Post by JimRatliff on Dec 13, 2014 13:27:59 GMT -7
Specs from their website @ 165
120-67-100 (14m sidecut radius)
On-piste Rocker. 2 inches, almost not noticeable. They say that it "means the tip edges are in the snow when you want but out of the snow when you release". OK, I'm sure their testers can tell the difference. Mostly I think it means they can paste a sticker that says "rocker" on the top sheet that peeled off the first day in the snow.
Construction. Wood core sandwich construction with Air Carbon core and double Titanal shell.
I demoed this ski last January and really liked the feel even though it was a 170 and the Fischer rep agreed with me when I told him I wanted the 165 length. The rep said this ski line was to be a replacement for the Progressor line and to feel more like the old RX8, which is not a bad thing. The most noticeable difference from my Progressor 8 was how much more I could feel the entire ski, and especially the tail. I have a Progressor design theory now that would have kept me from buying "if I had known then what I think I know now". Anyway, over the summer Svend saw an ad for a 165cm pair in Canada, they became mine, and this was my first time on them.
We just got back from a week in Colorado, and the skis are everything that I would have hoped for (and absolutely right for the conditions we had). Any type of turn was available, just based on my speed and edge angle. We spent a day with Bob Hintermeister on his SuperShapes and my turns were normally shorter than his when he had me follow him. This is not to imply that I am anywhere near the skier he is nor to imply that the skis are comparable, but in the past following him in his tracks had been a challenge for me. No more.
They were easy to bend at slow speeds, like practicing linked two footed releases and when focusing on speed control on steeps, and they held at speed. There were times at speed (not Heluva speed!!!) when I would tip more midturn and the radius would really tighten up and the inertial forces back from the ski was a real load. (I wanted to say the forces would almost collapse my leg, but that doesn't sound very manly.)
What I wanted was a narrower waisted ski that would bend easily at slower speeds but still hold up to the forces of higher speeds. These will brush turns, they will carve just riding the sidecut, and they will respond to being bent and really shortening the turns. I got what I was looking for.
Most importantly, for anyone who has been here for a while, I think they are "Gary proof". Several times I took them off the trail into the trees, and not once did they come back out with yellow clumps of snow on the topsheets. This must be because of the increased heat retention properties of the Titanal keeping the ski warm enough to prevent clumping and facilitating the melting of any such clumps.
Me: 5'10" 165 pounds, 66 yo, probably level 7 skier
Also ski the Head Peak 84 Pro with 84 waist and original Ski Logic Ullr's Chariot with 101 waist. I can carve good turns œn both of these, but I can't shorten the turns on either of them like on the 67 waisted Fischer (and the UC's will leave my ankles really sore by the end of the a day if for some reason its a full day of western "hardpack").
Progressor design. The marketing copy for the Progressor touted the easier turn initiation from the wider tip and the "easier release" from the relatively narrower tail. However, both Lynn and I had developed a bit of 'heel push' in our turns (certainly not intentionally skidded turns) that I believe was exacerbated by the ski design. Both of us really noticed how much better we could feel the "whole length" of the ski (Head MYA7 for her) I mentioned this to Diana R. and she said she had never liked the Progressor's she had skied because she didn't feel that the tail of the ski was helping her around the corner. FWIW
120-67-100 (14m sidecut radius)
On-piste Rocker. 2 inches, almost not noticeable. They say that it "means the tip edges are in the snow when you want but out of the snow when you release". OK, I'm sure their testers can tell the difference. Mostly I think it means they can paste a sticker that says "rocker" on the top sheet that peeled off the first day in the snow.
Construction. Wood core sandwich construction with Air Carbon core and double Titanal shell.
I demoed this ski last January and really liked the feel even though it was a 170 and the Fischer rep agreed with me when I told him I wanted the 165 length. The rep said this ski line was to be a replacement for the Progressor line and to feel more like the old RX8, which is not a bad thing. The most noticeable difference from my Progressor 8 was how much more I could feel the entire ski, and especially the tail. I have a Progressor design theory now that would have kept me from buying "if I had known then what I think I know now". Anyway, over the summer Svend saw an ad for a 165cm pair in Canada, they became mine, and this was my first time on them.
We just got back from a week in Colorado, and the skis are everything that I would have hoped for (and absolutely right for the conditions we had). Any type of turn was available, just based on my speed and edge angle. We spent a day with Bob Hintermeister on his SuperShapes and my turns were normally shorter than his when he had me follow him. This is not to imply that I am anywhere near the skier he is nor to imply that the skis are comparable, but in the past following him in his tracks had been a challenge for me. No more.
They were easy to bend at slow speeds, like practicing linked two footed releases and when focusing on speed control on steeps, and they held at speed. There were times at speed (not Heluva speed!!!) when I would tip more midturn and the radius would really tighten up and the inertial forces back from the ski was a real load. (I wanted to say the forces would almost collapse my leg, but that doesn't sound very manly.)
What I wanted was a narrower waisted ski that would bend easily at slower speeds but still hold up to the forces of higher speeds. These will brush turns, they will carve just riding the sidecut, and they will respond to being bent and really shortening the turns. I got what I was looking for.
Most importantly, for anyone who has been here for a while, I think they are "Gary proof". Several times I took them off the trail into the trees, and not once did they come back out with yellow clumps of snow on the topsheets. This must be because of the increased heat retention properties of the Titanal keeping the ski warm enough to prevent clumping and facilitating the melting of any such clumps.
Me: 5'10" 165 pounds, 66 yo, probably level 7 skier
Also ski the Head Peak 84 Pro with 84 waist and original Ski Logic Ullr's Chariot with 101 waist. I can carve good turns œn both of these, but I can't shorten the turns on either of them like on the 67 waisted Fischer (and the UC's will leave my ankles really sore by the end of the a day if for some reason its a full day of western "hardpack").
Progressor design. The marketing copy for the Progressor touted the easier turn initiation from the wider tip and the "easier release" from the relatively narrower tail. However, both Lynn and I had developed a bit of 'heel push' in our turns (certainly not intentionally skidded turns) that I believe was exacerbated by the ski design. Both of us really noticed how much better we could feel the "whole length" of the ski (Head MYA7 for her) I mentioned this to Diana R. and she said she had never liked the Progressor's she had skied because she didn't feel that the tail of the ski was helping her around the corner. FWIW