2024 Atomic Maverick 86 C - SkiEssentials.com Ski Test

[@Canseco89]

Have taken these out 3 times now, love them! Excellent review. All true!

[@SkiEssentials]

Right on

[@saam5262]

Thanks for a great review.

[@FirstRoundBye]

Torn between these and the Stance 84 (both on sale near me). I previously skid Navigator 85s, which were great for carving but felt a little heavy for the trees / off-piste that I've been getting more into. Which would you lean towards for a true "all-mountain" east coast ski? or is it a coin-flip?

[@SkiEssentials]

The Stance is a more comprehensive and versatile ski. The Maverick is great, but is happier in shorter and tighter turns as it's so agile and relatively stiff. The Stance is very natural and innate.

[@bm5799]

awesome review! I cant wait to try these - recently picked up last seasons 86Cs (just slightly different graphics) in 176cm! Snow needs to start falling now!!!

[@SkiEssentials]

Hope you enjoy them! And yes, snow is needed.

[@orazioinsogna8427]

As someone who just bought these skis for the upcoming 2023-24 season, I cannot wait to try these things out. I hope they ride as good as they look!

[@SkiEssentials]

I bet you'll have a blast! Very energetic and grippy--so easy and fun to turn.

[@hyro8840]

Been skiing on these this season over in NZ, they are great skis

[@deltasr5443]

Great review Jeff. QQ - I am an intermediate skier hoping to advance and progress into a fast/aggressive carver. Looking for skis that can carve with good edge hold and grip in groomed resort trails on icy and artificial snow that is common in NY, NJ and PA; with occasional forays into ungroomed, freeriding trails. So how do the 86c carbon skis do in such terrain compared to Maverick 88 TI? Would you recommend any other skis for the terrain and use-case I laid out?

[@SkiEssentials]

If you're still in the progression phase going from intermediate to advanced, I think the 86C is more of a useful ski. The 88Ti is pretty darn stiff, so if you're not used to being somewhat aggressive when it comes to pushing and bending skis, the Ti version might hold you back a bit. The 86C is still pretty stiff and responsive, it's just lighter and easier to turn than the Ti. I'd also take a look at Elan's Ripstick 88 and the Armada Declivity 88 C--both on the similar side to the 86C. Have fun!

[@touchstar68]

This would be a ski I would buy, riding on an Atomic Blackeye TI, I think this would be the nearest thing to it.

[@SkiEssentials]

The 86 C is a lighter more all-mountain oriented ski with less of a pure carving mentality.

[@leodeoca8147]

Great review! I have this exact skis this season and really liking it so far. East coast solid intermediate skier here snd heading to Aspen next week, would you recommend me bringing this skis (considering the amount of snow from the last couple days) or renting a more wider skis is a better option? I like to ski steep groomed runs, trees and the backside every once in a while. Thank you!

[@SkiEssentials]

I think bringing this ski gives you about an 85% success rate. Worst case scenario, it snows!

[@OscarBaldizon]

6ft, 175lbs, progressing intermediate living in CO. I just moved on from the maverick 88 ti (184cms) because they were to much to handle in tight spaces/bumps. I loved their groomer performance. Would you suggest getting this Maverick 86c in 184cms hoping the different build makes it better for bumps/trees or the Maverick 88ti in 176?

[@SkiEssentials]

I think if you're moving up, the ski is fine but I'd size down to the 176.

[@noahmughal8775]

I've always rented my skis and want to buy my own skis now. I am trying to get better in powder skiing and am thinking about buying these skis. They are in sale for 270 dollars in a store where I live.

[@SkiEssentials]

Great skis, great deal!

[@Whydidilose]

I ended up purchasing these skis based on your review and how they are good all around skis. This is my first year skiing, and I’ve gotten 30 days in. Was able to progress off of groomers into moguls and trees with these skis. I’m 5’6 160 lbs and went with the 161cm. Question for next year: I’m on the east coast, and while these skis are decent on hard pack groomers, what would be a good ski that’s better on east coast ice (for those days)?

[@SkiEssentials]

There's quite a bit in the front side category, and if you don't want to go much narrower, if you like the platform, the Atomic Redster Q7.8 is worth a strong look. www.skiessentials.com/products/2024-atomic-redster-q78-revoshock-c-skis-w-m-12-gw-bindings?ski%2520size=159

[@pepito9122]

Hey, i am stuck between the Mav 86c or the mav 88ti, which one do you recommend for a young guy skiing mostly groomers, but if there’s powder I will spend the day skiing the pow, i was thinking about the volkl kendo 88, I am 173 cm and live skiing

[@SkiEssentials]

If you are also interested in Kendo, the 88Ti will make more sense than the 86C. I think if you're mainly groomers, the Ti version is a better option.

[@mindyourspine]

Thanks for your great reviews. Considering this ski or the Stance 84. I’m a 150lb intermediate-advanced skier for mainly Wisconsin skiing. One-ski quiver. Thoughts?

[@SkiEssentials]

Personally I prefer the Stance, but if you really enjoy quick and energetic short turns, the Maverick is tough to beat. The Stance feels smoother and more versatile overall.

[@mindyourspine]

Thanks. I’ll give the Stance a try!

[@Qge123]

Hi! Considering getting these but wondering about the right size. I’m around 5 foot 8 (172cm) tall at 165lbs. I do maybe 60% piste and 40% off piste. I’m much more confident/fast on piste but would like to improve my off piste skiing. Would the 169 cm be right for me?

[@lynnwillis4131]

I'm wondering the same as I just bought the 176 cm length and am the same height but 155 lbs. and advanced tele skier. I'm upgrading from skiing 165 cm for the last 15 years. Trying to make sure I have the correct size before I mount my tele bindings on the new boards. I can't find a sizing chart for atomic mavericks.

[@SkiEssentials]

I'd say the 169 is the correct size for your stats and application in that ski.

[@PhillipPeterson-xn2iz]

Hey Jeff, I have my selection narrowed down to the 88TI or 86C. I’m a confident skier in my late 50’s. I do want to be better in the bumps and make better short turns. I also want to cruise with my wife, grandkids and friends. I’m 5’-11” so I’m thinking 176. Thanks

[@SkiEssentials]

The Ti version will certainly give you a higher end performance ceiling while the 86 C is more amenable to shorter turns and more moderate speeds. If you are valuing bumps and short turns, I do think the 86 C fits that application a bit better. 176 sounds right to me!

[@OrvilleBernard-qh6kx]

I began skiing last year and I’m progressing faster than I anticipated. Are these skis a worthwhile upgrade from my current Rossignol Experience 76?

[@SkiEssentials]

Yup! You'll be getting a more versatile ski for sure, but with the carbon stringers, it's still very responsive and stiff, making it quick from edge to edge and nimble in the bumps and other tight spots.

[@lukecico5155]

I have a 2023 Volkl Kendo. Love them for their control and edge hold, which is why I got them. But by afternoon, I feel pretty fatigued. Although these maverick 86c may be more forgiving, but how are they in ice? Think National and Liftline on a typical scrapped off, ‘edges do your thing, please’, kind of day?

[@SkiEssentials]

They're a bit light and pingy for a firm Liftline afternoon. I would say that the 88 Ti version of this ski is a mix of the 86C and the Kendo. They've got the 2 sheets of metal, but are lighter overall so they're not as tiring. I'd also check out Salomon Stance 90 for a ski in this width that can be both grippy and manageable.

[@dimitrislv]

Thanks for the review! how do these compare to the nordica steadfast line? I'm an intermediate skier looking to improve my carving on groomed snow but also have a ski that I can use on crud snow as well

[@SkiEssentials]

I had an overwhelmingly positive experience on the Steadfast 85 this past year. It's a better carver than the Atomic for sure, and a surprisingly versatile performer as well. The Atomic is quick and mobile, but it's also very light, and that doesn't always translate to strong crud performance. The Steadfast at least has the metal to make it smoother in the more choppy snow that you may encounter.

[@stevewhiteley9249]

I tried out last year’s version and really liked them. As an easy going, older skier it seems to be the right kind of spec for me. I like the approachable feel as you put it but I do want to ski well. I also want a flat ski as I would like to use the Head/Tyrolia protector binding. One question - how would it compare to the Volkl Blaze 86 which seems to be in the same ball park but maybe quite a bit lighter, which I would appreciate?

[@SkiEssentials]

The Atomic does have carbon stringers in it, so that adds a bit of pop and energy to the mix. The Blaze has more of a rounded and rockered shape and profile, making it a bit more adept at softer snow while the Atomic is more at home when it comes to groomers and firmer snow pack. Both are very light and maneuverable.

[@stevewhiteley9249]

@@SkiEssentials brilliant thanks, sounds like the Atomic is the one for me.

[@davidsturchio7330]

Thanks for the review, Jeff! I'm a former skier (from about 5 years old until about 13) who left it to snowboard, but I recently got back into it recently because both of my kids ski. I've been renting skis for the past few years and I am completely comfortable on blues and blacks out here on the East Coast. I'm looking to have a one ski quiver that will keep me progressing. I'm 41 years old, 5'9" and about 180lbs. What are your thoughts on ski lengths for this model? Or if you have some suggestions for other skis, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[@SkiEssentials]

I'd go 172 in that ski--great option for progression due to the ease of use, but it also has a lot of grip and agility due to the build with carbon stringers. I'd also take a look at Elan Ripstick 88 in the 172--so much fun and energy in these carbon-powered skis!

[@davidsturchio7330]

Thanks for the response! Currently I can find the 2023 Maverick 86C discounted pretty solidly, but I see only 169 or 176 lengths in the ski. Since a 172 length would pretty much be right in the middle, do you think I go with the longer 176 version or stay with a 169?

[@sanderschellens1615]

Hi! How do these skis compare to the salomon qst 92s? I am mainly on groomers but I really like to go off them to venture in softer snow some more. Next to that I love hitting side jumps and skiing a bit of switch on groomers! Any advise?

[@SkiEssentials]

The QST 92 is a much more complete ski. It's slightly heavier, and that's really the only knock, but what you're getting in return of that weight is a much grippier and poppier ski that can hold up to more creative and progressive skiing.

[@junwson]

how is it good for icy condition like in the morning and at night? I usually go early skiing and late nights.

[@SkiEssentials]

The carbon adds more stiffness and grip, making them pretty sharp and crisp on firmer snow. If you move to the Maverick 88 Ti, you get even more grip and power with the addition of two sheets of metal.

[@notme3207]

Hey there you mention that they perform well on soft snow and I was wondering how they handle carving on hardpack and ice? And if you had to recommend a similar ski but maybe a little more advanced what would that be? Thank you!

[@SkiEssentials]

The lighter weight keeps them from being stable at speed on hardpack and ice, but in shorter turns, they're plenty grippy and engaging. In this width range, check out the Elan Wingman 86 Ti or the Nordica Steadfast 85 if you're looking for a step up in all around performance. Have fun!

[@rasvankhandro4563]

hi jeff , im really torn between this mav 86 c and the bent 90 s , i want to get a wider ski since i ve always wanted to try one , ive been riding other groomer carv skis but i really want something playful something i can ride in more conditions since after a few hours the snow here turns to moguls and i need something agile ! thanks in advance !!

[@SkiEssentials]

If you're looking for playfulness, it's tough to argue against the Bent. You will get more precision and carving performance out of the Maverick, but that ski isn't nearly as flexible or fun as the Bent.

[@rasvankhandro4563]

@@SkiEssentials thanks a lot ! im a pretty tall guy 193cm and i was thinking of the 184 cm mavs since i do like that precision and i sometimes do ski a bit harder , and i ski in the european mountains around so im thinking the mavs might be a more versatile option for me . what are ur thoughts maybe !

[@larsw.larsen4173]

Thanks for the review - I am 75 kg and getting older😅. Would you think that a really good price on a new 2022 model year could be good value? Beeing 185 cm tall would you reccoment the 184 cm version?

[@SkiEssentials]

Yup! The skis only changed graphically, so if you find an older model at a price, it's the same ski. I'd go 184 if you can find it as the skis are very agile and light--the shorter length would feel short.

[@mikeyu-sun7696]

How would briefly compare this ski to the dynastar mcross 88? Thanks

[@SkiEssentials]

The M-Cross feels smoother and more powerful thanks to the metal laminate and the PU hybrid core. The Maverick is very quick and agile, but the carbon makes it a bit more jittery at speeds. When locked into a carved turn, the M-Cross is extremely satisfying. For quick turns through bumps and trees, the Atomic is very nice, but if you're looking for more drawn-out carving performance, the M-Cross is a superior choice.

[@chy9792]

Hi Jeff, im using the Head v shape v6, and now I would like to start riding a little in Powder like free ride, this Atomic Maverick 86 C is a good option for me? I saw this model is 176 cm and 184 cm, which one would you recommend to me? I am 184 cm tall and weigh 78 kg

[@SkiEssentials]

The ski is great--lots of flotation for an 88 (it's only 86 in the shortest length) especially due to the light weight and HRZN tech in the tips. I'd go 184 in that ski. Have fun!

[@swedishburrito5073]

👍

[@seemsegit]

does this maverick have the same construction as the maven? from atomic's website both models have the same features

[@SkiEssentials]

Yes the C versions of Maverick and Maven are the same.

[@supkim5801]

Hi what binding should i have to attach for this ski? size 90 ? size 100? Also if my DIN is about 6~6.5 DIN 11 binding would be better? compared to 13 Max binding to save some money?

[@SkiEssentials]

We pair them with a Tyrolia Attack 14 and it works great. Brake should be 85 on that ski with this binidng. www.skiessentials.com/products/2024-atomic-maverick-86-c-skis-w-tyrolia-attack-1?ski%2520size=153

[@johnjohnson5483]

Did the construction change at all from last year?

[@SkiEssentials]

Nope!

[@rickypiero]

How do you compare this to a Volkl Kanjo?

[@SkiEssentials]

This is closer than Kanjo vs. Ranger 84. The carbon of the Maverick is poppy and snappy, much like the glass frame in the Kanjo. Despite the name, the Maverick 86 shares a mold with the 88, so there's some more width to this ski than the Kanjo than may let on. As such, there's some more versatility here with the Mav.

[@bm5799]

How would these compare to the K2 Mindbender 90C?

[@SkiEssentials]

The big difference here is the amount of energy and quickness--both of which the Atomic has over the K2. The K2 is smoother and quieter, and while the performance level is about the same, they go about it in slightly different ways. For firmer snow and more mobility, I like the Atomic while the K2 has a softer snow presence that is hard to deny.

[@bm5799]

@@SkiEssentials Thank you for the quick reply! Sounds like the K2 is similar to my Rossi Black Ops Escaper from a couple years ago - very similar dimensions, with the Diago Fiber and Damptech - more free ride surfy feel. Maybe Ill get something different in the Atomic. Im trying to work on more technical skills like carving, which I really suck at right now.

[@santiagorumi]

What’s the difference between this one’s and the bent 85?

[@SkiEssentials]

The Bent is heavier and stiffer while the Maverick is very light and energetic. If you're mostly on-trail making carved turns, the Maverick is a more sensible choice.

[@santiagorumi]

@@SkiEssentials thanks!!

[@TJG15]

Will this ski be fine for mainly steep groomers?

[@SkiEssentials]

Yes, it has great grip with the flatter tail and carbon stringers. It's easy to get from one turn to the next. The only thing it doesn't really have is high-speed stability--that's where you'd want the Maverick 88Ti.

[@theoVKG]

I m 190cm, would you recommand 184??

[@SkiEssentials]

Yup!