Would really appreciate any advice following buying Fischer Ranger 96 last year and struggling to get on with them. I've had a pair of Dynastar powertrack 84's for the past 8 yrs which have been fantastic but wanted a little more underfoot width for off piste and the reality is the Rangers are just awful on piste which is probably 70% of where I spend my time due to the limited conditions/time.
I have been skiing for many years but have limited off piste experience (hence thought I would add a ski better suited to off piste) however the skis feel locked in with poor turn in.
What's are the collective experienced heads thoughts on:
1. Is this the nature of wider all mountain ski's
2. Is this all me, do I need to look into my technique (Please be kind!)
3. Do I need to tune the ski's to improve the looseness/playfulness...detune the edges maybe?
4. do I just sell them and stick with the Dynastars!
Steve
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
what bindings do both skis have, anything else changed except the ski?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
The Rangers have Salmon Strive 14Gw’s and the Dynastar were sold as a package with look bindings (2015)
What's the boot centre like in comparing one to the other (if the same length ski) are you now mounted the same front to rear distance or has the Ranger position with more tip, less tail dimension ?
I'd start with the tune. If they aren't flat then they will ski like poo-poo. Check the bases with a straight edged piece of metal and a torch. If they aren't flat then get a shop to grind them until they are acceptably flat. Then progress to checking the edges.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
96mm skis are always going to be compromised on a hard piste. You can spend a fortune on tuning and playing with edge angles, but fundamentally they're the wrong tool for the job.
After all it is free
After all it is free
That's not a very helpful, nor a very true answer. 96mm can work pretty well on piste. I ski 93 as a piste focused ski.
The tuning hint is good. I had no bevel on the "factory tune" of my kastles and they skied like poo-poo, with .7 deg they are amazing. Concave bases ski terrible, too, and I have seen many Fischer made skis exhibit this problem (Scotts, Salomons).
Buy a straight edge and get a good tune.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Without wanting to turn this into another fat ski thread, you should be able to get a 96mm ski to work ok on piste. This isn't 2004. By that I mean you should be able to carve pretty well on softer pistes and make predicable skidded turns on true hard pack.
Others have made good points about the boot/binding set up. For example, I have my bindings set with either 0mm or 1mm difference in height between the toe and the heel. I can ski different setups but it's harder because I'm out of balance. Big differences between what you are used to on the dynastars will be obvious also. But start with the tune.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Checking the tune is a quick and simple idea, could solve it in the snap of your fingers. However generally it’s best to work from you, out. Footbed, internal delta, coller angle, external delta, binding delta, mounting point, tune.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Thanks for all the responses, sounds like I have some work to do
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
the comment regarding delta is really good, too. mark a spot on the toe and heel. put boots in old setup, measure height above ski. repeat in new setup. compare. you should be able to tell whether you end up more forward or flatter. this can make a huge difference in ski feel. I am sensitive to as little as a single mm in delta delta
so, check tune, delta.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
I ski Ramger 98's with Dynafit Beast bindings and touring boots. I actually find them quite forgiving on the piste. They are heavily rockered in the tip, so they can be quite nimble for a wider ski.
I also ski on Head SL, my skiing style is quite different for the two skis. The Heads can be really driven through the turn and held on edge all the way through.
I ski the Ranger in a more shallow arc, they don't rail but there's enough flex in the ski to give me grip on hardback. They are great fun in soft or even mixed snow, they really don't like refrozen crud as the tips are carbon and bounce around.
Play around with the edge settings, they are a really fun ski IMO
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@gravity slide, ...you do have to get ON them...pressure the front, no hip dump, angulate. I sniff a problem with technique rather than the skis.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
