They are also beefier in construction and designed for durability.
The shapes are tweaked to offer more rocker and a more traditional footprint than the previous ski too.
Its the lighter, stiffer more park-focused iteration and its a blast because of it!
_
Shape/Flex/Construction:
The Chronic 94 is a twist on the classic modern park ski shape.
it has a good amount of camber underfoot, blunted noses with a nice taper to them.
Somewhere around the 6-8-7 nose-to-tail arbitrary rating scale of ski stiffness.
Its playful and light enough to have fun on but youre not buying a narrow Chronic to rail turns.
For me, the 101 was wide enough to be a slush-busting, surfy ski all around the mountain.
I had mine at -2cm which Im sure helped the performance.
That said, I agree with Milo that the 101 is better.
For a 94mm underfoot ski, they handle mixed conditions and some slush pretty decently in my opinion.]
Park
One of about 3 tricks I can do.
It’s even a great street weapon.
If youre looking for an all-mountain freestyle too, personally, Id look elsewhere.
The Chronic 94 does a great job of doing what it does best.
Which, for the current state of ski building is pretty rare.
This isnt that, its a Line Chronic, buy it to ride park hard and youll love it.
Expect a duck to run like a cheetah and youll be disappointed.
[Twig: I largely agree here.
That did make it a slightly more stable landing platform, and poppy ski on jumps/takeoffs.
The Chronic 94 is definitely a better choice for fast swaps and spins.]
For me at the very least.
This choice comes down to personal preference, chose the width your heart desires!
Because of that, it just kinda works.
Its a Volkl though, its missing some of the fun that Line skis have in their DNA.
I thought the Revolt 90 was an incredible ski and was my daily driver down under.
Its more directional in terms of camber, rocker and sidecut but skis beautifully.
But if you prefer a wider, more versatile platform, go for the 101.
