or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fischer RX8

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 
Ski Make: Fischer
Ski Model: RX8
Ski Length: 170
Snow Conditions Used In: Hardpack/icy manmade, packed power, 6-18" powder
Number of Days Used: 12
Your Ability: 8+
How Many Years Have You Been Skiing: 33
Avg. Days per Year Skiing: 10-20
Other Skis You Like: Fischer Race SC, Atomic SX:11, Elan S12 Fusion, Volkl 6*
Your Height/Weight: 6', 180lbs.
Comments: Since I have bought a pair of RX8s and had a chance to ski them in a wide range of conditions (since we actually got some new snow Friday night that I was able to ski early Saturday), I thought I would post a follow-up.

These are tremendous skis!

I was actually shocked at their ability to carve cleanly on the manmade hardpack/ice that we had last Sunday. The weather was 3 degrees F with wind blowing at 30-40mph. All of the soft snow blew off much of the center of the runs, leaving only the really hard base. I am used to sliding around on that stuff no matter how hard I work to carve. However, with these skis (and new boots) I carved as cleanly as I had been used to doing on packed powder! I could go as fast as I cared to and hold a line. It was uncanny for me.

Then, yesterday morning, I had the joy of a few runs in fresh snow. The skis planed on the 4-6" over the groomed base, and danced easily in the 12-18" off the edges of the groomed trails. They turned easily, seemed to float very well (better than anything that I have skied, but I've never skied a real fat ski), and I especially noticed that short turns in the powder were effortless and joyful.

I still haven't found a speed limit on these, and I haven't found a condition that they don't handle very well. I have the flat versions mounted with a pair of Marker 1400 EPS bindings, but I wouldn't hesitate to get a pair with the Railflex if I could.

Highly recommended.
post #2 of 30
Are they forgiving of mistakes (do you have to be right on all of the time)? How are they at tight turns at slower speeds on the steeps?
post #3 of 30
Thread Starter 
Mistakes? How would I know if they forgive mistakes? You don't think I make mistakes, do you?!?! [img]graemlins/angel.gif[/img]

Actually, I'm not sure what it means for a ski to forgive mistakes. But, what I have noticed is that when I have made mistakes (usually fore/aft balance, especially as I adjust to new boots), I could recover, recenter, and keep going. I don't believe that I've fallen on them, yet, but there aren't any real steeps that have been opened where I've been skiing, either. That said, they do like to be skied. When I try to cheat and get lazy with my stance (a habit I'm working on breaking), they let me know. The tail will start to carve and I'll find myself realizing that I'm out of balance and need to adjust.

I hope that helps...
post #4 of 30
Thread Starter 
You asked about slower turns on steeps. As I mentioned, I haven't been on any real steeps, yet (hopefully later this week when I visit Vail), but I have noticed that they perform very well at slow speeds, as well. I have used them in my level I demos and also in lessons for mimicing exercises with level 1 skiers. A gliding wedge turn is very effective on them.

On the steeper pitches that I've been on, I have varied the turns from short turns in the fall line at slow-to-medium speeds to high-speed medium-to-long radius turns and feel that they perform both very well. Smallish bumps, too.

Hope this helps...
post #5 of 30
Steve, just for curiosity's sake, how would you say the RX8 compares to the WC Race SC on a scale of demanding/exacting re technique soundness and energetic input? I'm starting to think that the FX8.6 is just as demanding as the Race SC, and gives the same big rewards when you give it good, energetic input. Just wondering how the RX8 falls in there.
post #6 of 30
Thread Starter 

For me, the RX8 was less demanding than the WC SC and gave me a bit more back for my input. Now, please keep in mind that I have a habitual tendancy to get lazy and stand up, and this undoubtedly contributes to my impressions of the skis, although I was pretty fresh when I first demoed the RX8 and WC SC. I think that a quiver of the RX8 and the WC SC (or, in my case, maybe the Race SC) would be outstanding, giving the opportunity for a more "all mountain" feel for wider turns on the RX8 with a little more "forgiveness" than the WC SC, while leaving the WC SC for carving up the mountain with that great 10m carve.

I found the WC SC (for the 2-3 runs I was on it earlier this season on the same day I first demoed the RX8) to be much more demanding and it felt to me like it returned less energy to me. Keep in mind that I was on it before I made some very significant technique changes (including, for example, skiing on both feet instead of almost exclusively on the outside foot), so that's one reason I'd like to get back on them sometime soon.
post #7 of 30
thanks. just wondering. since I try to avoid groomers (except when I'm on the Race SC), I like the BigStix FX8.6 for the "other pair," especially since I live in an area where we can have weeks of snowfall without any grooming at certain ski hills .

Try the BigStix 8.6 if you haven't yet... it's a fun ride, but if you aren't driving it, it can "conk out" on you in the turn.
post #8 of 30
Thread Starter 
Thanks, Gonz, it's on the list! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #9 of 30
I purchased a pair of RX8 last November. Since then I have tried the 2 days on the new Rossi 9S oversize, one day on the Head 200 and one day on the RC4 GS WC. Other than the RC4's, I don't find that neither of these skis have the energy and speed of the RX8 in groomed conditions. The RX8 need to be skied and it's not the type of ski that even an advanced skier will enjoy if he likes to simply cruise around the hill all day long. It's very stable at all speeds, handles powder well, but it really shines on hard packed or icy conditions. I have the railflex system on these and I am not disappointed with this ski.
post #10 of 30
height: 6'1.5"
weight: 155 lbs

I purchased the RX8 in 165 cm (non-railflex version) last month and absolutely love them. I demoed the RX8, Elan fusion S12 (which I really liked), Rossignol rpm 100, Voikl 5 star and a few others beforehand. I'm coming off of 195 cm straight Olin's, so I'm still getting use to the length, but the fischers are extremely stable at high speeds and easy to carve with.

I've skiied them 3 times so far in hard pack east coast conditions. As probably would be expected, the edges are already starting to dull. One question for the experts on this board: Towards the front of the ski (where the ski isn't very thick) at the edges of the cap are getting pretty beat up and starting to lift a bit. Am I getting too far up on my edges or something?

post #11 of 30

If you've been skiing straight skis up 'til now, I'll bet that you are used to a fairly narrow stance. Skis like the RX8 that just want to turn right now with a little bit of edge angle have a tendency to bang into one another around the shovel area if you ski in a narrow stance, which can leave some cosmetic damage, and sometimes ding the edges. My RX8's have a little of the same thing as what you describe, which I assume was caused by me falling back into my old habit of having a narrower stance. It doesn't seem to hurt the ski any, and the dings can be removed with an abrasive or a sharp knife.

post #12 of 30
If anyone is having trouble finding the RX8 (it is sold out in most areas), I have 2 new pair left (170, 175). Price is $599 with FX12 binding. PM me if interested! We also have the RX9 in 160/170/180 for $599 with binding, if you want a bit more versatilty and less sidecut. Great skis!

Also, regarding the 2005 skis, both the RX8/9 are unchanged for 2005, except that the colors on the RX8 are new. The current RX9 colors are the 2005 colors as well (I think they lightened up the green for 2005, the first skis to ship were a dark green, not really matching the race line well). The only skis I saw that were "new" for next season were the ladies line-which is totally revamped (and at very competitive prices). The FX Big Stix models are mostly unchanged (the FX7.6 is a bit heavier and more damp, although I have yet to ski it). The WC SC has a bit less sidecut, the RC is unchanged. I was told both the GS and SL will be redesigned. I will know more when I ski them on Tuesday!
post #13 of 30
By any chance do you know if Fischer is bringing back the high end fischer Sceneo's (last season's 400, 500 series )next season in the USA? They were available in the Canadian and Japan markets this year.

Thanks. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #14 of 30
A friend who returned from the OR show said that Fischer basically has two types of Big Stix next year - the air/carbon model like this year's, and a heavier wood layup with straight sidewalls.

I wouldn't be surprised if they did likewise with the RX's next year, using the old Sceneo layup for the higher performance models.
post #15 of 30
The Sceneo's are gone in the US for next year. The Big Stix 8.0 is the only vertical sidewall ski in that line, the FX8.6 is unchanged, the FX7.6 is a bit heavier and more stable than the 2004 version. We skied it back to back with the Mantis 666 Fusion (next year's model as well) and the Mantis was by far the better ski-more stable, smoother and much quicker as well. I am really sold on the Fusion system-I own a pair of Mantis 662's (current model) and the differences are obvious-more stability, smoother, and added versatility. I may even consider dropping to a 168 next year (on the 176 this season) Awesome ski!

Regading the RX series-the skis are unchanged (except for the introduction of the low-end RX2). I will have a review of them against a bunch of other all-mtn carvers (cross's) in a few days.
post #16 of 30
Thread Starter 
dawgcatching, does the Fusion have a riser plate for next year? I would really like to see the Fusion with a riser, since the leverage combined with the feel of the Fusion would really rock, I would think.
post #17 of 30
Thanks for the update on Fischer's line next season. Sure will miss the Sceneo's though.
post #18 of 30
Does anyone know the difference between the RX9 and RX8? RX9 vs RX6?

What about the main construction/design differences (other than sidecut) between the RX and Sceneo series?

Fischer's reason for discontinuing the Sceneos? If it's redundancy with other Fischer models, what models?

[ February 05, 2004, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: Pato46 ]
post #19 of 30
The interestng thing is The Sceneo series is currently sold along side the RX series and FX series at least in Canada and Japan.
post #20 of 30
Originally posted by dawgcatching:
The Sceneo's are gone in the US for next year. The Big Stix 8.0 is the only vertical sidewall ski in that line, the FX8.6 is unchanged, the FX7.6 is a bit heavier and more stable than the 2004 version. We skied it back to back with the Mantis 666 Fusion (next year's model as well) and the Mantis was by far the better ski-more stable, smoother and much quicker as well. I am really sold on the Fusion system-I own a pair of Mantis 662's (current model) and the differences are obvious-more stability, smoother, and added versatility. I may even consider dropping to a 168 next year (on the 176 this season) Awesome ski!

Regading the RX series-the skis are unchanged (except for the introduction of the low-end RX2). I will have a review of them against a bunch of other all-mtn carvers (cross's) in a few days.
Stop that! Now I am drooling over the Mantis 666 (isn't that the sign of the devil anyway? ).

I am already floored by the feel of the Elan skis (I have the Mantis 662 in 168cm). I cannot imagine how the Fusion system can make the ski more "versatile". Are you sure it is not the shorter length? Also, added stability/smoothness won't come from a floating binding. Maybe the ski construction changed. Maybe the Fusion plate, which is matted to the core, changes the ski characteristic.

Regardless, I am glad to see that others are discovering Elan's excellent line of skis.
post #21 of 30
I was on the Mantis 666 176, my brother (a very good skier but a bit lighter weight at 135lbs) liked the 168 better. He skied the 176 for comparison. It seemed like the Fusion did make for a smoother ride-I don't know of any construction changes. For reference, Peter Keelty's review of the Fusion S12 vs. non-Fusion S12 said similiar things-an improvement in stability for the Fusion version. The rounder turn shape probably increases it's versatility, meaning they can make a ski more stout and still maintain ease of use. I do know that everyone I saw on the 666 raved about it-most people up here don't know much about Elan, but that is all changing. Here is another example of Fusion: I skied both Elan's new GX Pro (race stock GS ski with more sidecut at 170cm-a radius of 18m) and Head's new i-XRC SW in a 170 (the new sandwich construction ski-same construction and base as the i-GS RD (which I own in 180)). The GX Pro is the new Fusion race system (fixed heel, floating toe) while the i-XRC SW was a flat ski. The i-XRC SW was a stout ski and fairly smooth and fast, but the GX Pro was incredibly smooth and more powerful than the Head. I got off the GX Pro and jumped on the Volkl P60 Race Stock (180cm length), and the GX Pro was smoother, as stable, with more edge hold and more pop out of the turn than the Volkl (Volkl was mounted with new extended WC Piston plate). Don't get me wrong, I loved the Volkl, but the GX Pro was unreal for a "consumer-friendly" race ski.

Also, if anyone is interested (since it is related to this thread), we still have some Mantis 662's in stock. 176 and 184cm lengths new are $449, and a 176cm demo with Tyrolia LD12 railflex is $500 (about 5 days on the demo ski). Also have a new pair of 777's in 184cm for $459. Elan is doing some great things with their line, I am very happy to have them in our shop!
post #22 of 30
I'm looking at RX8's. I am 6ft 205lbs 45 yrs old about 7-8 skill level. What size should I get
post #23 of 30
Originally posted by walldad:
I'm looking at RX8's. I am 6ft 205lbs 45 yrs old about 7-8 skill level. What size should I get
I'm 6'4"/260 and I ski the RX 8 in a 180cm. I'd go no shorter then 170, and no longer than 175 if I was your size. It's a stiff ski, ski'em short.
post #24 of 30
Thread Starter 
I am 6ft 175 and ski the 170. I tend to ski harder/faster than most and would be tempted to try them a little shorter to see how they handle. At a level 7-8, they may be a bit too much and you might want to consider an RX6. But, if you really want the 8, I concur with Coach13 on the size for you.
post #25 of 30
If anyone is still interested in any I had for sale-we have a pair of new RX8's in 170cm (plate, non railflex) for $350 or mounted w/binding for $470. Email me at thunderball23@hotmail.com and we can get you set up (we have been able to set up several Bears on hard-to-find skis this year (Elan, Fischer) at excellent prices). We also have the RX6 at $429 with binding (170cm is railflex, 175cm is plate). I hope we can help someone out!
post #26 of 30

I disagree with the idea that an RX8 can be "a bit too much". The guy says he is a level 7-8 skier. At exactly what level do you think a skier is ready to ski an RX8?

Why the idea that an RX6 is better?

What characteristic does a ski possess when it is "too much" for someone? How do those characteristics manifest themselves.

Walldad you can enjoy the ski in various ways. It will be a tremendous ski on the hard snow that you will find in Ontario or any spot in the east. Anything from 170 to 180 would be fine. The ski is a much better choice than the RX6 for the east due to the stability enjoyed with the addition of Titanium.

My relationship with Fischer makes me biased, (pro rep) however I do think it's silly to suggest any recreational skier cannot enjoy the benefits of the top end recreational skis made available by various companies.
post #27 of 30

I'm with you on this issue and I think walldad would be fine on the RX8. I'm an intermediate skier and I can ski the 8 fine. Personally I like the idea of a ski that is easy to ski but can perform with the best of them.

At a level 7-8, he'll love this ski and I posted such elsewhere. That said, I'm not dogging the RX6 as I liked that ski as well. It was simply too soft IMO.


Rusty's the man when it comes to info and knowledge of Fischer skis. If it was a lousy ski for you, he'd say so.
post #28 of 30
I personally like the RX6 a bit more than the RX8-it is better in soft snow and bumps, alot more fun in crud. It can be overdriven on hard snow by an aggressive skier, however (talking fast speeds, most people won't out-ski it). I think the RX6 is one of the ultimate "learning tools" available for people moving up toward expert status/modern technique. I was talking with a customer about this today-this was his first "modern" shaped ski (fair amount of sidecut) and during his demo today (he was on the 165cm RX6) he kind of struggled early on-the ski tended to toss him around a little. The ski forced him to learn to engage the tip more cleanly, and by early afternoon, it was voila for him-he felt like he was driving a sportscar all of the sudden. It was really the first carving sensation he had ever felt-the RX6 kind of leads you toward more efficient movements and away from skidding (it lets you know either way, a definite "feedback" ski). I guess it is kind of a tough love-that is why so many of our old-school customers skiing with a wedel technique hate the ski, but those with more athleticism and learning capacity really enjoy it.
post #29 of 30
The RX6 is probably better suited for skiing out west and if someone is a bumper.

I skied the RX8 in bumps at Copper all day yesterday and it did great.

I skied the RX4 last week and I'll let folks in on a dirty little secret. If you want to save a little money.....I doubt I could tell the difference between the 4 and 6 if they were taped.

Every company is making good stuff these days. What one has to consider is what they will use the tool for and then look at warranty/quality.

One of the main reasons that I have been so happy at Fischer is the way the handle my customers. I have to work with these guys. Skis break, bend, delam, etc. Fischer stands by there stuff whenn issues arise. I can get an RA# in a day and get a new pair in somebody's hands as fast as Fedex can fly to Colorado.

Does Fischer have quality issues? No more so than anyone else.
post #30 of 30
I demoed the RX6, I think it was 170 or 175cm. Didn't feel like enough ski for me, exspecially compared to my Atomic R11 170cm which hold like ice skates but are a bit stiff in the bumps.

I'd like to demo the RX8.

Rusty, what length would you recommend for 170lb 6', PSIA L1 maybe close to PSIA L2? Like to hold on eastcoast ice but also play in the bumps and trees.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews