Fischer S-Bound sizing?

Discussion in 'Backcountry' started by satanas, Jun 25, 2017.

  1. satanas

    satanas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    35
    I've been playing with the "Product Finder" on Fischer's website (https://www.fischersports.com/us_en/productfinder/index/result/) and am a bit dubious about the ski lengths suggested. I'm typically about 63kg, and currently have the 169 Boundless, which I've found a bit too soft when things get steep, and a bit narrow in soft snow, so have been toying with getting either the 112 (or 125?) to replace them. The 112 seems more sensible, given Ziggy seems to think these are reasonably stiff, and thus require some effort to ski. One account of the 125 suggests they're very soft, not what I'm looking for, however I've never seen any.

    Fischer's tool suggests 169cm for the 112 up to 64kg, then 169 or 179 up to 69kg, then 179 at 70kg. I've never skied on the 112s, and don't know anyone who has, so have no reference point. There's a source for the 112s at a good price, but only in 169cm - are these likely to be too soft? 179s would be at least $150 more expensive. :-(
     
  2. skifree

    skifree Part of the Furniture
    Moderator Season Pass Gold

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 1998
    Messages:
    15,894
    Likes Received:
    3,589
    Are you 63kg bare or including ski kit & pack?
     
  3. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Rent some and see. Or I'll be around Falls from July 22 and you can try my 179s (duck bills).
    These are more of a classic cambered design and the old rule of thumb may apply - longer for speed, shorter for turns.
    If most of your skiing is on spring snow I would lean to shorter.
    If most of it is with full kit, longer - which is what skifree is driving at.
     
    skifree likes this.
  4. satanas

    satanas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    35
    I haven't found longer helps with a pack; glide may be a tad better but maneuverability is worse. Without a pack I'm inclined to think that a bit more stiffness (rather than length) probably wouldn't hurt. There's really no way to tell without demoing. :-(

    Ziggy, can I ask what you weigh? Thanks for the offer, but I'm in NSW and unlikely to make it to Falls, except maybe for the Hoppet. I need to decide ASAP though.
     
  5. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    76kg satanas.
     
  6. satanas

    satanas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    35
    Thanks Ziggy. I'm usually around 65kg, so the 169s might be okay; unfortunately they're now gone. :-(

    I could still get the S-Bound 125 in 175, but know nothing about these; one comment I've seen suggests they don't work when it's firm.
     
  7. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    No. Edging would be a pain.
     
  8. Moondog55

    Moondog55 Dedicated Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,017
    Likes Received:
    300
    As you go wider do you need a bigger stiffer boot to boss them around as well?
     
  9. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Takes more leverage and you don't want any slop.
     
  10. satanas

    satanas Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    35
    The problem with the 125s, mentioned at the earnyourturns.com forum, was that they were too soft. No edge hold, rather than just too wide. Some skis, like the first Dynafit Manaslus, just won't hold when it's firm - no torsional stiffness. Voile Vectors are basically the same width but don't suffer the same problem.
     
  11. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Typical Aussie snow at touring time you don't need that width anyway.

    90mm underfoot is plenty.
     
  12. Ajmit321

    Ajmit321 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    Messages:
    160
    Likes Received:
    96
    Agree - 125 ! way too wide for touring nz and aus. Even 112 is a stretch if they are heavy.
     
  13. Ziggy

    Ziggy Addicted Member
    30 Day Pass

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    With the S-bound 112 is the shovel measurement.