Once I got going on the Ranger W 98, the ski’s low weight became very apparent, and I felt a chatter and shakiness on the firm snow that concerned me. I needed to make a very conscious effort to stand on my outside ski through the turn; if I released some pressure, the ski would move around, threatening to shoot out from under me.
What exactly are you saying here? You were trying to make high speed turns on your inside foot and the ski would not let you? How much time did you spend on this ski? Shouldn’t it be apparent from the lightweight construction and the general feel at lower speeds that Fischers tend to want precision and finesse, rather than bulldozing power, to work at their best? They don’t want you to click in and be a passenger, and when you assume the driver’s role, it’s not like driving a baja truck where holding the wheel straight is the toughest part, it’s like driving a funny-fuel go-kart at high speeds on a turny track.
The main problem with all gear reviews at Blister is the incessant need to imply the tester is more bad-ass than anyone, and that’s implied by vague descriptions like the one quoted above. It’s almost like the editorial standard here is “brag, and demean what you can’t make work for you.”
I’d say the mark of a skilled athlete is the ability to make all kinds of gear work (because athlete is fluent in relevant skills), and the mark of a skilled reviewer is an accurate description of what the gear does. Demeaning the gear is the piker’s activity, the poseur’s ruse-filled self-aggrandizing.
How in the world did Bode Miller ever win anything on K2 Fours? How is it I watched a friend who weighs 200lbs ski fluidly through junky snow on Rossi T3s (PowderBirds) without complaint about how the ski folded or lacked torsional stability?
Blister gear reviews look like long-form bragging, rather than thorough, skilled assessment of gear. While that may generate clicks from pseudo-athletic poseurs who want to know how to regurgitate the trendiest words on twitter or in gear forums, it really doesn’t speak highly of the reviewers’ skills at, you know, reviewing gear.
“What exactly are you saying here? You were trying to make high speed turns on your inside foot and the ski would not let you?”
JE: Julia didn’t say that she was trying to make high speed turns on her inside foot. Her statement is totally clear.
“How much time did you spend on this ski?”
JE: As it says clearly at the very top of the review, Julia spent 6 days on these skis.
“Shouldn’t it be apparent from the lightweight construction and the general feel at lower speeds that Fischers tend to want precision and finesse, rather than bulldozing power, to work at their best?”
JE: This is a silly statement. This particular Fischer ski is lightweight. It is an unfounded generalization that “Fischers” tend to want precision and finesse. The 190cm Watea 106 we reviewed is not the same as the outstanding Motive 86 Ti that we reviewed, or the Watea 96, or this ski. There is no such thing as a “Fischer” feel.
“The main problem with all gear reviews at Blister is the incessant need to imply the tester is more bad-ass than anyone, and that’s implied by vague descriptions like the one quoted above.”
JE: You move from an empty generalization about Fischer skis to an unfounded generalization about *all* Blister reviews. You clearly don’t know Julia, and I doubt you’ve spent any time with any other Blister reviewers. I have, and I can assure you that none of our reviewers are trying to impress people they’ve never met. What we do try to do – and what I insist that all of our reviewers do – is make clear the performance ranges of the gear we test. So yes, we will do our best to push gear hard, and we will then do our best to explain what we experienced. Julia did exactly that in this review.
“I’d say the mark of a skilled athlete is the ability to make all kinds of gear work (because athlete is fluent in relevant skills) and the mark of a skilled reviewer is an accurate description of what the gear does. Demeaning the gear is the piker’s activity, the poseur’s ruse-filled self-aggrandizing.”
JE: Julia never demeaned Fischer or these skis, she provided information about how the ski handled various terrain and conditions. It’s then up to the reader to decide if the equipment meets the performance range he or she is looking for.
“How in the world did Bode Miller ever win anything on K2 Fours? How is it I watched a friend who weighs 200lbs ski fluidly through junky snow on Rossi T3s (PowderBirds) without complaint about how the ski folded or lacked torsional stability?”
JE: No idea what your point is here, other than yes, people have always been making equipment that isn’t optimized for the conditions work. And we do this all the time. But as reviewers, I’ll say it again, our job is to provide a sense where the equipment was most at home / most in its wheelhouse, and where it felt most out of place. That’s what we do, and again, that’s exactly what Julia has done here.
“Blister gear reviews look like long-form bragging, rather than thorough, skilled assessment of gear.”
JE: From the many thousands of comments we’ve received – and that you can view for yourself all around the site – it’s evident that the vast majority of our readers understand – even if you don’t – that we try to tease out and convey the relative strengths and weaknesses of the gear we review. Simple as that. But I guess you view all those readers as “pseudo athletic poseurs,” while you yourself know better, are better.
I’m reading this review because my wife skied and loved some 98W Ranger demos this weekend and I wanted to understand how they would work in different conditions. She skied fairly soft groomed runs and some cruddy firm’ish bumps. I wanted to learn how they would fair on more challenging conditions, so I’m glad that Julia pushed these skis in conditions they may not be ideal for. That doesn’t make them bad skis, just helps those considering them make a more informed purchase decision. You suggest that they should only write about the skis sweet spot, in this case softer conditions at slower speeds. What if you don’t ski that way, isn’t it better if the review covers multiple types of conditions and skiing styles?
Personally, I think the best way to get a feel for skis is to actually demo them. However, Ski Reviews ARE a big help to try and make sense of all the various brands and their models. Are ski reviews perfect? Of course not, but they have always been a help to point me in the right direction when considering buying some boards. I appreciate Julia’s efforts with her opinions on the Rangers and also I appreciate Blister’s efforts in general.
BTW, I’m a guy but maybe I’ll demo some Ranges next winter.
Once I got going on the Ranger W 98, the ski’s low weight became very apparent, and I felt a chatter and shakiness on the firm snow that concerned me. I needed to make a very conscious effort to stand on my outside ski through the turn; if I released some pressure, the ski would move around, threatening to shoot out from under me.
What exactly are you saying here? You were trying to make high speed turns on your inside foot and the ski would not let you? How much time did you spend on this ski? Shouldn’t it be apparent from the lightweight construction and the general feel at lower speeds that Fischers tend to want precision and finesse, rather than bulldozing power, to work at their best? They don’t want you to click in and be a passenger, and when you assume the driver’s role, it’s not like driving a baja truck where holding the wheel straight is the toughest part, it’s like driving a funny-fuel go-kart at high speeds on a turny track.
The main problem with all gear reviews at Blister is the incessant need to imply the tester is more bad-ass than anyone, and that’s implied by vague descriptions like the one quoted above. It’s almost like the editorial standard here is “brag, and demean what you can’t make work for you.”
I’d say the mark of a skilled athlete is the ability to make all kinds of gear work (because athlete is fluent in relevant skills), and the mark of a skilled reviewer is an accurate description of what the gear does. Demeaning the gear is the piker’s activity, the poseur’s ruse-filled self-aggrandizing.
How in the world did Bode Miller ever win anything on K2 Fours? How is it I watched a friend who weighs 200lbs ski fluidly through junky snow on Rossi T3s (PowderBirds) without complaint about how the ski folded or lacked torsional stability?
Blister gear reviews look like long-form bragging, rather than thorough, skilled assessment of gear. While that may generate clicks from pseudo-athletic poseurs who want to know how to regurgitate the trendiest words on twitter or in gear forums, it really doesn’t speak highly of the reviewers’ skills at, you know, reviewing gear.
“What exactly are you saying here? You were trying to make high speed turns on your inside foot and the ski would not let you?”
JE: Julia didn’t say that she was trying to make high speed turns on her inside foot. Her statement is totally clear.
“How much time did you spend on this ski?”
JE: As it says clearly at the very top of the review, Julia spent 6 days on these skis.
“Shouldn’t it be apparent from the lightweight construction and the general feel at lower speeds that Fischers tend to want precision and finesse, rather than bulldozing power, to work at their best?”
JE: This is a silly statement. This particular Fischer ski is lightweight. It is an unfounded generalization that “Fischers” tend to want precision and finesse. The 190cm Watea 106 we reviewed is not the same as the outstanding Motive 86 Ti that we reviewed, or the Watea 96, or this ski. There is no such thing as a “Fischer” feel.
“The main problem with all gear reviews at Blister is the incessant need to imply the tester is more bad-ass than anyone, and that’s implied by vague descriptions like the one quoted above.”
JE: You move from an empty generalization about Fischer skis to an unfounded generalization about *all* Blister reviews. You clearly don’t know Julia, and I doubt you’ve spent any time with any other Blister reviewers. I have, and I can assure you that none of our reviewers are trying to impress people they’ve never met. What we do try to do – and what I insist that all of our reviewers do – is make clear the performance ranges of the gear we test. So yes, we will do our best to push gear hard, and we will then do our best to explain what we experienced. Julia did exactly that in this review.
“I’d say the mark of a skilled athlete is the ability to make all kinds of gear work (because athlete is fluent in relevant skills) and the mark of a skilled reviewer is an accurate description of what the gear does. Demeaning the gear is the piker’s activity, the poseur’s ruse-filled self-aggrandizing.”
JE: Julia never demeaned Fischer or these skis, she provided information about how the ski handled various terrain and conditions. It’s then up to the reader to decide if the equipment meets the performance range he or she is looking for.
“How in the world did Bode Miller ever win anything on K2 Fours? How is it I watched a friend who weighs 200lbs ski fluidly through junky snow on Rossi T3s (PowderBirds) without complaint about how the ski folded or lacked torsional stability?”
JE: No idea what your point is here, other than yes, people have always been making equipment that isn’t optimized for the conditions work. And we do this all the time. But as reviewers, I’ll say it again, our job is to provide a sense where the equipment was most at home / most in its wheelhouse, and where it felt most out of place. That’s what we do, and again, that’s exactly what Julia has done here.
“Blister gear reviews look like long-form bragging, rather than thorough, skilled assessment of gear.”
JE: From the many thousands of comments we’ve received – and that you can view for yourself all around the site – it’s evident that the vast majority of our readers understand – even if you don’t – that we try to tease out and convey the relative strengths and weaknesses of the gear we review. Simple as that. But I guess you view all those readers as “pseudo athletic poseurs,” while you yourself know better, are better.
I’m reading this review because my wife skied and loved some 98W Ranger demos this weekend and I wanted to understand how they would work in different conditions. She skied fairly soft groomed runs and some cruddy firm’ish bumps. I wanted to learn how they would fair on more challenging conditions, so I’m glad that Julia pushed these skis in conditions they may not be ideal for. That doesn’t make them bad skis, just helps those considering them make a more informed purchase decision. You suggest that they should only write about the skis sweet spot, in this case softer conditions at slower speeds. What if you don’t ski that way, isn’t it better if the review covers multiple types of conditions and skiing styles?
Personally, I think the best way to get a feel for skis is to actually demo them. However, Ski Reviews ARE a big help to try and make sense of all the various brands and their models. Are ski reviews perfect? Of course not, but they have always been a help to point me in the right direction when considering buying some boards. I appreciate Julia’s efforts with her opinions on the Rangers and also I appreciate Blister’s efforts in general.
BTW, I’m a guy but maybe I’ll demo some Ranges next winter.
Thank You So Much