Rank the Race Skis in Order...

[markojp]

What was it about the non FIS Sl's that you didn't like?

More (shorter) turn radius than a FIS SL and softer forebodies isn't a recipe for stability. They're just really squirrely, weird, one radius trick ponies. FIS SL's though are scalpels that are still rock solid at speed and will make a variety of turn shapes.

 

[ScotsSkier]

More (shorter) turn radius than a FIS SL and softer forebodies isn't a recipe for stability. They're just really squirrely, weird, one radius trick ponies. FIS SL's though are scalpels that are still rock solid at speed and will make a variety of turn shapes.

Exactly!

 

[Johnny V.]

FIS SL's though are scalpels that are still rock solid at speed and will make a variety of turn shapes.

I always forget how much fun they are until I ski them. The only drawback is trying to keep up with your racer buddies when they are on GS skis.............

 

[razie]

I don't necessarily agree with Razie that the 18-23m radius is more useful - it may be better in Ontario or on small hills - but I am typically on a 30m ski as my default coaching ski and prefer the longer radius. Important to add however that radius is only one element, flex in my experience is much more critical.

So, if you are thinking about running gates I would definitely steer you away from the 193 Head. If it is just as a high speed groomer ski it could work. Just give yourself enough space

That's what I meant - I wouldn't try carving a 30m on a run with many other skiers on it... it only turns at 30m or a bit less for well trained racers/coaches and only when you go fast enough and if anyone gets in the way at that speed, it is unpleasant... I think a 23m would be more flexible and provide enough of a GS feel without requiring a wide empty run...

Here's a visual - freeskiing 30m (188s) - it's not crazy fast/wide, but without training, it won't be as tight: I only get 11 full turns on that run, he got 13-14.


One thing they have though, they're smooth at speed, that's for sure! If one's bombing down the hill - that's the ski to get!

 

[sparty]

More (shorter) turn radius than a FIS SL and softer forebodies isn't a recipe for stability. They're just really squirrely, weird, one radius trick ponies. FIS SL's though are scalpels that are still rock solid at speed and will make a variety of turn shapes.

Having spent a year on the Atomic non-FIS slalom and never felt that they were particularly squirrelly, I'm now thinking I need to compare to the actual slalom skis. FWIW, I was coming off an older pair of Fischer FIS slaloms that skied pretty well until my body told me I was working too hard to keep up with them. If that took more than a run I might've stuck with FIS slaloms, but I've been really happy with the flexibility of the non-FIS Atomics—I can ski hard and make real slalom turns when I want to, but I can also cruise around and do drills without having to drive as much energy into the ski.

As far as 30M+ GS skis, it's not always easy to discern how a ski works for running gates from how it works freeskiing or vice-versa. I took a few runs on a pair of 195/35 Nordicas when those were the FIS GS specs, and they were perfectly pleasant to ski on a wide groomer. No f'ing way did I want to try cranking them through a GS course.

Even within a radius category, the fastest ski may not feel the best (or vice-versa), and "fastest" doesn't matter if you just want to rip GS arcs down your favorite groomer.

 

[François Pugh]

I too find that skis with a side-cut radius less than 13 m have radii that are too short, but for folks that weigh between 140 and 160 lbs, there are non-FIS slaloms out there that are 13 m radius in a 165 cm length (like my Fischer SCs). These skis are stable at speed and can easily be bent into a tight radius by a lightweight skier who isn't afraid of a little speed (sweet spot at 150 lbs is 25 to 45 mph). That being said, there are lots of non-FIS skis with a smaller side-cut radius, which are a blast on a really small (<250') hill, but too squirrelly elsewhere, so only add to quiver if you spend a lot of time on a small hill (e.g. Head WC Rebels i. SL ---without the RD in the name).

 

[ski otter 2]

I've found that the women's 157 FIS ski, as long as the base bevel is set correctly, works fine for a man 150lb./5'10". A blast, and versatile with different turn shapes and conditions, not twitchy WHEN base bevel right. (I still prefer the 165 FIS ski, though.)

 

[maxwerks]

I"m a lightweight man 145lb/5'7" mostly training gates on a 300m / 20 degree indoor slope. I love my Rossignol Hero 157 FIS SL for training but need to add a 165 for races. I want to get last seasons Fischer FIS SL in a soft flex. However several people I spoke to say that Fischer no longer supplies the FIS SL with different flex ratings. Does anyone know if this info is accurate? Would the medium flexing RC4 SL still be a good choice?

 

[James]

This Fischer at 54 flex is quite soft.
Apparently there's another level beyond this. It would have "2081" stamped on it. But that's the "wcup" ski, whatever that means. You don't want that.

I think it's a 17/18, but it's possible it's 18/19.

 

[razie]

I don't think they had a "soft" per se, just a medium and stiff, until last year.

The new ski feels just in between.
The stiff are a blast but take some precision. The medium are probably better for your purpose..

A used stiff is also an option, at about 30-40 days they are really nice (or 10-20 days if skied hip to snow).

Question - that does not sound like a FIS slope so why do you need a 165 for races? You can have a ton of fun on 158s...

 

[Swede]

Yeah, why’d you use different specs for training and racing? Sounds very ... different.

 

[maxwerks]

Thanks for the tips. I am looking at a user 2017/2018 pair marked as 54, with Z18 bindings for 350 euro. Same model as what James sent. Handflexing them, they feel supple and progressive. I think they will be perfect but man are they heavy and solid! Big difference compared to my Rossi Hero girls ski. One concern is that the steel edges on this pair are quite thin, slightly under a millimeter. Since they were used as race skis the previous owner kept them razor sharp and perfectly bezeled. I hand sharpen my skis with a diamond 100 / 200 once a week. My only worry is that the edges are too thin already...

 

[maxwerks]

Here's a photo of the edges. The skis are marked 2081.

 

[Swede]

Here's a photo of the edges. The skis are marked 2081.

Difficult to see, but >1mm is thin. Race edges are thinner to begin with than normal piste skis, perhaps 2-2,5 new. You will need more than just stones to keep them sharp. A file is a must. They dull much quicker and easier than normal tourist skis, but they can get sharper. Sounds like not that much life left.

 

[razie]

Looks ok, classic for used race skis. Should keep you going a few seasons unless you race a serious league and train on ice.

The Z18 is a good binding - what does the DIN starts at, I think it's 8 - are you ok with that?

 

[James]

Difficult to see, but >1mm is thin. Race edges are thinner to begin with than normal piste skis, perhaps 2-2,5 new. You will need more than just stones to keep them sharp. A file is a must. They dull much quicker and easier than normal tourist skis, but they can get sharper. Sounds like not that much life left.

This Fischer has maybe a couple days on it. Never seen a file, but it was ground at a shop new to be set up like .3base, 4 deg side.
It's barely over 1mm. No way was it 2-2.5mm new.

This is my pet peeve with fis sl race skis. Edges are way too thin. They can blather all they want about speed, but I think it just endures they're dead in one season. These fis sl skis list for over $1k US.
The only exception with normalish width edges I've seen is Stockli, and I don't know if they're all like that. Even Augment pooo pooed the idea of normal thickness edges when questioned here.

The picture makes the edge look even wider. Maybe it's 1.25 mm. I don't have my caliper here to measure.

Here's a photo of the edges. The skis are marked 2081.

Those are pretty thin. Are they very sharp hopefully? I'd have to see it in person, but for €350 prob wouldn't go for it.

 

[razie]

This is my pet peeve with fis sl race skis. Edges are way too thin. They can blather all they want about speed, but I think it just endures they're dead in one season. These fis sl skis list for over $1k US.

you want to be as close the spec as possible and if you file too much they're too far from the spec again (or outside the spec)... so I don't think there's a point in making a FIS ski edge much larger...

 

[maxwerks]

Yes very thin, well below 1mm. I test skied them today and deeply impressed. The heft translates to a super stable platform, with limitless depth of power despite the soft flex. They ski exactly like I hoped, such a shame that the edges are too thin. And yes they are razor sharp. Much sharper than my other FIS SL. I guess I need to use the file more often, just hate to see the metal come off. Regarding bindings, normally when free skiing my setting is 7. But in the gates that is too low and causes unwanted prereleases. At a setting or 8 or higher I don't experience these any more. The Z18 is 8 to 18.

The indoor slope is not very icy, rather quite soft so super sharp edges not required all the time. I am also looking at a pair if RC4 SL 158cm 2018/2019 with z17 binding stamped 3031 for 380 euro. If these ski similar to the 165 then these would also be quite tempting...

 

[QueueCT]

Brand new pair of Stockli FIS SL 150s fresh from the factory measure a 2mm edge width (last season's skis, not the new ones).

 

[Swede]

This Fischer has maybe a couple days on it. Never seen a file, but it was ground at a shop new to be set up like .3base, 4 deg side.
It's barely over 1mm. No way was it 2-2.5mm new.

This is my pet peeve with fis sl race skis. Edges are way too thin. They can blather all they want about speed, but I think it just endures they're dead in one season. These fis sl skis list for over $1k US.
The only exception with normalish width edges I've seen is Stockli, and I don't know if they're all like that. Even Augment pooo pooed the idea of normal thickness edges when questioned here.

The picture makes the edge look even wider. Maybe it's 1.25 mm. I don't have my caliper here to measure.

View attachment 79012

Those are pretty thin. Are they very sharp hopefully? I'd have to see it in person, but for €350 prob wouldn't go for it.

it’s normal that they are ca 2 mm new, give or take ... These are a raced pair of Salomon LAB FIS SL that has had 0.5-1 mm shaved off. I belive 19/20 will be their last sesson.