I've personally had more success and happiness on the M-Free 99--I love the mobility, smoothness, and energy out of the turn. The Fischer is a fine ski and works great in a variety of conditions and terrain, but I've simply felt more comfortable and confident on the M-Free 99.

They're pretty playful on the line, especially in softer snow. Beware of moving bindings on the Ranger Ti skis as they have the shaped Ti laminate that thins at the midsole line. If you go +2, you're altering the intended flex and use of the metal.

The QST 98 feels like a more complete and cohesive ski. I'd say that's a better choice. It's a bit narrower, but it's also more rockered and tapered, so it has an amazing amount of flotation to it while keeping a shorter and more responsive turn radius intact. The 102 is fine, but nothing really stands out about it like the QST.

Personally, I have had nothing but overwhelmingly positive experiences on the Justis--it's one of my all-time favorites. That said, it's also on the stiffer and more demanding side, especially of these three skis. I'd put the Rustler in the middle and the Ranger on the lower end, as I've not really found a connection with that 102 quite yet.

I think it's okay to size up on these skis--I'd go 176.

Thank you! @@SkiEssentials

It's not a huge difference in terms of power and performance between those skis. If you're looking for a sturdier 108, I'd look more to the Armada Declivity 108, K2 Mindbender 108, or Volkl Katana on the stiffer side.

The Enforcer is a more crisp turner thanks to the shape and profile. The Ranger has a wider forebody with some spoony taper, and that makes it a bit slower to pull into the turn. No such issues with the Enforcer, as that ski just jumps at the chance to initiate. Since it has two full sheets of metal, the Enforcer is more damp and stable at speed. It also has more of a twin tipped shape, so it's keeping playfulness and creative performance at the front of the discussion. Since it's heavier, it's more demanding, so the Ranger is more nimble and easy to use.

I'd put it at the bottom in terms of performance between those three. The Rossignols are a lot more directional in nature and use not only metal in the build, but also their carbon alloy matrix, and this makes them stiffer and more capable of carving from tip to tail. The 106 takes it to the next level with a denser wood core and even more metal for supreme dampness and power at speed.

The 106 is a sturdier and more consistent ski from tip to tail. The Ranger is a fun floater and has some good underfoot grip, but the Salomon is stiffer throughout, and when combined with the smooth taper in the ends, makes for an equally smooth and predictable performance. The shovels of the Ranger, especially for heavier and more aggressive skiers, leave some performance on the table, mainly in firmer snow.

yes, certainly in terms of intended application. On snow, the Rustler is actually quite a bit sturdier, especially in the tips and tails. There's a lot of similarities underfoot, but the dampness and stability of the Rustler stand out everywhere else. If you're more aggressive and like carving longer and more powerful turns at speed, the Rustler is a better option. For more playful soft snow performance, especially if you're lighter or less aggressive, the Ranger is a wonderful ski.

I'd say that's about right!

Jeff is 5/10 150