2023 Armada Declivity 88 C - SkiEssentials.com Ski Test

[@lync3012]

I loved the 2022 version, and think its something that they could make into a 96 or 98 version and it would be amazing as well. Can't recommend this ski enough if you are just looking for an all around fun ski.

[@SkiEssentials]

Yes! Say that again, but louder so Armada can hear you! We couldn't agree more. Skis like this often get overlooked in favor of the Ti options, but realistically this is such a fantastic choice for so many skiers. I think a 96/98 width would be AWESOME.

[@ClearWaterArizona]

Jeff, I really enjoy your reviews and thoughtful perspective. I ski in Utah & SV exclusively. ( BTW great Kendo 88 review in SV). I just got back into skiing and was previously a very advanced aggressive skier. 205 - 5'11. I currently have 184 cm Scott Mission 98ti as all mtn option. Looking to build a balanced quiver and a ski for the early season late November - January man made snow / groomer tilted when off piste isn't ideal yet..... I hope that makes sense really liked the reviews in SV on the Declivity 82ti as it ranked very high in testing, the word approachable seemed to be the buzz on that ski. But recently have been thinking the 88C may be a good call and was pleasantly surprised on Bob's review of the ski. I thought he would think it was too soft, especially at Stowe. I can really get on the ski when I want to drive it, and am pretty athletic and strong for my age. But I am now 54 and want to enjoy skiing moderate speeds with nice clean carves with spurts of aggressive charging and playing in the soft stuff off the side for giggles. I shy away from icy conditions & moguls for the most part. I know the 82ti is stronger and based on reviews seems like it would probably be just fine regardless. (weight is about the same on these skis, very little difference) Any insight comparing the 2 options and length recommendations or other comparable skis would be greatly appreciated!!! Thanks again.

[@SkiEssentials]

Hi! So, my assessment would be to focus on how often you're going to be using these skis in un-groomed situations. If you're not taking it off trail much and have little interest in moguls, the 82 Ti might be the better choice as it's quicker edge to edge and a little more responsive. On the other hand, the 88 is a bit better for that side-of-trail soft stuff you're referring to. Obviously, it's not so black and white. You'll probably go off trail sometimes, nothing is so cut and dry, but it's a good way to think about it and which ski would work better for you. They're both great, so I don't feel like you need to bring in other options as it would kind of just over-complicate an already-challenging decision. In the 82 Ti, I would go 182 cm. In the 88, you could ski the 184 without major issues, in my opinion. Hope that helps!

[@chadridsdale9970]

Your channel is awesome! Thank you. I recently demod the 180cm 92ti and the 176cm maverick 88ti. I LOVED the 92 ti I didn't like flex of the maverick. But I did like the shorter maverick better in the moguls. How would you compare the maverick 88ti to this declivity 88c? Thank you

[@SkiEssentials]

More pop out of the tail in the Armada, as in, you can get it to really boost out of the turn. The Maverick takes more effort for sure and is more demanding as a result. Even as a bigger skier at 6'2 225, I found a lot of performance in that 88C from Armada.

[@chadridsdale9970]

@@SkiEssentials thank you. I do like energy in the tail to throw into the next turn. 👍 keep up the excellent work

[@Mr_Dusty]

As a groomer ski, for a 5' 11", 155 lb expert skier, what length would you recommend? The 176 or 184?

[@xargayo]

Hi guys, great review as always! I'm torn between these, the declivity 92ti and the enforcer 88. Any suggestions that will help me lean towards one or the other? I'm a 5'7, 155lbs intermediate-advanced skier. I ski in the alps and pyrenees so not as much powder as on the west coast. 80-20 on/off piste. Don't want to be too demanding on the knees to be honest.

[@SkiEssentials]

Enforcers will feel the most demanding. Heaviest and with the most torsional stiffness, so probably worth ruling out. 92 Ti is a little more forgiving than Enforcers, at least in my opinion. If you don't ski super fast and need the vibration damping of the Ti, however, that 88 C is a really fun ski and definitely the easiest on the knees. Also feels like a great intermediate/advanced ski. I'd say either Declivity is the way to go depending on how aggressive you are.

[@johnwicked4982]

Hey Jeff, nice review. I am 5’4” around 62 kls. Is these model of armada with length of 160 will suit to me? I am using now a 158 cm and ski mostly groomers. But i am going to venture in a big mountain and do some backcountry as well next season.Thanks

[@SkiEssentials]

Yup, I'd say the 160 is the way to go based on your stats and application. Have fun!

[@craftsmanbuilders]

How would you compare this ski to the Dynastar MPro 85 for on trail performance, moguls, trees and some softer, broken snow? Are they as nimble and forgiving? Again, thanks for answering my questions. I am unable to demo any of the skis I am interested in here where I live. So am reduced to making a decision based on research, reviews and the feedback I get from you guys. Much appreciated!

[@SkiEssentials]

I think the rocker of the Dynastar makes it a better choice for softer snow, bumps, and trees while the 88 is a bit lighter and more poppy/cambered for groomers. The Declivity is more of a traditional style and personality of a ski while the Dynastar isn't quite as intuitive. You're in the right zone for sure with all of your questions--I think that price, availability, and even color can factor in at this point! SE

[@craftsmanbuilders]

I know these skis are in slightly different categories but I wonder how you would compare these Declivity’s to the Soloman QST 92 for all mountain performance? Again, skiing in Colorado, off trail almost as much as on trail. I’m an older, advanced intermediate who is really focused on technique. Thanks much for all of your replies to my inquiries!

[@SkiEssentials]

I love the snap of the Declivity for sure, but the QST 92 is just so much smoother and more stout overall. If you're skiing a true mix of on and off-trail, I don't think skis get a whole lot more versatile or well-rounded than the QST 92. Leaning to on-trail snap and energy, loving the Declivity.

[@ronnieanderson7381]

I am 6ft 1” and 220lbs advanced intermediate but like to stay mostly on piste at the resort. I currently have a set of Rossignol Black ops escapers in 172 and want something more controlled at speed. I purchased a set of these Armada 88c’s in a 184cm and haven’t received them yet. Do you think these will work well or i was thinking of the Salomon QST 92’s?

[@SkiEssentials]

I'd say the 88C is a good choice. It's more directional and on-trail oriented than the QST for sure--lighter and quicker and still very grippy.

[@craftsmanbuilders]

How would you compare this ski to the Liberty Evolve 84 or the Soloman Stance 84? Skiing in Colorado and looking for a great ski that is as balanced off trail as well as on trail. 50% on groomed trails but like to dabble off trail, in trees, moguls and, of course, occasional powder. Want a fun ski that performs well without being overly demanding.

[@SkiEssentials]

The Declivity brings an awesome mix of performance, light weight, and energy to the table. It's great in the bumps and trees, and at 88 mm underfoot and light, is a decent floater. I like it more than the Evolv and the Stance for your application.

[@bm5799]

How do these compare to the Atomic Maverick 86C - which are actually 88mm undefoot as well?

[@SkiEssentials]

The Declivity is a bit stiffer and more substantial overall. The Maverick feels very light and agile, but not as trustworthy when pushed more aggressively.

[@thehungariankid]

These are a direct comp to the Ripstick 88

[@SkiEssentials]

Lots of similarities. I'd say one of the differences is that the Elan has a more flexible shovel while the Declivity is more consistent from end to end.