Fischer vs. Karhu

[hikerbiker]

I got some Fischer Rebounds this year and while they turn great I'm not thrilled with their climbing ability. Has anyone experience with the Rebounds and the Karhu Orions or Dorados as I'm thinking of switching next year.

 

[Tramper Al]

Getting a grip

I have Karhu Lookouts (aka Pavos) and Fischer Outtabounds Crowns.

The Karhus have a modest advantage (grip) for climbing. It's certainly not enough to consider new skis, in my opinion.

If I have a sustained climb with either ski, I put on the skins, and then it just doesn't matter.

 

[David Metsky]

If you look at the waxless patterns of the two skis you'll notice that they are quite different in construction. The Fischers scales are cut into the ski base, the Karhus are raised from the base. As a result, the Fischers will glide better but climb worse than the Karhus.

It's been my experience that in moderately difficult snow conditions (cold, loose snow, or cold hard snow) the Fischers have limited grip. The Karhus will definately grip better. Most folks I know who have the Fischers carry skins because climbing is really not fun in difficult conditions. I don't know too many folks with the new Karhus, but not as many carry skins.

Is this worth new skis? Possibly, depends on the kind of skiing that you do. If you are interested in turns, the Rebounds are clearly the better ski. How much of your skiing is on rolling terrain?

-dave-

 

[hikerbiker]

fischer v. karhu (2)

Dave,

All most all of the skiing I do is on rolling terrain. If there is a climb steep enough to require skins, I'll bring snowshoes as I'm not good enough to get down those types of hills on skis yet. I had a pair of non-metal Karhus before the Rebounds and hills that I could walk up with those I now have to herringbone. I'm not sure the extra effort and time lost on the uphills is worth the penalty on the flats and downhills.

 

[el-bagr]

For general backcountry touring, I vastly prefer Karhus -- whether you're talking about something relatively straight like a Pyxis or the more shapely and fatter skis. They're little leg-powered tractors!

Fisher's shape tends to be turnier and the camber tends to be softer. All this might make the skis turn themselves more, but is of little use when touring.

That said, is it worth buying new skis? Depends on your budget and your desires. All things aside, for a rolling tour (e.g. Pemi) where your objective places more emphasis on a safe descent of any steep terrain than on slicy turns, I'd go with Karhu hands-down.

(I may not be sponsored by Karhu, but the way I accumulate Karhu skis, I probably could be said to sponsor them. Quality craftsmanship!)

 

[spencer]

I skied on waxless Karhus (10th mtns) and they climbed great. I now ski on Fischer Outtabounds waxables. Get wax, learn it and you won't go back.

otherwise I agree with most of what was said above.

spencer

 

[g o]

karhus = touring
fischers = turning

i currently ski karhu pyxis for bsp trips and fischer outtabounds for sugarloaf, saddleback and other downhill excursions.

speaking of excursions (garmont) - get some. they are great no matter what ski you use them with.

 

[KenG]

Dave's right, Karhu bought out Trak and their patent on the positive fishscale pattern, which gives them greater kick and poorer glide. Since then their patent has expired and I believe Rossi is the only other company that has incorporated it into their ski line. I own the Fisher Rebounds, which has a negative fishscale pattern, (poorer kick, greater glide) and a pair of Black Diamond kicker skins, which I think is the best way to go. But, that's just my opinion, and you know what they're like, everyone has one! Also, Spencer is right too, you can climb trees with waxable skiis, but they're time consuming and irritating until you become familiar with the waxes. They're also a pain in the butt on a sunny spring day when you're going in and out of the sun. But, on a good day, you can't beat beat them! Your decision to make, but I'd try kicker skins before I'd switch skis, 'cause "in my opinion", no-wax skis suck in the kick department no matter what pattern you have! Oh, but you can't beat the shaped ski design of the Fisher's for turning!

 

[DougPaul]

My approach is to have several sets of skis for BC and choose according to the route and snow conditions:
* Tua Escape, waxable BC
* Kahru 10th Mountain, waxless BC
* Tua Traverse, waxable light-weight Tele (great for turns, but still fine for BC)

I prefer waxable over waxless so the waxless stay home unless the snow will be wet or crusty (difficult waxing conditions). The waxable will outclimb and outglide the waxless in good conditions.

I can use full skins with any of the above. And kicker skins can do the job if you have waxable skis in conditions better suited to waxless skis. (Kicker skins also work nicely if you need some extra kick but don't require a full skin.)

BTW, basic waxing in good snow condtions (dry powder) is pretty easy. Just go with a friend who knows how to wax the first time.

Doug