I've skied on 2015 Fischer Progressor 900's (170cm) for 15 days now, and I am very happy with them as all-around groomer zoomers. They feel like a very quick GS ski but do better than a real race ski in varied terrain and conditions. They love to be laid over hard and have a very high speed limit. They reward good technique, but they don't punish bad technique (they just get bored). They're great for 75% of the skiing I do, so I'm definitely keeping them.
I'm 67, 5'7" and 165 pounds - old-school advanced skier. Alas, I only ski 10 days a season if I'm lucky. The P900s at 170cm are a good all-around length (and 10cm shorter than my previous 2000 Atomic Beta Race 920's), but I feel like I could have gone down to 165cm if I'd wanted a more slalom-like feel.
So with that said, I think I'd like a 2nd pair of skis geared toward bumps, trees, and crud. Powder isn't really an issue, as I ski exclusively in New England - mostly day trips to New Hampshire. I'm thinking that I want something 'slithery'. I'd still want good (but not necessarily great) carving on groomers, but would accept more modest high-speed capability in favor of enhanced low-speed maneuverability and playfulness.
I like the Fischer feel. I demoed the Motive 86s in 175cm a couple years ago, and liked them - especially the rebound from the tail - but I bought the P900s in spite of the Motive 86's perceived versatility, as they more closely matched where and how I ski most of the time.
OK, so now I'm looking for a deal on a 90-ish ski to complete my first ever 2-ski quiver. Since I'll only use this ski about 25% of the time, at least initially, I'm looking for an off-season deal on an older model. Specifically, with the new Pro MTN series replacing the Motives for 2017, I think the 2015 Motive 95 might be a good bet; it seems I can get them brand new in either size with good bindings mounted and adjusted for under $500. But I'm wondering about the length. I figure in that ski, the 174 will feel/ski about as long as my P900s in 170 do, and the 168 might feel/ski more like a P900 in 165 would have. Given my intended usage, I'm thinking of going for the 168. Would that be a mistake? Another factor to consider, though I don't want to over-emphasize this, is that I'm not getting any younger and it's conceivable that I might start to slow down in a few years ... maybe.
It looks like I won't be able to demo before purchase, so what do you guys think?
I'm 67, 5'7" and 165 pounds - old-school advanced skier. Alas, I only ski 10 days a season if I'm lucky. The P900s at 170cm are a good all-around length (and 10cm shorter than my previous 2000 Atomic Beta Race 920's), but I feel like I could have gone down to 165cm if I'd wanted a more slalom-like feel.
So with that said, I think I'd like a 2nd pair of skis geared toward bumps, trees, and crud. Powder isn't really an issue, as I ski exclusively in New England - mostly day trips to New Hampshire. I'm thinking that I want something 'slithery'. I'd still want good (but not necessarily great) carving on groomers, but would accept more modest high-speed capability in favor of enhanced low-speed maneuverability and playfulness.
I like the Fischer feel. I demoed the Motive 86s in 175cm a couple years ago, and liked them - especially the rebound from the tail - but I bought the P900s in spite of the Motive 86's perceived versatility, as they more closely matched where and how I ski most of the time.
OK, so now I'm looking for a deal on a 90-ish ski to complete my first ever 2-ski quiver. Since I'll only use this ski about 25% of the time, at least initially, I'm looking for an off-season deal on an older model. Specifically, with the new Pro MTN series replacing the Motives for 2017, I think the 2015 Motive 95 might be a good bet; it seems I can get them brand new in either size with good bindings mounted and adjusted for under $500. But I'm wondering about the length. I figure in that ski, the 174 will feel/ski about as long as my P900s in 170 do, and the 168 might feel/ski more like a P900 in 165 would have. Given my intended usage, I'm thinking of going for the 168. Would that be a mistake? Another factor to consider, though I don't want to over-emphasize this, is that I'm not getting any younger and it's conceivable that I might start to slow down in a few years ... maybe.
It looks like I won't be able to demo before purchase, so what do you guys think?
