Fischer CLAPS BACK- Gender Neutral Skis Curated Reaction Fischer Ranger 96
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 авг 2023
- Elliott Addresses comment from member of the Fischer Sweden Team. Curated Fischer Ranger Reaction. Elliott Reacts to Curated's Review of the Fischer Ranger 96 Women's Ski Review and gives insight on the skis.
Спорт
Love the ski tips!
Easy way to determine Men's verses Women's skis -- Check the Lengths they are offered in
Women's skis typically max at 179-181. where mens 190+
Great advice!
Hopefully I will be in the light of day for my next video! Thanks for watching everyone.
The amount of stress this curated videos causes you cracks me up hahaha. Sorry but I enjoy nonetheless. Btw, do the Stockli Montero AS!!!
would love to if I can find a pair to test
He is correct, Fischer skis only makes Unisex non gendered skis now, and they talk about it in several brand discussions and interviews. It’s their well known stance in the industry. They don’t believe there should be a difference between men’s and women’s skis because they think all that is really needed is different length options and skilled skiers of both sexes want the same thing from their skis. Curated is simply titling their video that way probably because they want women to want to buy the ski and watch the video, and they are showing a women skier skiing the unisex ski.
I’m a woman skier who currently skis a women specific ski, the Moment Sierras, and I think both sides of the argument are valuable. As a very petite and lightweight woman I benefit from having a women’s model in my case, as the skis are almost exactly like the “men’s” version, the Moment Deathwish, but are offered in shorter in lengths, more slender underfoot, and are slightly softer flexing with different woods. I’ve found it to be the perfect stability for my weight and other petite women have found the same, while larger and taller women sometimes opt for the men’s version. I’ve also seen men with small builds go with our women’s version and love it. So in this case the gender difference in the ski design is pretty much just purely benefiting those with smaller frames vs those with larger.
This was a super cool comment thank you for sharing your perspective! I used to work in ski shops when women's specific skis first came out, and I think they've come along way with incorporating the original design and cut. The first ones I got pretty negative feedback on.
I think you're right about curated and Fischer's messaging, but my bigger message is that for the average consumer that doesn't follow the industry and just picks skis up off the store wall or an online seller, it's not super transparent. Also It's not listed on Fischer's direct website. So just trying to advocate.
I agree with you that it's super cool, I just think it could be more visible for consumers. I think consumer transparency is good for everyone.
I wonder if a better solution would just be to have a "soft" and "stiff" version? Wdy think?
I do agree that it's important to make skis accessible for different body types and skiing preferences, but I want it to be less confusing for consumers for sure.
Thanks for the nice comment and thanks for watching!
@@RicketySkiReviews thanks for the detailed comment, I was actually coming back to add to my comment because I thought it wasn’t clear that I actually agree with you that Fischer should put their stance on having Unisex skis front and center on their website. It’s clearly what they want to be known for, so it’s odd their website doesn’t show immediate info on this, as I would have expected it to and would have been confused if I didn’t watch so much ski content, so your criticism is very valid.
I had no idea women’s specific skis were a fairly recent thing! What general years did you notice them appearing in ski shops? I was skiing as a young child in the 90s but had no idea what was going on in the ski shops and with branding until I was an adult, my dad always picked our skis up from ski swaps or other such places.
As for my opinion on whether women’s models are better or stiffer vs softer skis are preferable, I’m actually not sure! I like that brands are doing different things, and I think it’s driving healthy focus on women and petite skiers needs for the first time in the long history of skiing. I like Fischer’s brand choice to have all Unisex because I have heard from many women they make awesome and very skiable skis. They would be top of my list to try if I got a chance to demo a pair. And yet I also love Moment’s skis and I ski their women’s line because I literally don’t fit into the length requirements for any of their “men’s” skis because they are far too long for me. This has always been an issue for me when looking at skis to try because few offer skis in my size unless they are specifically made for women. I am a part of a women’s ski forum called The Ski Diva and this is pretty split-many of the smaller women like me really appreciate having women’s specific models because they are what we are able to ski in many cases with the exception of the brands like Fischer which go out of their way to make skis that are small enough for us. On the other hand, the larger and taller, or even just heavier and larger framed women skiers tend to be able to enjoy men’s and unisex skis more often and appreciate them.
I really think in the current market there is hopefully a place for both strategies. I like that there are skis that were designed from the ground up with a small framed person, often a woman, who was an excellent skier, and yet had a body weight and size which means that gravity and the way the skis flex is different than someone far larger who is able to press harder into their skis with their body weight alone, as well as the often significant power difference that men’s muscles can have. If Unisex ski companies are really having women be a large part of their development and making sure they have ski lines which are accessible to the large amount of women who are a lot smaller than most men, it comes to a similar final result. I only worry that some companies may use this as an excuse to essentially just make men’s skis, developed almost purely with men or perhaps a larger woman who can ski the skis just as well, and then no thought or development is given to women skiers in a meaningful way. I don’t think Fischer is doing this now, but it could be a temptation for companies in the future to use good PR to cover up the reality of essentially just making men’s skis for those with larger bodies and calling them unisex. Similar to the opposite issue I heard we use to see with companies making much lower quality and lower skill skis and calling them the “women’s model”.
I really enjoy your videos and now snarky they are compared to most ski content, especially some of the criticisms of Curated, which I had an issue with (not fully their fault, but I was definitely sold a ski that was far too tall for me because it was the last of its type in stock, and now have a pair of 106 Salmon Stella’s taller than my head which I can ski, but which were exhausting to use due to how difficult they are for me to carve. I was completely out of the loop with new ski designs having always been given my skis used, and was told the new powder skis were great when taller than the skiers head, and that these skis ski short, so as an advanced skier, I would love them. To be fair, he originally also recommended the Atomic Mavens, which would have been a far better choice, but I wanted Salomon’s because I’d skied them many years and was nostalgic for them, wanting to ski those skis with my husband on our honeymoon. Unfortunately they were out of the Salomon’s in my size and the only women’s model was the Stella, which were in a size taller than I was by quite a bit. With the reassurances from the expert, I bought them. I didn’t realize that especially for very light and petite skiers, this was an even worse idea than usual. Learned a tough lesson after skiing them for a while and finding myself unusually exhausted by the end of the day even in deep powder. I bit the bullet and after learning from other women skiers that this is an experience they have had often with ski shops and curated alike, I purchased a properly fitting pair of skis that I fell in love with, and feel stupid and laugh at myself whenever I see the enormous pair of Stella’s I should have loved, but bought in an inappropriate size, and also that I should have gone thinner. My current skis are 95 underfoot, and I ski Taos and Jackson Hole and this is plenty of width for a daily ski. Your perspective is extremely helpful, and will help prevent people like me from believing these claims, and have them do more research on their own before making a purchase that sounds great in a review but isn’t right for them at all.
Maybe in the future all ski companies will suggest a weight range for their skis! It makes a lot more sense that way.
OMG, this was the nicest comment thank you! I'm sorry about your skis, but I'm glad you found something you're happy with now.
I think you're totally right, I think the more options for consumers the better honestly. I don't think that skis that are softer and built for lighter skiers will ever go away, I just kind of wonder if maybe they would be relabeled, perhaps we start just labeling skis based on flex the same way we label ski boots.
That way lighter men /teenagers won't feel uncomfortable buying the softer skis, and larger built/ stronger women won't feel uncomfortable buying stiffer/ larger skis.
Thanks for your nice comment and insight, I really enjoyed reading this!
@@SokolvaI have worked in the ski industry for 40+ years so I have observed the various developments in ski design. Currently some manufacturers will offer a similar model but they adjust the design by substituting carbon for Titanal or use one Titanal laminate instead of two. They may use a different type of wood to alter the flex. For a long time manufacturers have altered the recommended mid boot sole mounting location based on the difference between the average length of men’s and women’s boots. K2 even had a chart in their shop manual for the recommended distance from the tail for each model, length for men’s and women’s models. When helping a customer determine which model would work best factors like height and weight are important. Personally I think some skiers are on too wide a ski for their skill set and typical snow conditions. This includes both women and men. Listening to your description I might suggest something like a Volkl Blaze 94 W for they type of resorts and snow conditions you ski frequently. Check them out on a Skiessentials review on RUclips. Unlike other Volkl models the Blaze doesn’t have Titanal laminates only a metal binding plate in the middle of the ski. I recommend them to several women who are on the lighter side in our ski group and they love them. These women had been skiing Nordic Santa Annas that had one Titanal laminate.
Fischer has been making two colours of these skis for years. I searched for a pair of the hot pink 191cm Ranger 102 a few years ago but they were totally sold out in Europe.
The pink looks so clean!
Love ur insights man. I think we should get some ski position/technique crit vids next. Show crappy technique, leading up to great technique. I would prefer if the vid sometimes looped whilst u talked. Maybe even multiple different footages during your explanation. Only for when you might need a break from reviews, of course. Pz
Great feeback! Thanks so much
She says the skis feel stiff. "Titanal under foot could help with that." I think she may be asserting that it's the titanal that makes them feel stiff. But the use of the word "could" makes it sound like the skis don't already have Titanal. She should've said "Titanal likely helps with that." One thing I've noticed from many of the feaured skiers is there's no real challenge. I'd like to see some reviewers making tight, technical turns with linked edge sets down the fall line on a run like Goat or Starr at Stowe, Bubblecuffer at Sugarloaf or Organ Grinder at Sugarbush. Fluffy, soft snow on wide open western style boulevards isn't what I'd call challenging. Steep, icy, ungroomed terrain is the kind of terrain that'll demand proper angulation and counter-rotation. Alternatively, terrain like Silver Fox or Great Scott at Snowbird would test any reviewers mettel.
While I was editing I had the same thought! but it's a bit of a mess to understand, especially for the average intermediate skier looking to buy.
Totally, I actually like seeing both, sometimes steep terrain allows bad skiers to get away with more because they use the momentum to help their balance. I like seeing people carve just loading up, but then also how the skis look in challenging sections like you said!
Thanks for the nice comment!
@@RicketySkiReviews I hear you but that same unintended momentum/ falls caused from inability to control speed on expert slopes will rebuke these reviewers claims of being "expert skiers." Also-- to really test a ski, you need to get it up on angle and pressure it. Sure speed on groomers can do that, but so can the effect of a steep pitch and counter-rotation.
"Nightmode" is getting out hand
To be clear fuscher rangers have titanal underfoot.
Sarah skis alot like my wife who also raced when she was in hs.
Its possible that the snow was more gnar than appears in the videos. But the snow actually looked really good to me.
Same, I think it's fair to give them the benefit of the doubt, the camera can be misleading for conditions/ pitch.
I stand corrected I see these 102 Rangers come in both colors max length 190
I think this is usually correct though for most skis
WHAT?!?!
What?!
@@RicketySkiReviews… I get a kick out of it when you say “What?!”… especially when the young lady (I forget her name) was talking about how the Fisher Ranger needed teatonal.
Oh yes, lol, sorry it's been 2 months haha! Glad you're enjoying, thanks for watching! @@alainbrouillaud484
Maybe Fisher should just colour their womens ski's Pink, then women skiers will know which ski's are for them.
But the skis are the same either way? Also I would love pink skis. Thanks for your comment though and thanks for watching!