EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Very short slalom type ski Fischer rc4 race sc or wc sc for small hills??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Very short slalom type ski Fischer rc4 race sc or wc sc for small hills??

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
Just purchased (after reading all the comments posted here) some RX8's in 165cm as a step up from my old 4 stars and have used them for a three days and they are stunning compared to the 4 stars, better in every way, except bumps are not quite as easy. Everyday was a huge grin with no more unstable feeling from the skis.

The superb carving performance has me thinking that perhaps a short slalom ski would make things more interesting when i have to accompany my wife and various friends when they want to go cross country once a year in norway/finland/sweden, usually the places have a reasonable but small alpine hill as well that is very well groomed. I have the opportunity to buy some Fischer RC4 Race SC ($350) or Worldcup SC.(about $425 ish) I had a hyper carver once, a Salomon axecleaver in 152 that were fun, so was thinking a really short length about 155, so they would be different to the rx8.

Me 42 years, 5 foot 8 inches, 170 lbs have been skiing for 12 years, about 25 days a season. sometimes more Fit(ish), but could be better. Level 7, enjoy proper carved turns,especially on steep icy blacks as there are never many people on them. but not very good at bumps, but trying to be.........

: Questions are:
Would this be a waste of time and money as the rx8 will do exactly the same job?
The race sc seems very similar to the rx8, but a shorter length will make it different?
Will the world cup version be overpowering and ski me rather than me skiing it?
Is this just a nuts idea?:
post #2 of 14
That is exactly what I use my Stockli 156 SL's for. Short narrow trails and eastern ice. I'm pushing 60 and 165 pounds.
post #3 of 14
How small a hill are we talking about? I think the Race SC would be about the same as the RX8, and 165 should be short enough. I also wouldn't get a WC SC exclusively for really small hills; it's too stiff. A better approach might be get a more flexible ski, like a Salomon Equipe SC. Well, it seemed more flexible to me.
post #4 of 14
Thread Starter 
The resorts are usually between 1500ft and 2000 foot vertical, in low season they are usually empty. everything tends to be very groomed. However some can be very icy, last time in Are Sweden it was really solid. I could use a WC SC at other places we go to, its just i am concerned it may be a bit stiff?
post #5 of 14
Both WS SC and Race SC go in the same boat, very nice tight carving SL skis. Im about 160lb, 5'9", aggressive and love both ski's. I have both in 165cm with Tyrollia LD12 bindings and have the following radius details:

WC SC - 123/86/102 - R11
RACE SC - 115/64/97 - R12

You can really feel the tighter radius on the WC SC, the ski sat in the carve much tighter, much more stable (seemed to grip a whole lot better - even too much at times with the back and front really not letting the ski slide if you need to in tricky situations). It is a stiffer ski althogether, and also heavier (cant get stiffness from nothing) and can definatly handle much more energy. At times I feel that it is too heavy, too stiff for "all mountain" work - you can live with it though. I feel the Race SC would be a more user friendly ski through various terrain. But on smooth runs, its definatly a choice over the RACE SC.

I like how my friend described both ski's, the Race SC was a cool carving turning type ski, you can pull off turns easily, then when he tried the WC SC it was like an F1 car, turning was precise, smooth and instant. Both skis seemed to need a bit of pushing if you like to go super fast (Race SC is a tiny bit floaty at warp 9, WC SC is less - heavier ski more yaw inertia), i've noted that some users have said they're fast enough (maybe its just me), i think its just a general SL ski trait that im feeling.

If its going to be used on smooth runs, I would think a WC SC in a longer length could be interesting.


post #6 of 14
These are in the sales at the moment.
post #7 of 14
Interesting topic. I am about your size and weight and I ski an RX-9 in 170. I also have the World Cup SL in a 161. I realize that neither is a ski that you are considering, but a couple of thoughts anyway. I have also skied the RX-8 and I think it skis similarly to the RX-9 but it is a much shorter radius ski. While I can ski the RX-9 all day, I would not say the same about the WC SL. It really does not like to skid and doing so requires some serious effort. It is a blast on groomers, but not much else. I'll use it if I go skiing after work, but I certainly wouldn't enjoy it all day. It is certainly not what I would call a recreational ski, but I bought it for slalom racing not recreation. (I have actually considered going with an RX-8 in a 165 for use as an all day carving ski as I know several people who ski it and love it.)
As I said, I haven't skied the WC SC or Race SC, but you may want to ask about how demanding they are. If your friends like to cruise down the mountain and not ski fast, I know the SL would not be the ski of choice, but I am not sure how much softer the SL's are. Just something to consider...
post #8 of 14

03/04 Wc Sc

J_Mech mentioned this ski above. It is a completely different animal than the current WC SC. The 03/04 model in a 155 (123mm tip) has a radius of 9m. Not only will this ski rip but it handles quite well at slower speeds. As mentioned earlier, skidding is not one of its strong points.
post #9 of 14
On a 1500 foot vertical hill, you don't really need a smaller turn radius. You may think you do, but I predict that after you've had it for a year you will be looking for a longer one.

WC SC info: I weigh 165 lbs and am just under 5'9". My 165 cm Fischer Worldcup SC is 118-66-99 R13. It's basically an RX8 on steroids. It feels very good once it's going above 25 mph, best between 40 and 50 and feels a little out of its element at around 60. It just begs you to throw it into high-g carves. I can't resist making bananna turns at the first steep section to get it up to 50 and then start cranking out tight-as-I-can-stand it turns and catching lots of air off rollers and little bumps.

With the one degree base bevel, it will slide it's way down moguls, but I can tell that it really is too stiff for that. It can be done, but it's the wrong tool for the job. It is also too stiff for making effortless thoughtless easy turns below 25 mph.

Going shorter will still not be enough to make you enjoy the WC SC ski at slow speeds.

RACE SC info: I haven't skied it but understand it to be a lot like the RX8, so yes shorter will be turnier, but still not a hyper carver.

ADVICE: I really think that if you are looking for a ski to ski slowly while you accompany your wife and kids, the Equipe SC is your best bet. It slices off turns effortlessly as if it can read your mind, is flexible enough for bumps (a little skill is required to prevent it from hooking, but you can use your 4*s for bumps anyways), and it doesn't need to go fast to work well. Other than not being beefy enough for heavyweights, the Equipe's only flaw is that it has a lower speed limit than the other contenders. You should be able to find a deal on them.
post #10 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thank you for all the replies. I need to provide a bit more info.

When we go to these places I spend all my time on the hill, everyone else goes and does cross country, i usually have to do it once or twice to be sociable, but cross country not my thing at all. No one else does the alpine at all. I often spend too long on the hill.... last year in Levi, Finland i got frostbite on the end of my big toe, it gets really cold. I knew my feet were cold, but i was enjoying myself too much.........

So going fast is not a problem as i am on my own, but not sure if 60 mph is on the clock for me at the moment? however I really like carved short turns down the fall line, its just i am a bit concerned about my ability to ski the wc sc. The RX8 are great, seemingly at all speeds I can ski them at, i just thought something a bit more radical would make these small hills more interesting as most of the runs espicailly the steeper stuff are very short, for example In levi the vertical is only 1000ft, however most places we go too are a bit more, but many runs do not use the whole vertical and so are very short.

The 4 stars are gone, as i decided that i did not like the unstable feeling on hard pack as i now certainly travel at higher speeds than last year and someone made me an offer i could not refuse. I don't really anticipate moguls if i buy these short slaloms (and i would probably bend them?)

Real skiers seems to indicate that the RC4 WC SC is forgiving(ish), but demanding and suitable for levels 6/7 and above, everywhere else seems to indicate they are a bit higher level than that

Would a shorter RC4 WC SC be easier to turn, ie. softer because of the shorter length than a longer version? Or would Race SC be a safer choice

The reason for the fischer bias is i am really impressed with the rx8, and a fellow worker is going to germany for 2 days next week, the hotel is next to a shop with deals on fischers.............but nothing else at this level.
post #11 of 14
So long as you don't plan on going under 20 mph, the SC will be fine. The SC won't beat you up. If you were the type of skier who only likes to pivot turns and bull the ski around when the tip is deep in the snow, then you wouldn't have liked the RX8 so much. If you know how to carve a turn, they really are forgiving. They are better on really hard ice to boot. Compared to my old SG skis with a 0.5 and 2 bevel these are learner skis. Be warned, however they will cause you to make many more high energy turns, and you may not be out there long enough to get frostbite .

The only places I would rather have an RX8 than my SCs is on 300-ft. vertical hills, in moguls, or when I'm skiing slowly.

Edit: Fore-aft balance at speed over chop will make things more "interesting" if you go too short.
post #12 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thank you for all the replies, especially Ghost and J_Mech

My work mate suggested that I get both the World Cup sc and the Race sc as they are not that expensive and try them and he doesn't mind bringing 2 pairs back. Seems as bit excessive but he suggested then sell the one i don't like as i will get my most likely easily get my money back on them. (i have had to promise my wife that one of them will go!).

I have looked on Fischers site, it seems to only suggest length based on height which seems a bit odd, however it suggests world cup sc in 160cm, and race sc in 165, but as my rx8 are in 165cm to make the race sc different i am going to get them both in 160cm. Does that seem reasonable? I understand the fore aft balance issue if i go shorter, and from memory my hypercarvers at 152 were not as pleasant when it got a little rough.

One thing i have noticed is my RX8 stood next to my old 4 stars before they were sold are identical in height yet the 4 stars are labelled 168 and the fischers 165...............? Do fischers measure short?
post #13 of 14
You wouldn't go wrong with either the WC SC or the Race SC. I had the WC SC ('03/'04 model which had a wider tip) in a 160cm which was plenty of ski for my 165lb weight. I now have this year's Race SC, also 160cm, which I like better than the WC because I find it to be more versatile in ungroomed conditions, and it has a more appropriate flex for my weight. It has excellent edge grip in hard snow and ice, and it handles speed very well. It does not feel too short to me, but I have a "shorter is better" bias when it comes to ski length.
post #14 of 14


Ski manufacturers measure length in varous ways, running surface, arc length tip to tail, chord length tip-to tail, to name a few that come to mind.

Get the length that gives you the turn radius you want.
If your stuck between two lengths and can't decide: the WC SCs will be stiffer, so in order to get the same match to your weight you want to go 5 to 10 cm shorter than the length that would work best for your weight in an rx8. My 165 WC SCs are a lot more ski, in terms of how much momentum I need to bend them into a sweet turn, than a 170 RX8.
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 › Very short slalom type ski Fischer rc4 race sc or wc sc for small hills??