EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: Fischer Watea 94
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Fischer Watea 94

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Picked up a pair of Watea 94's from Dawgcatching (thanks again!) and I've got 3 days on them now, so I figured it was fair to give a review.

Me: 32 yrs old, 195 lbs, probably a level 8 skier, have been skiing on 191 Rossi Bandit X's for quite a few years now. This is a layman's review. I don't ski on a ton of different skis, and can't articulate the nuances like some of the better reviews on here. For me, my main criteria is: do they make the skiing more fun.

The skis: 186 Watea 94's mounted with Rossi Axial 120's.

The conditions: Except for deep powder, you name it, I skied it in the past 3 days. Frozen corduroy, corn, slush, windblown crust, soft bumps, soft crud and new snow up to boot deep with the occasional knee deep shots. This was at Stevens Pass and Mt. Hood Meadows.

So, do they make the skiing more fun? Yes. Overall, I had a blast on these skis. From soft groomers to boot-deep-ish (heavy) snow, these were just fun. Very playful, easy to bring around, but still strong enough to handle some pretty manky spring crud. I was really impressed at how well I could tip them up on edge and just run right through some pretty heavy snow. For a ski that's billed as a light, lively yet strong ski, I was wondering how well they'd do in the crud that's oh so common around here. But they handled it well. I wouldn't say they're a super beefy crudbuster at all, but they do the job well enough, IMO. For the type of skiing I like to do, and the snow conditions we usually get here in the PNW, these are a blast, and will make a great everyday ski for me.

They don't do everything well, of course. They were not too happy on the frozen corduroy, but that's probably my lack of solid technique as well, I'm sure. And they definitely aren't as quick in bumps as my older, much narrower skis. After a few days , I'm working on adapting my bump technique and it's getting better, definitely. That's it, those are my only complaints. Everything else was fantastic.

Anyone looking for a good all-around ski in the 90+ range, I highly recommend you check them out. And I know there are some killer deals on them right now.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 13
New to this so bear with me...

Question? I am going to Alyeska in a couple of weeks for some Heli skiing.. Taking 183 Goats, need another pair... Thinking of Watea 94 or Mythic Rider..

Any thoughts... Never skied them before and probably would like both based on the reviiews... Also have a pair of AC40'S, didn't like them that much for all mountain purposes, great on-piste but not great off.. SMALL sweet spot.. They overlap w/my Tigershark 10's too much...

Thinking of the watea, but this might also be overlap to my Goats...

NEED HELP...
post #3 of 13
thanks for the nice review. glad you like'em.

i'm thinking @ getting the watea's and relegating my beloved big stix 76's to ....dare i say, rock ski duty.
post #4 of 13
Jao,

My sentiments exactly. Bumps and ice not the best, but everything else (especially powder) = one big smile for fun! Closest one ski quiver that I've ever had.
post #5 of 13
Mehama, I love the 94's in soft bumps. Ice, Haven't been on any this season. Had them one day on hard pack and they did just fine, but that's not what they are for.
post #6 of 13
Awesome ski -- I wish all my skis had this much heart.
post #7 of 13
Yeah, I should have said hard bumps. I prefer my shorter/narrower skis for that. Wateas kill just about anything, hence their name.
post #8 of 13
Thread Starter 
I mainly didn't like them in bumps because I've spent most of the last 8 years skiing on my 69mm, 29m radius bandit x's (if I measured correctly, they're not marked with their dimensions), and have adapted my technique accordingly. I normally ski bumps with my feet together and right down the zipper line, something you just can't do (or, I can't do) on something as wide as the 94's. Once I started adjusting my technique, it was getting better, but I'm still learning the best way to go about it with these skis, to be honest.

But man, these things were fun in the new snow and crud.
post #9 of 13

An East Coast Perspective ...

Demo day at Mt. Sunapee in NH today and Fischer was present. I'm looking for a soft snow ski and really wanted to try the Watea 84. Conditions were completely frozen corduroy in the AM, but things softened up in the afternoon ... to mashed potatoes on top of frozen corduroy. A better day for race carvers, but already have a pair of those .. so off we go in the morning on a pair of Watea 84's.

Couldn't believe just how fun and responsive these skis were ... and held on well on the frozen glop (not as well as my Race SC's, but very respectable). I could even see this as an every day ski .. although I would miss the Race SC's on days like today.

So back to the tent and say great, but wondering how the 94's ski. Surprisingly, he has a pair of 94's in the van .. so out I go again.

Still frozen corduroy, but starting to soften up in places. Man this was a fun ski!! Although I did get some chatter if I tried to hit the brakes hard, the edgehold was more than adequate for the conditions. I ran them again later in the day and hit some trails with soft, wet bumps and glop along the sides. The 94's motored right through without batting an eye. The ski is not as beefy feeling as, say, the Volkl Mantra (which I demo'd as well) and it might get a little twitchy in frozen, chopped up crud (although this is pure speculation as I didn't find any today) but I think this would be a dream ski in soft snow.

So while the OP is correct in suggesting that there are better hard snow skis, the 94 is no slouch if you keep 'em on edge and don't try to throw on the brakes. Certainly adequate to get you across the hill to the soft stuff on the other side
post #10 of 13
OldEasternSkier, that's awesome you got to demo both on the same day! Very good assessment of the skis. I should add, I had the 84s and 94s in heavy crud and they both did fine -- a lot better than the light feel would suggest.
post #11 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehama View Post
Yeah, I should have said hard bumps. I prefer my shorter/narrower skis for that. Wateas kill just about anything, hence their name.
I try to avoid those! (hard bumps)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaobrien6 View Post
I mainly didn't like them in bumps because I've spent most of the last 8 years skiing on my 69mm, 29m radius bandit x's (if I measured correctly, they're not marked with their dimensions), and have adapted my technique accordingly. I normally ski bumps with my feet together and right down the zipper line, something you just can't do (or, I can't do) on something as wide as the 94's. Once I started adjusting my technique, it was getting better, but I'm still learning the best way to go about it with these skis, to be honest.
But man, these things were fun in the new snow and crud.
I wish i could zipper line but, I don't think the 94 lends it's self to such tight lines, if you ski more rounded turns they work great. I find the softer tip is great at absorbing energy and controlling speed. I am still learning bumps though.
post #12 of 13
 Great review of the 94's. I'm in a bit of a quandary here as to whether I should purchase the 178 or 186. 

Me: 23 years old, raced for years, around 140, and 5'11" 

My intent is to use these primarily for powder, as I already own ski's for the hard stuff. What's your take?
post #13 of 13
Definitely 178 for you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews

Gear mentioned in this thread:

EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: Fischer Watea 94