2023 Fischer Ranger 96 Ski Review with SkiEssentials.com
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- Jeff and Bob discuss the new 2023 Fischer Ranger 96! This is an interesting conversation. More to talk about than the Ranger 102, which carries the shape forward and which Bob and Jeff both thoroughly enjoyed. Jeff loves the 96 too, but it doesn't seem to work as well for Bob. We talk through it, skis it compares well to, and cover your questions at the end.
Written Review: www.skiessentials.com/Chairli...
0:00 - Intro
4:50 - Construction
7:35 - Shape
9:25 - On-piste
16:25 - Off-piste
21:00 - Audience Questions
Thanks guys - the combo of the written review and video is awesome. I think I found my ski for next year! :-) :-)
Thanks Paul! Appreciate the feedback.
I think I snagged the last set of pink 102FRs from SkiEssentials; and I'm so glad I did. I'm sure the new Fischer line is great; but I love, Love, LOVE the "old" design.
Great review per usual, guys. Your videos are so helpful in finding outstanding equipment.
It's almost worth not putting bindings on the pink 102 and keeping it as a collectors item! I'm quite sure people are going to feel a lot of nostalgia for that ski.
Thank you Jeff and Bob for your excellent reviews. I am a hard charger and I love the old 99ti, prob one of my fav skis. But no doubt, the new ranger 96 has a broader set of competence and has more appeal to a wider variety of skiers.
Certainly, excellent way to describe it. There will be some skiers like yourself who miss the 99Ti, but I think Fischer will be more successful with this new line, especially in comparison to the 92, 99, and 107 Ti. The 94 and 102 FR leaves a bigger question mark in my mind as to which will ultimately gain more popularity.
I really liked the conditions that you were filming.. That carved up powder.. I skied conditions like that with my 2016 Stockli Stormrider 88 177 and I had a miserable time probably because they were so heavy.. I am not going to ask a question this time but I really do enjoy that you both had different experiences on that ski.
Thanks for the feedback Darin! A little bit of extra width helps a lot when there's soft snow on groomers like that. 96 definitely helps stay more composed than an 88 mm ski.
I've been waiting for this one for a while -- thanks very much, fellas! I should mention my slight disappointment to hear that Bob couldn't ride the 187, which is what I was most looking forward to hearing about (I am pretty close to Bob's weight and height -- but have at least 20 years on him and am not nearly as powerful or skilled, which is why I use the term "slight" instead of "very"). But hearing your brief mention on the SERPO was EXCELLENT to hear as it helped me place this within my own short list pretty accurately. What lingers here is Jeff's positive experiences in carving on the groomers -- would that accurately scale to my additional weight and height on the 187, given my less powerful stance and reduced acumen when comparing myself to Bob.. Thanks again!
Hey Curtis! So, while we can't answer that question based on experience as we haven't had that length available for testing, my inclination is to say yes, so do think the performance will scale to accommodate your weight in the 187 cm length. I expect Bob will find the same.
I noticed that the factory tune of this new ranger was extending a little beyond where rocker starts, so I extended the sharp active edge +7cm and I am very surprised, softer nose of the ski combined with earlier iniciation point on groomer, makes for a very well iniciating ski similar to old series , without feeling grabby, something that due to wery stiff nose could not be done on the old series.
I ski the 102 , but I can imagine it would be the same here
Always enjoy listening to you guys. Can you guys please get your hands on the new Peak skis? I would love a review on them.
We certainly plan on it! It might be somewhat challenging just from a logistics perspective once we're back on snow, but we'll do our best to make it happen.
Oh boy is this great !!!
I bought these from you guys as soon as they released. They are extremely smooth. I have to echo what Jeff said, some of my best carves of the season were on this ski. I'm 5'9" ~185lbs and the 180cm is perfect. Handles high speed way better than the 92ti, but not nearly as good in the moguls. It's definitely more versatile though. I find the new 96s hard to compare to the 99tis though, they feel completely different. The 99tis are much more oriented to skiing very hard in softer snow, imho.
Hi guys, I hope you will put both the 96 and the 102 in the womens line-up this autumn as well 🙏 and bring in the st ana, the sheeva and so on.... especially since the women's models in some brands differ from the men's, but is not the case for these ones. Can't wait😀
We certainly will! It might actually be a more interesting comparison on the women's side... Certainly will include SA and Sheeva.
Thanks again for a great review gent's. I've been on a pair of Fischer Progressor 8+ since I bought them new in 07/08 and I have loved them but it's time to upgrade. I've been reading and watching reviews on so many ski's, it's hard to pick not knowing which will feel/suit me best. I know that it's best to demo to get a good feel but I also feel like I could spend a whole season demoing which seems like a waste of time. Any thoughts? I'm 5'3 at 165 and I'm thinking the Ranger 96 at 160 -170. I'm definitely more on-piste but I want to explore more while feeling comfortable and agile.
I think a 166 cm Ranger 96 would be an excellent choice! The 96 performs great on-piste, but also lets you explore the entire mountain and feel comfortable while doing so. It's quick and agile, but strong too. It's truly an extremely well-rounded ski. Demoing would be awesome if you can make it happen, but I'm pretty confident you'd love the Ranger 96.
Where was that video filmed? That’s a big open area looks awesome.
That was last summer testing final prototypes at Mount Hood. That's on the Palmer glacier at Timberline, skier is Foreste Peterson.
Your videos are great - the best in the business, thank you. I'm a Colorado-based technically strong skier (male) who likes to ski the whole mountain. I love bumps, chutes, bowls, trees, and groomers somewhat equally (depending on the conditions). I ski somewhat aggressively but focus more on smooth skiing as I get older. It Seems like in Colorado tracked-out powder is a normal condition. This would be my daily resort ski, I have another wider pair (107 mid) for powder days and touring. I'm 5'10", 180ish, and debating between the Ranger 96, Rustler 9, Enforcer 100s, and maybe Head Kore 99. FYI I currently ride Volkl 90eights for this purpose and love them but want to try something new. Any advice?
Thanks, David!
I'd say the Ranger 96 is the closest comparison to your 90Eight, so if you're looking for similar, I'd say that's a great choice. Rustler 9 is a bit grippier and turnier than the Ranger, but shares a lot of off-piste performance characteristics. Enforcer 100 is the beast of the bunch--solid, stable, and fast, so if you're looking for a bit more of a challenge, but with the highest-performance ceiling, that should be on top of the list--fantastic in crud, powder, and groomers, you just have to work slightly more to get it. Head Kore is likely my personal favorite on your list, but has a unique blend of attributes in terms of light weight and stiff flex. It's not for everyone, but if you know how to bend a ski, you can get a whole lot out of it without having to put the work in like with Enforcer. If you are looking for something precise and light, the Kore makes for a very intriguing option. If you're not as aggressive as you used to be (same here), I think a stronger look at the Kore may be warranted. Have fun!
SE
@@SkiEssentials I really appreciate you taking the time to send these notes. I am going to go with the Kore 99's.
You guys do such a great job- thanks!
How would you compare it to the BC Camox. I imagine the metal gives it a wider speed range than the Camox. What’s your take?
I guess so, although the Camox does a great job with a pretty basic build. I didn't find the Ranger particularly engaging in a fast carved turn, while the Camox was more eager to make rounder carves. I think the versatility of the Ranger is all there, but I personally enjoy the liveliness of the Camox, and I'll take a bit less stability at speed in order to get it.
Will buy the fisher 102 (176) after seeing your very informative review. I have skied the Elan ripstick 96 (180) black edition for the last 2 seasons per your review but now want something less tiring. I am trying to decide between the fisher 96 (173 or 180?) vs the Elan ripstick regular edition 96 (180). Elan 96 or Fisher 96 ? Thanks for your expert advice.
HI Richard!
I think the Ripstick 96 powered by carbon will be a nice complement to the 102 with metal. They're a bit cleaner through the turns than the Ranger 96, and offer a whole lot of torsional stiffness and rebound as well. There's not a whole lot of difference in terms of tiring between the Black edition and regular. If you're looking for that, then I'd either go to the 172 or the Ranger 96 in the 173. I personally prefer the Elan.
I think the Fisher Ranger 102 fr ( carbon nose) is a fantastic ski, I have G3 ions on a pair of 177cm previously had the same binding on a 180 Fischer ranger 99 ti, again a great ski. Have yet to try the new ski, but if you get the chance to buy the old models go for it.
I personally agree with you. I loved the 99Ti.
Awesome in depth review. How would You compare the Fischer Ranger 96 to Rossignol Sender 94 TI?
Sender is very underrated. Whereas the Ranger is slightly heavier and more sluggish than Sender, the Rossignol has great energy and pop to it. Not quite as stable, but a lot more interesting, I've found.
hi bob and jeff, i know that this years reviews are almost over but in your opinion, could you tell me what skis have the lowest swing weight in the order of lowest at #1 and the highest at the other end between this 96 fischer, bliz rustler 9, Dyna M-free99, Sal Qst 98/ stance 102, K2 mind 99, great reviews as always, thanks
Hey Kim! Lowest swing weight... starting with the lowest, I would say it's M-Free 99, Ranger 96, QST 98, Rustler 9, Stance 102, Mindbender 99 Ti. Actually the Stance and Mindbender could be swapped, or at least they're basically tied. That's based on my own personal experience on all of those skis, although I imagine most would agree with me.
@@SkiEssentials thanks for that answer, and out of the 1st 3 the dyn-fish-sal- which one would have the most dampening?
@@ambertudor I'd give it to the Ranger, but only by a slight margin over the QST. For not using metal, Salomon does a very good job quieting the ski through cork and their C/FX material.
How is the float in soft snow? And how do these compare to the Serpo in that department?
Maybe this question is better suited for a comparison video.
For a 96 underfoot, directional ski, I think float is really good. Very similar to the Serpo in the float department. I might give the edge to the Ranger, however. I don't really have any big reasons to point to, I just feel that way having skied both of them quite a bit.
I am currently skiing the 2019 Elan Amphibio 84 XTI 170's. I,m 5' 7" and 185 lbs. Love these skis but am looking for an all mountain mid 90mm under foot as I am skiing a lot out west now on softer snow. I like the sounds of the Ranger 96, the Elan 96 Regular and Black Edition Ripsticks and the Atomic Maverick 95 TI.
What would you recommend I demo? Thanks
If you can, try them all! If you have to do one, I'd focus attention on the Ripstick 96 Black. I find it to have a wonderful blend of on-trail carving performance and off-trail versatility.
I'm trying to decide between the 96 Ranger and the 90 ranger. I ski mainly in Utah and already have powder ski for the big days. I definitely want it to carve, but still want something fun and versatile. I'm leaning Ranger 96 but not sure... Also on the Ranger 96, trying to decide between 180 and 187. I'm 6'3" 175 on the more advanced side. Thoughts?
I think the 90 is still pretty darn versatile, and the fact that you have a wide ski kind of furthers my opinion that the 90 is a better choice. If you had zero skis, I would likely go with the 96, but for an all-mountain complement to the wider ski, I would go 90. It splits the difference at 184 in length, too if that helps!
@@SkiEssentials That is super helpful. And I assume I can still get s decent float with the 90 ranger if i find some leftovers or a secret stash? Is this one of the better floaters in the 90mm range? Really appreciate the reviews and input!
so, its comparable to the black crow serpo? im 6ft 1 and 190 lbs, and usually ski 184 cm. is the 187 cm still playful?
Definitely comparable to the Serpo. Serpo feels a little more precise, Ranger more playful. I do think you would still find the 187 to be a fun, playful ski at your size, yes!
How does the Fischer Ranger 96 compare to a Salomon QST 92 or 98. Looking for something good in tight trees in New England. Im 215lbs 6'1 and thinking the Ranger 96 at 180cm could be my next ski.
It's pretty awesome in the woods! That said, it's up against two of the best in the QST line! I think the QST 92 has to be the best on your list as it's got a great blend of agility for tight trees as well as better on-trail turning performance. While Ranger is a playful and maneuverable ski for sure, it's not quite the performer that the 92 is in terms of versatility and energy.
Lay em ovah guy!! skiing like a "MAINE"iac :)
Whos got an old pair of RC-4s with the aerodynamic cut out tip? :)
How does the new Fischer Ranger 96 (2023) compare to the black Crows Serpo (2022)?
Very similar skis for sure. I find the Ranger feels a little softer and more playful, while the Serpo feels more precise and with slightly better torsional stiffness. They're definitely in the same conversation and feel more similar than different, but that's kind of where I draw the line in my head.
How do they compare to the Liberty in similar width?
Smoother, more vibration damping, at least compared to the Origin. It would actually kind of be like if you took an Origin 96 and blended it with an Evolv90.
Hey guys, long time viewer, first time commenter. I ski relatively dry powder snow about 20 days a year. I am looking for a ski that I can use for both powder and groomers. I am attracted to the 162 length and am looking for a ski between 100 and 110 mm. Does this sound like the right choice?
I'd bump it up to the 102 and then we're talking. The 96 lacks a bit of rocker and width that the 102 has more of. At the same time, the 102 isn't a bit drop when it comes to groomers, and seems to fit in better with the shape you're looking for. Hope that helps!
SE
How does this ski compare to the K2 mindbender 96 C? on piste and in the bumps?
The K2 is considerably easier to ski in the bumps and trees while the Ranger 96 will deliver more power and precision when it comes to on-piste performance.
Vs the Nordica unleashed 98?? Cheers Nick
Interesting comparison. Obviously there are some differences in the shape with the Unleashed being a true twin tip and the Ranger 96 being more directional. If you take out the difference in shape, however, there are some similarities in how they feel. Similar flex pattern, similar vibration damping, similar overall feel. The metal in the Unleashed is longer, but that's kind of negated by the longer rocker lines, so I would say overall stability and edge grip is pretty even between the two... Hope that helps!
A comparision that wasn't brought up so far - what about the Head Kores?
These are way stiffer aren't they?
They surely are. I'm mostly interested in a carving performance comparison and the feeling and feedback when you push them hard.
Kores are just about the stiffest ski you'll even flex. It gives them a unique personality. Light and very stiff means they're incredibly reactive and responsive. The Ranger is hands-down the smoother ski with more vibration damping. Softer flex, metal laminates, it creates a much different feel. They definitely react in different ways when you ski them hard. The Ranger will flex more easily into deeper trenched turns and allows you to manipulate turn radius more easily. When you push hard on a Kore, you get crazy amounts of snap out of a turn, but it comes along with more of a learning experience. You need to be perfectly weighted and dialed on the Kore or else it can kinda buck you.
That intro was from Timberline, right?
Yup! Palmer Glacier last summer testing the final prototypes.
I skied the Palmer on June 11th last summer and had better snow. A couple of inches of freshies and upper 20’s. I had the lane next to the lift to myself. The only bummer was a front came in after a couple of hours and it was so socked in I was forced to call it a day. Such is life in the PAC NW.
vs blaze 94?
Ranger 96 feels stronger than the Blaze to me. Heavier, more vibration damping, etc. It's always important to remember how long the rocker profile is on the Blaze. It makes it extremely agile, but takes away some edge grip and stability.
How do these compare to the Head Kore 93?
I really prefer the stiffness and energy out of the Kore 93 vs. the Ranger, which I find to be fun and playful, but not quite as high-performance or reactive. I'd rather ski the Ranger in soft snow, trees, etc, but anything firm, and the Kore is a great option.
How will it be on hard snow??
I (Jeff) thought it did quite well on firm snow! I do think this is a situation where skier weight might be somewhat of a determining factor. Bob pushed the 180 a bit past its limits on firm snow it would seem, although I don't think that would've been as much of an issue had he been on the longer length.
Hi guys, What ski does you Bob like the way Jeff enjoyed the 96Ti? Cus I am #BuiltLikeBob 🙂
I like the more responsive Head Kore 93 (95 mm at 184cm), the Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition, and the Dynastar M-Pro 99 for a mix of energy and versatility.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for answering! 🙂 How would you say Salomon QST 98 stands to the ones you mentioned above?
Bob needs to ride the 187's....
Agree 100% and I expect he'll have a very different experience.