I’ve been on the Ranger 90 for several years , it’s a brilliant all round ski, handles ice, hard piste, moguls, trees, narrow chutes. It’s a bit small for super deep powder as you would expect.
Hi guys! I'm starting to home in on the Ranger 90 as a good 2nd set of skis to start improving off-trail and powder skiing for the few days a year that I get the right conditions for that (#icecoast)! I current ski Wingman 82 Ti in 172cm, so would I find the 170cm Rangers too short? Or is it not really a problem considering a slightly shorter ski might actually help off-trail? I am 5'10" / 160lbs. Love your videos! Keep up the good work.
I don't think they'll be too short. You will gain mobility due to the length, but they still have metal in them so they're intrinsically stable. Your stats indicate that you could go up to the 176, but I don't think that's what you're ultimately looking for here.
@SkiEssentials Thanks for the great content! This or the kendo 88 for skiing east 60% and out west 40%. Looking for something that can handle grommers/ice well and softer conditions when out west.
Personally, I lean to the Kendo over the Ranger 90 for a mix of groomers and ice. Maybe the Ranger has more to offer when it comes to softer western conditions, but overall, the Kendo is a very strong and stable performer that does exceptionally well in off-piste conditions and terrain relative to how precise it is on-trail.
Hello, which ski would you suggest between ranger 90 and stance 90 for advanced intermediate, not too aggressive skiing in the Alps? I am looking for something to hold an edge on icy/hard snow but with some capacity off piste (mainly side of piste one). I am 177cm - 77 Kg preferring shorter turns than blasting down long turns. Thanks
I personally prefer the consistency of the Stance to the Ranger, as the metal doesn't extend all the way to the ends in the Fischer. For others, that may seem a better fit as it makes the ski more mobile in shorter turns, which it sounds like you enjoy.
Flotation is decent due to the slightly softer shovel, but it's still not terribly wide for pure float. I'd look to something a bit wider and slightly lighter like the Volkl Blaze 94 or the Head Kore 93 to mix in and out of bounds skiing.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for your answer! I have now orderd and received the QST 92 with Salomon shift bindings.. It was a in the end a contest between Vökl Blaze 94 and QST 92. Both probably very good skis but the margins were with QST92 since it had a little higher rating at FREERIDE. But also, your many wise reviews also pointed to this ski. Now, I only hope it delivers! Many thanks!
Hi I was interested in finding the ranger 90 to demo but had to settle for the 96 in a 173 was wondering if the 90 has more edge hold on hard pack/ ice I noticed the 96 chattered later in the day. Note: im 5’10 135lbs.
Hi, I have a qst 106 and want a narrow ski to complement it. I'm not a very aggressive skier and want a fun loving carving ski that can handle moguls(70 kg, 182 cm). I have thought of ranger 90,maverick 88ti, qst 92, serpo, ripstick/black and new stance 90. What do you think will work best for me?
Lots of good options! The safest bet will be the QST 92, as it has a very similar character overall to the QST 106 that you already know. Ranger 90 is the next on line when it comes to playfulness, with the Stance just behind. Declivity, Maverick, and Serpo have a different sort of energy--more at home on firm snow and groomed terrain. If carving is high on your list, and fun is right there with it, the Serpo is one of my personal favorites here.
The Ranger 90 seems to have quite a bit of rocker. I'm looking to replace my 173 Bonifide with a more forgiving New England ski as I age (60 yo). Advanced - expert, who wants to feel fresher at the end of the day. 177 or 170 the smaller effective edge?
There's some rocker there for sure, but I don't think it's quite enough to warrant an upsize, especially if you're looking to boost forgiveness and refreshment. The 170 should offer plenty of performance, especially if you've been satisfied with 173 in the Bonafide.
Personally, I have a better connection to the Ripstick than the Ranger. I like the agility, crispness, and energy of the Elan more than the damper feeling of the Ranger.
I've had more positive experiences on the Stockli for sure. It's smooth, quiet, stable, and secure. I find the Ranger to be a bit too spoony and flexible in the tail for proper on-trail versatility while the Stockli is a no-brainer.
How would you compare this to a Ripstick 88? I have a Ripstick 96 in 180, would 177 measure similar with Fischer? Looking for something narrower that's fun on the groomers I'm skiing most of the time in the northeast in Killington and Stowe. Not that I can't do that with a 96, but it would nice to be quicker edge to edge.
Yes, we've found the Ripstick to measure about 1.5 mm shorter than stated, so that 180 is really a 178.5. The Ranger is less reactive but a bit more stable at lower edge angles. I think the Elan is way quicker from edge to edge, though, as it's considerably lighter and metal-free.
I’ve been on the Ranger 90 for several years , it’s a brilliant all round ski, handles ice, hard piste, moguls, trees, narrow chutes. It’s a bit small for super deep powder as you would expect.
Great feedback, thanks for sharing!
Hi guys! I'm starting to home in on the Ranger 90 as a good 2nd set of skis to start improving off-trail and powder skiing for the few days a year that I get the right conditions for that (#icecoast)! I current ski Wingman 82 Ti in 172cm, so would I find the 170cm Rangers too short? Or is it not really a problem considering a slightly shorter ski might actually help off-trail? I am 5'10" / 160lbs. Love your videos! Keep up the good work.
I don't think they'll be too short. You will gain mobility due to the length, but they still have metal in them so they're intrinsically stable. Your stats indicate that you could go up to the 176, but I don't think that's what you're ultimately looking for here.
@SkiEssentials Thanks for the great content! This or the kendo 88 for skiing east 60% and out west 40%. Looking for something that can handle grommers/ice well and softer conditions when out west.
Personally, I lean to the Kendo over the Ranger 90 for a mix of groomers and ice. Maybe the Ranger has more to offer when it comes to softer western conditions, but overall, the Kendo is a very strong and stable performer that does exceptionally well in off-piste conditions and terrain relative to how precise it is on-trail.
Hello, which ski would you suggest between ranger 90 and stance 90 for advanced intermediate, not too aggressive skiing in the Alps? I am looking for something to hold an edge on icy/hard snow but with some capacity off piste (mainly side of piste one). I am 177cm - 77 Kg preferring shorter turns than blasting down long turns. Thanks
I personally prefer the consistency of the Stance to the Ranger, as the metal doesn't extend all the way to the ends in the Fischer. For others, that may seem a better fit as it makes the ski more mobile in shorter turns, which it sounds like you enjoy.
Hi Jeff and thanks for the review! How would you evaluate the BC capabilities of R90?
Flotation is decent due to the slightly softer shovel, but it's still not terribly wide for pure float. I'd look to something a bit wider and slightly lighter like the Volkl Blaze 94 or the Head Kore 93 to mix in and out of bounds skiing.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for your answer! I have now orderd and received the QST 92 with Salomon shift bindings.. It was a in the end a contest between Vökl Blaze 94 and QST 92. Both probably very good skis but the margins were with QST92 since it had a little higher rating at FREERIDE. But also, your many wise reviews also pointed to this ski. Now, I only hope it delivers! Many thanks!
Hi I was interested in finding the ranger 90 to demo but had to settle for the 96 in a 173 was wondering if the 90 has more edge hold on hard pack/ ice I noticed the 96 chattered later in the day. Note: im 5’10 135lbs.
The 90 is a better firm snow performer mainly due to the narrower waist and the longer metal laminate.
Hi, I have a qst 106 and want a narrow ski to complement it.
I'm not a very aggressive skier and want a fun loving carving ski that can handle moguls(70 kg, 182 cm).
I have thought of ranger 90,maverick 88ti, qst 92, serpo, ripstick/black and new stance 90.
What do you think will work best for me?
Lots of good options! The safest bet will be the QST 92, as it has a very similar character overall to the QST 106 that you already know. Ranger 90 is the next on line when it comes to playfulness, with the Stance just behind. Declivity, Maverick, and Serpo have a different sort of energy--more at home on firm snow and groomed terrain. If carving is high on your list, and fun is right there with it, the Serpo is one of my personal favorites here.
The Ranger 90 seems to have quite a bit of rocker. I'm looking to replace my 173 Bonifide with a more forgiving New England ski as I age (60 yo). Advanced - expert, who wants to feel fresher at the end of the day. 177 or 170 the smaller effective edge?
There's some rocker there for sure, but I don't think it's quite enough to warrant an upsize, especially if you're looking to boost forgiveness and refreshment. The 170 should offer plenty of performance, especially if you've been satisfied with 173 in the Bonafide.
This or Ripstick 88? Thanks. I mainly want a pair as my off-piste skis.
Personally, I have a better connection to the Ripstick than the Ranger. I like the agility, crispness, and energy of the Elan more than the damper feeling of the Ranger.
How does it compare to the Stormrider 88? thanks!
I've had more positive experiences on the Stockli for sure. It's smooth, quiet, stable, and secure. I find the Ranger to be a bit too spoony and flexible in the tail for proper on-trail versatility while the Stockli is a no-brainer.
How would you compare this to a Ripstick 88? I have a Ripstick 96 in 180, would 177 measure similar with Fischer? Looking for something narrower that's fun on the groomers I'm skiing most of the time in the northeast in Killington and Stowe. Not that I can't do that with a 96, but it would nice to be quicker edge to edge.
Yes, we've found the Ripstick to measure about 1.5 mm shorter than stated, so that 180 is really a 178.5. The Ranger is less reactive but a bit more stable at lower edge angles. I think the Elan is way quicker from edge to edge, though, as it's considerably lighter and metal-free.