I’m interested in the Atomic Backland 95 (2023) for BC skiing only (in the NE) and would pair it with lightweight tech bindings. How would you all compare this ski with the Fischer Hannibal 96C? Thanks for your input.
I think the Backland has a more natural feel to it versus the Hannibal which is very carbon-based. It all depends on preference, but I like the overall character of the Atomic rather than the Hannibal, which almost seems Randonee to me.
I find it to be a little quicker and more maneuverable. The tip shape changed, and it's super agile now. Not that the other ski wasn't, but this ski does feel quicker.
I find it to be a little quicker and more maneuverable. The tip shape changed, and it's super agile now. Not that the other ski wasn't, but this ski does feel quicker.
I’m interested in the Atomic Backland 95 (2023) for BC skiing only (in the NE) and would pair it with lightweight tech bindings. How would you all compare this ski with the Fischer Hannibal 96C? Thanks for your input.
I think the Backland has a more natural feel to it versus the Hannibal which is very carbon-based. It all depends on preference, but I like the overall character of the Atomic rather than the Hannibal, which almost seems Randonee to me.
@@SkiEssentials thanks!
How does this ski compare to the older backland 95?
I find it to be a little quicker and more maneuverable. The tip shape changed, and it's super agile now. Not that the other ski wasn't, but this ski does feel quicker.
How does this ski compare to the older generation backland 95?
I find it to be a little quicker and more maneuverable. The tip shape changed, and it's super agile now. Not that the other ski wasn't, but this ski does feel quicker.