Coomback versus Hardside

Because they are well-known, fits my ski profile nicely, and sits in between my Shuksans (for lighter and faster) and Volkl Gotamas (for in bounds powder days), I have been eyeing the Coombacks for a couple of years now. I'd probably use this as my true go-to ski for touring and the occasional lift day. I've been "hearing" that I might enjoy the Hardside even more as it is touted as a better "Performing" ski due to metal reinforcement. "Performance" I assume means it is a bit stiffer/ stable when hard charging.

Hardside is 98mm instead of 102mm underfoot
Hardside is 130 grams heavier due to steel reinforced construction

I'd run them with Dynafit bindings and the Dynafit Titan boot, so not the lightest set-up in the world. If I want to go light, ski Vertfest, or climb a mountain, then I'll take the Shuksans and my light boot.

The thing is, maybe a little softer and lighter is a good thing in the BC. Wondering if anyone else has considered this choice or maybe skis either of these set-ups. I suspect the differences are minor.

I do not have any experience with the Hardside, but I would definitely recommend the Coomback. They are my only skis and I do not feel the need for anything else. They work great at the area, they are light enough to climb with, and they are fun in all snow conditions. Hard to go wrong.

Year two with my Coomback's as my only ski and really love them. Personally prefer the lighter weight and they felt "ok" with some of the December/January "survival skiing when the upper slopes got wind blown and icy. They really pay off when the powder presents. Have the Fritschi Freeride bindings so I'm riding a bit high for alpine but seem to have adapted. Hope to do some touring this spring/summer now that my meniscus seems to be healed. Ah, turning 50 and loving skiing more than ever.

I seem to have much of same quiver Cornfed. Picked up some used Coombacks a month ago and a lot more smiles generated than my 6 year old Shuksans. Even nice on last Sunday's crust and crud. Not tried Hardsides but most folks seem to find the Coombacks livelier and more snappy. If willing to carry more weight, the Sidestashes would be a fine choice. A good complement to my Gotamas for area skiing. Those should be fun at Crystal tomorrow.
If you like your Shuksan length, go the same with Coomback. Mount them boot center. If you wanted to wait, next year supposedly wider and lighter. Make sure a good shop mounts them as numerous toe piece pull outs reported on Wildsnow.

I've skied both (demo on the hardside for about 3-4 days). Loved them more than the coombacks, but I'm tele. My brother loves his coombacks on DH. It's a great all around ski. I just didn't like the CB's on tele...but on the DH's they were a ton of fun.

For me the Hardside is an excellent ski, more in line with the Volkl Mantra (I owned both).
I tele on them and they hold a powerful edge and absorb the chunder pretty well. I think they are a little heavy for touring though and they sit on the rack when touring is in mind. If the touring conditions are such that I need the Hardside...Well maybe I should be just riding the lifts.
Have not used the Coombacks so no help on that side, but I think they would be a heck of a ski overall.
It's hard for me to gage what works, since there are a lot of younger skiers that don't mind lugging around a bunch of weight in the BC.