Pros: Stable, smooth, easy, versatile, fun, and balanced.
Cons: Some chatter on hard turns on hard snow, and not as quick as the skinnier skis obviously.
Had a blast on these in various snow conditions and terrain (@ 6 ft. 200lbs.). My regular skis are the Watea 94s (186 cm). The 101s aren't as quick, turny, or as easy to bend as the 94s, but the trade off is more platform, stability, and smoothness. I think the 101s are stiffer in general (or at least in the middle portion of the ski) . I like the phrase "a gentle bear of a ski" that Michael used to describe it. I was able to maneuver this ski much better than I anticipated. They definitely ski shorter than their length indicates. This ski's dimensions haven't changed in something like 6 -7 years providing maximum versatility. Fischer might have something good here heh???
The 101s were amazing on spring like groomers - handling speed very well- with more of a of GS ski feel versus a medium carver and softer pop feel of the 94s. Good solid strong smooth energy while carving and yet the more I pushed the greater the response and energy awoke (hence the stiffer or higher end expert rating). They're also very easy to ski at slower speeds - auto pilot turns. However, if you were to throw them a bit too much sideways on harder surfaces at faster speeds -you definitely get the infamous chatter that may knock your teeth out. So wether it be pilot error or the nature of the Wateas under those circumstances -not so much fun. I've found that gentle edging on steeper - harder sections rather than trying short radius turns (at higher speeds) eliminates that chattering.
Straight lining was fun fun fun - very stable and easily handing the highest speeds that I could produce- a very fast ski indeed.
Steeps were super easy-with great edge grip, great stability through rough crud/chop, easy to throw around, and carve or slarve. You do get a fair amount of feedback from the snow rather than damp plank feeling on the Wateas, but I tend to like that feel and energy.
Moguls of the softer kind were surprisingly easy for a ski this size and never felt the length catching as I thought I would.
No deep snow to test, but this is where I'm sure the 101's would out shine the 94s with the wider and longer platform. The tips are soft enough to stay above the snow, but strong enough to charge over/through tough crud as well- a perfect perfect balance of soft but strong. I would probably tend to favor the 25 m radius shape of this ski in powder versus the 22 m radius of the W94s, but not huge difference.
Overall, this could be a one ski quiver for softer conditions particularly for larger skiers. I tend to like the softer, carvey pop, quicker feeling, and a bit more versatility I get from the 94s. However, if I were larger in size or skied bigger mountains (with higher speeds and big snows) I'd gladly take the 101s. Next years 101s in a 182 cm length may be the best of both worlds for a guy my size--hmmm??? Recently, saw last 2008 101s which is the same (just different graphics) for about $340.00 on ebay. A steal!