Fischer Ranger 108

[garretvs]

Really intrigued by this ski - good width, nice shape, metal. Anyone been on it?

Seems like it's very capable of charging - i.e.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJo4b-59q0Y

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I think they will be great. This guy is riding them in the video in this thread http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...-from-Jackson!
I have the final year Watea 96, it has the same basic profile minus the aeroshape as the Ranger series and they are great. It looks like next years Ranger 108 has the aeroshape of the Hannibal series blended with the profile and rocker of the final Watea/Ranger skis.
The tip on these is more early rise than rocker and I like it, a gradual fairly low rise.

[gregL]

I skied the Ranger 108 briefly on groomers at Bend. My notes say: "Smooth and quiet for the relatively light weight. Nimble underfoot. Predictable and controllable. Excellent choice for a West Coast quiver-of-one."

[Beyond]

It's getting strong reviews everywhere. Emphasis on near-perfect early rise and camber, weight. But have a sense from talking to folks who have skied it, not a push button. SKI will not like it.

[SUPERIOR]

Looks like Fischer finally got a good marketing guy for the freeski brand.

"Yeah, let's take that Aboriginal thingee-majig Watea, slap a black and neon yellow paint job on it, and call it the ranger."

I bet they'll sell a shit ton. No joke. Looks like a badass ski.

[Beyond]

No Fischer fanboy, but do your homework. Very different ski than the Watea, unless you think fiberglass, wood, metal and carbon = same ski.

[goldenboy]

Skied it for a run at SIA, along with a friend of mine. This is what I wrote: "The Ranger 108 is one of the least confidence inspiring, twitchy, scary skis I’ve been on in a while. They require massive amounts of foot steering just to keep them in a turn." The friend that I was with also couldn't wait to get to the bottom and get on a different pair of skis.

[Caucasian Asian]

GoNads is on them. She sounded pretty pumped about them.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Bump. These seem neat. Can anyone comment on actual length/how long they ski?
Oh, and camber/rocker pr0n is always appreciated.

[doebedoe]

Skied it for a run at SIA, along with a friend of mine. This is what I wrote: "The Ranger 108 is one of the least confidence inspiring, twitchy, scary skis I’ve been on in a while. They require massive amounts of foot steering just to keep them in a turn." The friend that I was with also couldn't wait to get to the bottom and get on a different pair of skis.

Realize this is old...but this sounds like a classic case of a Rep not tuning his sticks, just relying on the factory to get it right. Sounds like a bad tune.

I haven't been on the Rangers, but if they draw and improve on the Wateas they're likely a versatile for someone who is looking for something with a bit of metal but not particularly hard to ski.

[goldenboy]

Realize this is old...but this sounds like a classic case of a Rep not tuning his sticks, just relying on the factory to get it right. Sounds like a bad tune.

It's crazy how many skis at SIA are badly tuned. You would think that companies would realize how important that is. At least some of the booths will hand you a ski while saying "Sorry, the tune on that pair is really bad."

That said, it's pretty easy to tell a bad tune from a bad ski. The Rangers were tuned just fine, they may have felt like a railed ski in some aspects, but they weren't railed.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Did they not like it when you leaned forward?
Maybe they didn't set the boot center right?

[goldenboy]

I don't think it had anything to do with where the ski was mounted. I play around with skis at SIA enough to figure out a sweet spot, whether that's forward or back or whatever. The Ranger is just a twitchy ski. If you don't mind a ski that requires a lot of foot steering, you might like this ski. I hate foot steering, so I hated this ski.

I'm like 130 pounds. My buddy is over 200. Both of us would have put a "worst of SIA" sticker on that ski. But others in this thread like it, so it depends on what you're into, I guess.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Convex base?

[Atomicgray]

Here is some input on the Rangers - I have about 30 days on the Ranger 98 and about 15 on the Ranger 108 all last year mostly at Alta/Snowbird and Snowbasin. I ski for Fischer so take anything I say with a grain of salt. The 2015 Rangers are completely different skis than the old flat laminated watea's from years past. I have had no issues with either ski being twitchy..I am 220 and an ex racer /coach. So the Ranger 98 @ 188 is 136/100/126 with a radius of 19 - This is a great go to Utah ski. The Ranger 108 @ 188 is 142/110/131 with a radius of 20 - Fun ski for everyday or deeper snow days. I still put a lot of day on my 122's ( 192 - 145/122/136 ) as they are very fun in deep snow. The new Ranger are way lighter that watea's of the past..some will love others maybe sad as new skis are not near as stiff as skis from the past. The 98 and the 108 are still stiff just a little more forgiving that old models. Peace

[XavierD]

maybe goldenboy is just a twitchy skier?

[goldenboy]

maybe goldenboy is just a twitchy skier?

Could be... Like I said, some people like them. That's why there are so many skis out there- there's one for everyone. Or at least maybe.

I skied with a friend who skis for Fischer and he ripped around on them no problem. My background is that of an ex-racer and someone with a bunch of top 10 IFSA finishes, if that makes my opinion any better or worse. Anyway, that's my opinion but anyone who thinks they would like that ski should go try them out.

[adrenalated]

maybe goldenboy is just a twitchy skier?

goldenboy can jump turn in techy terrain like a motherfucking champion, but other than that I wouldn't say he's a twitchy skier.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Aren't you supposed to steer with your feet?

[XavierD]

Cool. Look forward to skiing them. Although not sure when. The directional 108mm field is already crowded with lots of quality; and I have four of the best to split my time on.

[GoldenBC]

Absolutely amazing. Skied them a half dozen days at Kicking Horse. Rails old groomers, damp, unbelievable predictable (that tip does exactly what you want in all types of snow). Makes you want to charge. They also have a decent float and smear factor for a 108mm ski. I'm 150lb and was skiing on the 188cm. Will buy them for sure.

[LC]

I'm looking to replace my 13/14 Watea 106 and found this old thread. Any updated experiences with the Ranger 108 now?

There's some wildly varying reviews here and elsewhere anyway. The Watea was my bigger touring ski and what I would normally take out on steep stuff with a flex, weight and rocker that I liked. I don't really want to go much softer than the Watea 106, nor lighter if it means sacrificing some power. The Ranger 108 sounds a little lighter than the Watea 106, so how does the 108 handle chop/crud/etc?

...or, has anyone been on the 14/15 Ranger 106? I can't figure out if it's the same ski as the older Watea 106 or if it's lighter & softer.

[lordf]

I've not seen or skied the new 106 but the Fischer dealers catalouge did say it has a revised core from your 106 as I looked at getting a set of those, local shop only had them in a 182 though. Measured 186 ish tip to tail though.

Not tempted to look at something like the Dynafit Chugach in a 188 or 193, the 188 is on sale on the epic tv shop for less than 300 euros I think.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Was that measurement with a tape measure or just standing it next to a Völkl?

[lordf]

Was that measurement with a tape measure or just standing it next to a Völkl?

Next to a masters GS ski (186) and was longer than a 184 Watea 88.