Misunderstood All-rounder
Yes, this ski can be leaned on and carved pretty hard in the resort (+60° lean), but it also is easily releasable to pivot in tricky ice luges. It is not the lightest 105mm ski, but it's dampness, stability, and consistent edge hold makes up for that and more. Paired with race bindings and light skins and this is my go-to "optimistic spring ski" to handle any condition even when the pow turns to barely edgable.
Fischer Transalp 105 CTI Ski
We expect a lot out of the modern powder ski. Sublime performance when the cold smoke stacks up, but capable of handling the ice luge back to the parking lot at the end of a long day. Luckily, Fischer has your back in the Transalp 105 CTI. Constructed from a paulownia wood core with carbon stringers, and featuring a generously rockered shovel, the Transalp CTI 105 is pure bliss in champagne powder. It is energetic and powerful, responding when you open up for GS turns should you please.
When the snow firms up, the titinal reinforced underfoot and flatter tail will get you back to the parking lot with confidence, and provide stability underfoot when conditions are less than ideal. Also, the sintered bases will stave off core shots on thin spring exits. Whether you are looking to round out your quiver with a charge-y powder plank, or prefer a wider daily driver, the Fischer Transalp 105 CTI should be on your shortlist.
- Paulownia Woodcore with Carbon Stingers gives the Transalp 105 CTI a lively feel.
- Shaped TI 0.5 provides stiffness and stability underfoot - this is a powerful ski.
- Tour Rocker to help keep your tips up for when conditions get deep.
- Air Tec construction helps keep the weight down for more laps.
- Sandwich Sidewall Construction for confidence in firm snow.
- Sintered bases soak up wax and will stand the test of time.
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 164, 171, 178, 185 |
|
Weight |
1470g [171] 1580g [178] 1680g [185] |
| Weight (pair) | 2940g [171] 3160g [178] 3360g [185] |
|
|
138-104-124 [164] 138-104-124 [171] 139-105-124 [178] 140-106-125 [185] |
|
Turn |
19m [164] 20m [171] 22m [178] 23m [185] |
|
Skin |
Z-hook tip, standard tail |
| Specs Verified | Yes |
| Design | |
|
|
Tip Rocker, titanal reinforced underfoot, flatter tail |
|
|
Rockered tip, generous sidecut, flat tail |
|
|
Carbon-Stringers, Air Tec, Sandwich Sidewall Construction, Sintered Bases, Shaped TI |
|
|
Paulownia Woodcore |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | Lap after lap of Mid-Winter cold smoke |
| Notes | Titanal plate adds stiffness |
| Bottom Line | Alpine performance for hard-chargers |
| Compare to other High-fat Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
Comment on this review:
1/7/2025
I'm an advanced level telemark skier with NTN Lynx bindings living in Breckenridge. Looking for 1 ski to do steep bowls in the resort, a few corduroy carver runs, some tours in the backcountry (no bumps or trees)...all with a mix of snow conditions (powder, crud, chop). Ranger 102 or Transalp 105? Thanks!
1/8/2025
Jerry- We do not carry the Ranger 102, so we have not spent much time on it. The Transalp 105 is supposed to be based on the Ranger series. With that said, we have skied the Transalp 105 a bunch and it would fit your criteria perfectly! And it has a good mounting plate to give you a strong mount for tele.
3/3/2025
Hey Jerry. I am a tele skier and I put some Lynx on these sticks. I have the 185s and rockin' the new TX Pros. I am 200lbs, 5'8" to give a couple of basic stats.
THESE STICKS KICK ASS!
The weight of these is great on the uphill and man, I have giggled a lot skiing these things. First day on them was 4-6" on top of firm and these thing were nimble, smooth and when put on edge hook up very well. I was pushing through the new snow down to the firm and the 105s tracked exceptionally well. They have the Fischer precise carving characteristics. Easy to release out of a turn as well.
Second day was 27" and 13F and at my weight I was a bit concerned about the size of these and not being enough and I was wrong. Easy to ski.
These sticks also did surprisingly well in punchy sun crust. They ski stronger than their weight would suggest.
I have owned more than 70 pairs of skis over the years, both tele and alpine, and have ski tested hundreds and the Transalp 105's are easily in my top 5 and now my go to tele ski. I would feel comfortable skiing these in a resort as well. I have the ranger 102's and there isn't a tremendous gap in performance.
THESE STICKS KICK ASS!
The weight of these is great on the uphill and man, I have giggled a lot skiing these things. First day on them was 4-6" on top of firm and these thing were nimble, smooth and when put on edge hook up very well. I was pushing through the new snow down to the firm and the 105s tracked exceptionally well. They have the Fischer precise carving characteristics. Easy to release out of a turn as well.
Second day was 27" and 13F and at my weight I was a bit concerned about the size of these and not being enough and I was wrong. Easy to ski.
These sticks also did surprisingly well in punchy sun crust. They ski stronger than their weight would suggest.
I have owned more than 70 pairs of skis over the years, both tele and alpine, and have ski tested hundreds and the Transalp 105's are easily in my top 5 and now my go to tele ski. I would feel comfortable skiing these in a resort as well. I have the ranger 102's and there isn't a tremendous gap in performance.
Answer this question:
12/29/2024
I am looking at the Fischer Transalp 105 or Blizzard Zero G 105. I am 5'9" and 155 and consider myself an advanced skier. I will use the ski the San Juan region of CO and occasional backcountry trips to other regions. I a concerned that the 171 or 172 will be too short, but also don't want a ski that is hard to manage in tight spaces of on the uphill. What size do you recommend for these skis? Do they lend themselves to shorter lengths since they are somewhat stiff for a BC ski, or does the lack of camber keep them maneuverable and I should go with a longer ski?
12/29/2024
Hi brknspoke5,
You are a bit between sizes! Ultimately, it depends on whether you would rather prioritize a ski that is more maneuverable in tight places, and efficient on the uphill, or whether you would rather trade that maneuverability/ease of use for more float and stability/support at higher speeds on the downhill. If the priority is skiing powder more aggressively, I would opt for the 178cm (or 180 in the case of the Zero G). If this is more of a do-it-all ski, I would consider how much tree skiing and steep skiing you will be doing and whether the shorter ski might be a better option. In general, going a little shorter than your usual resort size in the backcountry is not a bad idea.
Both of the skis you're considering are stiff, and both have some rocker (the Fischer has a bit more in the tip). I don't think either of them ski "short" - they ski pretty true to their length.
You are a bit between sizes! Ultimately, it depends on whether you would rather prioritize a ski that is more maneuverable in tight places, and efficient on the uphill, or whether you would rather trade that maneuverability/ease of use for more float and stability/support at higher speeds on the downhill. If the priority is skiing powder more aggressively, I would opt for the 178cm (or 180 in the case of the Zero G). If this is more of a do-it-all ski, I would consider how much tree skiing and steep skiing you will be doing and whether the shorter ski might be a better option. In general, going a little shorter than your usual resort size in the backcountry is not a bad idea.
Both of the skis you're considering are stiff, and both have some rocker (the Fischer has a bit more in the tip). I don't think either of them ski "short" - they ski pretty true to their length.
Answer this question:
12/26/2024
Hello,
I'm considering either Transalp 105/Backland 107 with Ski Trab Tr1 bindings against Salomon QST Echo with ATK Freeraider 15 Evo. From the weight perspective, it would be similar setup. Would the added elasticity of Ski Trab binding outweight Salomons Echos with absolutely rigid ATK binding? As I know, Salomons Echos are considered as etalon for (heavy)touringskis in dampness and overall comfort of ride. Thanks.
I'm considering either Transalp 105/Backland 107 with Ski Trab Tr1 bindings against Salomon QST Echo with ATK Freeraider 15 Evo. From the weight perspective, it would be similar setup. Would the added elasticity of Ski Trab binding outweight Salomons Echos with absolutely rigid ATK binding? As I know, Salomons Echos are considered as etalon for (heavy)touringskis in dampness and overall comfort of ride. Thanks.
12/26/2024
Peter, The comfort of ride comes from the ski and boot more than the binding. The binding may offer some absorption traveling down the ski but most of binding elasticity is to prevent pre-release of the binding. The ride on the Transalp is pretty damp and I would say then similar to the Echo. Now, the power transmition and performace on the down of the TR-1 binding is definitely better than any ATK pin binding.
Answer this question:
12/22/2024
Hi, looking for a "quiver of one" travel ski. Think Canadian hut trips or Euro touring where you might also be doing occasional lift day. I'm using the 178cm Fischer Ranger 108 as a resort ski and 178cm Voile Hyper Drifter as a powder touring ski, but neither fit the bill for the above. Considering the Fischer Transalp 105 and the Voile Hyper Charger primarily as I have had great experiences with their cousins. What do you think of sizing down to a 171ish ski at 5'7 155. Long time skier who likes to open it up when conditions permit.
12/23/2024
Hi Dan,
Thanks for writing in! I think this ski could be a great option if you wanted something a little more along the lines of your Rangers - stiff and pretty damp, but touring weight and versatile for many types of skiing. The Fischer Transalp 105 is a stiff ski with moderate rocker and some camber - a great directional ski for powder or mixed conditions.
If you wanted something more playful and a little softer, I would look at the Voile Charger Ace as a do-it-all resort and touring ski! It's heavier than the Hyper construction and will be more durable and damp for resort skiing, but not so heavy that you can't tour with it. It would be an excellent travel ski, with a lot of the great attributes that Voile is known for!
In terms of sizing, I think the shorter 171cm length would work great for you. The 178cm length is on the longer side for your height and weight, more stable and harder charging, but shorter skis can be a lot of fun too! They are more manuverable and easier to flick around, and both of the skis you're considering are pretty stable. I don't think you'd give up much in the shorter lengths, and they'll be better on the uphill as well!
Thanks for writing in! I think this ski could be a great option if you wanted something a little more along the lines of your Rangers - stiff and pretty damp, but touring weight and versatile for many types of skiing. The Fischer Transalp 105 is a stiff ski with moderate rocker and some camber - a great directional ski for powder or mixed conditions.
If you wanted something more playful and a little softer, I would look at the Voile Charger Ace as a do-it-all resort and touring ski! It's heavier than the Hyper construction and will be more durable and damp for resort skiing, but not so heavy that you can't tour with it. It would be an excellent travel ski, with a lot of the great attributes that Voile is known for!
In terms of sizing, I think the shorter 171cm length would work great for you. The 178cm length is on the longer side for your height and weight, more stable and harder charging, but shorter skis can be a lot of fun too! They are more manuverable and easier to flick around, and both of the skis you're considering are pretty stable. I don't think you'd give up much in the shorter lengths, and they'll be better on the uphill as well!
12/23/2024
Great, thanks for the help!
Answer this question:
11/22/2024
Do standard pomoca skins attach to these? The shovels are pretty squared off, so I'm curious if it's necessary to buy Fischers skins with the tip clip that fits in the hole for a good fit.
11/22/2024
Peter, The Pomoca tips should fit over those tips. Or, you can get the Z hook here - skin parts. You snap off the regular bale and the Z clip for a Fischer style skin.
Answer this question:
10/3/2024
Victor Major
(downright abused product)
I have used and abused this ski for two seasons now and they're still going strong. Tiny bit heavier than the Hannibal 105, but much more durable, powerful, and fun to ski. This is a directional ski that rips, especially when pointed downhill. It's also very secure in tight technical spaces and comfortable in variable snow. Unless I'm doing something really long in the spring or splitboarding, this is the ski I use on every tour. I use the 185 with the Transalp Carbon Pro boot and MTN pure binding.
Comment on this review:
3/15/2024
I am between this, the QST Echo, and the Backland 107. I am primarily looking for a touring ski which will still be fun for the occasional resort day. I mostly enjoy skiing trees and bumps, and I wouldn't describe myself as a super hard charger.
I tend to consider the uphill to be more important because I don't want to feel like I'm out of gas when the downhill is where I need to be the most focused.
I am 5'11"/179 cm and 145 lb, and I am considering the QST at 173 or 181, this at 178, and the backland at 175.
I currently ski and enjoy the feeling of the MTN 96 @ 166 and the QST 92 @ 176, though I prefer the latter for trees and the former for fast(ish) on-piste descents.
How would you compare the three?
I tend to consider the uphill to be more important because I don't want to feel like I'm out of gas when the downhill is where I need to be the most focused.
I am 5'11"/179 cm and 145 lb, and I am considering the QST at 173 or 181, this at 178, and the backland at 175.
I currently ski and enjoy the feeling of the MTN 96 @ 166 and the QST 92 @ 176, though I prefer the latter for trees and the former for fast(ish) on-piste descents.
How would you compare the three?
3/15/2024
Hi Zachary,
I think you might find a good match with the Backland 107! Both it and the QST Echo will be easy to turn in the trees, nimble and floaty in powder. The Echo is substantially heavier, however, so if you prioritize uphill efficiency, the Backland will give you that, and still be a good downhill performer.
The Fischer ski is stiffer and more traditional feeling, will require a firmer hand on the reigns. It is a great ski, but will be a bit different personality. It is a great damp touring ski at a reasonable weight, but more demanding than the Backland or Echo, and will require more input to turn at lower speeds.
I think you might find a good match with the Backland 107! Both it and the QST Echo will be easy to turn in the trees, nimble and floaty in powder. The Echo is substantially heavier, however, so if you prioritize uphill efficiency, the Backland will give you that, and still be a good downhill performer.
The Fischer ski is stiffer and more traditional feeling, will require a firmer hand on the reigns. It is a great ski, but will be a bit different personality. It is a great damp touring ski at a reasonable weight, but more demanding than the Backland or Echo, and will require more input to turn at lower speeds.
Answer this question:
1/7/2024
Hello Skimo! I'm looking at this and the Pagoda Tour 106. I get the impression that both are rather capable skis for powder and will have little problem in deep snow. Which one do you suppose gets the nod for variable snow conditions (that mythical one ski)? Thanks!
1/8/2024
Hi MT, the Pagoda Tour will be a more forgiving ski than the Transalp. So, I think the answer depends on your skiing style. If you prefer a stiffer platform and driving your skis almost all of the time you might prefer the Transalp. The Pagoda Tour will accept a wider range of skier input, and let you noodle around if you please.
Answer this question:
12/24/2023
What is the difference between these and the Hannibals other than a little less width in the waist?
12/26/2023
Hi,
The Transalp CTI has more metal in it and thus is damper and heavier than the Hannibal. More like an alpine ski, while the Hannibal is a more classic touring ski.
The Transalp CTI has more metal in it and thus is damper and heavier than the Hannibal. More like an alpine ski, while the Hannibal is a more classic touring ski.
12/30/2023
Thanks for the answer. According to the weights listed they are about the same for equivalent length so I thought the the Transalp CTI might be the successor.
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
