2022 Fischer Ranger 102 FR Skis
SKU
A16120
As low as
$479.99
Regular Price
$799.99
In stock
Get this ski with bindings and free mounting:
2022 Fischer Ranger 102 FR Skis
Light, floaty, and a ton of fun, the Fischer Ranger 102 FR skis are a perfect choice for today's modern freerider. How can a 102 with no structural metal beyond the mount plate carve such clean turns? How can a ski that's on the narrow side for a powder ski float so well? You can either spend a lot of time wondering about the answers to these questions, or you can just get on the thing and have a total blast. Since they're on the wide side for an all-mountain ski, you'd think they couldn't make such clean turns, but once you get them up on edge, it's amazing how round and precise they can carve. Certainly not like a race ski, but really, really nice for what it is. There's just a lot of grace to be found in these 102 FR's and the development of the ski over the past few years has been really fun to witness. For skiers who are looking for that fun-loving ski with a bit of extra width, this is a great way to go. There's not a whole lot of limitations that are found in the 102 FR, and many skiers have found that this is their go-to ski for any and all conditions and terrain. Thanks to the carbon nose and wood core, the skis are light and energetic and capable of holding an edge and releasing from a turn with ease. The turned-up tail makes for a playful and maneuverable finish to the turn, so whether you're using it for a freeride or an all-mountain format, the Fischer Ranger 102 FR skis are the way to go.
Features:
- Sidecut: 136/102/136
- Turn Radius: 18 m at 177
- Weight: 2000 g at 177
- Wood Core
- Carbon Nose
- Tip and Tail Rocker
- Milled Air Core
- Ability Level: Advanced Skiers
Ability Level:
Preferred Terrain
All-Mountain • Park • Powder
All-Mountain
Park
Powder
Rocker Profile
Learn More
hello! loved the video you put out on this ski. i saw it on the hill the other day and it was love at first sight. happy to know it actually performs and not just a looker. i'm 5'6" 120lbs and love to ski in the glades and am intermediate/advanced. would you recommend the 163 or the 170?
i'm interested in the look pivot bindings as i love these on my current skis. would you recommend the Size: 115MM Look Pivot 14 GW Ski Bindings 2021?
lastly, would the color Forza-2 be too much or a totally rad pop of perfection? infinite gratitude for your input!
i'm interested in the look pivot bindings as i love these on my current skis. would you recommend the Size: 115MM Look Pivot 14 GW Ski Bindings 2021?
lastly, would the color Forza-2 be too much or a totally rad pop of perfection? infinite gratitude for your input!
Question by: AURA on Jan 1, 2021, 8:56 PM
Hi Aura!
We're all pretty enamored with those skis, both looks and performance! I think the 163 is a better choice, as the width does give you more stability. Our staff who own the skis and Pivot bindings put the 95 mm brake on it with just a bit of a stretch. The 115 is too wide. We think the Gold in the Pivot 15 looks really sharp, but if you're going to go colorful, the Forza is pretty sweet. Have fun!
SE
We're all pretty enamored with those skis, both looks and performance! I think the 163 is a better choice, as the width does give you more stability. Our staff who own the skis and Pivot bindings put the 95 mm brake on it with just a bit of a stretch. The 115 is too wide. We think the Gold in the Pivot 15 looks really sharp, but if you're going to go colorful, the Forza is pretty sweet. Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Jan 5, 2021, 12:19 PM
I’m planning on purchasing these skis to go with DukePT bindings. I do more alpine skiing than backcountry but wanted the one ski/binding quiver to do it all. I’m 5’9” 165lbs and advanced/expert skier but because of the backcountry aspect, should I get the 177 or 184 length? Thank you!
Question by: Adam on Jan 4, 2021, 6:31 PM
Hi Adam!
I think the 177 is the way to go. For a straight alpine setup even, I think the 184 might be on the long side. Have fun!
SE
I think the 177 is the way to go. For a straight alpine setup even, I think the 184 might be on the long side. Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Jan 5, 2021, 1:16 PM
Hey! Highly in doubt between this ski and the Nordica Enforcer 104. Theoretically I prefer Fischer, but I’m an athletic 215 pounds, 6’5” dude and I don’t know if it would be an issue for this sk? If Nordica would be a better match? I’m an advanced skier who is always looking for stashes of new snow on the mountain.
Question by: Mauro Guimarães on Nov 14, 2020, 4:30 PM
Hi Mauro!
The correct answer is to get both. Really though, the Ranger is stiff in the tip but playful everywhere else while the Enforcer is on the stiffer and burlier side all through the ski. In the 191, I don't think you'll overpower the Ranger, making it a great choice for someone like you. For high speed and hard charging with stability to spare, I'd lean to the Enforcer, but for most daily skiing, with an emphasis on softer snow, the Ranger is the way to go, and it sounds like you're that type of skier. Have fun!
SE
The correct answer is to get both. Really though, the Ranger is stiff in the tip but playful everywhere else while the Enforcer is on the stiffer and burlier side all through the ski. In the 191, I don't think you'll overpower the Ranger, making it a great choice for someone like you. For high speed and hard charging with stability to spare, I'd lean to the Enforcer, but for most daily skiing, with an emphasis on softer snow, the Ranger is the way to go, and it sounds like you're that type of skier. Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Nov 15, 2020, 4:44 PM
Hi 175lbs 5’7&1/4” advanced skier who loves to ride everything form trees, to steeps to carving groomers in CO and NM. 170 or 177? Also can I purchase this mounted with the pivot 15?
Question by: Dominic Pettine on Sep 8, 2021, 2:31 PM
Hi Dominic,
Thanks for your inquiry. We appreciate your business!
I have also included a link to view our ski sizing suggestion chart based on skier height verse ability. Within the suggested range for your height and ability, the shorter lengths are going to provide easier handling making shorter turns easier but may lack a bit in stability at speeds as well as float. Whereas the longer lengths in the suggested size range will provide more stability at speeds and float but be more ski to handle making shorter radius turns. Ultimately deciding on a length is a personal decision for you to make based on the performance desired. At your height and ability according to your sizing chart you could go either with the 170 or the 177. The 170 would be better in the trees & steeps.
We also provide FREE mounting if you have the ski boots that will be used with the setup and can provide the actual boot sole length number in millimeters (mm) on the order. This number can be found on the outside or inside edge of the heel. It is small and engraved into the boot and is three digits roughly in the about the 250 to 350 range and will have mm after it for millimeters. Please note you will still have to take them to a certified technician at a local ski shop before your first run. They will need to set the forward pressure, Din and test the bindings with your boot to ensure safety and stability.
Let us know if you have any further questions.
Best,
Mark
Thanks for your inquiry. We appreciate your business!
I have also included a link to view our ski sizing suggestion chart based on skier height verse ability. Within the suggested range for your height and ability, the shorter lengths are going to provide easier handling making shorter turns easier but may lack a bit in stability at speeds as well as float. Whereas the longer lengths in the suggested size range will provide more stability at speeds and float but be more ski to handle making shorter radius turns. Ultimately deciding on a length is a personal decision for you to make based on the performance desired. At your height and ability according to your sizing chart you could go either with the 170 or the 177. The 170 would be better in the trees & steeps.
We also provide FREE mounting if you have the ski boots that will be used with the setup and can provide the actual boot sole length number in millimeters (mm) on the order. This number can be found on the outside or inside edge of the heel. It is small and engraved into the boot and is three digits roughly in the about the 250 to 350 range and will have mm after it for millimeters. Please note you will still have to take them to a certified technician at a local ski shop before your first run. They will need to set the forward pressure, Din and test the bindings with your boot to ensure safety and stability.
Let us know if you have any further questions.
Best,
Mark
Answer by: Mark Van Liere on Sep 8, 2021, 4:25 PM
Im shopping for skis for myself and my twin teenage boys. I demo'd the DPS 100 RP at Jackson and fell in love (with both), and I will probably get those.
For my teens...I'm not buying them carbon skis! I do have two questions: Based on how they ski, I think Fisher Ranger 102s or the DPS 100 RP in the Foundation layup. Have you guys tried that? We ski tight trees and bumps at Jay and Cannon and really never go fast. Groomers just seem like an extension of the lift line for me. Would you have a preference between those two?
Question 2. Given that their feet are still growing a little is there a binding that you would get for a 100 wide ski that is more flexible than others for adjusting to longer boot sole lengths? Im a pivot snob. Would those work?
For my teens...I'm not buying them carbon skis! I do have two questions: Based on how they ski, I think Fisher Ranger 102s or the DPS 100 RP in the Foundation layup. Have you guys tried that? We ski tight trees and bumps at Jay and Cannon and really never go fast. Groomers just seem like an extension of the lift line for me. Would you have a preference between those two?
Question 2. Given that their feet are still growing a little is there a binding that you would get for a 100 wide ski that is more flexible than others for adjusting to longer boot sole lengths? Im a pivot snob. Would those work?
Question by: Jay Hafner on Mar 21, 2022, 1:06 PM
HI jay!
The Foundation builds are heavy. You get the same shape as the carbon build but the use of fiberglass is pretty burly. We haven't bought/sold Foundation skis when an Alchemist/Pagoda option is available for this reason. So I'd go Fischer!
Pivots are in dead last in terms of binding adjustability--goes with the territory of them having a short mount distance. Marker Griffons and Tyrolia Attacks have about 2cm of adjustability in the heel, so if you have the heel track mounted further back to start, you can get the full range of the track. Have fun!
SE
The Foundation builds are heavy. You get the same shape as the carbon build but the use of fiberglass is pretty burly. We haven't bought/sold Foundation skis when an Alchemist/Pagoda option is available for this reason. So I'd go Fischer!
Pivots are in dead last in terms of binding adjustability--goes with the territory of them having a short mount distance. Marker Griffons and Tyrolia Attacks have about 2cm of adjustability in the heel, so if you have the heel track mounted further back to start, you can get the full range of the track. Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Mar 21, 2022, 4:25 PM
Hi! Really like the concept of this ski and curious about length. Currently ski a Bonafide in a 172 and want to get something without metal in it. Thinking 177 as I previously skied the enforcer 93 in a 169 and it skied too short. Any Thoughts? Thanks
Question by: matty on Dec 19, 2020, 8:57 AM
Hi Matty!
Yes, other than the 170, I think the 177 is your best bet. Great skis, and so fun!
SE
Yes, other than the 170, I think the 177 is your best bet. Great skis, and so fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Dec 22, 2020, 5:21 PM
Hi, I'm an intermediate looking for my first powder day ski. 5'7" and 150 lbs ski somewhere between cautious and confident depending on conditions. Would you recommend 163 or the 170 in this ski? My daily driver is the Kanjo 84 in 168. Value low swing weight and shorter turns. This would be a ski taken out on powder and choppy days only.
Question by: Justin on Jan 8, 2021, 8:17 PM
Hi Justin!
I think the 163 is the way to go, especially looking for low weight and short turns. Happy hunting!
SE
I think the 163 is the way to go, especially looking for low weight and short turns. Happy hunting!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Jan 11, 2021, 1:47 PM
I am looking to buy my wife a pair of nice ski's for Christmas and I am not super educated on the sport as she is a much better skier than myself. She is somewhere between advanced and expert as far as skill level goes. She needs an all-mountain ski, likes powder and moguls both but doesn't do anything super crazy. Are the Fischer FR 102 skis a good fit for this and should it say "Women's" on the ski's that I am looking at? Ignorant questions but I'd like to get her a quality pair of skis that fit her ability. Thanks!
Question by: Spencer W Widman on Nov 25, 2021, 12:54 PM
Hello Spencer,
Yes, this ski would work for her, depending on where oyu live and the type of snow that you get most regularly.
Most all-mountain skis are between 90-100cm underfoot in width. Mis to low 90's being ideal. This Fischer is a 102cm length underfoot so if you ski in areas that receive consistent snow like the West this could work. If you ski in the Midwest or Northeast, you want a narrower waisted ski. I have listed a few suggestions below that would be ideal:
2021 VOLKL BLAZE 94 WOMEN'S SKI
2022 SALOMON QST LUX 92 WOMEN'S SKIS
2022 ELAN RIPSTICK 94 WOMEN'S SKIS
Lastly, if you are not very educated on skis, you need to make sure you choose the proper length. Just send us her weight, height and knowing that she is as an advanced /expert skier, we can recommend the right length for her.
Hope this helps and think snow!
SE
Yes, this ski would work for her, depending on where oyu live and the type of snow that you get most regularly.
Most all-mountain skis are between 90-100cm underfoot in width. Mis to low 90's being ideal. This Fischer is a 102cm length underfoot so if you ski in areas that receive consistent snow like the West this could work. If you ski in the Midwest or Northeast, you want a narrower waisted ski. I have listed a few suggestions below that would be ideal:
2021 VOLKL BLAZE 94 WOMEN'S SKI
2022 SALOMON QST LUX 92 WOMEN'S SKIS
2022 ELAN RIPSTICK 94 WOMEN'S SKIS
Lastly, if you are not very educated on skis, you need to make sure you choose the proper length. Just send us her weight, height and knowing that she is as an advanced /expert skier, we can recommend the right length for her.
Hope this helps and think snow!
SE
Answer by: Dave Hatoff on Nov 26, 2021, 8:46 AM
I need help completing my 3 ski quiver.
I ski New York and Southern VT 90% of the time.
I need a ski for my annual 1 or 2 trips out West. ( types of snow varies based on location. Whistler, sun valley,snowbasin, tahoe, etc .)
Advanced skier. Mostly on trail. Some woods skiing, love side hits. 5'5" 160 lbs
Current Quiver:
Front side Carver.-Kastle Mx 73 limited edition
All mountain - dynastar m pro 90 and ripstick 88s.
Resort powder ski-???
Leaning toward something about 100mm underfoot. Little or no metal, but still stable.
I'm considering the following,( no particular order). But I'm definitely open to Other suggestions.
-Ranger 102 fr
-Black ops sender
-Rusltler 10
-Bent Chetler 100 (too soft?)
-Dynastar m free 99 (because i like my mpro 90s)
-K2 mind bender 99ti (skied and liked a lot, but maybe a bit heavy for my intention)
This ski would be used as an all mountain West Coast ski, and East Coast powder ski.
Thanks!
I ski New York and Southern VT 90% of the time.
I need a ski for my annual 1 or 2 trips out West. ( types of snow varies based on location. Whistler, sun valley,snowbasin, tahoe, etc .)
Advanced skier. Mostly on trail. Some woods skiing, love side hits. 5'5" 160 lbs
Current Quiver:
Front side Carver.-Kastle Mx 73 limited edition
All mountain - dynastar m pro 90 and ripstick 88s.
Resort powder ski-???
Leaning toward something about 100mm underfoot. Little or no metal, but still stable.
I'm considering the following,( no particular order). But I'm definitely open to Other suggestions.
-Ranger 102 fr
-Black ops sender
-Rusltler 10
-Bent Chetler 100 (too soft?)
-Dynastar m free 99 (because i like my mpro 90s)
-K2 mind bender 99ti (skied and liked a lot, but maybe a bit heavy for my intention)
This ski would be used as an all mountain West Coast ski, and East Coast powder ski.
Thanks!
Question by: Joseph Arcara on Dec 17, 2021, 8:12 AM
Hello Joseph,
Out of your list, we would lean towards keeping with Dynastar brand because you like how your M 90 pro skis. The 99 is just a step up in powder and soft snow performance with a rocker profile that still can bite on the hardpack. Great one-ski quiver for both coasts!
SE
Out of your list, we would lean towards keeping with Dynastar brand because you like how your M 90 pro skis. The 99 is just a step up in powder and soft snow performance with a rocker profile that still can bite on the hardpack. Great one-ski quiver for both coasts!
SE
Answer by: Dave Hatoff on Dec 17, 2021, 10:20 AM
(6'1", 150lbs) I am an ex racer very interested in freeriding and im looking for this to be somewhat a one ski quiver definitely airing on the side of off piste. I'm wondering both what size would be for me and if you were planning on stock/restocking the gap between 170 - 191 as I imagine I am within that range
Question by: Finlay on Jan 10, 2022, 10:14 AM
Hi Finlay,
The Ranger 102 is an excellent one ski quiver that can really do it all. At your height and weight, you fall in the 182-185 range. We are not getting any more of those sizes in, (184 would be your size) just the 177 cm lengths.
SE
The Ranger 102 is an excellent one ski quiver that can really do it all. At your height and weight, you fall in the 182-185 range. We are not getting any more of those sizes in, (184 would be your size) just the 177 cm lengths.
SE
Answer by: Dave Hatoff on Jan 10, 2022, 2:53 PM
Hi - I'm looking for an all mountain ski that can hold up in powder. I ski both east coast (have smaller Head carver's for most east coast days) and west coast. I'm 6'1"/150lbs, advanced skier. I'm debating between the Salomon QST 98, Atomic Maverick 95, Black Crow Camox, and Fischer Ranger FR 102...they all seem fairly comparable. Anything about any of these skis that should push me in one direction?
Question by: Alex on Jan 11, 2022, 5:30 PM
Hi Alex,
All are great options but I would lean towards the Fisher 103 R or the Black Camox. Both of these are above the rest listed in terms of floaters in pow, and can certainly hold up to firm, crud and chop as well. The Camox will be a bit more damp and precise on harder snow due to its build and the Fisher will be the best in deeper snow due to its dimensions and rocker profile. You really cant go wrong wither way between these two. We do have your size in the Camox which would be a 183. We are sold out of your size in the Fisher .
SE
All are great options but I would lean towards the Fisher 103 R or the Black Camox. Both of these are above the rest listed in terms of floaters in pow, and can certainly hold up to firm, crud and chop as well. The Camox will be a bit more damp and precise on harder snow due to its build and the Fisher will be the best in deeper snow due to its dimensions and rocker profile. You really cant go wrong wither way between these two. We do have your size in the Camox which would be a 183. We are sold out of your size in the Fisher .
SE
Answer by: Dave Hatoff on Jan 12, 2022, 8:33 AM
Hey, I’m looking to add a wider ski to my quiver and these are the frontrunner. I currently ski most of my days on Ripstick 88s in 172 (I’m 5’10”, 170lbs) and feel like the 172 is a great length for my skiing style (shorter quick turns, bumps, trees) do you think the 170 is too short and I should go 177 or does it sound like the 170 will suit me?
Question by: Evan on Feb 28, 2022, 6:06 AM
HI Evan!
I think 177 makes a bit more sense given your stats and application. I don't think the 170 would be the wrong choice, rather the 177 a better one. Have fun!
SE
I think 177 makes a bit more sense given your stats and application. I don't think the 170 would be the wrong choice, rather the 177 a better one. Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Feb 28, 2022, 9:59 AM
Hi, what length would you recommend in Fischer Ranger 102 for a skilled (race) skier, girl 15 years old, 155 high (today 153 and might not be much taller), wieght 40kg/89lb. Thanks!
Question by: Elisabeth on Mar 2, 2022, 8:37 AM
Hi Elisabeth!
The 156 is the only length I'd recommend, and that may be on the long side? It's the weight of your skier versus skill and height that gives me pause, but only pause, I think it's doable for sure.
SE
The 156 is the only length I'd recommend, and that may be on the long side? It's the weight of your skier versus skill and height that gives me pause, but only pause, I think it's doable for sure.
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Mar 2, 2022, 2:10 PM
Hi Guy's!
Love your reviews/videos! Just have a quick question: I currently ski on Fischer RC One 86GT and Liberty V82's - Former racer that absolutely loves fast groomers. 6 Foot 195 Pounds. Looking to add a soft snow - light powder ski to my quiver. Would you recommend the ranger 102's or the Armada Declivity 102's or any other ski for that matter? Ski mostly Vermont - Stowe - and occasionally out west.
Thanks a million!
Rich
Love your reviews/videos! Just have a quick question: I currently ski on Fischer RC One 86GT and Liberty V82's - Former racer that absolutely loves fast groomers. 6 Foot 195 Pounds. Looking to add a soft snow - light powder ski to my quiver. Would you recommend the ranger 102's or the Armada Declivity 102's or any other ski for that matter? Ski mostly Vermont - Stowe - and occasionally out west.
Thanks a million!
Rich
Question by: Rich on Apr 16, 2022, 5:33 PM
Hi Rich!
I would recommend the Rangers if you are looking for strictly soft snow performance. they're lighter and a lot more playful than the Declivities in deeper snow. Definitely a great ski to round out that quiver.
SE
I would recommend the Rangers if you are looking for strictly soft snow performance. they're lighter and a lot more playful than the Declivities in deeper snow. Definitely a great ski to round out that quiver.
SE
Answer by: Chris McClelland on Apr 18, 2022, 11:45 AM
Hi,
I really want to try the fischer 102 but wanted to see what length you think I should get. I'm 6.3, 205lbs advanced skier. However, I plan to spend a lot of time skiing with my 7yr old kid so I won't be going very fast for the most part. Intuitively I'm leaning toward the 191, but its hard to get. Do you think the 184 would feel a bit short?
Thanks in advance!
I really want to try the fischer 102 but wanted to see what length you think I should get. I'm 6.3, 205lbs advanced skier. However, I plan to spend a lot of time skiing with my 7yr old kid so I won't be going very fast for the most part. Intuitively I'm leaning toward the 191, but its hard to get. Do you think the 184 would feel a bit short?
Thanks in advance!
Question by: Andreas on Dec 29, 2020, 2:16 AM
HI Andreas!
I think the 184 will be fine, especially for kid skiing. They'll do just fine for your own time as well! Have fun!
SE
I think the 184 will be fine, especially for kid skiing. They'll do just fine for your own time as well! Have fun!
SE
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Dec 29, 2020, 10:24 AM
Product Questions
Write Your Own Review
