Very interesting take, most reviews I have seen and people that I have talked to share the opinion that the new Rustler 9 is quite soft. Given that the Ranger has much stiffer tales I'd think it would be the better carver and less playful off piste.
The new Rustler isn’t soft, it is softer than certain hard charging skis that are more front side oriented. The new Rustler 9 is better at carving than the Ranger 96, one of the first things you’ll notice skiing them side by side. The Ranger 96 is better at carving than the old Rustler 9.
Another great comparison as always, been really debating which to pick between these two. Both seem like true jack of all trades. Unfortunately life is about choices and I can't get both so... Which would you recommend overall as well as tips on length? I'm 167 cm 155 lbs advanced skier here in the Rockies, previously skiied on rental Deacon 8.0s (Not to be confused with deacon 80s) @165 cm, but these struggled in 2+ inches of fresh snow and am looking for something more playful and spontaneous. I ski everything and like to go everywhere, but favorite terrain is tight trees / bumps (and on the opposite end of the spectrum, steep alpine bowls!), and when on groomers I really like to carve. Also, George seemed really positive about the Rustlers, so leaning towards them. Would y'all happen to know what length he skiied in relation to height as well? Thanks guys. So stoked for the season.
How does the new Rustler 9 compare to the Armada Declivity 92 Ti and the Elan Ripstick 96 (and Ripstick 96 Black)? Looking for something to mainly ski the hardpack that Cannon / Wildcat brings as well as the soft snow in the glades at those mountains. Would the Rustler 10 be too wide for that application? I saw in your end of year round up that the Rustler 9, Rustler10, Ripstick 96 Black were in majority of your top 5 skis...
@robertlopes2163, All three of these are awesome skis, and they all live on our top tested list for the 23/24 season. The Declivity 92ti is going to offer the most hard snow performance out of these options. It grips well, carves a mean turn and won’t ever stutter as you pick up the pace. With all of that hard snow performance the Declivity can sometimes feel out of place in tighter terrain, they do fine, but aren’t the most maneuverable of the group. Ripstick 96 Black is going to be the most well-rounded option. It grips nearly as well and offers just about the same level of power as the Declivity, it’s lighter and more maneuverable than the Declivity 92 making the Ripstick Black a better choice if you do find yourself off trail every now and then. The regular ripstick 96 is a great ski, it will be more maneuverable than the ripstick black but it won’t carve as well or feel as strong on groomers. The Rustler 9 is more similar to the Ripstick 96 Black but it is more playful and the use of metal in the ski gives it a more damp feel over firm terrain. It won’t be as powerful as the Declivity or the Ripstick 96 black, but the playful qualities combined with the metal make it a really well rounded ski. Rustler 10 may be too wide and more playful than you could be seeking considering you’re trying to find a ski that can handle both groomers and trees really well. You really can’t go wrong with any of these options, if we had to steer you towards one option it would be the Ripstick 96 Black.
hey guys, since im choosing new skis for the rest of the season, i was wondering if you could do a review / comparison for the Rustler 9 vs Ripstick Black (vs serpo..)..? i'd appreciate that so much 100mm skis :D).
You certainly are convincing. I love to carve hard too and I think about changing my 2020 Rustler 9 for the new and improved version. About length, I currently ski 180cm which I consider perfect for me given the shape of the ski ( I’m 5’9 , 180 lbs). Should I consider going a little shorter with the new ones given the new width and slightly different footprint ?
@gmorissett2022, since you are 175cm tall, you are definitely in between 174 and 180. If this ski is a true all a-rounder most of us would be skiing the 174 if we were in your shoes. The 174 will be more versatile in bumps and trees and tight spots. If you value control at speed and want a higher speed limit the 180 will offer that stability at the cost of nimbleness.
So their places swapped LOL. Based on your last year review the Ranger is better on firm and now the Rustler is. I guess the old Rustler is the most playful.
I am looking for skis in this category for the '24 season. One of the skis I am considering, which I think would be similar to these 2 is the Black Crows Serpo. Could you compare and contrast where this one would fit in. I ski mainly east coast vermont mountains. Need a ski for the hard pack but also like to explore a little and spend time skiing the sides of trails.
Serpo is strongest, most powerful, and groomer focused; however that makes it the least maneuverable off trail (still capable off trail if you’re a stronger skier). Rustler falls in the middle, more capable/stronger on a groomer than the ranger, but more playful and maneuverable than the Serpo. Rustler would be the best option for a skier who truly spends a ski day across different parts of the resort; trees, groomers, side of the trail. Ranger is more similar to the Rustler, being the most playful and nimble. Ranger is more than proficient on a groomer, and it grips well in a turn, it’s just the most playful of the bunch. (All of these skis are on our top tested list, can’t really make a bad choice; however based on the description of his skiing style he might be best off with a Rustler)
@@TheSkiMonstersomething more versatile. I’ll have the bent 100 for more soft snow relaxing skiing and the Brahma for hard pack hard charging. Just looking for something that can be more all mountain. Hit groomer, take on some crud, that sort of thing. Home mountain is targhee and I’m a big aggressive skier.
Very interesting take, most reviews I have seen and people that I have talked to share the opinion that the new Rustler 9 is quite soft. Given that the Ranger has much stiffer tales I'd think it would be the better carver and less playful off piste.
The new Rustler isn’t soft, it is softer than certain hard charging skis that are more front side oriented. The new Rustler 9 is better at carving than the Ranger 96, one of the first things you’ll notice skiing them side by side. The Ranger 96 is better at carving than the old Rustler 9.
The old Rustler 9 was a legend
Agreed! and the new Rustlers will also be legends
I gave the previous model Rustler 9 and it was made in Ukraine, but the company Blizzard is Austrian.
The Rustlers are in fact pressed in the Ukraine but then finished in their Mittersill, Austria factory.
Another great comparison as always, been really debating which to pick between these two. Both seem like true jack of all trades. Unfortunately life is about choices and I can't get both so... Which would you recommend overall as well as tips on length? I'm 167 cm 155 lbs advanced skier here in the Rockies, previously skiied on rental Deacon 8.0s (Not to be confused with deacon 80s) @165 cm, but these struggled in 2+ inches of fresh snow and am looking for something more playful and spontaneous. I ski everything and like to go everywhere, but favorite terrain is tight trees / bumps (and on the opposite end of the spectrum, steep alpine bowls!), and when on groomers I really like to carve. Also, George seemed really positive about the Rustlers, so leaning towards them. Would y'all happen to know what length he skiied in relation to height as well?
Thanks guys. So stoked for the season.
@@uncledabob I am 5’11 213 lbs and ski a 186 in the Rustlers. a 180 will work but it won’t be enough in deeper snow or carving on groomers.
Would you please do a comparison between the 2024 Blizzard rustler 9 and the Atomic Maverick 95ti?
we'll add it to the list for sure!
How does the new Rustler 9 compare to the Armada Declivity 92 Ti and the Elan Ripstick 96 (and Ripstick 96 Black)?
Looking for something to mainly ski the hardpack that Cannon / Wildcat brings as well as the soft snow in the glades at those mountains.
Would the Rustler 10 be too wide for that application? I saw in your end of year round up that the Rustler 9, Rustler10, Ripstick 96 Black were in majority of your top 5 skis...
@robertlopes2163, All three of these are awesome skis, and they all live on our top tested list for the 23/24 season. The Declivity 92ti is going to offer the most hard snow performance out of these options. It grips well, carves a mean turn and won’t ever stutter as you pick up the pace. With all of that hard snow performance the Declivity can sometimes feel out of place in tighter terrain, they do fine, but aren’t the most maneuverable of the group. Ripstick 96 Black is going to be the most well-rounded option. It grips nearly as well and offers just about the same level of power as the Declivity, it’s lighter and more maneuverable than the Declivity 92 making the Ripstick Black a better choice if you do find yourself off trail every now and then. The regular ripstick 96 is a great ski, it will be more maneuverable than the ripstick black but it won’t carve as well or feel as strong on groomers. The Rustler 9 is more similar to the Ripstick 96 Black but it is more playful and the use of metal in the ski gives it a more damp feel over firm terrain. It won’t be as powerful as the Declivity or the Ripstick 96 black, but the playful qualities combined with the metal make it a really well rounded ski. Rustler 10 may be too wide and more playful than you could be seeking considering you’re trying to find a ski that can handle both groomers and trees really well. You really can’t go wrong with any of these options, if we had to steer you towards one option it would be the Ripstick 96 Black.
hey guys, since im choosing new skis for the rest of the season, i was wondering if you could do a review / comparison for the Rustler 9 vs Ripstick Black (vs serpo..)..? i'd appreciate that so much 100mm skis :D).
You certainly are convincing. I love to carve hard too and I think about changing my 2020 Rustler 9 for the new and improved version. About length, I currently ski 180cm which I consider perfect for me given the shape of the ski ( I’m 5’9 , 180 lbs). Should I consider going a little shorter with the new ones given the new width and slightly different footprint ?
@gmorissett2022, since you are 175cm tall, you are definitely in between 174 and 180. If this ski is a true all a-rounder most of us would be skiing the 174 if we were in your shoes. The 174 will be more versatile in bumps and trees and tight spots. If you value control at speed and want a higher speed limit the 180 will offer that stability at the cost of nimbleness.
Which would you say is surfier and more forgiving?
Ranger 96
So their places swapped LOL. Based on your last year review the Ranger is better on firm and now the Rustler is. I guess the old Rustler is the most playful.
Correct. Based on the updated construction of the all new 2024 Blizzard Rustlers these got swapped.
I am looking for skis in this category for the '24 season. One of the skis I am considering, which I think would be similar to these 2 is the Black Crows Serpo. Could you compare and contrast where this one would fit in. I ski mainly east coast vermont mountains. Need a ski for the hard pack but also like to explore a little and spend time skiing the sides of trails.
Serpo is strongest, most powerful, and groomer focused; however that makes it the least maneuverable off trail (still capable off trail if you’re a stronger skier). Rustler falls in the middle, more capable/stronger on a groomer than the ranger, but more playful and maneuverable than the Serpo. Rustler would be the best option for a skier who truly spends a ski day across different parts of the resort; trees, groomers, side of the trail. Ranger is more similar to the Rustler, being the most playful and nimble. Ranger is more than proficient on a groomer, and it grips well in a turn, it’s just the most playful of the bunch. (All of these skis are on our top tested list, can’t really make a bad choice; however based on the description of his skiing style he might be best off with a Rustler)
Do you have a review on the Peak skis that I saw on this video?
ua-cam.com/video/G2b-iV2KX_4/v-deo.html
and
ua-cam.com/video/bRKmnHJ5pAE/v-deo.html
Which would you guys pair with a Brahma 88 and a bent 100? (I own both and want something in between.) thanks!
What will the usage be? Are you looking for a Powder ski, a carving ski or something more versatile? Where and how do you ski?
@@TheSkiMonstersomething more versatile. I’ll have the bent 100 for more soft snow relaxing skiing and the Brahma for hard pack hard charging. Just looking for something that can be more all mountain. Hit groomer, take on some crud, that sort of thing. Home mountain is targhee and I’m a big aggressive skier.