EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Reviews: 2008 Fischer Cold Heat / 2008 Elan Magfire 12
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Reviews: 2008 Fischer Cold Heat / 2008 Elan Magfire 12

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Skis reviewed: 2008 Elan Magfire 12 176cm, 2008 Fischer Cold Heat 170cm


Conditions: challenging! 4 inches or more of rain fell in the past few days, with around 3-4 inches of decent fresh snow on top. It was up to 5 inches deep by the end of the day. Groomers had soft snow bunched up on top, covering up the concrete. Off-piste was fine in spots, death cookies were lurking elsewhere.

Skier specs: 5 foot 9, 155lbs, hack but improving, ski 30-50 days/year


Tune info: each ski was taken out of the wrapper, and a 1 degree base and 2 degree side bevel was put on the ski. The Elan had a very close to 1degree base already on the ski. Only the tip and tail needed additional base bevel. The Cold Heat had less of a bevel: it was close to .5 degrees, as a fair amount of material came off of the base. The Fischer required a bit of sidewall planing as well. Each ski was hot scraped and brushed a few times, until the base was shiny. Mounting point on a 176cm Mag 12 is 1.5cm forward of a 176cm Cold Heat, and I bumped the boot back .5cm on the Elan, so that it was 1cm in front of the Fischer. The Heelpiece can be moved back a maximum of 1cm from center on the Elan, and anywhere on the ski for the Fischer.

Fischer Cold Heat 170cm: I had skied this last February, but perhaps I was tired, as this ski really beat me up. I wanted to give it another chance, this time in 170cm. It is a fairly stiff ski, with Flowflex riser plate, laminate construction with a carbon fiber layer. I could ski either the 170 or 176, but chose the 170, as this ski is characterized primarily as a frontside (the Watea being similiar in dimensions but meant more for backside use). The 176 would be a bit more stable for me in big GS arcs at speed, and in rough crud, but not as sporty and probably getting more toward what the Watea is meant for.

Review: this is a very solid ski, but surprisingly, feels quite light underfoot. It has a very clean, smooth entry into the turn, holds nicely, pulling you in, and finishes with a bit of power. It was stable in the groomer chop, and didn't toss me around. I felt the ski to be very predictable, not overly powerful, but smooth, stable, muscular, and easy to ski. I could ski it at slow speeds without the ski getting out of control. The Cold Heat would also run quite nicely with a bit of edge angle. I didn't feel that it was as stiff or demanding as some of the beefier, high-end 82mm skis on the market (Jet Fuel, AC40) but performance was definitely in the same league. Regarding forgiveness, I would say that it was middle of the range: not as forgiving as, say a Legend 8000, but a tad better than the Magfire 14, AC40, and Jet Fuel.

Elan Magfire 12 176cm: I had been on the 14 last spring, and it was simply too stiff for my 155lbs. The 12 is the same construction, 82mm underfoot, but with 1 less layer of titanium. This ski in 176 has a 17m radius. It is a wood-core ski with metal, and feels a touch heavier than the Fischer. I chose the 176, as Elans tend to a ski a bit shorter. The new Mag12 has a Fusion system and ELD12 Tyrolia binding.

Review: Another high-performance 82mm ski. The Mag12 had a bit different feel than the Fischer. It felt a bit more glued to the snow, not quite as energetic in the tail, but with similar ease of entry into the turn and hold. I could feel the extra length in the Elan, which was mostly felt upon turn exit, which wasn't quite as snappy as what I was getting out of the Fischer. The Elan was a touch more stable in big arcs, and had the edge in the crud, due to the bit heavier feel and a little more dampness. I thought the Elan had more of a Nordica-like feel (the Hot Rod series is made at the Elan factory, which may explain some of the similarities), which is a heavier, wood core, damp, muscular, and fairly stiff flexing feel to it. I could carve it into tighter arcs as well as the Fischer, despite the longer length. In the moderate crud It made for a powerful and very capable all-mountain ski, that would be at home in most conditions. I would characterize this ski somewhere between the Afterburner and Jet Fuel in terms of performance.

Summary: Both of these skis are very enjoyable. Ideally, I would also try the Cold Heat in a 176, but more likely the 170 is the correct length. The 176, while more stable in variable snow conditions, wouldn't have been as sporty or as fun in the more frontside-like conditions that this ski is made for. I would say that the Cold Heat is a great ski for the person who wants something wider than, say a 70mm under foot Progressor, but still a powerful ski that is more carving and groomer oriented, and that has a nice, energetic feel to it (it feels much different than the Cool Heat, BTW). The Mag 12 got the edge in crud and for a ski that has a bit more of a damp, GS feel to it, and is very stable and capable in all conditions. Both skis are of similar performance, similar stability, and similar forgiveness, and there really wasn't much difference between them. More in terms of snow feel than anything, but even those differences are minor. I would recommend either to the skier looking for a all-mountain ride without giving up much in the way of hard-snow performance. I will eventually wrap these rewiews in with my all-mountain ski reviews that will hopefully be completed within the next 2 weeks.
post #2 of 12
Nice reviews, looks like there is an increasing number of really good 80-85mm (and 78 for the im78!) waist skis that those of us who like just one ski can enjoy all over the mountain.
post #3 of 12
I will be posting a Mag12 review after ESA. I think companies are swinging the pendulum too far with putting a lot of metal in htese skis and skis like the 12 and the mentioned Afterburner are more versatile skis than their beefed up brothers.
post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
I will be posting a Mag12 review after ESA. I think companies are swinging the pendulum too far with putting a lot of metal in htese skis and skis like the 12 and the mentioned Afterburner are more versatile skis than their beefed up brothers.
I share this view as well.

Interestingly, the ski personality is much less about dimensions anymore than it is about the type of build. I carry a dozen models or so in the 82-92mm range and I generally lump them into roughly two sub-categories. One is the group that shines a little more on the groomers, the other has a little more preference for softer snow. The difference is not the width. For example, the Nordie Hellcat (90MM) shines more as a groomer zoomer while the Fischer Watea (84mm) has more of an off road feel. The Atomic Crimson and Snoop are very close in dimesions, but the Crimson is a little better on the hard stuff while the Snoop favors the soft.

At first, it would seem that the "wide carver" would have little utility but when you examine what the majority of weekend skis really do, it starts to make some sense. For a great many skiers, perhaps even most of them, "off trail or powder skiing" consists of the choppy leftovers of a new snowfall over the groomers or at most a little foray off the edge of the runs. For them, the wide carver makes a great everyday choice.

SJ
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

At first, it would seem that the "wide carver" would have little utility but when you examine what the majority of weekend skis really do, it starts to make some sense. For a great many skiers, perhaps even most of them, "off trail or powder skiing" consists of the choppy leftovers of a new snowfall over the groomers or at most a little foray off the edge of the runs. For them, the wide carver makes a great everyday choice.

SJ
It makes some sense for the Northwest skier as well! We usually get moderate snowfall and soft, clumpy groomers, and it is nice to have a bit more float and forgiveness in these conditions than the typical 70mm carver provides. We aren't as blessed with big dumps as you Sierra or Rockies folk.
post #6 of 12
Interesting that the above review compared the Mag12 to the Afterburner, as I am looking at each of these skis. I'm from Michigan, and use Nordica Speedmachine 14's for the ice and hardpack around here. The new ones would be replacing my current "out west" ski, the Solomon Scream Xtra Hot. I tried the mag12 and really liked 'em, and I really like my current Nordica's, but I don't think I'll have a chance to demo the Afterburners. I can get either the magfire 12 or the afterburner for less than half price, but the afterburner is about $100 less. Do they really ski the same?
post #7 of 12
I am not an expert on this stuff so i want to ask why you put a 2 degree side bevel on the Fisher Cold Heat? I thought that Fisher skis had a 3 degree side bevel and a 1 degree base?

Is there a reason to change the factory setup?
post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechWorlds View Post
I am not an expert on this stuff so i want to ask why you put a 2 degree side bevel on the Fisher Cold Heat? I thought that Fisher skis had a 3 degree side bevel and a 1 degree base?

Is there a reason to change the factory setup?
The edge wasn't sharp out of the box, and the 3-degree bevel required a bunch of sidewall planing, so used the 2-degree file guide instead. 1/3 seems to be overkill for us soft-snow skiers out here.
post #9 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
The edge wasn't sharp out of the box, and the 3-degree bevel required a bunch of sidewall planing, so used the 2-degree file guide instead. 1/3 seems to be overkill for us soft-snow skiers out here.
Oh, ok. Thank you sir.

I was wondering because i have a pair of Fischer Progressors and a pair of Fischer BigStix and didn't know if the skis were specially made to run on 3 degrees or not.
post #10 of 12

What's wrong with the Cool Heat?

Hello, I wonder if someone could say a little more about the Cool Heat.

What makes it so different from the Cold Heat?

I demoed the Cool Heat for 2 days, but was not able to try the Cold Heat. I liked the Cool quite a bit. I found it very damped, and although they felt heavy, they turned quickly. The Cool heat really seemed to like having my weight forward, and carving. It held exceptionally well on the steep and icy, but was also nimble in the trees. They seemed fine in the bumps. I found that I trusted the skis, and found myself skiing significantly faster than usual.
post #11 of 12
The Cold Heat has a bit of a wider waist: 82mm, while the Cool Heat has a 76mm waist.
post #12 of 12
The Cold Heat will be a little more demanding; it will require 10% more speed, skill & effort to perform.

Michael
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 › Reviews: 2008 Fischer Cold Heat / 2008 Elan Magfire 12