Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 43 of 43
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,462
    Cool
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,836
    Quote Originally Posted by LC View Post
    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.
    You can still find closeout Watea 106s pretty easily, maybe go that route? It's a great ski.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    315
    I skied on the Ranger 98 last year as a touring ski and was very happy with everything about it. I skied it in a 180 with a Vipec 12 mounted on the line. I'm 6'0", 180lbs. I liked that length for touring. Question is, has anyone messed around with the mounting point? It's further forward than my other skis of similar length. Boot sole is 298mm, Scarpa Maestrale RS. Thoughts?

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    a swamp
    Posts
    632
    I have the 108 and am about to mount some speed turns on them and I also noticed that the recommended mounting point seems really far forward. I skied them last year at SIA and loved them thus bought them and I assume the demos were mounted at the recommended point but I'm surprised now that I look at them compared to my other skis -- then again maybe wider freerides have gotten in the habit of setting their recommended points further back as that became a trend for "powder" performance
    you know there ain't no devil,
    there's just God when he's drunk---- Tom Waits

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    4,167
    Resurrecting an old thread...interested to hear any comments on tip dive on the Ranger series. I have Watea 96s and love them for almost any condition except really deep snow. Was lucky enough to hit Snowbird in mid/late January and had a day where we got into 24" of untracked. The tips on the Watea 96s dove something fierce. Truth be told, I'm a pretty shitty skier but I've never experienced anything like that. I'm really intrigued by the Ranger 108s and interested to hear any feedback on their performance in deep snow.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    346
    Tips are really wide on the 108's. I never had problems with them diving but I can also say they weren't the best powder skis I've ever used so take that into consideration. I thought, for their waist width, that they are solid performers in the powder.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    4,167
    Thanks. The tip on the Watea 96 does seem on the narrow side for a ski of that width. The reality is, most of my pow days are 12" or less but if I do get the chance to go deep, I'm looking for a ski that won't make me suck worse than I do naturally.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Golden
    Posts
    1,023
    It's an amazing ski but durability is a major issue. I have seen at least 6 Pairs with identical damage where the edge and sidewall separate from the core and crack the base leaving you with a long strip on the side of your ski only held on by the top sheet. It can be up to 8 inches long. It obviously comes from hitting something but there can be almost no visual clue to this impact.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,612
    I have the Watea 96 as my touring ski and they're great in a foot or less new snow and passable if deeper but expecting them to float in 2' of blower is a little unreasonable. I think it's a great ski but I would like to try the Ranger 98, 108 and 122.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    5,868
    Funny timing. Just dropped my review this morning:
    http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...r-ranger-98-ti

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,612
    That review make me think it's not as good as the Watea/Ranger 96. Maybe as a touring ski.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,654
    I've got the "older" Ranger 106. It does really well with high-speed carving for a wide ski. Good crud/chop performance for being as light as it is. I'd say deep snow is also good - I was expecting better, but perhaps the stiffness detracts a bit. Maneuverability I'd say is just OK, but that might be partly due to the 190 length I'm on.

    Durability is just OK as well - top sheet is "chipping" off in pretty big chunks on both skis. I've had to glue these hangnails back to the ski several times.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    4,167
    Quote Originally Posted by AaronWright View Post
    I have the Watea 96 as my touring ski and they're great in a foot or less new snow and passable if deeper but expecting them to float in 2' of blower is a little unreasonable. I think it's a great ski but I would like to try the Ranger 98, 108 and 122.
    To be clear, I don't like surfy skis...I'm older than dirt and like being down in the snow rather than on top of it but the Watea 96s refused to porpoise up using my old school pow technique (or lack thereof). This is one of the reasons I want to try the Ranger 108. I'm looking at it as an east coast pow/touring ski that will work for the rare deep day in Utah or Wyoming.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,462
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenBC View Post
    It's an amazing ski but durability is a major issue. I have seen at least 6 Pairs with identical damage where the edge and sidewall separate from the core and crack the base leaving you with a long strip on the side of your ski only held on by the top sheet. It can be up to 8 inches long. It obviously comes from hitting something but there can be almost no visual clue to this impact.
    Dammit, I thought Fischer would be past this type of shit by now.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,612
    Quote Originally Posted by MyNameIsAugustWest View Post
    To be clear, I don't like surfy skis...I'm older than dirt and like being down in the snow rather than on top of it but the Watea 96s refused to porpoise up using my old school pow technique (or lack thereof). This is one of the reasons I want to try the Ranger 108. I'm looking at it as an east coast pow/touring ski that will work for the rare deep day in Utah or Wyoming.
    Huh, I find that the Watea 96 "porpoises" just fine in snow deeper than a foot.
    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Dammit, I thought Fischer would be past this type of shit by now.
    I've had nothing but the opposite experience with the Fischer skis I've owned, very durable. The top sheets on my Wateas look pretty good after some hard use. Maybe the newer 'aeroshape' Rangers are suffering from this?

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,654
    Quote Originally Posted by AaronWright View Post
    Huh, I find that the Watea 96 "porpoises" just fine in snow deeper than a foot.
    Agree - my old Watea 94s were fine porpoising. They were really fun on Feb. 20th, 2012 at Steamboat. Then again, barrel staves would have been fun that day.

    I've had nothing but the opposite experience with the Fischer skis I've owned, very durable. The top sheets on my Wateas look pretty good after some hard use.
    Yup - my 94s took a shellacking for 6 seasons until a very large boulder at Jackson took them out. That was a good day too.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    111

    Ranger 108 mount point question

    Sorry in advance for the old thread resurrection.


    Can someone with a 2017 or 2018 188 Ranger 108 get a measurement of the recommended mount point from the tail? I'm curious if my first year models were marked correctly...

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    3,327
    Quote Originally Posted by mf2e9c View Post
    Sorry in advance for the old thread resurrection.


    Can someone with a 2017 or 2018 188 Ranger 108 get a measurement of the recommended mount point from the tail? I'm curious if my first year models were marked correctly...
    I skied the 188 cm and own the 202 cm Ranger 108s. As a more traditional type skier, I hated the suggested mount and moved the mount points back. I settled on -2 cm from suggested for the 188 and -3.5 cm for the 202 cm.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •