EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Fischer RC4 WC SC size advice needed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fischer RC4 WC SC size advice needed

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 

Hi,

 

I am about to buy some new skis and would appreciate some advice on size. I am advanced level (Qualified CSIA level 2) and have previously skied with a set of Fischer RX8's.

 

I loved the RX8s and I still have them, however I am craving something with even more grip in the turn that holds a greater edge and have my eyes set on the Fischer RC4 WC SC''s. My fischer RX8's are 175cm (I am 6ft2 87kgs) and I love the feel of them, however I have noticed that the RC4s only go up to 170cm so I am wondering what size someone my height and weight should choose if I am used to 175s.

 

Also I did consider the Fischer RC4 superiors with a 15m turn radius but do you think the SCs will be more fun if I already have my rx8s.

 

All advice is much appreciated,

 

Thanks

Ben

post #2 of 16

I have some RC4 WC SC's in 165.

These are soft slalom skis.

I probably make 50% more turns on a run than on my cheater GS skis.

I'm 5'6' and 170 lb.

My GS skis are 175-180.

These skis are quit stable at speed and will carve big arcs if you don't load them too much.

Stand on them hard and you will know what slalom skis do.

I think they might be pretty good for instructing.

For general skiing plan to bring your A game.

The backseat is a killer.........

 

post #3 of 16

I've put a few miles on the 165 cm WC SC (older model, before the hole in the tip).  They are great at that length for slalom-sized turns, but they are a sl ski.  You can make GS or even SG turns on them, and they are fine at high speeds, but a GS sidecut will make cleaner cuts in those longer arcs that you will end up making if you give in to the need for speed.  If you want something  for higher speed longer turns, get the RC.  If I had the RX8 in the stable and I just wanted something with more oomph in a SL ski, I think I would go a little further and opt for the full-on RC4 WC SL.

post #4 of 16

^^^ I second that... Try and get the RC4 WC RC...

 

post #5 of 16

Not many folks are likely to want to freeski on FIS legal men's SL skis.

I skiied the RC4 WC SC's back to back with Blizzard SLR's.

Bought the RC4's, the SLR's are for strong skiers on glare ice in a SL course.

They don't have a cruise mode.

If you want a great short radius freeskiing race ski I like the Blizzard GSR Magnesium IQ cheaters.

15m radius at 168 makes them turn almost like SL skis.

Yet they open up nicely into GS turns ar reasonable speeds.

post #6 of 16

Contrary to the others, I love a FIS slalom ski for free skiing versus a non-FIS consumer slalom like the SC.  I ski mostly on Atomics, but I have two pair of race stock Fischer RC4 WC SL's in my stable too, and love them.  I probably spend 95% of my free skiing time on race stock slaloms.

 

I find the 'real' (FIS) skis to be more versatile than consumer models like the SC.  They are beefier and because they have a longer turn radius (13 meter range vs 11-12 for consumer slaloms) they do much better at speed.  I prefer them over a 15-17 meter consumer GS ski because when you aren't arcing short turns you can still ski them reasonably fast due to their construction and longer radius sidecut.  The consumer slaloms are far twitchier at speed.

 

As long as you have good technical skills, you will have no issues with a 165 cm FIS slalom ski (sorry but that's as long as they come).

 

PS. It seems to be easier these days to find race stock skis than consumer race skis.  If you decide you want to go the FIS SL route, my advice is to get a used pair, cheap, that are a couple of years old (pre-hole ski).  The hole in the tip might work on a race course, but it isn't a great idea for free skiing on anything other than perfectly groomed slopes.  You should be able to find something for $300 or so.

post #7 of 16
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the advice guys, I am now very torn between the Fischer RC's or the SC's....On the one hand I love the RX8s and the large arc turns I can achieve with them and would like something similar but with even more grip but would also like to do some shorter turns.

 

Any thoughts on the Fischer RC4 Superior's with a 15m radius which seems to be placed between the two (as seen on fischer website)? What sort of ski is this ?

Thanks,

 

Ben

post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by exracer View Post

Contrary to the others, I love a FIS slalom ski for free skiing versus a non-FIS consumer slalom like the SC.  I ski mostly on Atomics, but I have two pair of race stock Fischer RC4 WC SL's in my stable too, and love them.  I probably spend 95% of my free skiing time on race stock slaloms.

 

I find the 'real' (FIS) skis to be more versatile than consumer models like the SC.  They are beefier and because they have a longer turn radius (13 meter range vs 11-12 for consumer slaloms) they do much better at speed.  I prefer them over a 15-17 meter consumer GS ski because when you aren't arcing short turns you can still ski them reasonably fast due to their construction and longer radius sidecut.  The consumer slaloms are far twitchier at speed.

 

As long as you have good technical skills, you will have no issues with a 165 cm FIS slalom ski (sorry but that's as long as they come).

 

PS. It seems to be easier these days to find race stock skis than consumer race skis.  If you decide you want to go the FIS SL route, my advice is to get a used pair, cheap, that are a couple of years old (pre-hole ski).  The hole in the tip might work on a race course, but it isn't a great idea for free skiing on anything other than perfectly groomed slopes.  You should be able to find something for $300 or so.




what he said... go for the full on sl if you can find them.  you will find that good 165 race stocks sell quickly an are always in demand

post #9 of 16

The turn radius of the Fischer RC4 WC SC has varied a lot over the years.  When it first came out it was very short, my version is marked 13 m at 165 cm.  The most recent version called the SC Pro is supposedly 12 m at 165.  I would advise against getting the 12 m version.  The 13 m version is fine at speed, but like I said, the arc is purer with a longer radius ski. Get the SL; it will be FIS compliant radius which should be fine, or the RC Pro.  You always have the RX8 to ski when you want something more relaxing.

post #10 of 16

Mine are 165 with 13 m radius.

Flowflex plate,

I hear what you guys are saying about the WC SL but at my 168 pounds and advanced age, the SC's are plenty.

The 12 m cheater SC's rock in a tight course but, again, too racy for freeskiing at speed.

What is suprising to me about both the SLR's I skied and the WC SC's is how stable they are when going pretty fast.

No early rise or rocker here, all of that 165 cm is in contact with the snow all the time.

My cruiser skis are old Volkl AC4's and I can probably ski them twice as long as the SC's before I get tired.

post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

I hear what you guys are saying about the WC SL but at my 168 pounds and advanced age, the SC's are plenty.


You'd be surprised.  The race stock Fischer WC SL is very easy to ski on, stable, and amazingly versatile.  They make excellent all-round groomer skis.  Personally I find race stock slaloms far better and easier to ski than the rack versions if you have decent technical skills.  If you don't, you probably won't notice the difference anyway.  Race stock GS skis, on the other hand, are an entirely different beast and not worth free skiing on unless you have a wide, virtually empty, run to allow you to run them fast without danger to yourself or others (this coming from a guy who used to use 215 cm SG skis all my all-rounders).

 

post #12 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by exracer View Post


You'd be surprised.  The race stock Fischer WC SL is very easy to ski on, stable, and amazingly versatile.  They make excellent all-round groomer skis.  Personally I find race stock slaloms far better and easier to ski than the rack versions if you have decent technical skills.  If you don't, you probably won't notice the difference anyway.  Race stock GS skis, on the other hand, are an entirely different beast and not worth free skiing on unless you have a wide, virtually empty, run to allow you to run them fast without danger to yourself or others (this coming from a guy who used to use 215 cm SG skis all my all-rounders).


 

How much do you weigh  (I found the 215s too much like work in moguls and settled on the 208s as my one-ski quiver for a few years)?.  Personally I like the WC SC (at 13 m) but have more fun at GS speed, and realized that while the 13-m ski gives me more turns per dollar, I was often skiing them out of their ideal performance range.  I really didn't miss the longer sidecut at speed until I took the old SGs out for a run and realized how nicely they sliced those big arcs as opposed to tearing them.  If you don't already have an RX8, the SC is a good choice because it can still work at slower speeds for a light skier, but if you already have an RX8, then the SL is the ticket. 

post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

How much do you weigh  (I found the 215s too much like work in moguls and settled on the 208s as my one-ski quiver for a few years)?. 


195 lbs back then, 205 today.  My usual weapon of choice for bumps back then was a 205 or 207 slalom ski, but I've taken the Super G's into the bumps in the back bowls of Lake Louise on occasion.  Been launched in the bumps like a diving board on them once or twice too eek.gif

 

post #14 of 16

Now you guys are stirring old memories.

I have a pair of Kastle National Team SG's in my attic in 208.

Maybe they need new bindings...Hmmmmm?

Then there is that pair of Volkl P40's with three sheets of titanium.

It took some effort to bend those things.

Good for about three turns on my little hill.

 

Many race stock skis are softer than their off the shelf versions, particularly the womens skis.

I learned the virtue of soft from an ex Austrian National Team woman who smoked all our local racers.

I bought her skis, 205 Elan race stock, and they were noodles compared to what I had at the time.

Her opinion...the softest set of skis you can work through a course without overpowering them will be fastest.

 

 

post #15 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

Many race stock skis are softer than their off the shelf versions, particularly the womens skis.

I learned the virtue of soft from an ex Austrian National Team woman who smoked all our local racers.

I bought her skis, 205 Elan race stock, and they were noodles compared to what I had at the time.

Her opinion...the softest set of skis you can work through a course without overpowering them will be fastest.

 

 

Ahhhh... memories.  I used to have race stock 205 cm Elan RC05 slaloms.  One of my favorite skis of all time.
 

 

post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

Now you guys are stirring old memories.

I have a pair of Kastle National Team SG's in my attic in 208.

Maybe they need new bindings...Hmmmmm?

Then there is that pair of Volkl P40's with three sheets of titanium.

It took some effort to bend those things.

Good for about three turns on my little hill.

 

Many race stock skis are softer than their off the shelf versions, particularly the womens skis.

I learned the virtue of soft from an ex Austrian National Team woman who smoked all our local racers.

I bought her skis, 205 Elan race stock, and they were noodles compared to what I had at the time.

Her opinion...the softest set of skis you can work through a course without overpowering them will be fastest.

 

 

Yup, we got the same ski.  I still ski my 208s every now and then; those old all-metal Tyrolia 49's0 still work.  I can get two or maybe three good turns out of 'em at Blue Mountain, one or two at Eliot Lake.  Softer may be faster, but it's not safer for race speeds off a nicely prepped course; once you've had a ski fold up on you at speed, you will concur.

 

It was only after taking the old 208s out for a day that I realized how much better a long radius ski was at making those big high-speed arcs.  If I had only ever skied the SCs, I would have been perfectly content skiing them at 60 mph.
 

 


Edited by Ghost - 12/7/11 at 4:07pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Fischer RC4 WC SC size advice needed