Trying to decide between 177 and 184. Will be used for spring firm and steep conditions, volcanoes and such. Will mount with Alpinist 12. I'm 6-2, 200#, advanced skier and use a Hoji tour pro or ridge pro boot.
(Also thinking about Zero G 95 for same role, but that is a softer ski with lower camber...)
Thoughts on length and choosing between Ripstick and Zero G?
Elan Ripstick Tour 88 Ski
Ready to rip? So is the Ripstick Tour 88 - a lighter weight, backcountry friendly take on Elan's popular Ripstick line. With an 88mm waist, this piece of eye candy is ready for some winter or spring laps where conditions may vary from powder to corn to crud. The smaller turning radius brings this ski around quickly, which comes in handy in trees, couloirs, and anywhere else you want to keep those turns tight! Carbon sheets are a dime a dozen, but Elan's Carbon Bridge Technology is a fun twist on the theme. Utilizing a carbon tube that runs down the center of the ski you get less vibration and a more progressive flex. Buttery smooth turns are compliments of the Amphibio profile that creates a rockered profile edge to edge for better control and easier transitions into and out of that figure 8 you and your ski partner are making. The full 360° pyramid-shaped ABS sidewall is great for performance and durability, but we discourage anyone from pinballing off rocks as a way to test this feature. Turn up the tunes and get excited to ski the Elan Ripstick Tour 88 because it's meant to rip it - and rip it good.
- Amphibio profile* leads to smoother turns that are easy like Sunday morning.
- Carbon Bridge Technology is a lightweight solution to creating a damper and confidence-inspiring ski.
- Full 360° pyramid-shaped ABS sidewall increases durability and smooths out the ride.
- 2 layers of carbon reinforcement increase torsional stiffness and make for a smoother flex underfoot.
* Please note you will have a left and a right ski with the Amphibio technology.
Updates 2023/24: Same construction down to the core, but a classy new topsheet!
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 156, 163, 170, 177, 184 |
|
Weight |
1205g [163] 1260g [170] 1385g [177] |
| Weight (pair) | 2410g [163] 2520g [170] 2770g [177] |
|
|
125-88-104 |
|
Turn |
14.8m [156] 15.6m [163] 16.8m [170] 17.6m [177] 18.8m [184] |
|
Skin |
Tip notch, flat tail |
| Specs Verified | Yes |
| Design | |
|
|
Amphibio asymmetrical rocker edge to edge |
|
|
Tapered tip and tail |
|
|
Carbon bridge technology, 360° sidewall |
|
|
Laminated woodcore with carbon reinforcement |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | Spring touring, variable conditions |
| Notes | Carbon tube runs along the center of the ski to create a smooth ride |
| Bottom Line | Elan's offering for backcountry skiers who want to rip |
| Compare to other Mid-fat Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
9/13/2024
9/13/2024
Hi LePistoir,
You could use either. The 184cm ski will want to ski faster and you will have more ski to lean into if you are carving aggressively. Great for ripping down big open corn fields in the spring. The 177cm ski would be more of your mountaineering length - easier to kick turn, lighter, and still capable on the downhill, but a little quicker turning and maybe not as stable when you're skiing fast and trying to make bigger turns. If we were talking resort skis, I would steer you towards the 184cm, but in a backcountry setting I think an argument can be made for sizing down.
The Zero G 95 is not really softer than the Ripstick. They are both stiff, powerful skis. The biggest difference, aside from width, will be that the Zero G is straighter and more oriented towards steeps and ski mountaineering, whereas the Ripstick has more sidecut and makes for a great carving ski. Additionally, despite being wider, the Zero G is a bit lighter.
I would choose the Ripstick if you want a ski that is very dynamic and energetic when you put it on edge. Think fast, lower-angle, wide-open slopes. For steep, firm snow, jump turns, and ski mountaineering, I would lean towards the Zero G 95.
You could use either. The 184cm ski will want to ski faster and you will have more ski to lean into if you are carving aggressively. Great for ripping down big open corn fields in the spring. The 177cm ski would be more of your mountaineering length - easier to kick turn, lighter, and still capable on the downhill, but a little quicker turning and maybe not as stable when you're skiing fast and trying to make bigger turns. If we were talking resort skis, I would steer you towards the 184cm, but in a backcountry setting I think an argument can be made for sizing down.
The Zero G 95 is not really softer than the Ripstick. They are both stiff, powerful skis. The biggest difference, aside from width, will be that the Zero G is straighter and more oriented towards steeps and ski mountaineering, whereas the Ripstick has more sidecut and makes for a great carving ski. Additionally, despite being wider, the Zero G is a bit lighter.
I would choose the Ripstick if you want a ski that is very dynamic and energetic when you put it on edge. Think fast, lower-angle, wide-open slopes. For steep, firm snow, jump turns, and ski mountaineering, I would lean towards the Zero G 95.
Answer this question:
11/26/2023
Hello,
I am thinking of getting a new pair of skis.
I narrowed down to Ripstick 88 and Atomic Backland 95.
Which one will ski better in powder and wick one is stiffer on hard compacted snow.
I would use it most of the time only in BC because I have a pare of resort skis.
I am thinking of getting a new pair of skis.
I narrowed down to Ripstick 88 and Atomic Backland 95.
Which one will ski better in powder and wick one is stiffer on hard compacted snow.
I would use it most of the time only in BC because I have a pare of resort skis.
11/27/2023
Hello Palfit, Both of those skis will do well on hard snow or variable conditions. The 88 is a great ski, but a bit narrow for a fun powder ski, unless you are petite and prefer a light ski. Emailing us with details about you and where you ski, we can answer much better. Help@skimo.co
Answer this question:
2/1/2023
Dear Skimo team,
I am in the process of buying my first Elan skis setup and I am wondering if you could help me in choosing the proper one.
I am currently owning the Blizzard ZeroG 95 (164cm, 21/22 version, 19.5m radius) but I must confess that I am finding them quite difficult to control and manage and difficult to turn (especially where I need to make short turns and at low speed), requiring a lot of attention and precision, especially compared to my previous skis, K2 Wayback 88 (160cm, 2015 version, 14 m radius). I am not the most technical skier, so maybe I need a more easy and tolerant ski.
Collecting some information from the web and from other skialper, I had the feeling that Elan Ripstick Tour could be the good choice.
I am 168cm tall, I weight 71kg (I practice martial arts so i am quite heavy for my height) and i have 25.5 boot measures. My boots are Scarpa F1 LT and Scarpa Maestrale RS.
My typical day is 1000/1200m ascent (occasionally 1500), mostly in the Dolomites region, hence only on limited occasions there is really good and deep powder, most of time transformed snow. I do not do couloir (even if it may happens that to reach the saddle or the top I have 100/200m at 45°).
Based on such background, are the Elan Ripstick Tour series the good choice for me? I am looking for a easy ski, tolerant and that can help me during the descent in snow all conditions, making easy the turns, especially the short turns.
And which measure should be more suitable? 88 or 94?
The other options I am taking into considerations are:
- Blizzard Zero G 94 Approach
- K2 Wayback 92
- K2 Talkback 96 (I need the 160cm so I have to go with the Talkback)
- Salomon MTN 96 Carbon
Thank you so much for your very valuable feedback
Aligi
I am in the process of buying my first Elan skis setup and I am wondering if you could help me in choosing the proper one.
I am currently owning the Blizzard ZeroG 95 (164cm, 21/22 version, 19.5m radius) but I must confess that I am finding them quite difficult to control and manage and difficult to turn (especially where I need to make short turns and at low speed), requiring a lot of attention and precision, especially compared to my previous skis, K2 Wayback 88 (160cm, 2015 version, 14 m radius). I am not the most technical skier, so maybe I need a more easy and tolerant ski.
Collecting some information from the web and from other skialper, I had the feeling that Elan Ripstick Tour could be the good choice.
I am 168cm tall, I weight 71kg (I practice martial arts so i am quite heavy for my height) and i have 25.5 boot measures. My boots are Scarpa F1 LT and Scarpa Maestrale RS.
My typical day is 1000/1200m ascent (occasionally 1500), mostly in the Dolomites region, hence only on limited occasions there is really good and deep powder, most of time transformed snow. I do not do couloir (even if it may happens that to reach the saddle or the top I have 100/200m at 45°).
Based on such background, are the Elan Ripstick Tour series the good choice for me? I am looking for a easy ski, tolerant and that can help me during the descent in snow all conditions, making easy the turns, especially the short turns.
And which measure should be more suitable? 88 or 94?
The other options I am taking into considerations are:
- Blizzard Zero G 94 Approach
- K2 Wayback 92
- K2 Talkback 96 (I need the 160cm so I have to go with the Talkback)
- Salomon MTN 96 Carbon
Thank you so much for your very valuable feedback
Aligi
2/1/2023
Aligi,
This might be a great option for you! They are very quick edge-to-edge, and stable when on your edge. You may also want to detune the tails a bit to help break out of the turns, regardless of the ski you choose.
Another good option would be the Locator. They're very energetic on crud and hardpack at speed, which might not be ideal for you, but in spring conditions and somewhat soft snow, they're playful and easy to ski.
This might be a great option for you! They are very quick edge-to-edge, and stable when on your edge. You may also want to detune the tails a bit to help break out of the turns, regardless of the ski you choose.
Another good option would be the Locator. They're very energetic on crud and hardpack at speed, which might not be ideal for you, but in spring conditions and somewhat soft snow, they're playful and easy to ski.
2/2/2023
Thank you so much Emmett for your reply! As usual Skimo team is a guarantee!
Do you finally suggest me to go with the 88 or the 94?
Do you have also some feedback about the Blizzard Approach 94?
Thank you!
Do you finally suggest me to go with the 88 or the 94?
Do you have also some feedback about the Blizzard Approach 94?
Thank you!
2/2/2023
Hi Aligi, the Approach 94 is not available in the USA. Similar to the Talkback and Wayback 92, it is a lower-end construction as compared to (newer) Wayback 88s and Zero Gs. The Ripstick Tour or MTN Carbon would be the best choices in my opinion.
Answer this question:
12/12/2022
I am currently trying to decide on a new pair of skis to buy and have narrowed it down to the K2 wayback 88 and the Ripstick 88. I live in the PNW and need a ski that will be light enough for long days skiing volcanoes but are also fun on the downhill. I like a ski that is responsive and snappy with tight turns but can also handle bigger carving turns. Because conditions can be pretty variable, I also want my ski to edge well when things get firm. Would the Ripstick better fit my needs and desires or the wayback? Or is there another ski of similar price that fits my needs better?
12/13/2022
Hi Claire, you're down to some good choices! You would likely be happy with either ski, but in this case I'd give the edge to the Ripstick, mostly in terms of snappiness. The Wayback is reasonably quick but feels a bit stiffer, while the Ripstick has a bit more pop with the tube in the core.
Answer this question:
2/26/2022
Is that a skin bungee notch in the tip, or does it just look like it?
2/26/2022
Hi, it's a bit of a depression but not all the way through the ski. Elan is using a custom widget for the skin attachment that slots in there. It won't work with a bungee unless you cut it all the way out, and probably go deeper.
Answer this question:
2/11/2022
I currently do all my touring on a 50/50 hybrid setup (more like 70/30 inbounds/BC)—Corvus Freebird/Shift/Hawx XTD 130. I like stiff chargey skis, driven hard. But I’m looking to add a skinny ski for volcano season, and so I’m looking for something much different than what I’m used to. And I think I’m having some hang ups around what all that entails, dig? I’m 178 cm tall, maybe 155lbs. I know the rule of thumb is to downsize to a ski up to 10cm shorter than body height, but that’s the first thing that feels real foreign to me. Still, I’m committed to making the leap here.
I read all these reviews and Q&As and it just seems like there’s so much acceptance of giving up power and skiability in the name of reducing weight. That’s the other place I’m hung up.
So, I’m looking closely at a couple few skis—the Blacklight 88 in 172, the Ripstick 88 in 170, maybe going a bit more exotic with the Magico.2 in whatever its 170ish length is, or the AlpTracks 89 in 169.
The Ripstick is the heaviest of the bunch, and I hear great things about the non-touring ripsticks, and so I’m wondering if that extra heft confers something onto these skis that hews closer to the traits I’m used to?
So, is the Ripstick my huckleberry? Do I just need to get over myself and give into the light side?
Last bit of rambling—I’m likely to wait a few months to buy new boots. So whatever I get, I’ll be driving them with the beefy Hawx to begin with. I do plan on picking up something lighter before too long—I’m thinking either the Travers or the Skorpius—but should I be concerned about overpowering any of these models while I’m wearing the Atomics at the outset?
Thanks so much for walking with me through my neuroses.
I read all these reviews and Q&As and it just seems like there’s so much acceptance of giving up power and skiability in the name of reducing weight. That’s the other place I’m hung up.
So, I’m looking closely at a couple few skis—the Blacklight 88 in 172, the Ripstick 88 in 170, maybe going a bit more exotic with the Magico.2 in whatever its 170ish length is, or the AlpTracks 89 in 169.
The Ripstick is the heaviest of the bunch, and I hear great things about the non-touring ripsticks, and so I’m wondering if that extra heft confers something onto these skis that hews closer to the traits I’m used to?
So, is the Ripstick my huckleberry? Do I just need to get over myself and give into the light side?
Last bit of rambling—I’m likely to wait a few months to buy new boots. So whatever I get, I’ll be driving them with the beefy Hawx to begin with. I do plan on picking up something lighter before too long—I’m thinking either the Travers or the Skorpius—but should I be concerned about overpowering any of these models while I’m wearing the Atomics at the outset?
Thanks so much for walking with me through my neuroses.
2/12/2022
Hi Chris, we're always happy to help talk through ski-related neuroses! As spoiled ski shop employees, we of course like a setup for every situation. More practically, it helps to narrow down what kind of terrain and conditions you will be skiing most often.
Skiability is of course subjective. Additional weight can help with reducing deflection and often add some dampness, but it's not directly correlated to edge hold, responsiveness, rebound, and other ski qualities folks desire. There are certainly some lightweight skis the Hawx would overpower, but you would still enjoy the skis on your list, which each have their strengths. It does help to adapt your ski style towards the lighter kit, which going lighter on the boots helps to encourage, so you're on the right track trying to match them.
For what it's worth, the Ripstick Tour 88 was well-liked by those of us that got to ski them, which is also obviously implied by the fact that we carry it. Quick, responsive, good edge hold, just plain fun about summed the feedback on the 170cm length. 177 will be a tad slower edge to edge but offer additional stability and float.
Skiability is of course subjective. Additional weight can help with reducing deflection and often add some dampness, but it's not directly correlated to edge hold, responsiveness, rebound, and other ski qualities folks desire. There are certainly some lightweight skis the Hawx would overpower, but you would still enjoy the skis on your list, which each have their strengths. It does help to adapt your ski style towards the lighter kit, which going lighter on the boots helps to encourage, so you're on the right track trying to match them.
For what it's worth, the Ripstick Tour 88 was well-liked by those of us that got to ski them, which is also obviously implied by the fact that we carry it. Quick, responsive, good edge hold, just plain fun about summed the feedback on the 170cm length. 177 will be a tad slower edge to edge but offer additional stability and float.
Answer this question:
12/5/2021
When are you guys going to have the women’s version available?
12/6/2021
Hi Eric, unfortunately the women's ski will not be available until next season.
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
