2012-2013 DPS Nina 99

Chalky Off-Piste

One day, the wind found some extra snow somewhere, and it blew a nice layer of chalk onto some aspects of Alta. This small layer of chalk created a smooth and consistent surface that the Nina 99 could rip on. The skis felt super stable under my feet, whether I was turning the ski over on edge down West Rustler (also known as West “Buffler”) or doing quick smeary turns through Fred’s Trees.

Off-Piste, Rough Hardpack

Conversely, there were a couple of days where the entire mountain was covered in rough, wind-scoured hardpack, where most skis would be at least a little chattery. Despite my trying to carve on edge or smear turns, the Nina 99 chattered throughout every turn. This was both uncomfortable, because of the harsh chattering on my legs, and scary, because I felt like there was no stability under my feet.

The pure carbon laminate used to make this ski certainly has its advantages (extremely low swing weight, etc.), but the Nina 99 ski is anything but damp, which becomes significant in firm, nasty conditions. The ski is so lightweight that it gets deflected easily by uneven, hard snow. The carbon is also very elastic, so upon deflection it immediately snaps back into its original position. This gives the ski an almost plastic feel to it in these extremely hard conditions, leading to excessive chattering and a feeling of instability.

Trees and Moguls

The low weight of the Nina 99, besides coming in handy when hauling my skis everywhere, is very beneficial in trees and moguls. Since the skis are so light, in consistent snow they felt quick and light on my feet.

Here, the rigidity and elasticity of the carbon gives the skis energy for fast, precise turns. When pressure is applied to the ski going into the turn, the carbon bends slightly. As soon as pressure is released for the next turn, the ski immediately snaps back to its straight, rigid position. This gives the ski extra energy going into the next turn, allowing for quick, tight turns through trees and moguls.

For being so light, however, I would have liked to try a mount location a little farther forward, +1 or +2 cm of the factory recommended line. (The 99s I had were mounted for a male-sized boot, so I couldn’t move the bindings as far forward as I would have liked.) I generally prefer a more-forward mount, so think a little less tip in front of me and slightly lower swing weight would make the Nina 99 even easier to navigate quick turns, especially in variable snow, where such turns were at times a little more difficult.

Groomers

The Nina 99 was super fun on groomers, in a variety of turn shapes. They performed well in large, sweeping turns, and they also turned over from edge to edge quickly in tighter turns. Despite being so light, the stiffness of the carbon allowed me to feel stable at high speeds.

While all skis benefit from a good tune, having a good tune is important on the Nina 99 because of its short running length; a short portion of the ski is in contact with the snow. As the edges of the Nina 99 were dulled on rocks and stumps from early season conditions and limited coverage, the skis became a bit slippery on groomers.

Sizing

I initially started out with the 176cm Nina 99. I figured this would be an appropriate size for me after liking the 174cm  H2O Gear Kodiak, a huge, beefy ski with 122mm underfoot. Also, as mentioned, I am currently skiing the 174cm Sickle, which is heavier, wider, and six centimeters longer.

For the stiffness and huge amount of tip, however, the 176cm Nina 99 was just too much for my miniature self. They felt a bit like two-by-fours stuck to my feet, and I could not move the bindings far enough forward to feel like I had control of the tips. After two days on the 176cm, I went down a size to the 168cm length. I’ve since put in 26 days on the shorter length, and I have not found a time where I would have wanted the larger size. So you might consider sizing down a little (or at least not sizing up) on the Nina 99 because of their stiffness and the size of the tip.

Durability

After 26 days on the Nina 99, I have skied them all over in rocky, early-season conditions, as well as on the High Traverse (which in itself is a ski destroyer), and have not put any core shots in the ski. In fact, the bases look surprisingly good considering how hard they have been skied and the amount of non-snow surfaces they have been over.

But on this particular pair, I have noticed a few issues. For example, the top sheet has started to chip off along the edges a little, and more importantly they are showing signs of delaminating at the topsheet/sidewall junction in three locations: two near the heel pieces and the other about six inches above the toe piece of the binding. (When I got the 168cm Nina 99s, they looked pristine, so I think it’s fair to say that few, if any, people had skied them before me.)

I also noticed that, with this particular pair at least, almost every time I grab the skis without gloves, I get carbon splinters in my hand from the topsheet/sidewall junction. Just something to be aware of if you’re going to be handling these skis.

Bottom Line

I found the Nina 99 to excel in consistent snow conditions. I wouldn’t suggest this ski for someone primarily looking for a ski to rip huge, fast GS turns through chop, but for women looking for a fun, maneuverable, and lightweight ski, the Nina 99 can crank out endless, fast, and precise turns down moguls, and make playful, slashy turns through deep pow.

 

NEXT PAGE: ROCKER PROFILE PICS