Ok, yes, I realize that title is a ridiculous proposition. But let me tell you a story. And it starts far away from either of these skis.
I've been pretty vocal about how much I love my Fischer Motive 95 . But I am in my third season on these and I know I'll have to replace them some day. So when everybody started raving about the Renoun Z-90 it really started sounding like the first thing in a long while that could replace my Motives and, possibly, be an improvement. When I make the move, I don't want to miss my Motives.
Being a loyal pugskier and a N* season pass holder, I contacted @Philpug and asked him if I could get on them. I only want to demo skis on days I am not with my kids so that I can focus on the skis. So that day was yesterday (Fri Jan 20).
It wasn't an ideal day for this ski. I knew that going in, as the forecast called for 5-10" the day before. It was more like 20". What the hell, I had set it up, and I was going to do it.
First run down Pioneer. Why do I ski Pioneer? I make this mistake all the time. Badly bumped up, too many people. Not to mention that, for whatever reason, the snow on Pioneer just always feels heavier than the rest of the mountain. I don't know why. It faces southeast and the top feels the same as the lower, even though it is higher than other areas of the mountain that don't have this doughy consistency. Its fine at the open, but gets tracked out in no time. And I had arrived late (long drive night before, 45 minutes of shoveling, and broken water pipe . . . ugh).
Anyway, being on short (174) and narrowish skis for the conditions, I chose to ski around the bumps even though they were more doughy/spongy than cement. Absolutely, without a doubt, the quickest most nimble ski of this width I've ever been on. They make the Motives feel like planks, and those are nimble skis for their size. On the flatter (and thus, less bumped out) I opened it up a bit and let it run.
That is when I started to think about the weird, supposedly revolutionary, construction of these things. On this run, and later when I found some not bumped up blue groomers to confirm, I started to notice the difference quickly. They were damp. Really damp (or dampening, as would be grammatically correct, but unconventional). More so than the Motives. And the common criticism of the Motives is that they are so damp, they are a little dead. Its a fair criticism, but one which doesn't alter my love for that ski.
Yet the Z-90s were not dead. Not at all! And that is the revolutionary thing about these really. You've been on damper skis. You've been on livelier skis. Have you ever been on a ski that excelled at both?
And these are the exact conditions where this matters. When things are thoroughly roughed up, the Motives lack the feedback that lets you adjust in a timely manner. Especially in low vis where you are counting on the skis as much as your eyes to tell you what is happening. You get out of shape easily in those circumstances. With the Z-90's, I felt every little bit of feedback, but it never felt unstable (even though these are 6cm shorter than my Motives).
Hand flexing, I'd call them merely medium stiff. Definitely not as stiff as the Motives, and particularly not in the tails. Yet they never once folded up on me. Really getting into them at speed I noticed that the flex is very progressive. Get them up on edge with a little speed and they bend you into a nice medium-tight turn. A little more input and the radius tightens some. Give them everything you've got (I'm 200 lbs) and it tightens up a little more, but not much. There are more skilled and stronger skiers than me, but I truly doubt anybody could noodle these skis. That moderate flex that makes them easy to get into a turn tightens up rapidly the more input you give them.
They do take a little speed to come alive. Not a lot. But you don't feel the flex and sidecut at low speed. OTOH, they don't feel planky, just a little dead at low speed. Rather like the Motives, so its not really a criticism, just an observation that they are merely mortal under these circumstances.
But I promised you a comparison, did I not? Well, after several runs on the z-90s and a little rest (shoveling and dealing with the broken pipe took a lot out of me the night before), I met up with Phil. We did a few runs together and then he was calling it a day. "You want to try these?" he said, pointing at the DPS'. Well, of course! So we swapped them out. I love Aaatack 13 demos. So easy to adjust.
Anyway, the interesting thing for me was that I found the Foundations to be a bit of a challenge in comparison. There are a lot of things going into this. First, I was pretty worn out. I was also experiencing, for some unknown reason, a bad rubbing/pain in my right ankle bone. It hadn't been a problem before, but even a day later it is red and swollen. So I was having a little bit of trouble controlling the right ski when it was downhill.
Still, they were so soft in comparison to the Renouns. The deflected on everything, the Renouns on nothing. Before parting ways, Phil had quoted @Tricia sig line: "Point your skis where you want to go. Or go where your skis are pointed." It was good advice in general and especially for the Foundations. And to be fair to the skis, Phil effortlessly ran away from the entire mountain on them. Watching, for the brief moment I could still see him, I didn't see him experiencing any deflection on them. And he is a big guy too.
These would be the skis to follow, ie, go where they are pointed. If I were a better skier or had more time to get used to them, that is the approach I would take. But to my taste, these were not crud skis. Still, I did go through a big pile of soft snow that Phil had shown me, and which had completely suffocated the Renouns. They didn't quite float (more like surf), but I didn't feel like I was drowning. No lie, that was the completely illogical reaction I had in the same spot on the Renouns. Help! I can't swim! At least not with the Renouns on my feet.
And, on my way back on Village Run (wide, low angle deserted groomer) I decided to carve them. This was not a hard surface by any means. But it was perfectly groomed and not at all bumpy. A little spongy, but not bad. And they really, really carved nicely. Especially for such a big ski. They didn't store/give back any energy, but you wouldn't expect them to. Just as I was thinking, these are surprisingly fun, it occurred to me, the Renouns would have been REALLY fun here!
They also made me feel like I was too far forward on the ski. I thought about moving the bindings back, but I realized they would deflect even more if I did so. The tails were supportive enough, but I often felt like there was too much of them back there.
Neither ski was the perfect weapon for the day. But I actually felt more comfortable on the Renouns than the DPS. Deep, bumpy snow is still a challenge for me to ski. However, I can very clearly say that I wanted to strong platform of the Renouns here. An ideal ski for the conditions I think would have been longer and wider than the Renouns, but would have been stiff and supportive just like them.
The bottom line is that, if I'd gotten there earlier, I think I would have liked the Foundations more. If it were a firmer, low tide day, well, I'd love to try the Renouns in those conditions.
I've been pretty vocal about how much I love my Fischer Motive 95 . But I am in my third season on these and I know I'll have to replace them some day. So when everybody started raving about the Renoun Z-90 it really started sounding like the first thing in a long while that could replace my Motives and, possibly, be an improvement. When I make the move, I don't want to miss my Motives.
Being a loyal pugskier and a N* season pass holder, I contacted @Philpug and asked him if I could get on them. I only want to demo skis on days I am not with my kids so that I can focus on the skis. So that day was yesterday (Fri Jan 20).
It wasn't an ideal day for this ski. I knew that going in, as the forecast called for 5-10" the day before. It was more like 20". What the hell, I had set it up, and I was going to do it.
First run down Pioneer. Why do I ski Pioneer? I make this mistake all the time. Badly bumped up, too many people. Not to mention that, for whatever reason, the snow on Pioneer just always feels heavier than the rest of the mountain. I don't know why. It faces southeast and the top feels the same as the lower, even though it is higher than other areas of the mountain that don't have this doughy consistency. Its fine at the open, but gets tracked out in no time. And I had arrived late (long drive night before, 45 minutes of shoveling, and broken water pipe . . . ugh).
Anyway, being on short (174) and narrowish skis for the conditions, I chose to ski around the bumps even though they were more doughy/spongy than cement. Absolutely, without a doubt, the quickest most nimble ski of this width I've ever been on. They make the Motives feel like planks, and those are nimble skis for their size. On the flatter (and thus, less bumped out) I opened it up a bit and let it run.
That is when I started to think about the weird, supposedly revolutionary, construction of these things. On this run, and later when I found some not bumped up blue groomers to confirm, I started to notice the difference quickly. They were damp. Really damp (or dampening, as would be grammatically correct, but unconventional). More so than the Motives. And the common criticism of the Motives is that they are so damp, they are a little dead. Its a fair criticism, but one which doesn't alter my love for that ski.
Yet the Z-90s were not dead. Not at all! And that is the revolutionary thing about these really. You've been on damper skis. You've been on livelier skis. Have you ever been on a ski that excelled at both?
And these are the exact conditions where this matters. When things are thoroughly roughed up, the Motives lack the feedback that lets you adjust in a timely manner. Especially in low vis where you are counting on the skis as much as your eyes to tell you what is happening. You get out of shape easily in those circumstances. With the Z-90's, I felt every little bit of feedback, but it never felt unstable (even though these are 6cm shorter than my Motives).
Hand flexing, I'd call them merely medium stiff. Definitely not as stiff as the Motives, and particularly not in the tails. Yet they never once folded up on me. Really getting into them at speed I noticed that the flex is very progressive. Get them up on edge with a little speed and they bend you into a nice medium-tight turn. A little more input and the radius tightens some. Give them everything you've got (I'm 200 lbs) and it tightens up a little more, but not much. There are more skilled and stronger skiers than me, but I truly doubt anybody could noodle these skis. That moderate flex that makes them easy to get into a turn tightens up rapidly the more input you give them.
They do take a little speed to come alive. Not a lot. But you don't feel the flex and sidecut at low speed. OTOH, they don't feel planky, just a little dead at low speed. Rather like the Motives, so its not really a criticism, just an observation that they are merely mortal under these circumstances.
But I promised you a comparison, did I not? Well, after several runs on the z-90s and a little rest (shoveling and dealing with the broken pipe took a lot out of me the night before), I met up with Phil. We did a few runs together and then he was calling it a day. "You want to try these?" he said, pointing at the DPS'. Well, of course! So we swapped them out. I love Aaatack 13 demos. So easy to adjust.
Anyway, the interesting thing for me was that I found the Foundations to be a bit of a challenge in comparison. There are a lot of things going into this. First, I was pretty worn out. I was also experiencing, for some unknown reason, a bad rubbing/pain in my right ankle bone. It hadn't been a problem before, but even a day later it is red and swollen. So I was having a little bit of trouble controlling the right ski when it was downhill.
Still, they were so soft in comparison to the Renouns. The deflected on everything, the Renouns on nothing. Before parting ways, Phil had quoted @Tricia sig line: "Point your skis where you want to go. Or go where your skis are pointed." It was good advice in general and especially for the Foundations. And to be fair to the skis, Phil effortlessly ran away from the entire mountain on them. Watching, for the brief moment I could still see him, I didn't see him experiencing any deflection on them. And he is a big guy too.
These would be the skis to follow, ie, go where they are pointed. If I were a better skier or had more time to get used to them, that is the approach I would take. But to my taste, these were not crud skis. Still, I did go through a big pile of soft snow that Phil had shown me, and which had completely suffocated the Renouns. They didn't quite float (more like surf), but I didn't feel like I was drowning. No lie, that was the completely illogical reaction I had in the same spot on the Renouns. Help! I can't swim! At least not with the Renouns on my feet.
And, on my way back on Village Run (wide, low angle deserted groomer) I decided to carve them. This was not a hard surface by any means. But it was perfectly groomed and not at all bumpy. A little spongy, but not bad. And they really, really carved nicely. Especially for such a big ski. They didn't store/give back any energy, but you wouldn't expect them to. Just as I was thinking, these are surprisingly fun, it occurred to me, the Renouns would have been REALLY fun here!
They also made me feel like I was too far forward on the ski. I thought about moving the bindings back, but I realized they would deflect even more if I did so. The tails were supportive enough, but I often felt like there was too much of them back there.
Neither ski was the perfect weapon for the day. But I actually felt more comfortable on the Renouns than the DPS. Deep, bumpy snow is still a challenge for me to ski. However, I can very clearly say that I wanted to strong platform of the Renouns here. An ideal ski for the conditions I think would have been longer and wider than the Renouns, but would have been stiff and supportive just like them.
The bottom line is that, if I'd gotten there earlier, I think I would have liked the Foundations more. If it were a firmer, low tide day, well, I'd love to try the Renouns in those conditions.
Last edited:
But, so I'm 180 lbs now. Early in the season I was 185, and I found the PT's a bit narrow in deep sierra cement. But I've never skied pow, so it's all new for me.
