EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › RC4 Progressor and Blizzard World Cup SL Magnesium Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RC4 Progressor and Blizzard World Cup SL Magnesium Review

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Me: 5'10" 250
My skis: RX8 165, Helidady 180 (same as sugar), Big Stix86 180
Conditions: Packed Powder/Hard pack

Fischer RC4 Progressor: 165 (117-70-?)

Rep explained this ski as a slalom ski from waist to tip and gs ski in the tail. I would say that is a good summary of how the ski felt on the slopes. Railed slalom and gs turns very well.

I attended this demo day with the expectation of trying lots of skis. I rode these first and stayed on them most of the day only leaving enough time for about 5 runs on the Blizzards-hence only the review of two skis. These hook up similar to the RX8 only quicker and the edge hold is far superior. I could not find any speed limit and it was a fast day as the slopes where empty and conditions were very good. It is very smooth out of the turn and gives back as much as you put in but not in a harsh way very smooth. I did not think it was very demanding but my guess is it would punish you with the wrong techniqe. It was easy to skid if I wanted to but then again at my weight I dont have much trouble making a ski do that so take it fwiw. It was good at short slalom style turns and bigger gs type turns. It is butter smooth out of the turn.

I think this will be replacing my RX8 next year!

Blizzard World Cup SL Magnesium 165 (race stock)

Also great skis butter smooth in and out of the turn but with way more energy exiting the turn than the Fischers. Rock solid stability loads of edge hold and was able to get them to do various turn shapes. Very quick edge to edge. They did the obvious short radius sl turns well and longer GS style turns and they felt very solid. It did not feel as stable in GS type turns as the Fischer. Very fun ski and I did not feel like these were overly demanding either but also not as versatile as Progressor.
post #2 of 19
Thanks for the review. Can't wait to try a pair. Sounds like a combo Worldcup RC and SC
post #3 of 19
Me: 6’ 205 level 8
My skis: RX8 170+175 RX9 180
Conditions: Packed powder and hardpack
Fischer RC4 Progressor 170 117-70-100

I had the chance to demo he Progressor’s on Friday but only for three runs. I concur with powderhound on his review in all aspects.
The fist thing that I noticed was the weight difference between the Progressor’s and the RX8’s. The progressor’s were quite a bit heavier. These skis were silky smooth. They carved turns like a knife through butter and with just incredible edge hold. I was skiing earlier on the Nastar course with my RX9’s in a 180. The course had iced up a bit and I was getting bounced around just a bit. I tried the progressor’s on the course and they just carved through turns like a tank on rails……amazing! It felt like my best run of the day but still a half second slower then the RX9’s but not a good comparison for speed. These skis were extremely fast edge-to-edge but enjoyed them the most on knuckle dragging GS carves. Again……Amazing. The trails were empty on Friday so I could put the pedal to the metal and they just railed. No speed limit. I’ve been thinking about purchasing the world cup RC for next year but now there is no question that I will be purchasing these next year. There is no question that these skis are going to be a big hit for 2008. A Fischer RX8 on steroids……
post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
nikonfme--glad you got to ride them I have already started the sales process to the misses as to why I need another pair of skis. I can't wait to get back on these I had a blast on them.

All those that love the RX8s make sure you ride these!!
post #5 of 19
I agree. I want to demo these in a 175 for comparison. I would prefer the 175 but may be too much ski at that length. I already know that I can't go wrong with the 170 but if I can handle the 175 I would want those for racing.
post #6 of 19
I am 230lbs and ski the RX8 in 175. What lkength should I try in the Progressor?
post #7 of 19
Thread Starter 
I am 250lbs ski the RX8 in a 165 and they do get a bit squirrly at hi speed but not to bad. I did not get any of that with the progressor and I was on the 165 and that is the size I will be buying. If it were my only ski I might go a little longer.
post #8 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
I am 230lbs and ski the RX8 in 175. What lkength should I try in the Progressor?
If you are skiing the RX8 in a 175 AND like it, I would not go smaller than the 170. I think that the RX8 in a 165 is too one dimensional for my liking. Just my opinion. I know that there are a lot of people on the 165 and love it. I can't wait to try the 175 myself and hope I get to do it this year. I'll have to start looking for resorts in NH/VT/ME that may have demo days between now and closing.
post #9 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
I like the RX8 in 175. With the Progressor should I stick with 175, go longer, go shorter?
I would say go either same length or shorter but alot of that is personal preference. Is this going to be your only ski?
post #10 of 19
I like the RX8 in 175. With the Progressor should I stick with 175, go longer, go shorter?
post #11 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
I like the RX8 in 175. With the Progressor should I stick with 175, go longer, go shorter?
I guess it would really depend on the type of skiing you enjoy the most.........You are not going to over power the 170. It's stiffer and heavier than the RX8 with vertical sidewall construction. I would say that is more like the Worldcup RC. I would guess that this ski in a 165, 170 and 175 are going to ski VERY differently
post #12 of 19
I was speaking with a salesman in my local shop today who has skied RX-8s the past few years in a 170 length. He has ordered the Progressor in a 170 length. So he is actually not changing the size.
BTW, does anyone know of any pics of the Progressor that are online?
post #13 of 19
post #14 of 19
Not the typical Fischer color schemes........No green, orange or yellow.
post #15 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikonfme View Post
Not the typical Fischer color schemes........No green, orange or yellow.
bleu clair, thanks for the photo link.
No, they aren't typical Fischer colors and I don't find them especially appealing, but I am ordering a pair from my local shop for next season.
Let's be honest, Fischer has done a lot worse in the graphics area in the past.
post #16 of 19
Just when you thought Fischer RC4's were yellow and black sometimes with a splash of green thrown in, they change the game. Fischer did that at least once before when their SL race skis were red and GS race skis yellow. Fischer's taste in "neo-retro" graphics aside, they likely are excellent skis. Their graphics guy must have worked for Raichle before.
post #17 of 19
I kind of like the red & white even though its not traditional Fischer colors! Does anyone have any additional information on the ski as far as sidecuts, radius and length?
post #18 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by powderhound24 View Post
Blizzard World Cup SL Magnesium 165 (race stock)

Also great skis butter smooth in and out of the turn but with way more energy exiting the turn than the Fischers. Rock solid stability loads of edge hold and was able to get them to do various turn shapes. Very quick edge to edge. They did the obvious short radius sl turns well and longer GS style turns and they felt very solid. It did not feel as stable in GS type turns as the Fischer. Very fun ski and I did not feel like these were overly demanding either but also not as versatile as Progressor.
Lots of feedback on the Fiscers here in this thread but no word on the Blizzards. I switched from Head to Blizzards this year because of ski-school policy but also because I thaught I would give the Blizzards a fair chanse since I really liked how the skis were designed, built and shaped. I was not dissapointed. For some years now it has been a trend among our local master skiers to switch from mens 165cm to 155cm womens SL skis due to tight set courses and I too was giving this option some thaught but the Mags changed that thinking in a blinck. It is a very light ski to ski and suitable for all kind of skiing. It turns very quickly and jumps from turn to turn with exploding power. The edge hold is also very good and it carves beautifully on hard groomed snow. I cannot think of a better carving ski. They are very responsive and not dead like my old skis. Bigger arch turns are also fun to ski but attempting to ski GS courses is offcourse out of the question. My ranking in master SL improved a great lot and I even won 2 small events. Skied on them on our family vacation in the Alps for a week.

From a construction standpoint I really liked the fact that the edges are a bit wider than on other racing department skis. This gives hobbyists like me a lot more edge to work with and longer ski life. It is also not as sensetive to rocks and will not be damaged as easily. The midmark is set more forward than on the Heads and I liked that a lot, made turning easier and prevented the tail from skidding. Mounted my bindings according to the BallOfFoot measurement which placed my boot 5mm in front of the original midmark.

I just bought a new pair in store for next year.
post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6 View Post
Lots of feedback on the Fiscers here in this thread but no word on the Blizzards. I switched from Head to Blizzards this year because of ski-school policy but also because I thaught I would give the Blizzards a fair chanse since I really liked how the skis were designed, built and shaped. I was not dissapointed. For some years now it has been a trend among our local master skiers to switch from mens 165cm to 155cm womens SL skis due to tight set courses and I too was giving this option some thaught but the Mags changed that thinking in a blinck. It is a very light ski to ski and suitable for all kind of skiing. It turns very quickly and jumps from turn to turn with exploding power. The edge hold is also very good and it carves beautifully on hard groomed snow. I cannot think of a better carving ski. They are very responsive and not dead like my old skis. Bigger arch turns are also fun to ski but attempting to ski GS courses is offcourse out of the question. My ranking in master SL improved a great lot and I even won 2 small events. Skied on them on our family vacation in the Alps for a week.

From a construction standpoint I really liked the fact that the edges are a bit wider than on other racing department skis. This gives hobbyists like me a lot more edge to work with and longer ski life. It is also not as sensetive to rocks and will not be damaged as easily. The midmark is set more forward than on the Heads and I liked that a lot, made turning easier and prevented the tail from skidding. Mounted my bindings according to the BallOfFoot measurement which placed my boot 5mm in front of the original midmark.

I just bought a new pair in store for next year.

That Blizzard is one hell of a ski and if I was looking for an SL ski it would be at the top of the list.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › RC4 Progressor and Blizzard World Cup SL Magnesium Review