Hey!
I am considering these skis but I can't decide the size, I am 163cm and would be skiing in all sorts of conditions (ice, powder, packed snow). Any thoughts ?
Atomic Backland 98 Ski - Women
As a version of the esteemed Backland 100 designed specifically for shorter or lighter skiers, the Backland 98 jumps into the fray of powder-hunting, crud-busting skis in the competitive 95-105mm-waisted ski category. What makes this striped salmon of a powder board distinct from all the rest? Foremost in our testers' minds was the rocker/camber balance of the Backland 98, which makes the ski notably predictable and obedient even as conditions change from untracked blower to cut-up chalk to windboard. Atomic has long excelled at making both flat-tailed touring skis such as the Backland UL 85, as well as blue whale-sized powder skis in their Bent Chetler series, and the Backland 98 is the best of both worlds, freeride and touring alike. Atomic, true to its Austrian heritage and alpine-race-ski engineering roots, made sure that the Backland 98 would feel stable on edge and quick to engage when turning on hard snow. Not just a flash of brilliance for a few days of skiing, the full sidewall construction underlies the ski's durability for many deep days in the backcountry to come. If the goal is to bust crud and surf pow with the same boards on your feet, the Atomic Backland 98 Women's ski should get the nod.
- HRZN Tech tip shaping increases flotation in soft snow, and decreases turn deflection in variable conditions.
- Detuned for lighter skiers, the carbon backbone provides the right amount of stiffness for a responsive, but supple ride.
- Atomic's Powder Rocker profile yields easy turning in powder and crud alike.
- Full sidewall construction makes for a durable ski with solid edge hold.
Update 2021/22: UpdatedTopsheet
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 156, 164, 172 |
|
Weight |
1095g [157] 1185g [164] 1265g [172] |
| Weight (pair) | 2190g [157] 2370g [164] 2530g [172] |
|
|
126.5-97-117 [156] 127.5-98-118 [164] 128.5-99-119 [172] |
|
Turn |
12.5m [156] 14.6m [164] 17.0m [172] |
|
Skin |
Round tip, curved tail with rubber protector |
| Specs Verified | Yes |
| Design | |
|
|
Rockered tip and tail (20%/10%), light camber underfoot (70%) |
|
|
HRZN Tech tip, shorter radius, mostly round tail |
|
|
HRZN Tech, Carbon Backbone with Ultra Power woodcore |
|
|
Carbon fiber and Karuba wood |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | Ski touring in soft snow and mixed conditions |
| Notes | HRZN Tech spoon a rockered tip offers simple, fun turning |
| Bottom Line | Well balanced ski for powder-heavy touring |
| Compare to other Women's Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
4/8/2022
4/8/2022
Hi Gina, ski length is very much a personal preference, but for general touring, I think the 156cm sounds great!
Answer this question:
3/20/2022
Quick Questions
What would be a good size ski for 5'9" 135lb women intermediate skier in this ski? I live in California, primarily backcountry skiing out of mammoth lakes ca so conditions are a mixed bag.
I am also deciding between the atomic 95s or these 98s. What can I expect the differences to be?
What would be good skins for these skis? Would the raised tips create a gab between the skin and the ski and let in snow as im skinning on powder days?
What would be a good size ski for 5'9" 135lb women intermediate skier in this ski? I live in California, primarily backcountry skiing out of mammoth lakes ca so conditions are a mixed bag.
I am also deciding between the atomic 95s or these 98s. What can I expect the differences to be?
What would be good skins for these skis? Would the raised tips create a gab between the skin and the ski and let in snow as im skinning on powder days?
3/22/2022
Hi Sarah, some great questions here! At your height/weight in the backcountry, the 164cm makes a lot of sense. While either of the skis you mention are pretty damp and would be dependable daily drivers, the Backland 98 is more of a soft snow ski than the 95, being more rockered and less cambered.
Whatever your favorite skins are would be fine with these! As long as they are applied uniformly to your ski bases, I see no reason why snow would intrude near the tip. The ski tails are somewhat chunky so durable tail clips would be a nice skin feature.
Whatever your favorite skins are would be fine with these! As long as they are applied uniformly to your ski bases, I see no reason why snow would intrude near the tip. The ski tails are somewhat chunky so durable tail clips would be a nice skin feature.
Answer this question:
2/15/2022
I've demoed the Backland 100s in 164cm for skiability, and they ski amazing in mixed conditions. Super nimble, love the turn radius, even with the light weight they ski very much like my alpine Atomic skis... super intuitive for me. In comparing those with the Backland W 98s, all the specs are the same except for the 2cm waist difference. I'm super thrown off by the copywriting "designed specifically for lighter skiers." I'm not light, 5'8" and 175 lbs. I like the 98 topsheets more than the 100s, but I'm extremely excited about how the 100s skied. Would you recommend it's an interchangable choice on topsheet/price, or is there going to be a big difference in skiability for the 98s? (I don't see 98s locally to demo). Thx much!
2/15/2022
Hi Lisa, good question. There is actually no difference in shape or construction as compared to the 100, so take your pick based on topsheet! It's only named 98 because the reference length for women is shorter and skinnier than the reference length for men.
Answer this question:
1/11/2022
How does the 98W compare to the 100 in terms of stiffness/ flex? I'm looking at these skis for my girlfriend (5'8", intermediate skier, getting into touring) but I'm nervous these may be a little too stiff. Thanks!
1/12/2022
Hi Jack. The 98 and the 100 are the same construction just slightly different shapes. I think this would be a great ski for an intermediate skier getting into touring. I hope that helps.
Answer this question:
12/28/2021
Hi! I'm interested in these skis for the PNW of the US- wet snow, ice, crust, trees, etc. I'm planning to use them 80% backcountry and 20% resort. I'm 5'3", 150lbs and currently skiing a 160 Voile Vector. I can't decide between the 156 and the 163. Thoughts?
12/29/2021
Hi Jen, either of those lengths would work for you, but based on the kind of skiing you're looking at, I would go with the 156 over the 163. The slightly shorter ski will be more nimble and easier to pilot through the trees, especially on slicker conditions.
Answer this question:
10/18/2021
Hi there!
I ski in the Lake Tahoe area where the snow is heavy. These seem like they would be a good ski for me. I ski a lot in a variety of terrain and conditions. I like to be able to make controlled turns. I'm wondering what length would be good for me. I'm 5'6 130 lbs. This to be my only touring ski. Thanks!
I ski in the Lake Tahoe area where the snow is heavy. These seem like they would be a good ski for me. I ski a lot in a variety of terrain and conditions. I like to be able to make controlled turns. I'm wondering what length would be good for me. I'm 5'6 130 lbs. This to be my only touring ski. Thanks!
10/19/2021
Hey Nicole,
I think you could go with either the 164cm length or the 172cm length and both would be appropriate based on your height. Your decision on which one to go with should come down to what length of ski you are used to skiing--if you are used to longer skis, go long, if you are used to shorter skis, go short. It should also come down to what you prioritize in your skiing experiences. The shorter length will be easier to turn and maneuver, especially in tight or variable conditions. The longer length will be slightly less quick to turn, but will float a little better in deeper conditions and will be a little more stable at higher speeds. Either way, it's a great, versatile ski, and no matter which length you choose I think you'll have a blast!
I think you could go with either the 164cm length or the 172cm length and both would be appropriate based on your height. Your decision on which one to go with should come down to what length of ski you are used to skiing--if you are used to longer skis, go long, if you are used to shorter skis, go short. It should also come down to what you prioritize in your skiing experiences. The shorter length will be easier to turn and maneuver, especially in tight or variable conditions. The longer length will be slightly less quick to turn, but will float a little better in deeper conditions and will be a little more stable at higher speeds. Either way, it's a great, versatile ski, and no matter which length you choose I think you'll have a blast!
Answer this question:
My husband bought me these last summer and I couldn’t wait for it snow so I could get them on my feet. They are 10 ounces lighter per foot than my Atomic Centuries, which will make my multi-lap ski tour goals a reality. I skinned up the ski area and bombed around on groomers to break them in and was honestly surprised at how well they handled firmer groomers. They gave me an immense amount of confidence for literally any type of terrain or snow condition and that held true when I transitioned into the backcountry and slew some powder :) My favorite skis yet!
Comment on this review:
11/1/2020
Hey!
Any idea why the stop sheets online are different than those currently in stores? The ones here at near black tips and horizontal marking and the ones in stores are purple with diagonal watermark pattern!
Haha just curious which ones I'd get if I order online.
Thanks!
Any idea why the stop sheets online are different than those currently in stores? The ones here at near black tips and horizontal marking and the ones in stores are purple with diagonal watermark pattern!
Haha just curious which ones I'd get if I order online.
Thanks!
11/2/2020
Hi Christine,
The Atomic Backland 98 that we have listed on our website matches the appearance of the ski that we have in the shop as well. I would recommend you reach out to the shop where you took that photo and inquire with them!
The Atomic Backland 98 that we have listed on our website matches the appearance of the ski that we have in the shop as well. I would recommend you reach out to the shop where you took that photo and inquire with them!
Answer this question:
10/25/2020
How are these different than the men's version other than the 35g per ski?
10/26/2020
Hi Jim,
Thanks for reaching out! Besides the minute discrepancy in weight that we found, there is no difference between the Men's and Women's skis in terms of construction.
Thanks for reaching out! Besides the minute discrepancy in weight that we found, there is no difference between the Men's and Women's skis in terms of construction.
Answer this question:
10/9/2020
In talking with a few ski people and asking them about the Fisher Hannibal 96 I was lead to these more than once. What are your thoughts between the two?
10/10/2020
Hey Laura, both skis have similar characteristics but the main differences between the two is the Hannibal has a more traditional shape with a longer turning radius and will hold an edge a little stronger. The Backlands will feel a little more playful, make tighter turns, and will feel that you can slide the tails out easier. Hope this helps, if you like to have an in-depth discussion email us at help@skimo.co.
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
