2013-2014 Fischer Watea 96

Powder

I haven’t been able to get the Watea 96s in more than about 7” of dense, mostly wind-deposited (but untouched) fresh powder and soft chop, but I’ve been very happy with how the ski has performed.

The tip rocker on the Wateas, again, isn’t as dramatic as the TST’s, but it seems to provide just as much float in fresh snow. In fact, I think what I’ve said about the way the TST feels in powder could be said of the Watea 96. Specifically, that in soft snow, the shovels of the ski “felt supportive, and never felt as if they were about to dive on me” and that the “skis track very well, demonstrating no real hookiness.”

On a day with more than say, 8-10” of fresh, I would definitely prefer to be on a wider ski, but for its width, the Watea 96 still does nicely in powder, especially in that it feels intuitive, even when lacking some flotation. The ski’s directional shape is predictable and smooth when skied from a forward stance, tracking well in fresh snow even when the tips are submerged. A more freestyle oriented all-mountain ski of a similar width, like the 97mm underfoot Nordica Soul Rider, is going to feel much surfier and looser through the tail in fresh snow (and in most every other condition). This isn’t necessarily better, but it’s a different sort of handling than you’re going to get from the Watea 96, which feels much more traditional.

Soft Chop

I wasn’t too surprised to find that the Watea 96 floats well for its width, but given its  lighter swing weight, I expected them to get bucked around and deflected when skied aggressively in more tracked up snow, as the TST did. However, when making big, fast turns down Telluride’s Revelation bowl through ~4” of tracked-up chalk, the skis actually remained pretty well composed.

So long as I stayed relatively light on my feet, not driving the shovels too hard into big piles of snow, I could take the aggressive lines I wanted with a nice, dependable feel from the Watea’s tails. I can’t say they felt anything like a genuine freeride / big-mountain ski, as I was never comfortable depending on the ski to smoothly plow over bumps and ridges in the snow. But if I kept those undulations in mind when working the skis through such terrain, they felt totally adequate, even at higher edge angles, where the TST would probably have felt less substantial. In this sense the Watea 96 seems to have a bit of a higher speed limit than the TST, catering to the same style of skiing, but at a slightly more aggressive level.

Steeps in Firm, Variable Conditions

Making aggressive turns with a considerable amount of edge pressure down the lower portions of Castor and Pollux last month, the Watea 96s were again pretty well composed. They didn’t offer a super damp feel in firm, rough conditions by any means (as a heavier ski with a metal laminate core construction would), but I didn’t feel as though I was pushing them way out of their element. Again, so long as I didn’t weight the ski too heavily, and kept my turns relatively light and smooth, I could confidently take more aggressive, fall-line routes through rough, cruddy patches of snow.

Here again I felt the Watea 96’s speed limit is a bit higher than the TST, enabling slightly faster, more aggressive skiing, though not nearly the sort that a wider ski like the Watea 106 or the Moment Belafonte, or a ski of similar width with metal in the construction (like the Experience 98, Mantra, or Blizzard Bonafide) would allow.

Watea 96 vs. the Nordica Hell & Back & Others

I’ve compared the Watea 96 to the TST here because the TST is the most similar ski I’ve personally been on, but the 98mm underfoot Nordica Hell & Back might be the better, more relevant comparison. Unfortunately, I haven’t skied it, but from what Jonathan Ellsworth has said about the Hell & Back, I’m thinking it might stand just above the Watea 96 in terms of how demanding it is. The Hell & Back has a less dramatic tip rocker than the Watea, and a slightly stiffer flex through the shovel, which makes me think it would take a bit more speed to plane and track in powder, while at the same time providing more stability at higher speeds in variable, cruddy snow.

So in order from least to most demanding, I would tentatively rank the TST as most forgiving, with the Watea 96 above it, and the Hell & Back just above the Watea 96.

The Blizzard Kabookie probably also belongs in this  ~95 to 104mm underfoot, directional, no-metal, all-mountain genre, but I’ve yet to ski it, either. My guess would be the Kabookie, with a bit of tail rocker, would offer a slightly easier, more forgiving feel than the Watea on groomers, would be a bit easier to maneuver in bumps, and might offer a slightly smearier feel in powder than either the TST, Watea, and certainly the Hell & Back.

I’m hoping Jonathan will be able to put some time on the Watea too, so he can add a more informed perspective on these comparisons.

What I can say pretty confidently is that if you think you prefer a ski with a burly, great for blasting through chopped, cruddy snow, rather than athletically maneuvering around it, you’re almost certainly better off considering something like the Rossignol Experience 98 or Volkl Mantra (skis with metal laminate core layups). However I don’t think either of those skis would come close to matching the light, snappy response and energy that the Watea brings to the table at both slow and high-speeds.

Secondly, it’s worth noting that Fischer does market the Watea series as more of a “sidecountry” touring line, which seems totally reasonable. It wouldn’t make for the lightest touring ski out there, but the Watea is certainly well-suited to tackle a wide variety of conditions, inbounds and out.

Bottom Line

If you’re an advanced to expert-level skier looking for a lightweight, very directional all-mountain ski that offers outstanding response and energy on groomers, is perfectly suitable for mogul skiing, and can handle fluid, fall-line skiing in soft chop and powder, the Watea 96 is absolutely worth considering.

A Note about the Watea 96 for the 2014-2015 Season: Introducing the Fischer Ranger 96 TI

For the ‘14/’15 season, Fischer is renaming the Watea series the Ranger Series, and the Watea 96 is coming back as the Ranger 96 TI. Apart from the name, the only changes made to the ski are to the structure of its core. Fischer is introducing an impressive dedicated touring line next season, in which all the skis’ cores are strategically milled to shed weight, allegedly without affecting flex qualities or torsional stiffness.

This same milling technique is being applied to the beechwood core of the Watea 96 / Ranger 96, purportedly shedding 25% of the weight of the current core. At the same time, Fischer is adding sheets of titanal metal to just the binding mount areas of the ski to ensure binding retention isn’t compromised by this new core construction.

I had the chance to ski the new Ranger 96 back to back with our Watea 96 a few weeks ago. Though I only put a couple runs on the new rendition of the ski, (on soft groomers and in low, soft bumps) I honestly could not tell the difference between it and the Watea. Maybe, if anything, the Ranger felt a touch more torsionally rigid though the tail, but I’m confident that this had more to do with the fact that I was used to skiing the Watea 96 with an AT binding, which could have affected the lateral response / feel of the ski, compared to the Tyrolia demo binding the Ranger was mounted with.

All in all, I think I would be comfortable recommending the Ranger 96 to someone on the same grounds as the Watea 96. In the limited time I put on the new Ranger 96, it felt practically identical to the Watea 96.

NEXT: Rocker Profile Pics of the Fischer Watea 96