or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Fischer WC SC length help
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fischer WC SC length help

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
I'm looking at a pair of '06 Fischer WC SCs and am trying to decide if a 160 or 165 would be the better size. I'm 6' 1", 190 lbs, solid level 8 skier, 45 YO (40 years of skiing) on the West coast.

I'm leaning towards the 165s for a bit more versatility and because I naturally tend toward medium radius turns. I figure the longer length would still crank out as short a turn as I'd want to make but might be a little more forgiving of the occasional longer turn.

Am I off base with my assessment? Any words of experience are appreciated. I'd like to understand the trade-offs before I make up my mind.

These won't be my only ski: just a pair for fun carving on days where there isn't any fresh snow or I'm feeling like hitting the groomers. I'm planning to stick with my Salomon Xtra Hots for off-piste stuff (until I find the right fat ski that is!)...

Thanks for your help!
post #2 of 6
I have a 165 cm Fischer WC SC with a 13-m sidecut radius. I weigh about 165. These skis will turn on a dime if you get on the tips. Their only drawback is that at my weight they don't like going slow (they're not as bad as my SGs though).

As to longer turns, at least on hardpack, these skis don't give you that sweet feeling you would arcing them with a longer radius ski. Even at 165 it is pretty much a short-turn ski. Sure you can do them, but it just doesn't feel as good. They are versatile in that they will let you ski at high speeds making all kinds of turnshapes even very long radius turns, but they are not versatile in that they just wont arc them.
post #3 of 6
I weight 150 and have the 04/05 model in a 160 length. At your weight, I'd go for the 165's. I agree with Ghost - long radius turns are possible but they're not what this ski excels at. Medium radius should be fine (of course, one person's medium is another's long...). Hard to explain, but when your on these things, they just feel like they want to be ripped through short/medium length turns.

Great ski, BTW - don't take these comments as negative.
post #4 of 6
I'm 5'7" 220 lbs, a north tahoe resident, level 8-9, 47 yrs old, 30 yrs of skiing. I purchased the WCSC in '04 (same dimensions as the 05-06 model). At the time the shortest ski in my quiver was a 180cm SX-11. I was looking for a "shorter radius" hard snow carver but didn't completely want to give up the high speed stability I liked about the SX-11.

I demoed the RX-8 @ 175cm, liked it a lot but felt it just wasn't beefy enough for this fat boy who likes to ski fast. I opted for the 170cm WCSC, despite several recommendations to get the 165cm. I couldn't be happier about the length choice. It rips tight and medium radius turns and at my weight still bends well at slower speeds while staying stable at faster speeds. The only caveat is that one needs to pay attention at very fast speed and constantly move from edge to edge for longer radius turns. The ski is exceedingly stable but it really wants to turn.

After spending 1 1/2 seasons on this ski, I'm now inclined towards this tighter turn & shorter ski philosophy. I picked up another SX-11 @ 170cm last season, and an SL-11 @ 165cm just recently for dedicated short turns.

My main point is that while shorter turns are a lot of fun, here in Tahoe on a groomer day, it's fun to let the skis run and for me at least, the longer "slalom" length of 170cm fits the bill quite nicely. For you at 6'1", 190 lbs, I would think that the 165cm would be a bit twitchy at significant speed, the 160cm even more so. Manageable, but not as versatile as the 170cm would be at both short and medium radius turns at speed. If you looking for strictly a short turn carver then by all means get the 160 or 165cm.

I've found the WCSC to be a great ski, my usual 1st choice on cold, hard groomer mornings and I'm sure you'll be happy with whatever length you decide to choose.
post #5 of 6
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the input! I know they're a slalom ski and it's going to be tight turn time. Part of what attracts me is to have something completely different than my usual medium - long radius boards. Shoot, the last slalom ski I had were the Mahre-era 710s. I have a feeling the WCSCs in a 165 might be a touch different!

The 170s sound like another possibility but I've got a line on a great price on the 165s. Being cheap and just wanting a toy...I'd probably go for the 165 because I won't justify to myself spending the extra $$$.

Sounds like it will be a fun ski though!
post #6 of 6
The Fischer RC4 WC SC @ 165cm sounds like a great choice.
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 WC SC length help