Fischer RX8; after further review

Anyone who has spent any time on the equipment forum here knows my bias in skis this year. I purchased a new pair of Fischer RX8 RailFlex in 165 after skiing the non-RailFlex RX8 in 170 last year. I also have a pair of Atomic Metron:b5s as a complement to the RX8s.

My stats:

Height: 6'
Weight: 185lbs
Other equipment: Tecnica XT17 boots
Skiing skills: 34th season skiing, ski most of the mountain, but prefer powder, and smooth steeps. New skis have me loving groomed terrain, again, even the very gentle.

Conditions:

I skied today at Copper Mountain, CO, USA after a reported 3" of new snow on top of 24" in the past week (48" base). Conditions ranged from a few powder shots to soft bumps to occasional Rocky Mountain hardpack (not to be confused with Eastern hardpack!). I skied about 25,000 vertical feet total today.

Ski: Fischer RX8 RailFlex2, 165cm

Review: There is one word that I use for these skis: Fun. They are so full of energy, so responsive, and so predictable that it seems to me that I can go anywhere and do anything on these skis. A simple tip from one edge to the other gets you a nice snaky turn series (like a flush in a slalom course). Or, you can arc them as far over as you're willing to commit, ripping carved arcs in any anow. Bumps, groomed, steep, powder, trees, all were controlled and enjoyable. Specific details below.

Groomed blue, new snow: By simply varying the edge angle, these skis will carve a turn of virtually any shape that you'd like. The 165s are officially a 13m radius ski, but they seem able to carve long turns and short turns with equal aplomb. More than anything, though, they seemed like generators on my feet! They were so full of energy. Like a thoroughbred ready to run. I actually dropped these over far enough to hit my boot on the snow (although I didn't "boot out") and they just arced back under me. If I tightned the arc, I could get them to just rocket back across.

Bumps: I skied them on bumps fairly frequently throughout the day. I skied them in gentle, medium, and large bumps on all kinds of terrain (up to black). They are very accurate and effective in all of these conditions, including those bumps where the troughs were filling in with new snow. I skied them zipper line and felt like Superman. Then, I skied them gently and just savored the environment.

Steep: The skis are light, and respond well to different steep techniques, including hop turns, pivot turns, and tight carves. I was able to control them easily, avoid thin spots, and stay on top of them even at high speeds.

Icy chunks: There were a few times when I found myself on terrain with icy chunks. While the skis made it through, their high "feel" made those chunks evident to my feet. Unlike some other skis that just motor over such irregularities, I could definitely feel the characteristics of the snow under-foot. Some may consider this unnerving or "squirrely".

Flat running: As with a number of other skis, these definitely prefer to be on edge. I did run them flat a few times, but I prefered to tip them very gently instead to keep them from grabbing the edges and throwing the tips around.

Overall impression: Fun, high-energy, all-mountain carving ski. Race bred, it works well for those of us who have skied race skis but prefer something more versatile. It doesn't seem to me to give up much in the process.

Highly recommended

ssh,

OK.........I'm going to ask you to take this on faith. If you like the RX8 try the Speedmachine 14. You will go nuts.

I have never steered (rotary) you wrong now have I?

I tried the SM 14 at Loveland earlier in the season. It was a bit less energetic (damper, you might say) than the RX8 in that experience. I know you don't read my long demo reviews but, I did mention the Speedmachine 14, the Doberman Pro SC, and the SUV 14 in it...

So, Steve, the obvious question is..... if you could only keep one pair to ski for the next couple of years which would it be? The Metrons or the RX8's?

AM.

Hmmmm... AM, let me think on that a bit. It may actually take me through the ESA to give you my thoughts on that. While they are very different from each other, they are both exceptionally excellent and versatile skis. Are you willing to give me a couple of weeks, please?

How would you compare the 165cm to the 170cm? 165cm seems pretty short for 185#, of course I'm still amazed out how short skis are getting.

They seem short to me, too, but I am skiing the b5 in a 162...

Anyway, the only experience that I don't remember from last year on the 170 was the sense of the icy chunks. At first, I thought that maybe I was pushing them too hard and fast and as a result had hit a speed limit. However, I don't think that such was the case based on the rest of the experience over the course of the day. I did ski the 165 on real icy hardpack during the demo day this fall, and did not experience that same sensation. These are pretty strong skis, so I think that it's worth trying in a shorter length.

FWIW, I was encouraged to ski the 165 by a friend who is about 50lbs heavier than me. He said he found them great for arcing and teaching.

Well, that about sews it up for me. At 154 pounds and 5'8", average skier (advanced with a lot of work to do), I'll go for the Fischer RX8 in 160 cm for the carving/teaching ski and keep an open mind on the deeper snow ski (maybe the new Fischer AMC 79).I'm saying that the 160 cm length obviously would work fine for me in the RX8. What do you think, ssh?

oboe, that seems like it would work well. I think that the 165 would likely work equally well, too (kind of like the 165/170 pair for me). They're a fun ski... You'll enjoy them!

I tried them at 180cm last year at A-Basin. Am a 7 of 10 skier from the midwest, at 5'9" , 147# then. Thought I'd be better off with less stiffness, therefore shorter. Otherwise thought they were extremely stable, and a ready turner, and liked the fore-aft relative eveness of flex differential; much better than the 5* Volkls.

I'm 154 pounds and also have been on skis waaaay past optimum in length. Sure, I could handle them, but I don't think I was using them as they were designed to be used. A 180 cm length in the RX8 seems like waaaay past optimum for a skier weighing 147 pounds, at least according to what I've been reading here.

agree completely w/oboe. 180cm in ANY Fischer is going to be big for someone at 147 lbs. an aggressive, fast, strong skier at 147 lbs might want a 180cm Big Stix 8.6 but I can't think of any other Fischer model that would be remotely fun at 180cm and 147 lbs weight driving the 180cm.

I like to haul tuchus and I weigh 160 lbs, 44 yrs old, Level 8, 5'10" tall. I'd not want to be on anything longer than 170 cm in an RX-8. I ski the BigStix 8.6 in 180cm and it's almost too much. ALMOST.

I skied the WC SC in 160cm very happily, at eyewatering mouthdrying cheekflapping speeds.

Gonz, you and I are going to have fun ripping together. If I wasn't so fat, I'd be about 160, too...

I just purchased a pair of 170's from Dawg, and am anxious to break them in. I will report on my long term impressions. I demo'd both the 165 and 170 before buying, and didn't find a lot of difference in the two. Being that I weigh in at a svelt 2 and a quarter, and ski mostly the ice at Whiteface, I opted for the little extra length for what I hoped was a bit more stability.

I've read so many great reviews of the RX8 that this post is hardly necessary, but I thought I'd nevertheless throw in a couple of impressions.

I demo'd the 165's and 170's the past few days in Park City. Simply put, the 165's are unbelievable. They are the most incredible carving ski I've been on. As everyone has mentioned, the RX8's can carve just about any kind of turn you can imagine, and they are ridiculously quick edge to edge. I liked the 170's, but I did notice a difference in turn radius and quickness.

I've already ordered my pair, and I'm counting the days until they're delivered. Thanks to everyone who encouraged me to give these skis a try.

Nice, gkorn, thanks for piling on!

Skied the RX8 today here at Big Sky in everything from hard groomed to corn. On the first run, I've had estimates from some that we were skiing in the neighborhood of 50mph (I don't have a clue how fast we were skiing, but I admit that it scared me! Especially since I didn't have a clue what the terrain was going to do!). The RX8 performed on all of this as well as I could have asked, although my tuning job left something to be desired... A 165cm ski ripping at 50mph...?!

I would not want to ski them at that speed all the time. I'd likely get a different ski for that (the RX9 or something a bit damper like the Nordica SpeedMachine 14 that Bob Barnes was skiing today).

Hopefully, this will give some of you some more grist for your decision process...

Hey Steve---Have you skied the RX 9----I'd be interested in any input you or others here have on that ski.

UL, yes. My thoughts are in my demo thread from earlier this season. Ski them in the same length that you'd ski an RX8. They are just longer-turn versions of the same ski, as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks !

Why would you want to ski a longer turning ski in the same length?

Because the length is designed for longitudinal flex characteristics (skier's weight, primarily). The sidecut is what determines turn radius. The two skis (RX8 and RX9) are designed to be skied in the same length for the same skier, but will give different turn radius results.

Note: I have skied the RX8s at about 50mph on hard snow (groomed) with no chatter or loss of edge hold--at 165cm!

I have some new RX-8 in 180cm (I am 235lb 6'1").

One thing I love about the skis is they allow an extremely smooth transition between turns -- turns blend together very nicely. It's almost like the skis smudge the last part of the tail's grip when you release and get into the next turn like butter. I attribute this to a good tail shape/design, and have never experienced this exact feeling in a ski before. Very nice.

Excellent edge grip in any conditions. Out of the box, these were the sharpest skis I have ever had (requires extreme caution when handling).

Not very forgiving, but more forgiving than Volkl 6-stars (and ski as well or better in my opinion). Don't get them sideways or try to scrape, you will be punished. These skis want to carve/turn and won't really respond to incompetence. This is actually a good thing for me, it encourages more proper skiing in bad situations (where before I would have put on the brakes and started granny turns).

The skis have a very sharp crisp feel, but as noted, they will transmit a lot of information up to you and this can be a downside in rough/hard snow. I have a feeling they would be punishing in death cookies.

I bought the RX-8 to be my carver skis for fast packed powder, but they do pretty well at a lot of other things. Good in bumps, and decent in what limited powder I ski in the Mid-A.

Overall, very happy with these skis, and glad I got them instead of 6-stars. I probably won't ski on my other three pairs of skis anymore unless we get a big powder day.

Craig

Craig, great review; thanks. However, this skiing was on the RX8s, and they seem to me to be able to sideslip and butter as well as any other ski.

Steve, Nice skiing-and I had notrouble figuring out that you were on a steep slope. There is probably a big difference in the amount of skidding tolerated in 180 and your 165!! Tune differences will make a difference too. LewBob

Perhaps, LewBob, but I am a bit lighter, too. We did sideslips, pivot slips, etc. on blues, I did all of my level I and level II exams on 170cm RX8s (which should be pretty close to the 180s for skier219), and I've worked a lot on what I call "skarved turns" on them. I worked to get rid of my strong tipping bias over the past year plus on RX8s, and they have let me/helped me do that...

I was trying to communicate that I think they can skid just fine.

I noticed the issue when skiing fast down a steep and then making some skid turns at the bottom to check my speed. The skis were definitely not happy with that (no ski really is, but this was very noticeable). Next run I just did about 10 quick/short turns to shave off the speed and it was great.

I probably ski faster and closer to the edge than what was shown in the video, and that may be the biggest difference. The video showed some well controlled skiing on a steep hill at a more moderate speed. In fact, I even saw some carving there!

The skis definitely sideslip OK, but that is more about technique on a modern ski with little to no camber.

Craig

Just throw them into more of a brake than a turn and they'll behave.

skier, I'll post some of me on groomed black, etc. later. Just trying to say that I think that they can skid OK.

What would be a good length RX 8 for

150lbs, 5'4" Advance skill.

Skied C9.18 at 160 now.

thanks