Individual Review Long-Term Review: 2020 Fischer RC One GT 86

[blikkem]

@blikkem. What length version did you get? (Or did I miss you giving that info somewhere?)

I understand your starting point, having a flat pair of these skis to deal with. In this case, the heavier, and higher, the binding you choose, probably the more you would get the intended range of performance from this ski, matching the system binding in these ways. I'd guess that especially the 175 would be responsive to this solution. It does bumps and trees better, unless you are bigger.

I have both the 182 and the 175. The 182, for me, is an improved GS ski (the multiple radius), heavy and meant to be heavy, especially at the feet. It makes very pronounced, easy, GS type turns with power, no effort, in most all conditions but powder/deep chop - as powerfully, and more so unless one is at high angles, as a true GS ski, at GS length. Typically, the system binding was prototyped with the ski, to fit the ski, and visa versa. In such cases, the modifications and fine tuning of the ski from prototypes were in all likelihood done with the system binding, taking its basic characteristics into account experientially - even fine tuning the system binding to match the ski, occasionally. The 182 is not a bump ski, or tree ski: it is a front-side bias ski that can carve/handle some bumps, and some trees, some variable conditions wonderfully - especially chop. It carves groomers on corduroy or some variable conditions exceptionally - and is aided in doing this by the greater stand height of the system binding, the toe-heel angle, weight, and integration into the ski. That prototype package is very dialed in, amazing, in this particular ski.


With this typical proto development background, to me, what would make replacing the system binding make sense - if you had complete freedom about this - is if you intend to stretch the range of performance of the ski, into more bumps and trees, and more off piste gnarliness - what this ski was not necessarily intended for, but could handle. In that case, being closer to the ground, having less heel/toe angle, lighter weight at the feet, all would help this ski perform better outside its intended range.

@ski otter 2
I got the 175, trees (not much locally recently), variety in turn shapes were my reasons.
I like the idea that this is an 80/20 ski, that sounds good for me.
I've read your posts about the two sizes you bought, thanks for sharing. Always welcome insight from someone with has first hand knowledge.

 

[KingGrump]

I needed to fill some gaps in my knowledge about DIN. Specifically if there are ramifications from keeping them at the low end all the time. Seems to be a fringe case, everyone wants to talk about how high they can go. There I am asking how low I can go. I focus on things I don't know.

This post by @ScotsSkier in another thread should be pretty helpful in clearing up some of the fog.

 

[Tom K.]

Anybody know whether binding springs are straight-wound or progressive?

 

[jgiddyup]

Just purchased the 182 RC One 86 flat (2021) from Level Nine for $400 shipped. I'll see if I like them around 18 Jan in Colorado

 

[Shawn]

Just purchased the 182 RC One 86 flat (2021) from Level Nine for $400 shipped. I'll see if I like them around 18 Jan in Colorado

Took advantage of a similar deal from L9 with the system bindings. They only had the smaller two sizes left, but that worked out for me and my short stature!

 

[jgiddyup]

Just purchased the 182 RC One 86 flat (2021) from Level Nine for $400 shipped. I'll see if I like them around 18 Jan in Colorado

And they arrived in good shape

 

[mogulman]

Thinking about getting a pair of these at 182. Currently have 2019 Volkl RTM 81, 182 (one binding is helicoiled in so not sure how much longer it will last). Kastle FX 104 from 2015, 184cm. I live in the mountains in CO. Ski mostly piste these days, but love the powder and tree edges.

I can get them from level nine for $400 flat or multiflex for $565 from Canada. Prices include free shipping.

I'm 5'8” 250lb

I saw some notes about the weight on these skis, but I think they are lighter than the RTMs

Worth a shot? and flat vs system?

 

[mogulman]

Thinking about getting a pair of these at 182.

Worth a shot? and flat vs system?

Figured it would be quicker through Level9, since I'm in CO. No telling how long it could take from Edmonton.

Got the 182cm with Tyrolia Defiance 12 bindings for $510 mounted.

 

[Seldomski]

Finally got to try my pair, 182 length. Mounted flat with attack 16. Skied them 5 days so far in stellar snow conditions at Heavenly and Kirkwood.

I really like the flex on these. They feel stiffer than the laser AR/AX and softer than the ski they are replacing, 2017 kendo.

They are much better on groomers than the kendo with the tail following tip. Railroad tracks are easy and the ski flexes at med/low speed and can tighten the arca with more angle and speed. But, the tail will still allow brushed turns. They have not been tuned yet and the snow i have been skiing is so soft that judging edge hold on firmer snow is not possible yet. The tail is very accessible and not punishing. The tail on the kendos was really hard for me to use, so these are an improvement.

I am still working on how best to ski them in moguls. The tip flexes a bit more than the kendo. Also hard to really judge with the great snow. First world problems. The tail takes a bit more attention to keep them from hanging up on bumps. More of a pilot issue that I am starting to adjust to.

Great to ski in mixed snow conditions off piste and steeps are fun. Very stable ride and the ski tracks well. It does not try to hook up in variable conditions.

So far I am very happy with these. Very fun to carve but very well behaved off the groomer too. Versatile ski.

 

[mogulman]

Got mine today. Hope to ski them Wed. How do I know if they were made in the Ukraine vs Austria? Not that it really matters, just wondering.

 

[Seldomski]

Got mine today. Hope to ski them Wed. How do I know if they were made in the Ukraine vs Austria? Not that it really matters, just wondering.

There was a upc (barcode) sticker on mine that said Ukraine.

 

[Roman]

Can anyone please comment on the carving capabilities of RC One 86 GT vs Stormrider 88 if you have been on both of these skis? I assume that the latter will win in the playfulness department.

 

[Noodler]

Can anyone comment on the carving capabilities of RC One GT vs Stormrider 88 if you have been on both of these skis? I assume that the latter will win in the playfulness department.

I have not been on the latest SR88, but the RC One 86 GT is significantly stiffer, both longitudinal and torsion. Those characteristics typically result in a ski that would be the much stronger carver. The 86 GT is also fairly damp. What's most surprising is that it's probably the more versatile ski for a stronger skier. The rocker profile on the 86 GT is what truly separates it from the SR88. I like to say that Fischer skis have "rocker done right"; no decrease in on-piste performance with the way they design their skis.

 

[Seldomski]

Couple other comments on the 182 (I am 6'1" and 210 lbs). They are mounted on the line, flat with Attack 16.

-This ski is really fun to play with on open groomer with grippy snow. Tip it, retract that inside leg and enjoy the ride. Then, if you want, lift the inside shoulder/hip and tighten further. At transition, the tail helps keep the ski tracking across the hill and therefore helps initiate the carve on the next turn (this was missing on my old skis). Or get further aft at transition and get some rebound out of the tail and into the next. There is a lot to play with on this ski for groomers. You don't need tons of speed either to start bending this ski. There is so much fun here that I don't feel like I need to do bumps or risk groomer boredom.
-This ski excels on steep off piste with smaller bumps or leftover powder. I skied them quite a bit on the Wall at Kirkwood (with great snow) and Eagle bowl, and they are an absolute blast to ski/carve on that sort of steep, wind buff/wind slab/chalky surface. Whale's tale at Breck or West Rustler at Alta should be money. Great ski to charge that terrain.
-This ski is competent skiing larger moguls (wider, not deeper) on steeps. Gunbarrel at Heavenly for example. Basically any steeper off piste with larger bumps you can carve through with a round line are good. Feather the edges and slip around the moguls is good too. Lots of wiggle room in your fore/aft balance when skiing this type of line on this ski, though it may not be the most efficient at times.
-Skiing more direct line in moguls is possible with these, but I had to get really forward on the ski. If I didn't, the tail would hang up and I had to revert back to a rounder line, carving around bumps. My old skis had rounder tail and less camber and therefore more forgiving in bumps, so I did not need to make as big of an adjustment in bumps. I am not sure where 'too far forward' is on this ski yet - haven't played enough doing direct line with them.
-The ski is heavy. I don't really notice it while skiing other than the great stability, but I do when packing the ski bag. I upgraded binding (Attack 13 --> 16) and length (177 --> 182) on these relative to my prior skis, so that is also part of it. Can't put much clothing in the ski bag now.
-Refrozen off piste/cruddy stuff.... Skiing this with the 'factory tune' did not go well. The ski edges were trying to grab all the little knobbly bits when slarving through it. Probably a tune issue and I'll get them tuned before next ski trip. Skiing crap snow was no bueno out of the wrapper. If it looked really good from the chair, but no one else was skiing it, there was a reason...

What about stockli? I had demo'd Laser AR, AX, and SR95 when shopping for a new ski, but not this one, which I bought based on reviews here (that this was what the Laser AR should have been) and suggestion from @Noodler. All the comments in this thread about the fischer seem true to me based on my limited time on them so far. The fischer do not have the 'stockli feel' when on edge, but there is plenty of grip there. I really enjoyed the SR95 and AX, but they didn't quite check every box. I hoped the AR would be the best of both and more versatile, but the AR turned out to be a different beast with a different market in mind.
Crud performance/stability: Fischer > AR > SR95 (2019, 184) > AX (182) > AX (175)
Playfulness: SR95 >> (rest are not really playful) Fischer > AX (175) > AX (182) = AR (182)
Versatility: really close between Fischer vs SR95 > AX (175, 182) > AR (182).
Forgiveness/sweet spot size: Fischer = SR95 > AX > AR
Bumps: TBD, but probably AX (175) > Fischer > AX (182) ...??

I have not skied the SR88, so no thoughts there.

 

[Roman]

@Seldomski, @Noodler thanks a lot for the great insights, really helpful.

I’ve been skiing RC4 The Curv DTX in 171 for the last two seasons and have been really happy with it. In addition to it, I picked up Pro MTN 86 TI for cheap in 175 last season and can’t get away from a feeling of a too short ski, thus looking for an alternative. RC One 86 GT seems to be an option, also considered the stormrider series.

I spent a day on SR95 at Stowe today - 5-6” of new snow by the end of the day on top of hard-pack. The ski was really good, but only at the end of the day I felt that 95mm became justified, prior to that I guess I would have felt better on a narrower SR88.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

@Seldomski, @Noodler thanks a lot for the great insights, really helpful.

I’ve been skiing RC4 The Curv DTX in 171 for the last two seasons and have been really happy with it. In addition to it, I picked up Pro MTN 86 TI for cheap in 175 last season and can’t get away from a feeling of a too short ski, thus looking for an alternative. RC One 86 GT seems to be an option, also considered the stormrider series.

I spent a day on SR95 at Stowe today - 5-6” of new snow by the end of the day on top of hard-pack. The ski was really good, but only at the end of the day I felt that 95mm became justified, prior to that I guess I would have felt better on a narrower SR88.

FWIW - I skied the PM86 in 182 because I thought 175 felt too short. The 175 RC One does not feel too short. I'd love to try it in 182 also, but I've never felt like I need to go up a size.

 

[Noodler]

FWIW - I skied the PM86 in 182 because I thought 175 felt too short. The 175 RC One does not feel too short. I'd love to try it in 182 also, but I've never felt like I need to go up a size.

I'm only 5' 7" and 175 lbs, but for what I needed from the Pro MT 86 Ti in my quiver, the 175cm length is perfect.

I just picked up the RC One 82 GT (little brother to the 86 GT), so it will be interesting to compare that ski with the Curv GT and the Stockli Laser AR.

 

[Tony S]

I'm only 5' 7" and 175 lbs, but for what I needed from the Pro MT 86 Ti in my quiver, the 175cm length is perfect.

I just picked up the RC One 82 GT (little brother to the 86 GT), so it will be interesting to compare that ski with the Curv GT and the Stöckli Laser AR.

I'll be interested in your take. I skied the 82 and the 86 back to back last spring and was surprised at how much less beefy the 82 felt. I liked both, preferring the 86 on firm groomers by a lot. The 82 would be great narrow off-piste oriented all mountain ski for lighter skiers here in Maine, while I see the 86 as more of a classic wide ranging front side ski. It is surprisingly easy to ski even for someone like me who tends to prefer softer flexing skis.

 

[Noodler]

I'll be interested in your take. I skied the 82 and the 86 back to back last spring and was surprised at how much less beefy the 82 felt. I liked both, preferring the 86 on firm groomers by a lot. The 82 would be great narrow off-piste oriented all mountain ski for lighter skiers here in Maine, while I see the 86 as more of a classic wide ranging front side ski. It is surprisingly easy to ski even for someone like me who tends to prefer softer flexing skis.

I am surprised by your assessment, especially since you tend to dislike really stiff skis and/or longer lengths at your size. Let's look at some SoothSki data for some skis:

Those who know how much I like the previous gen of the Fischer Curv GT will immediately notice why I pulled the trigger on the RC One 82 GT. Notice just how much softer some other forum favorites are in comparison to the 82 GT and the Curv GT. Unfortunately the 86 GT is not in their data (come on @AlexisLD - find some Fischers!).

This will be part of my continuing assessment of how well the SoothSki data can be trusted to assist in the selection of potentially great skis.

 

[Tony S]

I am surprised by your assessment, especially since you tend to dislike really stiff skis and/or longer lengths at your size. Let's look at some SoothSki data for some skis:

View attachment 154332
View attachment 154333

Those who know how much I like the previous gen of the Fischer Curv GT will immediately notice why I pulled the trigger on the RC One 82 GT. Notice just how much softer some other forum favorites are in comparison to the 82 GT and the Curv GT. Unfortunately the 86 GT is not in their data (come on @AlexisLD - find some Fischers!).

This will be part of my continuing assessment of how well the SoothSki data can be trusted to assist in the selection of potentially great skis.

I may have misled unintentionally. I was on the 168 in both skis, not the 175.

In any case the stats above are not what I would have predicted for the 82 based on how they felt on snow. I suppose it's also possible that Fischer builds in a big stiffness jump between the 168 and the 175, especially since they've gone unisex.