Triple Treat — Dynafit Speed on Fischer Hannibal, Spiced with Maruelli
Dynafit Speed Radical with Maruelli heel post swapped in, mounted on Fischer Hannibal.
You know what it’s like. The perfect pastry, paired with an espresso that wafts that earth goddess coffee scent across your olfactory apparatus like a stiff wave of frost feathers carved up by a fast arc on your favorite planks? Fischer Hannibal skis are something like that. Yum. More, they’re amazingly light, and the curved white topskin has just about the best anti-snow-pile behavior I’ve seen on a ski. But I was running the Hannibals with heavy freeride bindings. My style of skiing is decidedly NOT freeride. Time to swap those clunky grabbers out for something with a lighter pull on the connective tissue.
Dynafit Speed Radical heel unit on Maruelli aftermarket center post spindle. Unit is rotated to touring position, pushed against the anti-rotation pillar on the Maruelli plate.
Along with last year’s Speed Radical, I had some Maruelli anti-rotation Speed Radical base units waiting to grace a ski, figured this would be the place. What’s excellent is not only did I get a sweet little mass reduction, but my ramp angle is reduced within a millimeter of where I’d dream it to be. Downside: when installed this way (without rails) the Maruelli heels have just a few millimeters of forward-back adjustment for boot sole length — just enough to compensate for normal variations in measuring and drilling. Dynafit Speed Radical yields fully 24 mm of boot sole length adjustment.
OEM Dynafit Speed Radical to left, Maruelli aftermarket mod part to right drops your heel 3.4 mm to closely match ramp angle of original Dynafit TLT (our favorite ramp angle).
Numbers, per binding:
37 mm, internal heel post height of Speed Radical with OEM anti rotation add on.
32.6, Maruelli internal heel post height (without boot length adjustment rails).
4.4 mm, drop of heel resulting from install of Maruelli.
66 grams, Dynafit Speed Radical 2013/2014 base unit with anti-rotation.
36 grams, Maruelli base unit (without adjustment rails).
30 grams, weight savings from switching to Maruelli unit.
16 grams, weight of 3.3 mm B&D toe shim eliminated by using Maruelli heel post.
46 grams (1.6 ounces), weight saved by eliminating B&D toe shim, combined with Maruelli weight savings.
More about binding ramp (delta) angles.
Fischer Transalp Hannibal 100, 180 cm. In this configuration, with bindings, total weight is 1760 grams (62 ounces) per ski.
And, a few words about Fischer Transalp Hannibal 100.
Check out our first look. I’ve been out on these guys for more than 20 days, in everything from powder to ice. Overall they’re a sweet ski — a fun and forgiving plank in the pow with smooth action on piste. If my job didn’t require me to ski thousands of boards, I’d make these a daily driver. This is a soft ski with quite a bit of rocker. Consequently they swivel easily, but I found them a bit sluggish to initiate in some situations. On breakable crust I had trouble getting a carve started, and attempting short turns in crud felt forced. Banking on past experience, I’ll bet a one centimeter forward mount position would liven up the initiation, but is that necessary for modern technique? Likewise, a bit more binding ramp and boot delta could have been a turn stimulant as well. I’m too picky. Those are but minor details, the sexy blemish on an otherwise perfect cover model’s cheek.
Hannibal 100 tip rocker goes about 45 cm of the total length 180 cm. Tail rocker is minimal, which I like on a soft ski as it helps complete turns on hardpack — you can pressure the rear of your boot and feel that final finish to your arc.
I’m in love with the 100 mm width skis. They uphill nicely, and provide me with all the platform I ever need on the drop. Hannibal 100 gives me that and more. Due to it being mostly white, polished and curved, the Hannibal topskin sheds snow and ice better than any other ski I’ve tested. Weight is phenomenally lacking, see our chart. Of more than 40 skis we’ve evaluated, Hannibal 100 is 10th lightest per surface area and falls in our lightest weight class. That means you get width without weight. Isn’t that the fantasy of every backcountry skier on the planet? Recommended.
Much of the Transalp weight reduction is achieved through a simple elimination of material in the build. A thin edge profile is said to help with movement in soft snow as well as edge-hold on hardpack. We’re not sure about how big a factor this really is (makes for good marketing anyhow), but the thin edge does allow a nice curve to prevent snow and ice buildup.
Our advertising partner 8KPeak is all hot and bothered about Fischer skis. Get them talking, you’d think you’re at Lamborghini Centro Milano prepping for an experience in transcendent technology. Perhaps you are. Shop 8K. Oh, and lest I forget, Maruelli mod parts are available at Skimo-CO. Oh, and if you’re looking for Dynafit Speed Radical, please shop here to help us out.
IF YOU'RE HAVING TROUBLE VIEWING SITE, TRY WHITELISTING IN YOUR ADBLOCKER, OTHERWISE PLEASE CONTACT US USING MENU ABOVE, OR FACEBOOK.
Comments
36 Responses to “Triple Treat — Dynafit Speed on Fischer Hannibal, Spiced with Maruelli”
Why not Trippple? Love those Maruelli anti-twist bases!
“The perfect pastry, paired with an espresso that wafts that earth goddess coffee scent across your olfactory apparatus like a stiff wave of frost feathers carved up by a fast arc on your favorite planks?”
I think you should let your staff take over Wild Snow, as you obviously should be the host of a Rick Steves-esque, globe trotting, ski touring travel television show.
Sheesh, I didn’t think anyone noticed the overwrought prose (grin). Was feeling quite depressed as a result, now I feel complete.
I was having trouble spelling triple.
People actually watch Rick Steve’s travel show?
Sounds like the Hannibals are a fun ski.
Still skiing the Transalp 88. It feels a little more race-like. Super edge hold, very damp, likes to go fast. Really snappy. Engages really quick due to the early rise tip, not really any rocker, so doesn’t smear as well. And the convex top does shed snow really well. Still waiting to get a true backcountry test, so more to come…..
Full disclosure, Scott stole our 88’s but I know where his house is.
Meanwhile, to be fair, skied the Volkl BMT 94 today and concluded that if Republicans or Democrats are into making new laws, they should make a law against skis this good as they make it too easy. Act of Congress is required, we need to go back to 60 mm backcountry skis with no rocker.
The Hannibal is new to me. Would you say they outmatch the carbon convert as the one ski quiver?
Hi Stian, I’ve not skied them on the same day, alternating, which one would have to do to make an honest comparo like that, and even then you’d need to find varied snow conditions. More, I’ve not skied the C Convert for a while now so I don’t have its performance sticking in my mind. My take would be they’re roughly equal in terms of serving as a one-ski quiver. Lou
Lou, Great post (as usual) but that Christmas card in the background is really top-notch. Merry Christmas!
Thought you’d like it, also checking if you’re reading every day (grin)! Lou
Hey Lou. Someone posted on a website on your airbag posts earlier, http://www.subqdesigns.com. Haven’t heard you comment on it. It was Dec 4 2014. I am the guy behind it, however I did not make the original post and I wasn’t planning on posting it here, but I think you would like it. It’s low a low profile, bring only what you need design with ABS bags. I can get a sample to you, from following your website for years I think that’s what you would like, just to tinker with it anyway.
Merry Christmas fellow backcountry friends.
Lou. My apologies, I had the wrong screen open, above post was for the alpride ‘rip out’ backpack post. Too much good stuff on here I get distracted easy.
Corbin, we’ll check anything out that’s viable. The contact option on your website doesn’t work for me, please leave a FB private message for me. Lou
62 ounces per ski? And the look of the bindings with the Maruelli parts is really nice. Is the Maruelli heel base screw pattern different from Dynafit?
Nice review Lou. I’d add that I know you are a massive fan of 100mm skis, but the Hannibal 94 is also a super ski as well as, bit also, what Scott Nelson said, the Trans Alp 88 is also super. The thing about this line is the technology. When I first grabbed a pair, they were so light that I was honestly skeptical about the performance not so much in powder / soft snow, but hard rough conditions. They hold like a race ski. So the line in my view is really quit amazing.
Add to the skis, the Trans Alp TS Light boot, and that’s a set up. The skis are amazing, but in my 25 yeas doing this stuff, the Trans Alp TS light boot is the biggest technological break through in all gear for me personally. It’s also super light with a nice rocker sole, but it’s without question the most dynamic AT ski boot I’ve ever had. Over the past several years, I have resorted to boots like the Technica Chosie as well as the Fischer Ranger which I used because they were more ski boots and for what I do, that is most important. I made them work on the climb and the skiing was awesome.. But the Fischer TS Light has all the attributes of a serious light weight ski mountaineering boot with performance for skiing that is remarkable.
In general, all the manufacturers are really figuring things out, so it’s an exciting time to be getting old in the game. haha. The gear is preserving my ability to keep it all going. Seriously. It’s awesome!!
Mark – the naked Maruelli bases have the same mounting width as rear Dynafit holes but a different length. They also offer adjustment rails that go underneath and match the Dynafit pattern.
Thanks jbo, to add to the info, Mark, please see this link:
https://www.wildsnow.com/13768/maruelli-antitwist-review/
Hey Lou, when I read older posts all the photos are am image of wildsnow girl with the caption “head on over to wildsnow.com”. Is there a way for me to see the images?
Thanks
Hairy, sorry about that. People are stealing our content and we’re trying to defend against it, sometime I make mistakes when doing so.
First, please refresh your browser. Sometimes your browser cache will pick up a bunch of those images during a maintenance phase of our website work.
If problem persists:
Please paste in the link from your browser address bar so I know exactly what you’re looking at, and please let me know what country you are in.
Thanks, Lou
Thanks Lou, that fixed it.
Cheers!
Thanks Lou for the perfect set-up.
Happy new Year to Wildsnow staff & friends !
I’m again working on the lightest NWP-Vertical Race 2015 Editiion, with our superlight M2 Bingings.
http://youtu.be/meR0DE9Ue88
Ciao
Stefano
How does this ski compare to the Dynafit Denali? Dimensions seem similar, does the Hannibal have more rocker? It seems heavier (1500g vs 1290g per ski?) so maybe stronger carver at speed?
The metal mounting plate on the Hannibal’s is a beast!
I know Lou commented on this in his initial blog post about mounting ION’s on Hannibal’s and I don’t claim to have drilled anywhere near as many skis as Lou but it’s going on a dozen or so now and no contest the Hannibal is the toughest yet by far. Was certainly tough work even for a brand new wintersetiger drill bit.
Agreed on the burliness of that metal mounting plate on the Hannibals. Toughest ski to drill into ever in my experience, having mounted at least 2 dozen skis on my own.
Just picked up some 177 Hannibal 94s. 1280 g per ski on my scale. Very light for a 94 waisted ski. Can’t wait to ski ’em.
Some very preliminary thoughts on the 177 Hannibal 94 after a day and a half. I’m 5’10” 175 lbs. Mounted them with G3 Ions. Skiing with Dynafit TLT6P. Skinned up the resort 1 night after it closed and skied some very firm groomers as a test the next day. Tahoe is getting skunked again this January, but I’ll eventually get them out in some real touring conditions.
On the up they’re really nice. So light at 1280 g/ski. Even with the Ion mounted, they felt super light.
I couldn’t believe how well they skied very firm groomers at speed. They are remarkably ‘damp’ for such a light ski. Excellent edge hold (although I was skiing them with a factory fresh tune). They felt very planted to the snow and stable for a ski this light. They’re not metal laminate race skis, but for a ski this light they handled these conditions surprisingly well. Not chattery and they held an edge.
I think they’ll make an excellent spring mountaineering ski. Light, very low swing weight, fairly large side cut radius for jump turns, good edge hold. They’re pretty traditional geometry with a long effective edge. I doubt they’ll be super surfy in the pow but they have mild tip rocker and I imagine they’ll ski soft snow well enough at 94 underfoot.
The thin edges fore and aft make me want to try the Volkl BMTs which have a similar profile. Maybe there’s something to this construction for a stable/light ski. Time will tell how durable this construction is.
Lou,
Id like to guest blog on a the hannibal 94s, 177, with ambition 12s before I head to AK in May.
-Jeff
Having just bought the Hannibal 94’s, I am planning to use the Speed Turn bindings for these. I just realized there is now a Speed Turn 2 available, with a four screw front binding. Any views on the improvement of the #2 over the original? It may seem that the weight has increased somewhat, can anyone confirm this?
Regarding the Hannibals, what hits me is the long effective edge of these. I think this makes sense if you are planning to buy the ski shorter than your resort ski, and if you do not prioritize deep snow tree runs. Some comparable skis with modern tapering have a substantially shorter effective edge and turn radius which should be considered when selecting ski length and typical use. I am not convinced that modern rockered and tapered geometry is always better for ski tourers.
I’m skeptical about the Profoils, but I think I’ll probably try Hannibal 94’s to replace my venerable Mustagh Ata’s (I seem to remember some one around here skied there) for spring touring. I’ve gone up in length for my other “rockered” skis, but I’m thinking of sticking with the 177’s for the Fischers. Any thoughts?
After a few short tours on my Hannibal 94s, a am very pleased with them. They are crazy light uphill compared to my previous Mantras (unfair comparison maybe, but the dimensions are comparable), and they handle well downhill despite their lack of mass. I went down one size in length compared to the mantras (got the hannibals in my body height 170) and I do not regret this, they still seem stable at speed and easy to turn even in soft, wet snow.
Hi Lou
I’m in the process of acquiring a 100mm wide ski… the Hannibal 100 is one of the top contenders. Did you by any chance compare them to the Line Sick Day Tourist 102?
regards
reto
Hello Reto, nope, no comparison was done between those two skis. ‘best, Lou
Which screws did you use on the maruelli posts? Regular 12,5mm torx for a speed radical toe? Or did you mount with quiver killers? Thanks!
hi,
I do not know where else here to ask so … I want to buy a new ski and thats either current VTA 88 (not light) or Hannibal 94 ( guess two years old model).
Hannibal @ 177 cm weights just 1250gr. In order to maintain similiar weight I would need to have VTA 88 @ 170 cm. I tried VTA88 for one day. Currently I have AMAK 177cm/83mm and they are good as well – are Hannibals gonna be a good for me given abovementioned information? Is 11mm over AMAK a big difference on ascent and traverse? Are they going to be a more universal ski? I have only used AMAK and old Blizzard and hagan skis. Always below 85mm. That is why I ask this community 🙂
If you are currently liking a given width and length, stay with something similar, or demo new skis before buying. Lou
Lou, thank you for your fast reply. Guess no one is going to help me answer that question except myself 😉