2022 Fischer Ranger 94 FR Skis

100% of 100
Out of stock

Fischer Ranger 94 FR Skis

What an incredibly fun and versatile ski! The Fischer Ranger 94 FR skis are a perfect complement to Fischer's line this year, as they check a lot of boxes in a clean and efficient manner. There's going to be a lot of skiers that find exactly what they're looking for with these great skis. Built like the highly-successful Ranger 102 FR from previous years, the 94 simply comes in a slimmer version. Built with a wood core, a partial Titanal laminate in the form of Air Tec Ti, and a turned-up tail, these things scream playfulness. Super-solid and stable underfoot, the Ranger 94 FR is as capable on-trail as it is off. When you're on the groomers first thing in the morning, the sandwich sidewall construction is capable of holding an awesome edge, even on firm snow. The wood core is stable, snappy, and fun, so you can really generate a ton of power out of a carved turn, even at high speeds. Skiers will love the overall damp feeling of the ski, with the Air Tec Ti underfoot, you'll feel like you have stability to spare. Off-trail, the turned-up tail and the wider platform make a huge difference in variable conditions and terrain. You get a wider, more balanced ski to base your adventures off of. Thanks to the carbon nose, the skis are highly maneuverable and capable of fitting through some tight spaces and narrow chutes. In the moguls, the forgiving tip and the turned-up tail make wiggling through tight lines an absolute blast.


  • Sidecut: 126/92/117 mm at 177 cm length
  • Turn Radius: 17 meters at 177 cm length
  • Wood Core
  • Carbon Nose
  • Air Tec Ti
  • Sandwich Sidewall Construction
  • Rocker/Camber/Rocker Profile
  • Twin-Tip Shape
  • Ability Level: Advanced Skiers

Ability Level:

Preferred Terrain
 All-Mountain •  Groomers •  Powder 


Rocker Profile

2022 Fischer Ranger 94 FR Skis

Learn More

2022 Ski Test
We've tested the 2022 Fischer Ranger 94 FR as part of our 2022 Ski Test. Click the link to see our full profile.
Chairlift Chat
We've discussed this ski on Chairlift Chat. Click the link to check it out.
Hey, I am 165lbs and 69" tall and am curious about 169 or 177 in Fischer Ranger 94 FR. Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated.
Question by: Jason Williams on Nov 16, 2020, 3:01 PM
Hi Jason!
Unless you're advanced and aggressive on skis, and know that you prefer longer skis, I'd go with the 169. Just a bit under head high for you, and will be a better choice to match the personality of the skis in terms of quickness, maneuverability, and playfulness. Have fun!
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Nov 17, 2020, 6:47 AM
looking at the Ranger 94's vs the Soul Riders for a playful 1 ski quiver in the north east, mostly Catskills and Adirondacks. I'm a 40+ skier who has come back to it after a bunch of time away. I like skiing switch, but no big jumps or park for me.... I'm 5'10, 180 also can't decide 177 or 169?
Question by: justin on Jan 27, 2021, 9:28 AM
HI Justin!
A bit stiffer overall for the Rangers--not quite as forgiving, but still very playful. I think the 177 in the Ranger 94 is the way to go. Have fun!
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Jan 27, 2021, 5:42 PM
I’m 5’9” and 200lbs. Skiing east coast snowshoe and 7 springs. What sized you recommend? I’m finally retiring my 2009 Rossi S3 in170cm.
Question by: Matt neal on Oct 28, 2021, 7:09 PM
Hi, I would recommend the 177 cm length for you but its a personal decision. Did you like the length of your Rossi S3? Do you like the shorter, more nimble length or did you feel they did not have stability at speeds. If you liked the 170 length, then I would go down to the 169 but the 177 will have more stability at speeds.
Hope this helps, SE
Answer by: Alli R on Oct 29, 2021, 10:21 AM
Hi- I'm debating a 2nd ski to my 2020 Kendo 163. For me, the Kendo is a perfect groomer/hard snow/icy all-mountain ski, I'd like something a little less demanding. Something that is good at low speeds, very playful, good in the moguls, a quick turner in the woods, maybe even inspire me to try to work on skiing switch. Having said that, the ski still needs to be well rounded and not all thumbs when I want to carve at speed. I was comparing the Ranger to the Elan Ripstick 96 in 164. Some background- I've gone back to skiing after some time misspent on snowboards ;) I'd say I'm approaching expert level (but not quite there!) Now that I have a son, I've been skiing nearly every weekend for the last 3 seasons with him and he and I have been working hard on our skills. At 8 I'd say can ski nearly any trail except for the most difficult blacks (me too). I'm 5-7 and an athletic 160lbs and ski in the Catskills and the Stowe area. As a side question, when do you think it would appropriate to start getting him his own skis rather than a seasonal rental?
Question by: Johnny B on Mar 6, 2022, 6:01 PM
HI Johnny B!
For you, I think the Ripstick makes a lot of sense. The Ranger is nice, but the Ripstick offers a bit more of a difference from the Kendo--better in softer snow, easy in trees, but still holds a great edge due to the carbon application. For the kid, I'm putting off buying my own kids stuff for as long as possible. I get a season lease for skis, but pay for an upgrade in boots to a Lange RSJ 60. It's nice to have the four buckles and a power strap. My twins turn 10 next year, and they've been clamoring for twin tips so I may give in then, more from a desire standpoint than necessity. My soon-to-be seven year old is still on very small skis, so I don't see buying her stuff for the next year or two. Back to you, I think the Ripstick 96 in the 164 is a great choice, with the Ranger right behind. Have fun!
Answer by: SkiEssentials Expert on Mar 7, 2022, 1:24 PM
Thinking of buying these for my 14 yo daughter, she is 5/5, 150 lbs, intermediate moving toward advanced, skis black frequently, is not afraid of speed, 169 or 161? Thank you!
Question by: Gary on Apr 12, 2022, 10:50 PM
Hi Gary!

The 169 would certainly provide more stability at higher speed but it would also start to cut into the maneuverability a bit. The shorter 161 is still an advanced skier length for her height and would be much more maneuverable in bumps, trees, and exposed terrain. My recommendation would be the 161 for overall performance, but if she's looking to put down some speed the 169 will be the better option.

Answer by: Chris McClelland on Apr 13, 2022, 1:35 PM

Product Questions

Write Your Own Review
Write a Review for the 2022 Fischer Ranger 94 FR Skis