or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fischer RX8 Ski Review

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

I recently bought second hand, a pair of Fischer RX8 skis in 165cm. I was coming from Volkl AC-3 of about 2007-8 vintage in 170cm. While I loved the AC-3s and bought them new after many demos on other skis, it is a heavy ski which takes some work to turn. The edge is great but it is just too much effort to make it pleasurable for me. A little background: I taught skiing at Vail over the first years, 1962 to 1968 and was a fully certified RMSIA instructor. But that was years ago and now I'm 72 years old but in excellent health. Ski about 20 days per year in Colorado. Have a friend who is really into understanding skis and the changing technology and that is whom I bought the RX8s from. I'm looking for a pair of used skis for my son who is an excellent skier but only gets to Colorado for 5 days a year. I'm looking for a pair of skis for him which I could use as an alternate to the RX8s.

Together, we demoed some K2 Rictors in 160cm. and loved them. Also demoed some Nordicas and thought they were pretty good too. Tried the 188cm. wide Volkls and found them to be squirrelly and not to our liking. My friend suggested the Fischer Progressor 8+ but the only unfortunate thing is they are not generally available on the second hand market. I would certainly settle on another pair of RX8s but thought something wider underfoot but as responsive in turns, would be about right. Any ideas.

A few comments on my skiing: Turns, many of them and quick are what I am all about. Being older, I want to ski steeper slopes but in total control. Reasonable sized moguls are fine, but I don't do the diamonds with a lot of big moguls. No legs for that or for that matter, skill at my age. A great edge is paramount for me. Love powder but there is so little of it during my 20 days a year, that I make do with whatever ski I have. Skied in 10 to 12 inches of powder this year on the RX8, and made out just fine. I was on the RX8s for the picture.

A few comments on the RX8s: They are a few years old but in excellent condition. I have never skied such a ski in my life. The short radius coupled with the fantastic edge, makes them the most fun ski I ever been on. I could never go back to the Volkls. I feel supremely confident, because I can control my speed even on steeper slopes. And I can make turns that I could never make before because of the slightly shorter ski, the lighter ski, short radius and superb edge.

I'd love to get a similar ski but wider under foot as an alternative to the very narrow, 66mm. of the RX8. Perhaps these would be great for me or son in deeper snow. And finally, I want them second hand for the $200 to $300 range. All inputs warmly welcomed.

post #2 of 10
Originally Posted by eriklessing View Post

 I'm 72 years old but in excellent health.


Turns, many of them and quick are what I am all about.


A few comments on the RX8s:  I have never skied such a ski in my life. The short radius coupled with the fantastic edge, makes them the most fun ski I ever been on.


I'd love to get a similar ski but wider under foot as an alternative to the very narrow, 66mm. of the RX8. Perhaps these would be great for me or son in deeper snow. And finally, I want them second hand for the $200 to $300 range. All inputs warmly welcomed.

Don't have an answer for you, but I'm sure you'll get some suggestions. 


I just enjoyed reading what an old pro thought about the RX8s.  You are an inspiration.  I bought a used pair in 2006 and am still using as primary ski (Eastern US).  Many folks here would call the very narrow waist an anachronism by this point in time, but the best ski is the one that puts a smile on YOUR face.


post #3 of 10

I came across a pair of the 06/07 RX8's at a local shop in Chicago over the past weekend, and am trying to decide if I should pick them up.  I'm looking for an all mountain ski which is ideally suited for groomed trails and can handle the ice well...so it seems like this ski is a perfect fit.  They are 175's and are new old stock with the wrapper still on them.  I negotiated a price of $400 with bindings and told the store owner I would get back to him.  This seems like a good price to me.  What are everyone's thoughts on these skis 5 - 6 years later?  The ski I was planning on getting is the Rossignol Experience 88 or Experience 83.  After reading all of the fantastic reviews on the RX-8's it seems like the price is right....although I am feeling kind of weird about buying "new skis" that are ancient in terms of what is available today.  For $200 - $300 more i could get the 12/13 Experience 88's or others.  Any thoughts or comments are appreciated!

post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 

You picked my favorite topic: Fischer RX8 skis. First, see my post of a few years ago about my love for RX8s. Yes, that is me skiing in Blue Sky Basin at Vail in 10 inches of new powder. Let's just say that this ski is the best by far I have ever skied on. These are, in fact, used skis which I bought from a friend.

Over the last year I have extolled the virtues of these skis to many people I know. My cousin's son bought a pair in 170cm on eBay, a lady I ski with got a used pair and my son got a almost identical pair but labeled slightly differently. But all the same dimensions. All these people agreed with me that they are the best skis they've ever skied on and love them. While they are great here in Colorado, they would seem to fit eastern or midwestern skiing even better. Narrower trails and harder snow would really match these skis' capabilities.

I repeat, they turn beautifully wiith their very short radius (my 165cms are 13m, the 170cm are 14m and I assume the 175cm are 15m). They initiate a turn easier than any other. The edge is superb. More grip than any ski I've been on including Volkl AC3s. I can make more turns, quicker than ever and hence more enjoy skiing steeper hills in more control. And the adjustable bindings are a joy also.

You might ask, why this ski's 66mm under foot is so different from everything in every shop which is much, much wider? Certainly in deep, deep powder, this is not the right ski. But for everything else, in my opinion, it is. I guess marketing has a lot to do with it. Convince skiers that the new trend is wide, and you get to sell more merchandise and make more money. That is all I can figure.

If they are the right size for you, buy 'em now.


post #5 of 10
I've skied the RX8's in 165, 170 and 175 extensively. The 175 is a different ski, more stable at speed, but not as much of a short turning ski.

I haven't been on any of them for a few years, but am sure they still are great skis. I moved on to the Progressor 8+, a very similar ski, to the Blizzard Magnum 7.6 and this year to the Blizzard Magnum 8.0 CA. All great skis.

The RX8's are not a powder or "all mountain" ski, but as erik shows in his picture and his words, you can certainly ski them in powder. What you buy depends upon where you ski and how you want to ski. If you are in the East and ski mostly on groomed trails for $400 with bindings the RX8's could well be the ticket, just remember the 175 is not the same ski as the 165. In many ways I preferred it, but it is not as good at short turns. The 170 to me was the best of both worlds.

If you are in the West you would probably be better off with the Experience 88. Ski construction has advanced and something like that or the Magnum 8.0 ca's would be better off piste, or in a bit more snow.

That said the RX8 is a classic and a great ski.
post #6 of 10
One more point. If you can find a pair of Blizzard Magnum 7.6 in the right length from a year or two ago they might be a similar price and are an equally great groomer ski. I liked them a bit more than the RX8's and that's saying a lot. Plus they're 76 under foot as compared to I think 65, which is a little more versatile.
post #7 of 10

Erik,  I am very glad you responded.  I stumbled upon your older post while at the ski shop, and I almost bought them on the spot because of your post!  I am still investigating a bit, as the price for a ski which is 6 years old is not bad...but not amazing either.  I'm going to see if the ski shop owner will reduce the price a bit....as I have gotten several offers from members here at Epicski which I am also investigating.  I'll for sure let you know what I end up doing!

post #8 of 10

I owned the RX8's, great ski.  As well as several other Fischers. IMO the current midfat Blizzies are not quite the same idea; superb skis but bit heavier, bit stiffer, so less flickable, like more assertive skiing, bit more serious. More analogous to Nordicas or Volkls done right. If you want the same feathery, grippy Fischer feel but fatter, well, there's ah, Fischer. Go search online for a pair of last year's Watea 94's or 98's. Or wait until the spring, save a bit, and score a pair of new Big Stix 98's. 

post #9 of 10

Thanks for the recommendations and input Erik, Mango, & Beyond.  I really appreciate your responses.  What are your thoughts on the 2011 Blizzard GPower FS 174 cm long?  I got a PM from a member who has two pairs for sale for around the same amount of money as buying the RX8's.  From what I've read online, the reviews seem quite favorable for these skis.  Also, other members suggested looking at the Fischer Progressor 10's?   I am just over 6 feet tall and weigh 150 pounds and ski mostly the midwest which tends to be 99% groomers with icey crud developing by mid afternoon. Mostly i have been skiing 168 - 178 the last decade + and I head out west once - twice a year.  I spoke with the owner at the ski shop, and he was unable to reduce to price any further on the RX8's.  Any thoughts? biggrin.gif

post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 

Just a few thoughts or comments. For used RX8s, most of those sales I talked about were for $200 to $270. They were used, but in perfect condition except for some minor cosmetic issues. The other fellow who participated in this thread, made a good point about the different lengths. I am 5'11" and weigh 165lb. I find the 165cm perfect for me although I have not tried the longer ones. The female who also bought used ones, got a 160cm and thought them right but she was coming from a shorter, whimperier pair. She was about 5'7" and 135lb. She particularly liked the great edges. Since the longer sizes have progressively wider radiuses, they would not be as snappy in turns as the shorter ones. Especially the 175cm ones. Either hold out for a much less price or keep looking for something shorter. You weight less than I do, so shorter is not a bad choice. Over the years, I've come down from 215cm to 165cm over a course of 55 years. The skis these days are so much better that I find 165cm for me to be great. The fact that I'm getting older is a factor also. I can go plenty fast and still have a ski which tracks better than any of the longer ones I've had before. I have more confidence than ever before. So don't be afraid of shorter. My son, who has the 170cm loves them too but is my same height but 50lb more. Good luck and I've loved being part of this discussion and hope I helped a little. Erik

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion