We’ve now been on the Sick Day 104 again at Telluride, and in a broad range of conditions. We’ve also had a few reviewers on it, so here Sam Shaheen (SS), Luke Koppa (LK), and Jonathan Ellsworth will all share their thoughts on the ski.
Sam Shaheen:
I’d like to start off by saying that I really like this ski. It jives well with my style of skiing and it is quite fun. It’s easy to ski, but can still be pushed hard — and that’s an excellent combination. I also think that this is a ski that a lot of people will really enjoy, and a ski that makes a good case for a 1-ski quiver in many locations.
Hardpack
(SS): The Sick Day 104 is not a dedicated carving tool, and that is clear on snow. But it still does a pretty good job. It can easily be bent into many turn shapes (from rather tight to wide open) and it holds an edge quite well. I would say it’s edge hold is a touch better than the 17/18 – 18/19 Rossignol Soul 7 HD and a touch worse than the 18/19 Salomon QST 106 (which can rail groomers hard).
The only complaint I have about the Sick Day 104 here (and I know that Luke disagrees), is that I don’t feel like I get much energy out of the turn, especially when compared to the Soul 7 and QST 106. Overall, the Sick Day 104 feels a bit softer than both of those skis, and when I try to power out of turn, the ski isn’t quite stiff enough to rocket me into the next one like the Soul 7 or (to a lesser extent), the QST 106.
(LK): Overall, I’ve been very happy with the SD 104’s performance on firm snow. It doesn’t carve as well as skinnier skis, but given how well it performs in a bunch of other conditions, it strikes a really nice balance.
I’ve been able to make a variety of turn shapes on the SD 104, from small / medium to fairly large. It doesn’t bend into tight turns as readily as the Line Sakana, but overall, I thought the two skis felt fairly similar when carving. I found the SD 104 to feel quite poppy, and this is one of the areas where Sam and I had a minor disagreement. I think some of this probably stems from how we ski — Sam has a more aggressive style than me, and therefore often ends up preferring stiffer skis like the Soul 7 HD. On the other hand, I rarely find myself blowing through a ski’s flex (e.g., I really like the 174 cm Sakana), and have found the SD 104 to feel quite energetic in a turn.
(JE): In my flash review of the Sick Day 104, I called it the love child of the LINE Supernatural 108 (R.I.P.) and the LINE Sick Day Tourist 102 (also R.I.P.). And especially since I wanted to see how hard it could be pushed compared to the Supernatural 108, I spent most of my time on groomers making big turns at high speeds. And granted, I only have had the SD 104 on pretty soft groomers, but I really liked how it carved, and given that I tend to like heavier, stiffer, damper skis than the Sick Day 104, I thought the ski felt quite energetic when rebounding out of big, laid-over turns. But I will agree with Sam that the 188 cm Soul 7 HD feels like a snappier carver, and I found it really fun to make shorter, quicker turns on that ski.
Bumps
(SS): I found the Sick Day 104 to be a tad sluggish to really excel in high-speed zipperline bumps, but its stable platform, fairly damp nature, big sweet spot, and light weight make it quite fun for scooting around oddly formed bumps on steeps, popping over troughs, or pretty much skiing bumps in any manner except flat-out down the fall line.
(LK): Yep, I agree with everything Sam says here, and would add that I did find the SD 104’s tail noticeable in bumps in that it does not want you to ski backseat. I would still put the SD 104 on the “more forgiving” end of the spectrum, but just like the SD 114, the SD 104’s tail is not as forgiving as more playful skis with more symmetrical flex patterns like the Line Sir Francis Bacon.
(JE): It’s interesting to read Luke and Sam’s take here, because again, when skiing the Sick Day 104, I was primarily thinking about how it compared to the Supernatural 108. And by comparison, the Sick Day 104 is much quicker and poppier. But Luke’s comparisons above are more apples-to-apples than the heavier, stiffer, and damper Supernatural 108, so keep the context of our statements in mind. But again, given my points of reference, I really liked the Sick Day 104 in bumps. So when Sam is talking about the SD 104 being “too sluggish to really excel in high-speed zipperline bumps,” understand that he is talking about absolutely nuking through bumps — Sam attacks moguls at speeds that most people don’t. So in that context, Sam’s comments make sense. But if you are a high intermediate or advanced bumps skier that doesn’t generally approach big bumps with the pedal absolutely to the metal, then I think you’re going to be just fine — and enjoy — the Sick Day 104 in bumps.
Chop / Variable Snow
(SS): The Sick Day 104 is a lightweight ski, but on snow, it skis a bit heavier than it weighs on the scale. The Sick Day 104’s shovel does a good job of planing in softer snow and it is forgiving when smashing into variable.
The Sick Day 104 is definitely not a damp charger, but it does a great job in variable and chop considering its weight.
(LK): If I skied the SD 104 without knowing the weight, I would guess that it was significantly heavier (and I mean that in the best way possible). Compared to several other skies I’ve used in this weight class, the SD 104 is near the top in terms of stability in variable snow. No, it’s not as damp as much heavier skis, but the SD 104 offers a really nice blend of stability and maneuverability / low weight. In fact, I’d say the SD 104 has one of the best stability-to-weight ratios of all the skis I’ve used. It’s really, really impressive.
(JE): Yep. As I wrote in my Flash Review: “My take on the Sick Day 104 is that it is a dialed-back, more playful SN 108. It is *not* the charger that the 108 is, but you can still push the SD 104 quite hard — just do it in a more dynamic style than the 108.”
In The Air
(SS): The Sick Day 104 is no spinny flippy park ski, but it does feel comfortable in the air. It is pretty balanced and natural, though when mounted on the recommended line (-10.15 cm) it feels more at home jumping straight off cliffs and natural features than it does spinning off park jumps. The tail on the Sick Day 104 is forgiving but supportive, so if you get back seat on landings (as I often do), the Sick Day will nudge you back upright. Thanks, ski.
(LK): Again, I agree with Sam here. Despite its rearward mount point, the SD 104 doesn’t feel very unwieldy in the air, and provides a nice, supportive landing platform. And here’s where the SD 104’s low weight becomes a bonus — it feels pretty light and fairly easy to flick around in the air.
(JE): Yep.
Mount Point
(LK): At the recommended mount point of -10.15 cm from center, the SD 104 unsurprisingly feels very directional. I could still easily break the tails free into slashes, but the ski always felt eager to get back into a carve, or at least straighten out.
I did play around a bit with the bindings on the SD 104, moving them from recommended to +1, +2, and +3 cm of the line. I ended up liking +2 cm the best, as I thought it didn’t sacrifice any of the skis carving ability while making it a bit easier to break free and feel slightly more balanced in the air.
Overall though, this is a directional ski and best suited to those who are comfortable driving the front of the ski. However, it’s a playful directional ski that does not feel one-dimensional or like something you always have to be on top of your game to ski.
As a 50/50 Ski
(SS): The Sick Day 104 weighs about 1875 g in a 186 cm, and that weight definitely makes it a contender for a 50/50 ski. I think the Sick Day 104 makes a lot of sense as a 50/50 option. It has a big sweet spot, deals with variable snow well, it’s easy to ski but can still be pushed hard, and it is confidence-inspiring all around.
Slap a pair of Salomon/Atomic Shift bindings on this ski, and you’ve got a very compelling 50/50 option — or a true 1-ski quiver for inbounds and backcountry use.
(LK): Given the SD 104’s impressive blend of stability and low weight — and its strong performance in a wide range of conditions — I’d put it near the very top of my list for a one-ski-quiver for everything (backcountry + resort).
(JE): Again, to paraphrase my Flash Review, the “Sick Day” name really threw me at first. I thought these were just going to be sort of underwhelming “50/50” ski that was marketed to do it all, which often translates to mean ‘This ski won’t be great at anything.’ But that’s not the case.
Bottom Line
After putting three different reviewers — each with fairly different skiing styles — on the Line Sick Day 104, we’ve all come away very impressed. It’s a ski that does a really good job of balancing a low weight while retaining respectable stability in variable conditions. And while we think it will appeal most to directional skiers, it’s not very demanding and still maintains a bit of a playful nature. In the end, the Sick Day 104 is a ski we think a wide range of skiers will like, and makes for a very compelling 50/50 option.
NEXT: ROCKER PROFILE PICS
After watching the promo video for the sick day series on line’s website, i’m sold on this skis for my style of skiing EXCEPT being able to use it more like a bacon (buttering, hokie 180s and 360s off side jumps). In that video, however, some of the riders appeared to be riding the sick day more center mounted than -10 cm. Any intel on how this ski would ride at maybe -5cm from center to allow some goofiness on the trail and slackcountry? I imagine there would be hardly any ski in contact with now in front of the bindings because of the generous looking rocker.
Thanks!
I mount my Sick days forward of the recommended, and I love it. I do step on my tails when doing kick turns sometimes while touring…
how far in front?
Hey mate. Curious what you ended up deciding to do. Also – you got a link to that video?
I am trying to find a more versatile ski for the PNW. I have some super wide powder skis for the deep days, but they kinda suck when the cascade cement gets tracked out and choppy. How would these skis do for a heavier guy (245lbs) for a fresh snow resort ski? I mostly ride at Stevens Pass in WA. The snow has a little more moisture content, and after the first hour, the pow gets pretty tracked out and compacted. The trees there are pretty tightly spaced together, so I would prefer something on the shorter side, but at my weight would the 179s be too noodley? Or any other recommendations for a 100-105mm wide versatile, but leaning towards shallow to medium pow days ski?
Hi, James – at 6’1″, 245, I think you’d overpower the 186 cm model of this ski in tracked-up heavier snow, and you would almost certainly overpower the 179 model. We really like this ski, but it shines as either a (1) 50/50 ski where you’d really want to save on weight, (2) dedicated touring ski where you’d also want to save on weight (3) fun, poppy ski for playing and jumping — not blasting through heavy chop (and not at your size).
So go heavier. If you really want to keep things shorter, the 181 cm J Skis Masterblaster checks off a lot of your boxes. My second choice at this width would be the 188 cm Moment PB&J – don’t sweat the length, it’s got a ton of tip & tail rocker. It’s just a bit lighter than the Masterblaster, so pick your weight.
But you might also check out the 186 cm ON3P Kartel 108, or the 184 cm 4FRNT Devastator – fairly heavy ski, tons of tip and tail rocker makes it easy to pivot in tight spaces.
I’m actually in a very similar position to James. I’m surprised you recommended the J Skis Masterblaster instead of The Metal – can you share some background? I’m 6’3″, 190lbs, also ski in the Cascades, and ride on ~5 year old Moment PB&J. I was looking for something a bit wider, a bit more directional, and figured the Metal would be perfect. But, both you and J Lev recommended the Masterblaster. What gives? :-)
Afarmer! how do you like the PB&J? I am considering that, along with the 4frnt devastator (super heavy), or the Bibby Pro (much wider) , I know those are all kinda different skis, but I am thinking I would still rather bias my next ski for new snow, then anything else..
What else have you ridden on our heavy snow out here? Stevens Pass is my main mountain, and by 11am, light snow gets pretty heavy and super tracked out on a sunny day on the back side of that mountain…
What else out there is great in the cascade concrete?
James, sorry I missed your reply.
I do enjoy my PB&J, but I find them difficult to swing around. That’s probably due to my poor form :-) I was skiing on my backcountry setup inbounds one day, and really enjoyed it. I think I just really like the more directional, lighter weight ski.
At this point, I’m tossing around the Atomic Backland 109 and the Salomon QST 106 as my new setup. They both get really good reviews from everyone I talk to, they both seem very versatile, and good in powder. The write-ups on these skis in Blister Winter Guide have been helpful, to be honest.
Again A Similar situation to JAMES (even the same mountains) though I am looking to get into touring 50/50 ski for next year. I’m 6’2″ & ~215lbs, a0nd my current ski is the enforcer 93 (which I love, except when things get bumpy). Looking to pick between the 18/19 Sick Day 104s or the 18/19 QST 106. is there anything that should sway me one way or the other?
James, my opinion for your size and location is that you definitely want something with some metal in it. Personally I run the enforcer 93s (185cm), but the 100s are also supposed to be great. You definitely give up some agility (especially in medium to large bumps) but, you can plow through basically anything else.
Have you guys had a chance to try the 4FRNT MSP yet? It may be a little more narrow, but seems like it may be what I am looking for as well…
Any idea how these compare to the Atomic Backland FR 102 and 109? I’m looking for a playful directional ski for east coast tree skiing and backcountry use – both the Sick Day and the Backland seem like they could fit the bill
So… When will we see a full review of these?
Curious too!
Don’t think a full review will come out.
Anybody can tell me how they compare to the Line Tourist 102?
I hope it will. Why do you say that?
I have now spent a week in Obergurgl on these skis. Skiing mainly off pist in variable conditions some really fast gs slope skiing and some moguls. And I am super pleased with tjena skis. Very versatile (very) and really dependable. Easy to skid around in short turns and a very solid carver in medium to long turns. Surprisingly stable and shines in big turns at pretty high speed. Still very quick and agile. Maybe not the last Word on really hard/ice slopes but not to shabby either. Very nice ski that completely crush my former K2 Pinnacle 105. (In just about everything except slalom like carved turns in good conditions) Thumbs up!
Sure y are talking about the first generation Pinnacles? Not the newer one?
Oops, typos. I meant:
I assume you are talking about the original Pinnacles, not the newer ones with the lower tip?
Yes correct!
Moved away from skiing a big mountain resort environment every day (Big Sky) to a more 50/50 type of ski plan in the future. (Helena, MT) I’ve been on 182 Rossi E100’s for a couple years as my every day ski, and love them, despite limitations in deep snow and crusty variable pow. 6′, 230+ lbs (right now)
Looking for a ski to put Shifts on for next season. Would the SD 186 be a good option? Or should I look for something a little burlier? I’m honestly not too concerned about weight going up, as I don’t do a lot of looong approaches. I demo’d the SD Tourists at Bridger Bowl on a soft chop type of day, and found them too noodly for me. I also found that I could easily overpower the original 188cm Soul 7 in roughly 6 inches of pow on a firm base on blue groomers. (Haven’t skied the HD)
Even though I find the Sick Days fairly damp and stable I suspect that a heavier/stronger skier could perhaps overpower them. (My weight is just below 80 kilos). To me the Nordica enforcer 100 is close to the Sick Day in overall performance and “feel” but the Sick days are a bit more “Lively and poppy” (and a fair bit lighter) while the enforcer may be a bit more damp and stable.
Are there any changes to the skis for next years model? (other than graphics)
Aside from the graphics, the ski comes back unchanged.
Nice to read this full review :-). Thanks!
But did I miss something? Not a word about pow? (I know we’re in April :-D)
Jonathan if you read this, can you give your opinion on how they behave in pow against the Sakana?
Thanks for great reviews! I just spent 3 days on these last week -186 version. Me= 155#, 6’1, advanced to expert. At +2 the turn initiation was noticeably easier, but I really liked these skis best at +1, especially in the morning refrozen spring conditions at Crested Butte. They like to charge and were really easy to throw around in technical terrain. I liked being able to break the tail free, but in hard snow they felt a bit skittery. I found the vibration of these to be a bit jarring at times and I had to keep on top of them as they could deflect when driving into hard conditions. For me these didn’t dampen anything in the terrain. They felt at home driving off the tips, but I found they liked a lighter touch with more agility rather than full charge mode. As soon as things softened up a little they were much more comfortable. I’d say this is a great ski for fair to good conditions, but not bad conditions. I was looking to replace my aging Nordica Hell and Backs with these, but in the end I’m still looking.
Line sick day 104 vs Armada tracer 108?
Any opinions on Line Sick Day 104 as a tele ski with NTN bindings and a Scarpa Pro TX Pro NTN boot?
Ive just discovered this site and reviews and Love it. I’m on pair of sick day 95’s from probably 4 or 5 yrs ago and looking to get a bit wider ski for the fewer but better days i get in now that i have a kid. Just can’t decide on this vs 114, and if i want to get a little backcountry in on these or just keep em resort.
Thanks, TheB! And apologies for the late reply.
Short answer: sounds like you first need to get a bit clearer on what, exactly, you’re looking for? But we’re big fans of both the SD 104 & 114. personally, if I were going to pair with the SD 95, I’d be inclined to bump up to the 114 just to avoid some overlap.
I’m looking at a 50/50 ski to put Salomon Shift’s on and am looking at the Line Sick Day 2014, Armada Tracer 108, or 4FRNT Raven. I’m leaning towards the Armada’s but have a buddy that said as a brand the skis seems “fragile.”
I’m 5 ft. 11 in. tall and weight 155 so I’m not a super hard charger. Let me know what you guys think!
Hi!
I have been riding the Sick Day 110 (2015 model), 186 as a everyday ski for four years now. For “heavy conditions” I use the Sick Day 125 (2015), 192.
Any insights if the current Sick Day 104 would be an even better everyday-ski than my old SD 110?
Everyday skiing ist about 60% on piste for me, in all kind of conditions.
BTW, I am 5.8ft tall, 160 lbs weight…
I’ve been scouring Blister for some more info on the 179 version. I am 5’8″ (5’9″ on an excellent day), 165lb and feel like the 186 might be a bit long, especially considering I will be using it as a 50/50 ski with Shifts. I demoed the 184 Moment Death Wish and felt really comfortable on it in soft conditions. I demoed the 184 Wildcat a week later in some deep, heavy snow and felt a bit awkward on it. The conditions did not help, but I don’t think I could get the ski going fast enough to make it feel loose, and in that regard it started to feel like the 184 was too much ski to throw around. I also demoed the 180 Brahma in Spring conditions and felt pretty good on it as well (awesome ski for spring conditions!). My current ski is a 173 Bonafide (16/17) and I have always regretted not buying them in the 180 length. So long story short, I am kind of torn between the 179 Sickday 104, the 181 QST 106s (18/19), or to hold off and wait tell some more info comes in on the Line Vision 108, Armada Tracer 108, and the Moment Wildcat 108. Any/all advice from Blister or readers would be appreciated! I might just have to take a chill pill and demo a few more skis hahaha.
Couple things:
(1) if you are getting along well with a 180 cm Brahma, I don’t feel like the 186 would be too much ski for you. That said, for touring purposes, I understand why the 179 might be intriguing … though Sam Shaheen and Luke Koppa both weigh less than you, and they like the 186. Plus if a 184 Deathwish felt good … that further points to the 186 SD 104.
The Line Vision is a *much* lighter ski that we wouldn’t seriously recommend for 50/50 use — especially not to someone who likes a 180 cm Brahma. 181 cm QST 106 could be a good choice, and we’ll be saying more about the 181 QST 106 soon, and also the 180 Tracer. Wildcat 108 will be a ways out, but we’ll be getting on those in a 184 & 190.
Many thanks Jonathan!
I’ve got about 10 days on the 186 Sick Day 104. I will tell you that it skis “short.” Super easy to pivot on at low speed, and easy to make tight radius turns on in steeps. Much easier than say the blizzard Cochise, Salomon QST 106, or Moment Wildcat.
The other big thing I notice with the Line is that it is harder to make high speed long radius turns on the ski without skidding the tails. It still feels stable at high speed, but the tail washout takes a little getting used to if your coming from a more directional ski. Also it feels like I am leaning way over the tips when skiing like this.
Bottom line, if you feel like you are between sizes on this ski, I’d consider sizing up.
Hello!
Im 5’10, 155, and currently skiing the M5. Love to charge and go fast, but wanting to slow it down a bit sometimes to jump natural features oh and primarily as a 50/50 with either shifts or marker Duke pt.
I’m currently between the 179 Sick Day 104 or the 181 QST 106.
Any secret insight? Thanks!
What size for an intermediate teen (16), looking to get better and improve? 5’-11”, 160lbs. 172cm or 179cm?
Definitely *not* 172. 179 could be good, but honestly, if he is skiing in more open spaces, I wouldn’t steer him away from the 186.
So all that said, 179 seems like a pretty safe choice … and you shouldn’t be considering the 172 at that height and weight. This is a lightweight, easy ski. Go too short, and you will sacrifice too much stability.
What length would you recommend for me (adult athletic, former ski racer, 5’7″, just under 150#, skiing NM and CO mostly) for a 50:50 set-up (more realistically 75 inbounds:25 BC)? I’m currently skiing 177 Mantras. Am leaning towards the 172’s but for the times I like to rail turns on groomers am wondering about the 179’s.
Did you decide? I’m pretty close to the same size and wondering the same thing. 5’8” 145#, skiing utah, 75:25 inbound:BC. Leaning towards 172s.
Hi Jonathon-
Thanks! Looking to pick-up a pair for my son as a BDAY gift. Just started this season on got about 12 days of skiing in (Colorado, Park City and Mammoth). Looking for a 1-ski quiver for him. Quickly progressing and likes to play around bumps and jumps. Any other recommendation for him?
I’m really torn between the Bent Chetler 100 (180cm) and the Sick Day 104 (179 or 186cm) for a 50/50 one ski quiver mounted with Shifts to be used mostly in the French Alps.
I’m 6’1 for 165 lbs and enjoy going fast on groomers, poping off small features and looking to progress in Pow / trees.
Any advice on ski and size Blister readers ?
Hey guys, I heard a rumour that the recommended mount point was further forward on the 19/20 topsheet model. Do you know if this is true, and if so is the +2 recommendation from Luke based on the old mount line or the new one?
We have not heard that they changed the mount point, but everything we said about the ski was based on our measured mount point (listed at the top, around -10 cm from true center).
Hi there,
I am looking for a 50/50 ski (more like 65 resort / 35 touring) for New Zealand and a trip to France.
The Line Sick Day sounds great, but I am 6’2″ and 190lbs so worried I might need a longer ski? Or would the 186 sick day still perform well? (any other suggestions)
Currently on an old pair of 185 Line Blends. Looking for a playful ski that can still handing technical terrain and the variable snow conditions in NZ.
Juist having issues at the moment being able to purchase the Blister Membership without the hard copy buyers guide option so any info would be greatly appreciated while I get that sorted.
Cheers
Glen
Don’t know if you made it to NZ as the borders shut but the Sick Day isn’t damp enough for here. Ruapehu is ice and the S Island is what I call deep crud on steroids. You need metal here. I keep my Sick Days in Montana and use Kastles and Nordicas here. The Volkl Mantra, Blizzard Bonafide or Cochise or a stiff Black Crow works too. All those would be great in the Alps too.
On the fence between 179 and 186. 6′ 165# former high school racer, now rad dad skiing about 70 days/season. QST99 in 188 were too long, liked it but I ski very tight trees in the east and just didn’t feel zippy. QST106 in 181 I really liked but did not like the shift bindings so sold the whole thing. Did not miss the length at all on groomers. These will be used as a one ski quiver for trips to the west and fresh snow days in the east. Next ski down is 91 wide Black Crow orb.
I should just get another pair of QST106 in 181, but I like trying new skis because I am a ski whore.
I just keep going shorter on skis and liking it, a guilty pleasure like listening to Liz Phair.
Snowblades?
I am skiing across Sweden and Norway(occasional Alps) and looking for a replacement to my Atomic automatics 102s at 188. I got the Automatic Backland 107 at 189, but found these were strictly big pow day skis only and tough for the side, glades, and on piste where tighter turns are needed. At 6 feet, 245 / 183cm, 112kg looking at the Line Sick Day 104 at 179 for the mixed days when I am on/off piste. Thoughts?
Skiing 188 Soul for years and absolutely loving them on moguls, trees, couloirs, pretty much everywhere from Cham to Revy. Thinking of adding another pair of skis but from a different brand – would 186 Sick Day 104 have a similar easy feel like Soul ? Any other suggestion from you guys that come as close to Soul as possible ? Reviews typically focus more on the differences between the skis and less on similarities….
This might be my next one-quiver ski! I am planning to set it with tech binding. I am only worried about the size. What size would you recommend for 5’10” and 180lb ex-racing skier? I mainly ski couloirs, trees, not much of a big mountain. Won’t 179 be a bit shorty to give me good float on powder days?
If not Line, what else should i look at? Thought about the new Volkl Blaze 106, or Head Kore 105. Could you guys recommend any other similar skis that i should look at?
I’ve been skiing the 179cm Nordica Enforcer 104 Free for the last season and a half but am looking for something similar but that has a lighter feel, easier/less work to swing around in tight terrain, trees, and bumps, and feels more balanced and comfortable in the air. Would you suggest the Sick Day 104 as suitable replacement or is there anything else you would recommend that might be a better option?
I started skiing last year after snowboarding for years and got about 39 days in on a pair of Soul 7s 186 that delaminated. Live in the PNW so see a lot of denser pow that can be punishing by mid-day (Mostly at Crystal). Also, I’m 6’2″ and about 205 with no gear. I have a friend who LOVES the wildcat, but I tried the 191 last year and felt like maybe it was just a little too much ski for me, but that could also be the conditions I was riding it in (firmer, end of season). I would like something I could tour in but I would say 90% of what I’m doing is resort riding so I think I would prioritize “ease of use” and “help me progress” over “can tour with it” considering “can tour” and “good in dense chop” are at odds with each other. I’m mostly between the Sick Day 104 186, the QST 106 188? (maybe the 181?), or at a distant 3rd, the wildcat 108 184. I’m also open to any other suggestions. I like the idea of a 184 length but your review of the wildcat 108 gave me pause because I would consider myself a weak intermediate right now. Please help and thank you.