2019-2020 Fischer Ranger 94 FR

Ski: 2019-2020 Fischer Ranger 94 FR, 184 cm

Available Lengths: 161, 169, 177, 184 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 183.8 cm

Stated Weight per Ski: 1900 grams

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 1937 & 1945 grams

Stated Dimensions: 127-93-118 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 127.1-92.3-117.7 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius (184 cm): 18 meters

Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 62 mm / 39 mm

Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~3 mm

Core: Beech/Poplar + Titanal Binding Reinforcement + Carbon Fiber Tip + Fiberglass Laminate

Base: sintered

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -7.4 cm from center; 84.5 cm from tail

Luke Koppa reviews the Fischer Ranger 94 FR for Blister
Fischer Ranger 94 FR
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on reddit
Share on email
Review Navigation:  Specs //  First Look //  Bottom Line //  Rocker Pics

Intro

Last year we were pretty blown away by the Fischer Ranger 102 FR. It’s a very strong ski that you can push very hard, but it’s a bit more playful compared to most other directional all-mountain skis.

Well, apparently Fischer was also pretty happy with their creation because, for 19/20, they’re adding a narrower version of the 102 FR — the Ranger 94 FR.

So just how similar is the new Ranger 94 FR, and how does its design compare to the other options in its class?

Shape / Rocker Profile

The new Ranger 94 FR looks very similar to the Ranger 102 FR. In terms of the skis’ shapes, they’re basically identical, apart from the width differences. The Ranger 94 FR and 102 FR both have a bit more taper than most directional skis in their respective classes. The Ranger 94 FR has more taper than the Volkl Mantra M5, Rossignol Experience 94 Ti, and Blizzard Brahma & Bonafide, but not as much as the Dynastar Legend X96 or Moment Commander 98.

The Ranger 94 FR’s rocker profile also looks nearly identical to the Ranger 102 FR’s, but the Ranger 94 FR’s tip and tail rocker lines are a bit shallower (which makes sense, given that the 94 FR is supposed to be more firm-snow oriented). Compared to the skis mentioned in the previous paragraph, the Ranger 94 FR’s tip rocker line is on the deeper side of things, and to a slightly lesser degree, so is its tail rocker line. And, like the 102 FR, the Ranger 94 FR’s twinned tail makes it stand out from those other skis, most of which have flatter, more traditional tails.

Flex Pattern

Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Ranger 94 FR:

Tips: 8-8.5
Shovels: 8.5-9
In Front of Toe Piece: 9.5
Underfoot: 10
Behind Heel Piece: 9.5-9
Tails: 9

The Ranger 94 FR’s flex pattern feels basically identical to the Ranger 102 FR’s. The Ranger 94 FR is still a very strong ski. It’s not quite as stiff as the new Ranger 107 Ti, but there’s still not any part of the Ranger 94 FR that’s very soft.

Compared to the J Skis Masterblaster, the Ranger 94 FR is notably stiffer at the ends of the ski. Overall, the Ranger 94 FR feels pretty similar to the Mantra M5 when it comes to flex.

Mount Point

The Ranger 102 FR that we tested had a recommended mount point of around -10 cm from center. The Ranger 94 FR we have came with a recommended mount point of around -7.4 cm from center.

When I was reviewing the Ranger 102 FR, I ended up moving the bindings a few cm forward of its recommended line, eventually settling on -6 cm from center as my preferred mount point for how I ski. Now, I think there are plenty of people (mostly directional skiers) who will still like the Ranger 102 FR on the more traditional recommended line, but I think it’s interesting that Fischer went a bit further forward with the mount point on the Ranger 94 FR. Since the Ranger 102 FR was a ski that I felt worked well at a variety of mount points, I’ll be playing around with this on the Ranger 94 FR.

Weight

Like the 102 FR, the Ranger 94 FR sits around the middle of the spectrum when it comes to weight — it isn’t some portly beast of a ski, but it’s not crazy light, either. The 184 cm Ranger 94 FR comes in a bit lighter than the 177 cm Mantra M5, 184 cm ON3P Wrenegade 96, 181 cm Masterblaster, and 180 cm Blizzard Bonafide. But the Ranger 94 FR isn’t quite as light as skis like the 180 cm Elan Ripstick 96, 178 cm Moment Commander 98, 180 cm Blizzard Rustler 9, and 183 cm Black Crows Daemon

For reference, here are a number of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for some notable skis. As always, pay close attention to the length differences to keep things more apples-to-apples.

1629 & 1684 Elan Ripstick 96, 180 cm (17/18–19/20)
1734 & 1750 Renoun Endurance 98, 184 cm (18/19)
1758 & 1774 Moment Commander 98, 178 cm (18/19)
1800 & 1824 Luke Koppa’s Romp Skis 100, 183 cm (18/19)
1807 & 1840 Atomic Bent Chetler 100, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
1829 & 1838 Faction Prodigy 2.0, 184 cm (18/19)
1863 & 1894 Blizzard Rustler 9, 180 cm (18/19–19/20)
1894 & 1980 Black Crows Daemon, 183.6 cm (17/18–19/20)
1921 & 1968 Head Kore 99, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
1925 & 1937 Liberty Helix 98, 186 cm (18/19–19/20)
1931 & 1932 DPS Foundation Cassiar 94, 185 cm (18/19–19/20)
1937 & 1945 Fischer Ranger 94 FR, 184 cm (19/20)
1966 & 1973 Liberty Origin 96, 187 cm (18/19–19/20)
1985 & 2006 Parlor Cardinal 100, 185 cm (16/17–18/19)
1994 & 2011 Fischer Ranger 99 Ti, 181 cm (19/20)
1997 & 2001 Blizzard Brahma, 180 cm (17/18–19/20)
1998 & 2044 4FRNT MSP 99, 181 cm (17/18–18/19)
2007 & 2029 Armada Invictus 99 Ti, 187 cm (18/19–19/20)
2019 & 2022 Rossignol Black Ops 98, 182 cm (18/19–19/20)
2049 & 2065 Volkl Mantra M5, 177 cm (18/19–19/20)
2050 & 2080 ON3P Wrenegade 96, 184 cm (18/19)
2053 & 2057 Atomic Vantage 97 Ti, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2062 & 2063 Rossignol Experience 94 Ti, 187 cm (18/19–19/20)
2085 & 2096 Dynastar Menace 98, 181 cm (19/20)
2101 & 2104 Fischer Ranger 102 FR, 184 cm (18/19–19/20)
2114 & 2133 Nordica Enforcer 93, 185 cm (16/17–19/20)
2115 & 2149 J Skis Masterblaster, 181 cm (16/17–18/19)
2118 & 2139 Nordica Soul Rider 97, 185 cm (15/16–19/20)
2124 & 2137 Blizzard Bonafide, 180 cm (17/18–19/20)
2131 & 2189 Nordica Enforcer 100, 185 cm (15/16–19/20)
2311 & 2342 K2 Mindbender 99Ti, 184 cm (19/20)

Some Questions / Things We’re Curious About

(1) The Ranger 102 FR stood out due to its combination of very good stability and just enough playfulness to make it stand out from the other directional options out there. So will the Ranger 94 FR retain this characteristic?

(2) As a narrower version of the 102 FR, the Ranger 94 FR should be better on firm snow. So just how much better will it be, and will it retain enough versatility for some deeper / softer days?

(3) The Ranger 94 FR is a stiff ski, so how forgiving vs. demanding will it feel?

Bottom Line (For Now)

The Fischer Ranger 102 FR is a very good ski, and it looks like Fischer didn’t stray too far from a proven recipe while designing the new Ranger 94 FR. Blister Members can check out our initial on-snow impressions in our Flash Review linked below, and then stay tuned for our full review.

Flash Review

Blister Members can now check out our Flash Review of the Ranger 94 FR for our initial impressions. Become a Blister member now to check out this and all of our Flash Reviews, plus get exclusive deals and discounts on skis, and personalized gear recommendations from us.

Share this post:
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on reddit
Share on email

Rocker Pics:

Full Profile
Tip Profile
Tail Profile
Top Sheet
Base

6 comments on “2019-2020 Fischer Ranger 94 FR”

  1. Good writeup Luke, looking forward to this review. Do you have any current recommendations for a 85-95mm high-energy groomer ski? Looking for that sportscar feel of the Soul7 but obviously narrower and much more stable at speed. Considering Brahma so far….

    • I haven’t spent a ton of time on the Soul 7, but I just talked to our editor Sam Shaheen about this (he loves the Soul 7), and he said the Volkl Mantra M5 would be his top recommendation for what you’re describing.

      • Thank you Luke, I’m going to look more into the Mantra M5. I’ve been sort-of disregarding it because have the 2010 Mantra which was more ‘planky’ and larger turning. By Soul7 “sportscar feel” I mean the energy that rockets you out of a deep turn and into the next turn… I’d guess the Soul7’s energy proabably comes from loading up its significant camber.

        • Yep, the new Mantra, with its camber and new construction, definitely feels much more energetic than the previous versions. Sam is a huge fan of both skis and thinks they complement each other well.

  2. I managed a quick demo of this the other day. Felt really good; could handle speed, good edge grip and not too hard to break free the tails. I also skied the Ti92, which felt a bit less playful but more stable. It’d be great to see a comparison between the two lines (I know there’s stuff already out there about the construction of FR vs Ti, but I was hoping to see weights and tip/tail profiles.)

    Looking forward to the full review!

  3. I got 25+ days on my 102 FR this past season and love them but I think they’re short at 170cm length. I’m 170cm tall 150lbs expert and the 170 is super manueverable but feel like a very short effective edge
    1) Luke/Sam at I think 174/179cm tall would you be on the 184 or 177 if you were buying this ski?
    2) As a mainly Tahoe and Utah ‘daily driver’ would you get the 94 or the 102 to complement a powder ski? (I’m off trail in the trees a huge amount of the time, not sure yet if wider ski will be a wildcat, line outline, or rustler 11)

    I can’t find anyplace to demo Fischer so i’m torn between the 94 or 102
    thanks!

Leave a Comment