mm skis. I find discussions around length of skis really interesting as well. Hearing Bob (?) say he was comfortable on the QST 92 at a 177 length was surprising, and then hearing him say that he didnt feel as comfortable with that same length on the QST98 or indeed this Rustler 9 ski at a 180 length. The other thing which I like and that I sometimes wish you might spend some more time on, is what is a suitable ski to progress on for mid-intermediate type skiers. For someone still learning to carve properly, control the ski on steeper runs etc - what is a good ski? For advanced skiers, I feel like they already have a pretty good idea of what they like and don't like in a ski, as well as preferred relative dimensions etc (usually longer rather than shorter). Whereas for us intermediate types who are still trying to make sense of all these options and are still looking to progress in the basics - specific information on which skis are the most forgiving and easiest to get up on an edge/turn with, as well as maintain good control on steeper slopes, icy surfaces and off-piste terrain - this kind of information is really helpful. I'm 5'9 with a heavy build, 220lbs and I have narrowed it down to the QST 92 in a 176 length - or this ski, the Rustler 9 in the 174 length. Do you have any thoughts? Thanks again guys for all your great content!
I think it comes down to what type of turn shape or style you prefer to make. I found the QST in the 176 was an amazing ski at short to mid radius turns, especially if you're more of a skidder like me. If you want to lean a bit more into the roundness of a cleanly carved turn, the metal layering of the Rustler will allow you to access those shapes and styles. I do think there's more stability in the Rustler as a result, but I still personally prefer the QST because it fits my style more than the Blizzard. You are correct, though, between these two, and many other skis in this range, you cannot go wrong. I believe your lengths are correct for what you are looking to get out of these skis.
Thanks guys, been waiting for this one since Jan! It sounds like this does everything I'd want. My only concern is that at 6'4 200lbs whether I'm going to find the limits of the ski off piste or just during hard carving? I'd like to be able to do everything on these, but don't care as much about groomer performance beyond not making it too hard work.
I think you'll be just fine. The 186 should hold up pretty darn good to hard carving while staying reasonable enough for off-piste performance with ease.
I’ve been looking forward to this review. Very informative, Guys! I’d really like to know Bob’s opinion after skiing the 186cm length.
To me, that’s really important, actually, given his physical size.
Will update next season for sure.
Can’t wait to see if they’ve bettered the last iteration, which is amazing. Thanks for the length recommendation @skiessentials 🙏
It's an update for sure! Whether it's an upgrade is still up to the skier.
Always like checking in on your reviews guys! I have a pair of Rossignol Sprayers that are length 178, I am 5'10 189 lbs and would consider myself on the brink of being an advanced skier who likes doing a bit of everything. I feel like my Rossis are holding me back at the moment, they just don't fit my style as they're heavy, stiff, unresponsive and not very confidence inspiring when I want to get playful with them, like hitting some park laps or just playing around on off and on trail features. But they are very stable when I charge groomers and they carve well. I've been looking at a lot of replacements, like the Atomic Bent 100, and Rustler 10 because I've found great deals, but I believe I'll pass on them since the 100 underfoot is unnecessary for me. The Rustler 9 do however seem like a good fit for me, I'm just debating on if I should spend the extra cash on getting the 2024, as they seem more appealing than the 2023. Currently, I've been looking at a pair of 2024 in 180 length, the price is hefty though. Thanks.
Rustler 9 feels like a great choice for you. I agree, you don't need to go all the way to 100 underfoot. The Rustler 9 is plenty of width and retains better all-mountain versatility. In my opinion, it's worth paying the extra amount of the 2024. It's a better ski, and if you're going to spend at least a few seasons on it, it's worth getting the new version. Hope that helps! Sorry for the delay getting back to you!
Great review as always gents!! So I’m an ex racer (20 years ago now haha), and I have the 2022 Rustler 9s. Love their playfulness & their versatility (I’ve taken them from groomers to the trees to moguls to decently deep off-piste powder in Chamonix and while they weren’t perfect at any one thing, but they were super solid at everything…sort of a “Jack of All Trades / Master of None” kind of thing…which isn’t to say I don’t love them, I do) The only thing I don’t love about them is their lack of ability when if comes to real edge grip if I want to rip some fast GS turns (and drag my knuckles so-to-speak). Do the new Rustler 9s have more of that feeling or ability? Or is there something else I should be looking at? (I can’t really afford a 3-ski quiver which would obviously be ideal). Thanks so much!!
I don't really think that if you're putting a premium on edge grip that the new Rustler 9 will be that much of an improvement. Slight, I'd say, but not marked. Sticking in the same width range, for a ski that has more grip without losing the versatility, I'd take a look at the Salomon Stance 96, Armada Declivity 92Ti, or Dynastar M-Pro 99. Lots of great skis here!
Thanks so much for the reply! Cheers! -Matt
Definitely thinking about the rustler 10 as I only have a skinny ski at 72mm
Great complementary ski! A bit wider than the 9 here, so better flotation and smoothness in softer snow.
Great review as always! How would this ski stack up against k2’s mindbender ti? Thanks guys! Hope the skiing is better next year.
The Rustler has quite a bit more rocker and splay to it, so that makes it more amenable to shorter turns and more playful skiing. The K2's are burlier and more directional and function better on firmer groomed trails and in a purely carved turn. As such, the Rustler ends up being more versatile, especially in a soft snow realm while the K2's are more comfortable in firm snow, crud, and challenging conditions.
I thought maybe these were now 96 underfoot across the board but my ‘24 model in 186 length are indeed 98 underfoot. It’s all good though. Still quite quick and maneuverable for its size.
I found it quite interesting to hear you talk about mount point and mention that unless you’re skiing rails or spining 900s with the ski, you shouldnt move the mount point. I recently bought DPS Pagoda 100 skis and mounted them regular and I’m having a hard time evaluating whether I’m regretting it or not. I dont do rails but I do 360s and getting into 540s, I managed to get used to them being off centered when spinning compared to my dead center twin tips, but it still feels odd from time to time whem I land a little backseat and find myself missing some lenght at the back of my ski. Same thing goes for hitting drops where I have to be extra careful not to land backseat. I’m curious to know from you’re experience what I should be feeling and if mounting it recommended is good pratice for someone like me. By the way Im 5’11 145 lbs skiing the 179!
Firstly, and specifically, that DPS ski has a mount plate, so make sure wherever you go on that ski that the bindings sit flat to the plate. If you're considering going forward, a +2 is a good place to start. I actually like to stand on the ski with my boot and see what it looks like from a visual perspective. One of the cons is that if you go forward ahead of either the height of camber or too far into the sidecut of the forebody, you're altering the way the ski performs. This is why most technical park skis are more symmetrical.
Please do the Rustler 10! Great reviews
Ok!
Jeff's switch skiing is so amazing to watch. Btw is the new "What's in my quiver" series still in the pipeline?
The most amazing part is that he goes faster backwards than forwards. As far as the quiver videos, they're getting less interesting as we ski far less on our own skis as the years go on. While I have more skis and bindings in my house than I can count, much to my wife's chagrin, I really only use a Head Kore 93 and a Stockli Montero AR. Jeff's sitting on a few more, including a Black Crows Mirus Cor, Armada ARV 94, Elan Playmaker 91, and probably something wider. He's got a ton in storage too, but they really never get used. Kinda sad, but a good thing at the same time.
Skied the Rustler 9s (2023) a couple weeks ago at Beaver Creek. Also skied the the Atomic Maverick 88s and the Rossignol Sender 94s the same week. For the Rustlers, I think the the 180cm was 94mm under foot. Found them to be extremely maneuverable as they turn very naturally at low/moderate speeds. With all my ski gear on at 6 feet tall I'm pushing 195 lbs - but the skis definitely chattered when things started getting fast. Overall I found them to be a safe ski that seemed to do everything reasonably well, but I'd put it's greatest strength on maneuverability. Going down steep and bumpy terrain you could easily jump the skis into a sharp turn if needed. As a comparison I found the Maverick 88s to be much more fun but those skis had intense chatter when things got bumpy. *Just ordered the Kendo 88s from you all last weekend... first time I've ever looked forward to Winter at the beginning of Spring :)
Awesome! Thanks for the feedback!
As always, great review guys! what is your opinion between the 24 Blizzard Rustler 9 and the Atomic Maverick 95ti ? I'm an advanced skier who skis 50/50 primarily Midwest.
Thanks!
The Maverick is considerably more precise and adept at firmer snow conditions while the Rustler is a lot happier with something to bite into. When the snow is soft, the Rustler is decidedly more comfortable and playful--the Maverick simply wants to cut and blast through anything that's not firm. I would think the Maverick lines up better with a 50/50 midwest skier.
Guys, Another great review and I watch all of them. You were right got the Rustler 11 for Western pow days and wow is it fast and locked in over the pow and chop in the steeps love them. My question is if I wanted to replace my Ripstick 96 Black Edition quad with some metal maybe 93 to 100 under foot what would be a great replacement for ripping groomers and the back bowls/steeps in between the deeper days? Under 2000grms.? Didn't like the brahma 88 for reference. Ski on 172s. Thx guys!
Thanks, Mark!
I'm thinking of something like Black Crows Serpo or Armada Declivity 92 Ti would scratch that itch. Lots of versatility for how well they carve!
SE
Awesome thanks I will try those, still have 3 more weeks of spring skiing out here. What about the Rustler 9 to compliment the 11?
@@markfriedman8892 that's what I was wondering.. however you said "steeps" so maybe they were suggesting something with less of a twin tip tail design to ensure the best edge grip possible. I have taken my sheeva 9's down some of the steepest terrain here in the midwest, when parts of the hill (like right at the top where it's the steepest) has been super flat, icy with no loose snow to grab and my edges held! I was crossing my fingers and hoping not to die, and they were fine!! So they CAN do it I know!! I LOOOVVVEEE my Sheeva 9's if that helps you at all.
Btw really like your content guyz! 🤘And have a one question.. Last year i bought Fischer Ranger 90, I love the capability of the fast turns/stability/accuracy/carving, but it lack little payfulness/Deeper snow handling and little park capabilities...
For this point of view its seems to be the Blizzard Rustler 9 2024 is a perfect candidate!
But could you advise me on some other types of skis that have similar capabilities as im searching for ?
Rustler 9 is great. Mixing playfulness, deeper snow, and some park, also check out the Nordica Unleashed 98, Rossignol Blackops 98, and the Black Crows Camox.
Hey, any Skis you recomend for someone who likes the entire mountain. So like groomers, off piste bumps forest and would also like to learn skiing switch and hitting 180 and stuff. So a good all rounder with at least some twin tip. 6f3 180 lbs. Thanks love the vids.
Definitely this Rustler 9 and others in the mid-90's range with similar shapes. Black Crows Camox, Nordica Unleashed 98, and Rossignol Black Ops 98 all fit into this category quite nicely.
Oh man, I thought you guys forgot about these skis since you first discussed so long ago. Good thoughts.
It was nice to get a good solid chunk of time on the skis before giving final and total thoughts. It's a big move for Blizzard so we wanted to give it a fair shake.
Big ask. If you were to hazard a guess. How do you think the new changes will effect the Rustler 11 as a big mountain pow ski? I literally have a 2023 pair sitting in a cart and now I’m on the fence. 😂Thanks for doing what you guys do!
It does change it a little, but the Rustler 11 basically changes the least out of the 9, 10, and 11. The shape stays VERY similar, which reduces the differences in how it feels. The change in construction does provide a difference (more stability at a higher edge angle, less deflection, stuff like that), but it's less profound than the differences between the 9 and even the 10 too.
I live in Jackson Hole and have used your advice and purchased a few skis from y'all in the past, all of which have nailed it. My 8 1/2 y/o daughter is fine skiing the blacks here on her kid's Sheevas and Mantras. I own the '23 Nordica Enforcer 94s and like them, as well as the Cochise 106s. Bob convinced me to get the Soul Rider 87s back in the day for spending play time with my kid, and they were great, but were also my rock ski, so they're at the end of their lives. I do not find the 94's that great for doing the more light-hearted skiing with my kid and want to know if the new '24 Rustler 9's could be a replacement. My wife wants me to just buy them, but I feel like I might have too much overlap.
Again, we ski at JHMR. Thanks! I'll take any suggestions. :)
There's a bit of overlap in terms of width between the 94 and the Rustler 9 but they are very different skis in terms of feel and application. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the Rustler at all. If you're looking for a bit of an extra difference, check out the Salomon QST 98 or the Nordica Unleashed 98 (Soul Rider replacement with partial metal). Hope that helps and have fun!
SE (Bob)
Thanks, Bob! Y'all had a great deal on the Unleashed 98s with binding right now (and free mounting!) so I went and grabbed a pair after looking up the review you wrote on them. Great to have@@SkiEssentials around to help out. I'll enjoy them with my kid!
Blessings!
@@SkiEssentials FYI the Unleashed 98 I ended up purchasing from y'all is the best thing since sliced bread. I want to ski it every day! The only time that I'm not on it now is during deep powder days here in Jackson Hole. Absolutely amazing ski and I can't believe how well it carves. The only downside is that it has really made 80% of my quiver pointless. Thank you!
I’m going to ask Santa for Jeff and Bob to switch from “this ski” and “that ski” to “new ski” and “old ski”.😂
We're trying! It's a lot harder than it seems! Also, it's tough to call a 2023 ski the "old" ski.
Comparison the 2023 Mindbender 99s? Recently bought MBs from you guys and love them. I debated about waiting until you had more '24 R9s in stock. Would like to know the difference in playfulness, and stability.
As far as stability, the K2 is still more of a straight-line charger than the Rustler. If I was placed atop a big mountain with a mix of fresh and broken snow, I'd rather be on the K2. Same goes for a wide-open groomer. For moderate speeds and playful skiing, the Rustler has a lot more to offer. It depends on where you find yourself more often.
Great review, as always. How would you compare/recommend Rustler 9 (2024), Ranger 96, 4FRNT MSP 99, and Rossi Sender 94ti? I am about 5'10", 185 Colorado skier, expert, and like to ski the whole mountain, mostly off-piste, and love steeps, trees, and bumps. And yes, I enjoy a good carving session but it's usually a smaller part of my day. This would be my resort daily driver for 8" or less of powder
The Rustler and Ranger are on the playful side of the spectrum for your four skis while the MSP and the Sender are stiffer and more directional. If you're looking for an easier, smearier, and driftier experience, I'd lean to Rustler/Ranger, but for more of the all-mountain/carving experience, the other two are fantastic. The Sender flies under the radar a bit, but for no good reason other than maybe graphics. Personally, I think the Sender makes a lot of sense, and is one of my favorites on the list when it comes to blending on and off-trail performance.
@@SkiEssentials you guys are awesome, thank you
Great video! I'm 5'10", 150 lbs, getting bored by easier blues, taking harder blacks and moguls slow, looking to improve this season. Would you recommend the 168 or the 174?
I'd go 174 in that ski, especially if you're looking to improve and progress--this one will go better than the 168. Have fun!
Wonderful review as always! Any chance ya'll have the weight measurement for the Rustler 9 at the 162cm length? Thanks!
1583g/ski at 162.
@@SkiEssentials Appreciate the reply, lifted a pair of the Rustler 9s and they felt much lighter than the weight listed on Blizzards website for the 162, this helps a lot 🙂🙏
What is best for tight bumps in the 90’s width skis? I ski exclusively Rockies and Tahoe. ‘23 R9, ‘24 R9, qst 92 or 98, or unleashes? Or what? I love skiing bumps and trees. Thanks!
I'm going with the QST 92 for bumps and trees of those on your list. It's so automatic and easy to turn. Surprisingly, you get a great on-trail carve as well, so there's a lot of bonuses to this ski.
Does anybody know what resort this is in between 23:50 and 24:05? I’m guessing Stowe, VT based on the information from parts earlier in the video.
Yup! Majestic Mt. Mansfield!
Guys, So I demoed the Declivity 92 couple of weeks ago (May 26th was my last day) and loved top 2/3 but did not like the tail Esp in the corn/soft bumps/slushy conditions. Not as much as fun as the Ripstick Black. Thinking of trying the Rustler 9 at the beginning of the season, Thoughts? Rustler 11 is my deeper day ski. Sold my Ripstick 106(too soft) & Wingman 86 CTI (loved but more variable than groomed these days) for the black edition. 5'9 215lbs and 52 yo, raced in the 80s lol, hence a forward stance. Thx as always.
Hi Mark!
You may have a similar experience with the Rustler 9 in terms of the softer tail--that's where the more directional and slightly stiffer tail of the Ripstick Black comes in handy. If you like the Rustler 11, the 9 isn't that much different overall in personality and character. If you're looking for something in the ~90 range, check out the Black Crows Serpo or slightly narrower, the Atomic Maverick 88. Both of these skis have very responsive tails and still fall to the versatile side of the spectrum. Have fun!
SE
Ok Appreciate you guys! You are the best in the business. Think that the Rustler 11 was super fast also for how fat it is and super easy to release the tail.
If I put Look Pivots on the Rustler 9 (186cm length with 98mm waist)... would you recommend the 95mm brake or 115mm brake for the bindings??
The 95 will work better than the 115 on that ski. Hardly a need for any bending of brakes at the 98 mm waist.
I need help 😂 Im 189cm and 85kg, advanced’ish skier. Most of the time I spent on groomers but like to go offpiste whenever possible. I have been looking at Ripstick 96, Qst 92 and the Rustler 9. What would make the most sense? And what length would you suggest? Love the channel!
The QST 92 is a no-brainer ski--it's so incredibly fun and intuitive for both on and off-trail skiing. The 92 and the Rustler are more playful than the Ripstick 96, so if you're looking to make that a priority, I'd at least focus on those two. Rustler is great--not quite the same pop as the QST, it's more happy rolling from edge to edge.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks! I will go with the qst 92!
👍❤
Would it make sense to add these to an East Coast quiver that currently has an Enforcer 88 and Volkl Revolt 104? I’ve been going back and fourth for so long on adding these or the Nordic’s Unleashed 98, but I need some advice from the experts.
Other than the longer camber in the Unleashed, it's a pretty similar ski. I'd think the Rustler may fit better between your two other skis as the Revolt 104 seems to satisfy the more twin-tippy needs, and I definitely feel that Unleashed is more of a freestyle ski than the Rustler. Personally, if I didn't have any skis, I'd take Unleashed, but it seems like Rustler fits the hole you're looking to fill.
Great review! Do the 2024s actually ski longer than 2023? They 'look' like they would ski shorter with all the lift in the tips/tails. Any recomemdations? ; Blizzard warranty is replacing my 2023 rustler 9 @ 172 with a 2024, but they only come in 168 or 174. @ height 5'7(170cm) the 172s were great. Blizzard says the 2024 ski longer and 168 will be perfect and equivilent to the 23' 172 with the new design, but seems a bit short? But 174 is getting a bit long through trees, esp at 96 wide.
I think the new 9 skis slightly shorter than the old 9. The 10's and 11's are about the same. Based just on your stats and application, though, I'd think the 168 is a better fit than the 174. Have fun!
Looking to replace Enforcer 100. Want something a little more playful/lighter but will still perform all over the resort. We out in CO, and will spend 60-70 days guiding, coaching, playing…interested in Unleashed 98, Blade Optic 96 or this Rustler 9…thoughts??
Dope reviews, happy shredding!!
The Unleashed is a pretty natural transition. You will feel a lot of the same properties in the Enforcer in terms of turning capabilities, energy, and dampness, but it's a lot less demanding. The Rustler and Line take it to the next level in terms of ease of turning and playful character.
What do you guys think about mounting demo bindings on personal skis? I bought some Stöckli Laser ARs with the demo Warden 13 binding. I like Wardens so no problem there and I can’t say I experience a difference from conventional Wardens to demo Wardens, but I haven’t skied the same ski with both bindings.
These days I ski a lot with my nephew and he has the Laser AX, he’s 27.5 and I’m 25.5 both Mach 1s, it was nice to be able to switch skis - had me thinking why not mount the demo Wardens on all my skis?
Weight and stand height are the two big differences. Are these negatives, though? That's kind of up to you. On narrower skis, this gets you up another 5-10mm so you will have more leverage as well as more of a solid/hefty platform to stand on. I think it's better on narrower skis like the AR than it is on wider skis, since most skiers prefer to be closer to the snow on more freeride-oriented models. I'd wonder if the brakes are too wide for an AX? Just a thought.
Probably a question you guys get a lot of, but aside from the obvious differences in construction and shape, how does the Rustler compare to the QST 92 in terms of tree and mogul prowess? From your videos I get that the Rustler is probably a ski you can push a lot, but there is still some forgiveness there. With a Montero AX and an Origin 106, I'm looking for something to slot in the middle of my quiver. Something that is suitable for those days where I don't know where I'm going to be skiing.... I could be skiing trees and bumps all day and don't want to get punished, but maybe I'm bombing runs frontside. I like everything Bob has always said about the QST 92, but is it enough ski would be my question??? For reference I'm 6'1" 200lbs and consider myself a fairly advanced skier.
It's a good question. I (Bob) am eternally impressed with this QST 92. At 6/2 225, I skied the 176 in this video ruclips.net/video/bLQ4lPDmB_o/видео.html and never found it to lack in any department. Personally, I prefer how the QST has more pop and precision over the Rustler. I actually find the Rustler to be on the flexible side for my liking, especially at higher speeds. Both make very clean and round turns, but I like the zip of the QST compared to the lower energy of the Rustler 9.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks Bob! I'm similar in size to you and looking for a fun do it all ski that I can take in the trees and bumps. My other ski is a Stockli AX, so the QST would be for those days where I don't know where I am going to be skiing. Some of my friends are constantly ducking into the woods, or looking for bumps and side hits..... not exactly where the AX excels.
That “tuning fork” design is quite similar to the BC Serpo. Thoughts on how it compares?
Serpo, Mindbender 89Ti, Rustler, even Kendo/Mantra to some degree--all use this style of construction. For the Serpo, specifically, the energy and pop out of the tail is more apparent than in the Rustler, which is a lot smearier and friendlier in the back third of the ski. I like the energy of the Serpo but the playfulness of the Rustler.
For someone 5'7" without shoes on, would you suggest the 174 or 168 length? I would normally go 168, but due to the increased rocker, should I go 174 instead? Thanks.
The rocker doesn't necessarily make this ski feel shorter. I'd say the 168 is the way to go here.
Hi guys, quick question after a great review. About me expert level can ski anywhere after 65 years and racing etc. 5’9 about 185. I have the old rustlers in a 180 and a 173. I normally ski brahama 88 in a 173 as my daily driver switching to the rustlers when it gets softer or some new snow. I have found the 173 rustlers to feel to short and the 180’s a bit long for tree skiing etc. getting older after 65 years and a new knee, heading to Steamboat this winter and I am just trying to decide which length to go with in the new ones. Any thoughts?
I would go 174 in the new one. The 180 is likely going to feel long, still.
Hello, great review! what length would you recommend? 186cm, 80kg, advanced/expert skier, mostly off Piste (70/30 in Alps, powder is rare here) I´d use this with a shift as an allround ski even for short skitours. Or would you go for the rustler 10? Thx!
I'd say the 9 is a better option for your stats and application. They're pretty good floaters if you do encounter the deeper days. I'd go with the 180 in that ski.
Thank you!@@SkiEssentials
I have a pair of Dynastar M-Free 108's that I use as a daily driver out west. I generally prefer a wider ski & I really love them for softer snow conditions & for when I'm in a more playful skiing mood. That said, they're a pretty heavy ski and I want a set of skis that are narrower in waist width for days when the snowpack is harder and for when I want to do more all-mountain charging vs playful smeary skiing. Do you think these Rustler 9's or Rustler 10's would be a good fit? How would the Rustler's compare to something like a QST 98 for what I want? For context, level 3 skier who spends a lot of time skiing trees & bowls out west. Thanks!!!!
I'd think the 9 would be a better complement, but the 10 would be a better replacement. The QST 98 brings it to the next level in terms of flotation for a 98--lots of rocker and taper here to go along with a short radius. This makes the QST quite a bit different from the more traditionally shaped Rustlers. If you like trees, though, the QST 98 is fantastic, while in bowls, the Rustler 10 is smooth, stable, powerful, and yet still maneuverable.
@@SkiEssentials thanks so much! incredibly helpful and appreciate the follow-up
Great review, I'm 187 at 84 kg, would this ski in 186 be to much for me? I''m currently on Maverick 86C in 176 cm
I think your stats can put you on the 186. This way you'll never have to wonder if you left performance on the table by going with the shorter length.
First of all, I started watching one of your other videos that just came out and i didn't watch the end.. Maybe it will come up so i can watch the end..
Second, very thorough description of size..
I liked how you compared the construction to Volkl mantra... How does the performance compare to the mantra.. I did test the mantra 103 but there is a mantra 96 that i see more out in Colorado...
You guys also mentioned when skis chatter.. Both my 104 Free and my Foundation 100 RP chatter on icy corduroy but are great in the slush.. I know you compared this ski to the Unleashed.. That ski has less metal than the Free..
While the Mantra does not really seem to have a speed limit, we've found the Rustler to top out in the shorter lengths. It's not quite as solid or stable as either M6 or 102, but is significantly easier to turn at more moderate speeds and in variable conditions and terrain.
All skis chatter. We look at a lot of slow-motion video and it's amazing that even the most sturdy skis out there have some variation of bounce to them when they're put to the test. Metal just quiets that movement, it doesn't really remove it.
@@SkiEssentials i think what i am finding is there is no "perfect" ski.. i can use my stockli during the ice and my 104 Free or DPS Foundation for when conditions are soft..
i am still interested in the stockli 105s or 102s to try them out in all conditions.. i don't think that i want to try the 2023s just because they are blowing out at the heal..
Would you go with the 180 or 186? Im 1,85m 70kg and an Advanced Skier
I think it's okay to go 186 in this ski unless you're looking specifically for maneuverability or mobility.
Before I even watched I already had typed out this or QST 98.. and then I watched the review.. I demoed the QST 98 and liked it. I'm 5'9" 160lbs and skied the 183. The length feels intimidating on paper but actually skied fine. Only thing I'm wondering would the Rustler be more stable in variable off-piste conditions. I assume the QST 98 floats better but if things are choppy or wind buffed.
I'm probably overthinking here since I skied the QST and liked it but I keep speccing skis all the time. Right now I have Ripstick 88 and Stance 90 (the old green one). Is the Rustler and QST so similar that there really isn't a difference.. or does one shine over the other in some areas?
sorry to hijack your post. how do you feel the ripstick compares to the Stance? i demo'd the risptick96 and smiled from ear to ear in soft snow until i hit the crud and windbuff (what i end up skiing 90% of the time) i fellt the ripstick was too light and i got bounced around too much for my type of skiing. i thought maybe the stance might be a good inbetween (playfullness vs performance) or on the other side of the spectrum the rustler9
Can't speak about the Stance, but I'm moving from the RS96 Black Edition to the 2024 R9s. I also feel like the Ripsticks are less planted and get bounced around more compared to the Rustlers in variable conditions.
@@nashvegas631 cool, thx for the input
@@urbanrunoff I have the old Stance so can't say much about the new one. There is a reason I keep both the ripstick and stance. They are very different ski and I'm glad I have both.
I would love you guys to answer this question.
Which one is better in the bumps, qst98 or russler 9.
Hi Jeff, I'm 5'10 and 184 lbs intermediate to advance skier. I ski 65% groomers and 35% off piste. Reading below i can see you advise to go with the 174cm length. But i'm concerned about the big rocker and shorter effective length. On the other hand, you are the same height and skiing the 180. What do you think ????
I think if you're concerned, one way or the other, and both sizes will work, then go with your instinct. The 180 will not be too long. Many skiers think they want a longer ski due to the added stability, but then end up really enjoying the slightly shorter versions--that's been our experience anyway!.
It would
Be interesting to compare Rustler 9 with Armada’s Declivity 92.
The Rustler is making a move to the more freeride side of the spectrum while the Declivity is staying pretty rooted in the all-mountain realm. There's more carving power and edge grip in the Declivity, and the gap has gotten bigger with this new Rustler, at least in terms of high-speed performance.
Being 6’2 on the lighter side at 165 and a advanced/expert skier. But am young and still gaining weight what length would you recommend the 180?
I think 180 sounds good!
Love the review! Pretty sure Rustler 9 is going to be in my ski quiver this winter. I just turned 65 ( 5’11” and 185 lb ) but still ripping through the bumps at Killington in May when the air temperature is 70 degrees. Need a ski that can handle these conditions but also hold on the ice. Thinking 180 cm.
Thoughts?
Yes and yes. Great choice and length. Have fun!
How would you compare this new rustler to the black crows serpo or the fischer ranger 96? Stability, maneuverability , edge hold, playfulness, etc,
The Serpo still stands out among this grouping as having the most snappy energy out of a turn. The Ranger is pretty quiet and subdued with not a lot of pop. I feel the Rustler falls somewhere in the middle--nice energy, very smooth, and insanely versatile. It's the smeariest of the group as well, making it very playful and fun, but the Serpo has the best grip and edge hold in a carved turn.
Would you agree the rustler 9 is losing some of its east coast credentials with this update? I like the update with the core materials and metal but I think they over did it with the changes to shaping. We’re losing some of the hard snow and ice integrity with the increased rocker and taper in the tips and tails, reducing the effective edge; and the increase in waist width further reduces its ability to grip hard snow.
I do think the shaping changes make it a better soft snow, west coast ski, but at that point id rather opt for something wider like the rustler 10.
The serpo seems to be the better east coast option, but I’m losing the better playful character the previous gen rustler had.
I don’t think the increase in torsional rigidity/vibration dampening outweighs the reduction in effective edge and waist width for how the ski performs to grip in hard/icy snow conditions.
I don’t even expect you to reply at this point I’m just riding here to record my thoughts.
If I had it my way I would’ve made the gen 3 rustler 9 with the same shaping characteristics of the previous gen (rocker, camber, and taper), the lengths of this new gen, a consistent updated waist width of 94 mm for all lengths, and the updated core with the trublend wood core and flux form titanal shaping.
Is a Marker Griffon 13 appropriate on this ski?
Very much so!
rustler 9 vs fischer Ranger 102, which one would you like to be in your daily quiver? So hard for me to make the decision.
I'd take the Rustler 9 pretty quickly over the Ranger personally. Better carver, better tree ski, and more consistent from tip to tail.
Jeff, since you probably would read my comments here, please answer how did you mounted your Nordica Unleashed 98 from recommended forward?
I have same skiing style and intentions like you, that's why I want to mount them exactly the same way, please share the info with me. Will soon make an order to get them shipped to me.
Will the new Hustle 9 have the same shape changes?
Not yet, at least not for 2024, and we haven't heard or seen anything from Blizzard that would suggest a change soon.
Vs the old Rustler 10? They seem close?? Cheers Nick
It's getting closer! That was one of our first reactions is that it's creeping in on the Rustler 10. Is that leaving room for a Rustler 8? When I suggested that, the Blizzard people were either feigning ignorance or truly hadn't thought about it.
How would these compare to the Line Blade Optic 96?
They are very similar in both feel and application. I'd say the Rustler is capable of making cleaner and rounder turns while the Line feels more grippy and composed underfoot. From a flotation standpoint, I like the Line as it has pretty forgiving tips and tails that allow for greater maneuverability and playfulness in the softer snow.
hey guys. in wich ski resort are you testing the skis?
Mainly at Stowe, Vermont, but also some of this was shot at Sugarbush VT.
How it compares to BC serpo ? I’m an intermediate skier, 70% groomers and 30% off piste/ crud.
I don’t ski switch but would like to learn. Would the serpo have enough tail rocker?
Not much powder in east coast. Which one is better? and more maneuverable and forgiver?
The Rustler sounds like a better match if you're looking for more creativity and playfulness in your skiing. The Serpo is very precise and energetic--great rebound and pep, but not a ton of versatility, especially when standing next to the Rustler 9. That ski is very capable and smooth both on and off-trail. It's also more maneuverable and forgiving and likes to make rounder turns with decent stability versus the shorter more zesty turns of the Serpo.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks ! Any thoughts on jskis fastforward ? How it compares?
@@juancibert Regrettably, we do not spend much time on J Skis as we are not a dealer. We do know that they make a fantastic product and will certainly compare favorably against more established skis with similar builds and shapes.
I am 178cm tall and 168pounds
I am advanced (expert) skier with 30 years of skiing experience.
I cannot decide if 174 or 180 will be a better fit for me? Can you advise
I'd go 174 based on your stats and application unless you know you prefer longer skis.
Just bummed they would max this ski out at 186. For us 6 foot plus guys we really need something more like 190, especially with all the rocker they put in them. Had the old rustler 9s in 188 and loved them. I like the look and style of the new 2024 so much more.
At 6/2 225, I hear you. I also had a nice time on the 180 (haven't skied the 186 yet). I finally got on the 188 Rustler 9 last year and loved it. The new 186 will feel shorter than that, and that is kind of a shame. I just can't imagine they'd sell enough of the 192 (were they to make it) to justify. The new 10 comes in a 192--maybe that's worth a look for you? It's really only just 6 mm wider underfoot.
So maybe similar to the Maverick 95 ti? But with the Rustler on the playful side and the Maverick on the carvier/grippier side?
Correct--maybe a bit more different than similar--the Maverick is certainly a stiffer ski, especially in the tail. There's a lot of splay in the tips of the Rustler as well, but essentially you are right, just maybe a bigger gap.
@@SkiEssentials gotcha, thanks! I might try to demo one or the other next trip!
Hey guys. Best vids out there!! East coast guy who also does a trip or 2 out west per year. Age 61, 5’10” & 180 lbs advance/expert skier that is riding Enforcer 104’s at 179cm. Looking for a ski that is a little more playful and easier in bumps and trees and thinking the 2024 R9’s may be way to go. Do you agree and if so should I go 174 or 180 in length?
Question 2 - Attack 14 or Griffon 13 binding on this ski? I have the Griffon’s on my E104’s and can attest to the difficulty getting back in with deeper snow.
Great choice! I'd go 174 in that ski especially if you're looking to emphasize bumps and trees. If you're not in love with the step-in ability of the Griffon, you're not alone. The Attack 14 is a very comparable binding that's a lot easier to get in and out of.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks a lot and keep up the great work Bob and Jeff.
Rustler 11 2024 vs the old version? What is the take?
It's more similar in terms of shaping than the 9's are. The 10's and 11's follow very similar footprints, just getting the construction updates. The TrueBlend core does make a difference, and now the 11 has metal going nearly tip to tail rather than solely in the center. We haven't skied them a whole lot in the intended realm, but we're looking forward to it!
Hey guys! 183 cm height, 170/175lbs, 35 years old, was a snowboarder for 20+ years before taking up skiing three years ago. I'd consider myself as an athletic progressive intermediate since I already have all of the prior snowboarding experience. I like to ski at a medium speed and do medium sized turns. Blue and black runs, however don't have much experience as of yet in moguls or ungroomed blacks. Would you recommend the 180 or the 174? The 180 is just below the top of my head whereas the 174 is about ~10 cms shorter than my height. Thanks in advance!
I'd go 174 if you're more in the medium range.
Thanks for getting back to me!@@SkiEssentials
After listening to your video and how well this ski carves
Can you compare the Blizzard Rustler 9
Vs
Volkl Mantra M6
Certainly! In that comparison, it's mostly about precision and turn initiation. The Mantra has more camber and less rocker, so feels more precise when initiating a turn. It feels more responsive in how it's reacting to your skier input. The Rustler isn't as precise, nor does it have quite as much grip when you're in a carve, but it's smoother in initiation, or rather easier and more gradual. Then you get a lot more versatility out of it for other turn shapes, snow conditions, etc.
How does the rustler 9 compare to the origin 96 now?
The Rustler is still more of a precise and stable ski, and that is more pronounced when running flatter. The Origin really comes to life when it's up on edge, and is very smeary and drifty when ridden at lower edge angles. This isn't a good or bad thing, but some skiers may or may not like it. Rustler still feels like it wants to do things when it's at shallower angles.
@@SkiEssentials thats an interesting comparison. I know the origin and old rustler used to come up in the same conversation with you guys at times. Is that still the case? Interesting none the less. The origin is certainly a fun ski to get up on edge in the corn. Happy spring days!
For Jeff: What is the ski that propells you (a lighter guy) out of a turn with the most energy?
The Kore 93 or the Black Crows Serpo are two of the most energetic skis out there.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for the reply! I actually purchased the Serpo. I loved the Mirus Cor, but ultimately the Serpo's higher speed limit won me over. I would love to try the core 93, but I am skeptical about it having no metal!
Right now the 2023 Rustler 9's are on sale for $450 and the 2024 rustler 9's retail for around $750, so if I was in the market for a Rustler would you say that the 2024 is $300 better than 2023? :)
That's more of a discussion between you and your bank account. Some skiers, to no surprise, are incredibly wealthy. To them, it's not even a conversation. As you move to the middle of the pack where $300 does make a difference, it gets murkier. My general thought process is that if you want the skis, just don't go out to dinner and drinks like 3 times and then your ski is paid for. Objectively, it's more sophisticated so you can definitely argue that it's a better or more valuable product. Is it going to be this way for everyone? Definitely not.
I got the skis and at the bottom of the skis it says engineered in Austria and in the middle it says made in Ukraine. Is that right. And I have a little QR qode on my skis.
This is correct!
What’s your opinion on the rustler 9 compared to the black crows camox for all mountain capability? Both latest versions
The Rustler is quite a bit turnier. The Camox likes to make short, poppy, and somewhat skidded turns, or longer drawn out carves. The Rustler makes very clean and round turns and prefers to adhere to the radius in this regard. There's a lot more splay in the Rustler as well, so if you get it in softer snow, it'll pop out of the deep stuff a bit better. I also like the Rustler's pivoting nature more than that of the Camox, which kind of has to be driven a bit harder to access the performance.
awesome thanks for break down@@SkiEssentials
Vs Enf 94?
The Enforcer still has a pretty big leg up in terms of top end power and stability, but the Rustler has more range when it comes to different turn shapes, styles, snow conditions, and terrain. On a groomed trail, or at higher speeds in crud and chop, I'd rather ski the Enforcer.
REally interested in this ski and the Atomic Maverick. 6'2'" 200 lbs older but still agressive skier, looking for something that I can ski groomer but spend a lot of time in trees, some bumps/bowl/chutes. Curious how you all would compare or reccomend?
I'm assuming you're meaning the Maverick 95 as it's closer to the Rustler's 96 mm width. Of those, if you're looking for more downhill and fall line aggressiveness, the Atomic will hold up better. The Rustler is great, but is more focused and happy in maneuverable and agile turns. It's a smearier and driftier ski while the Maverick is more precise. If you are spending a lot of time on the groomers, the Maverick is great. Even in the off-piste zones, there's a good amount of versatility. It seems like you're a Maverick skier based on your application.
How are these compared to the rossignol sender free 110 for a one ski quiver?
There not even in the same category. Rossi sender 94ti better comparison
Actually skied the Sender 94 and the Rustler 9 on back to back days. Am Intermediate and found the Rustlers much easier to ski. The Senders felt like they were a bit much for me but they did seem to be more comfortable with speed. Overall, making turns on the Senders was a bit tiring by end of day. Felt like Rustlers were more beginner/intermediate whereas Senders were borderline Expert
@@mcleanirish I agree with you a hundred percent. I skied the sender this year. I'm a pretty advanced skier. I found them a bit difficult to turn and pretty heavy. Very stable but not really my style. Check out the atomic maverick ninety 5 or onehundred. Really light but still has two sheets of metal and stable. Great ski for an intermediate that's developing.
@@carterfan80 Heard good things about the Maverick 95 - that one seems to be the sweet spot as it's consistently the most well-reviewed of that line. 88s were super fun but inconsistent with stability. Ended up with the Kendo 88s. Can't wait to try next winter
Definitely looking at the Rustler 11 to be lined up to the Sender Free rather than the 9. At that point, I'm hoping you ski in an area with a lot of snow because those are both pretty wide to be your only ski. If that's the case, then good for you! The Sender Free 110 is a bit more playful in the soft snow with a lighter swing weight while the Rustler 11 has some more precision to it.
I'm still trying to decide on a length. Between 174 and 180. Can you please tell me your guys height and weight so I can make an idea?
Author, please help this man.
I personally know him, he has been beating himself up for more than a week trying to decide. He's a decent skier, about 1.78m in height but has a hunchback so...
@mgabrielg 😂 if they don't answer, you'll have to drive to Austria and try them on for me. There's no other option unfortunately.
Also, he has been driving his (male) partner nuts discussing the pros and cons of the 180 skis.
Love this mini-thread. I think it skis true to size for the most part. I'm 6/2 225 and did just fine on the 180, although I would buy the 186 for myself. Jeff is 5/10 (177 cm) and would do the 180 all day. Based on solely stats, I think the 180 is the way to go. It'd suck to get the smaller size and then realize you left performance on the table. Have fun!
SE
That snow looks shit. But your turns do not.
Thank you?