Thanks Rick,
Whats not in the picture are a set of Never used Volants with geze bindings that I got this year for free.
The Firebirds are from a March ski break at Sutton Quebec 1981, when I broke my Dads old Yellow Blizzard Ansteiners 210 and need skis in the mid of the holiday (my Dad bought me these).
I miss my Dynastar assault verticals! 1992 I think, Skied them until they literally were missing several feet of edges on each side, (summer rock skis during the last couple of years)
There is a guy at Northstar that is skiing V9 Verticals.
I had those! Wasn't good enough for them. I recall complaining they felt "nervous" to me, because they kept wanted to find an edge and turn. 
They were marketed as an "extreme" ski, which in the context of the early 1990's meant not doing large radius skid turns on groomers. Wonder how they'd fare next to a pair of modern all mountains.
These seem to keep popping up, so thought I'd mention that I have a pair of virgin V9's...
http://www.epicski.com/t/110478/the-ski-luddite-thread/30#post_1444032
Open to selling or trading for some snow time next season with a good skier some place in CO/CA. Looking to work/improve on everything, but bumps are of particular interest.
PM me if interested.
My hardpack cruisers are 212cm Dynamic VR-17s with Salamander 737s... In my late 20s I learned to ski powder in the trees at Steamburg Falls, (skuze me.. AKA Steamboat Springs/Solomon 737s) on 200cm Rossignol ST Comps (white top with orange and black)... But I am totally comfortable exploring the woods on the VR-17s when the conditions summon my wet itchy nose to partake of the untracked... Nor would I hesitate to drop into the Tower 3 Chute at Jackson Hole should I be blessed with the opportunity to make 1st or 2nd, or perhaps even 3rd or 4th tracks in a couple feet of fresh pow...
I shipped my VR-17s to my nephew's in Centennial, Colorado, about 3 years ago when I was to attend his December 31st wedding... Unfortunately, Denver and the Eastern Slope was paralyzed by a 24-36 blizzard, my flight was cancelled, and I never made it to the wedding... About 3 months ago, I searched my garage high and low for those skis because I acquired a midweek pass at MtBaldy, a very small ski area in Southern California, about 90 minutes drive from my home... I couldn't comprehend someone coming into my garage and swiping a pair of 212 centimeter skis out here in the high desert... I mean these are my babies, I even taught beginning ski lessons for a season on my 212s and I get a kick out of standing in a crowded lift line listening to folks chatter about "the dude with the long boards"...LOL... I finally called my nephew to see if, perchance, I left the skis at his house when I last skid on Leap Day 2008 even though the orange Solomon bag in which they were packed for the flight from LAX to DEN is sitting in my garage next to my other collectables ... He said, they are in a box in my attic... You shipped them out before my wedding... (Oh what a relief to hear those words!)
Rather than shelling out $50 for FedEx to deliver them back to the desert, I will mount some brand spanking new Head bindings on a pair of 204 cm PRE M5As I picked up for $9 plus tax at a local 2nd hand store... After 4 years and 10 months I will fall off the wagon and resume my addiction to skiing... No, I am going to jump off the wagon and I look forward to enjoying my relapse...
I am also sitting on a pair of K2 Four Competitions (I think 207cm) that have not been drilled for bindings... I might indulge in those later in the season...
As I observe the short fat ski madness consume the general skiing population, and read about some of the serious injuries and fatalities, I doubt if I will make that transition any time soon... I realize they can turn on a dime and reach equivalent speeds of my long skis, but at 60 years of age, I don't believe I would feel secure on short sticks as I do on "straight skis"... Especially if I am about to drop into the Hobacks at Jackson Hole in shin deep breakable crud, or worse yet, the famed "bullet proof" hard pack...
If one is blessed with the opportunity to ski 6 or 7 days a week for a few concecutive seasons, one should develop the skill and prowess to ski any snow condition on any ski as follows: maintain your body weight over the balls of your feet, angulate (turn) the skis with your lower body (from the hips down),while keeping your upper body, (chest, shoulders and arms), perpendicular to the fall line... Don't sit back on your heels... As soon as you do, you lose control of the front of the ski and slide, rather than carve your turns... And don't plant a pole and allow your shoulder to follow your arm because it takes your whole body out of position to make the next turn...
Sorry if I got sidetracked a bit, but I think those of you that still ski boards that are designed to support the height and weight of the human form can relate to my comments...
Thanks for starting this thread, Eperot...
When I was a powder pig in Steamboat, my partner hailed from Sugarloaf in the days they turned a water hose on at the top of the FIS trail to make blue-ice... Do they still do that? Some very good skiers in your neck of the woods... Gotta go... GLAZO...
Nothing NOS, but all original owner (except the 223s):
Volkl: P9: 213 SG (1989 w/Derbyflex), 223 DH (1990-ish, ESS-Var)
Explosiv: 203 SL (1990), 210 GS (1990) ESS-Var
Comp Pro 205 (1992, Geze)
Rossi: 3G 207s (1987, Rotamat FD/M4), 9S 201s (late '90s); 9X 203s (late '90s); CXS 205 (late '90s); Bandit X 191 (2000-ish), RPM 17 184 (2004)
Salomon: S9000 3S 203 (1993-ish, Marker MR)
Kastle: RX Synergy 205 (1988, Rotamat FD/M4)
Tour Randonée 180 (1989, Salewa lockable plates)
Atomic: ARC 935 205 (1994)
Head: Standard (1957, 205, round tips, phenolic bases, originally mounted with Cubcos so no front-throw holes) mounted on the garage wall
Finally, my dad's old ridgetops from the 1940s, with flexy cables and beartrap toes, also mounted on the wall.
More old skis than bindings to match, but all remountable and skiable. The 3Gs are especially pristine for having had a lot of use, but all in very nice cosmetic condition. When I lived in Bend for six years in the 1990s, I'd take the 223s out now and then on uncrowded corduroy mornings for a couple of hours just for pure speed. My avatar pic is on the 213s. The 3Gs and Synergys have Salomon rental-binding brakes adapted to work with the pre-brake Rotamat/M4 bindings.
Ones I wish I still had: 1967 Rossi Strato (207), Allais Major (215); first-year K2 Comps (207); Molnar Green (190); Spalding Numero Uno (207); PK mudbucket boots; Scott SuperPro boots...
Gotta love the new stuff, but gotta respect your elders....
Funny comments. I just found my old Rossi STS in my parent's garage. I'd call them unskiable though, since they've been baking in a garage in southern California for 25 years.
What I miss (for purely selfish reasons) is the easy access to cheap gear that we had in California in the 1990s. As snowboarding took off, old school ski shops were closing left and right. Plus, general sporting goods shops were getting out the ski business. The result was a steady supply of bargain bin skis, bindings, boots and gear. Admittedly, a lot of the gear was horrible (anyone recall when there were Spalding skis?), but there was good stuff to be had. I recall a store in Lake Forest, CA that had hundreds of pairs of Olins at their going out of business sale.
My best purchase was three sets of Ess-Var bindings. $85 for one 614 and two 512. That was in 1992 or so. I was still skiing one of the 512s as recently as 2005, when they were mounted to my circa 1997 Atomic Beta Carves.
I still pine for my Nordica mid-entry boots too. All day comfort that I've never since replicated.
Still, my modern gear skis so much easier (boot comfort notwithstanding), that I can't see going back to the old stuff for any reason other than a lark.
I ran into a problem recently in that my local ski shop will not work on them, telling me that its an insurance thing. I feel they are trying to force a sale of a new package on me any thoughts????
It really pissed me off, after all this time now they wont work on them....
Ah, yes, the indemnified list. I go back to the era of the first Lipe binding testing devices. Gordon Lipe (rhymes with pipe) was a ski-safety pioneer in the 1960s who developed a lot of the first real consciousness of anti-friction, shock absorption, and tuning early bindings for consistent release. I still have my old personal LIpe Release Check, a little tool with a calibrated, spring-loaded plunger and handle on an aluminum base. You'd set the ski on the base and push the plunger against the side of the boot sole at the toe to measure the force required to release the toepiece. The modern stuff like Wintersteiger works essentially the same way, albeit automated and computer-controlled.
I was abnormally terrified of a ski injury when I was young and became a ski mechanic obsessed with good binding operation. In fact, I told my late older brother that his old Marker longthong rig was dangerous (not to mention unnecessary for boot support) with his rigid Rosemount boots, but what did Little Brother know? Two weeks later his best friend and I hauled him off the hill with a badly broken leg.
With that background (and a lawyer's training and decades of mounting and adjusting my own gear), I'm skeptical of the modern aversion to older bindings. There is a long list of "indemnifiable" bindings (meaning the insurers will cover retailer liability if an injured customer sues claiming maladjustment or defective design), but IMHO, there are plenty of bindings made in the last 25 years or so that didn't make the list but can be used safely if kept clean, lubricated, and properly adjusted with a bias toward setting them light and increasing retention as needed. In fact, you should be able to twist your toes out to take your skis off. Just sayin'...
With that background (and a lawyer's training and decades of mounting and adjusting my own gear), I'm skeptical of the modern aversion to older bindings. There is a long list of "indemnifiable" bindings (meaning the insurers will cover retailer liability if an injured customer sues claiming maladjustment or defective design), but IMHO, there are plenty of bindings made in the last 25 years or so that didn't make the list but can be used safely if kept clean, lubricated, and properly adjusted with a bias toward setting them light and increasing retention as needed. In fact, you should be able to twist your toes out to take your skis off. Just sayin'...
I just came across the indemnified list this morning while seeking info about mounting my new HEAD FREEFLEX PLUS11 bindings... They were introduced a few years ago but Level 9 sports had a few new pairs in the box for $86 plus shipping... They had the narrowest ski brake (72mm?) I could find at an affordable price... I am mounting them on a pair of PRE M5As (mentioned in my post a couple days ago)... The PREs are 68 mm at the waist...
From your lawyer's training, but moreso from your ski-tech experience, DanLassen, do you recommend having the bindings mounted by a certified tech just to be covered by someone's liability insurance(LOL)...???
The PRES are drilled for bindings but the bolt pattern doesn't match the HEAD bindings... I have always done my own tuning and swapped bindings on several pairs of skis 25 years ago when I was skiing regularly, (when the legal aspects were rarely discussed)... I always set the tension so I can twist out of the binding standing on flat hardpack... The HEAD bindings are on the indemnified list... (my e-mail is glazoramik1@juno.com if you want to reply directly)
As an aside, back to the original inquiry of this thread, I have a pair of KAZAMA - Glory No. 2 - 205 cm combination specials that I rescued from a garbage dumpster aabout 20 years ago... They were produced for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics... I'll get back to describing them later, but they are quite an interesting view of early technology... GLAZO
From your lawyer's training, but moreso from your ski-tech experience, DanLassen, do you recommend having the bindings mounted by a certified tech just to be covered by someone's liability insurance(LOL)...???
The PRES are drilled for bindings but the bolt pattern doesn't match the HEAD bindings... I have always done my own tuning and swapped bindings on several pairs of skis 25 years ago when I was skiing regularly, (when the legal aspects were rarely discussed)... I always set the tension so I can twist out of the binding standing on flat hardpack... The HEAD bindings are on the indemnified list... (my e-mail is glazoramik1@juno.com if you want to reply directly)
As an aside, back to the original inquiry of this thread, I have a pair of KAZAMA - Glory No. 2 - 205 cm combination specials that I rescued from a garbage dumpster aabout 20 years ago... They were produced for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics... I'll get back to describing them later, but they are quite an interesting view of early technology... GLAZO
Freehand mounting is not rocket science, but it does demand attention to detail and triple-checking. I've mounted from factory jigs, a couple of homemade alignment templates, paper templates, and carefully measuring and marking to ensure that the hole pattern is square and perfect before drilling. Dry-align everything (allowing for the rearward travel of the heel unit on click-in--there are usually alignment marks on the base and the clamping mechanism, so you can see how far it has to move), then measure between the units, flip them over, and take an impression in paper or thin cardboard. Decide where you want the boot centered longitudinally, and align your new paper template on the skis. Mark the holes and measure several times. When it's as perfect as you can get it, lightly punch the marks so the drill bit centers, and use an undersized bit for the first cut (so the bit doesn't dance and drift). So you should be able to mount the Heads on the PREs if you're reasonably competent on the bench. Remember to use an appropriate tap to pre-thread the holes, and secure the screws with epoxy glue. Be especially attentive to how deep the holes are vis-a-vis screw length.
The liability insurance protects the manufacturer and the retailer that installed the bindings, not the customer/skier. If you hurt yourself after a shop mounts and adjusts, and your friendly local contingent-fee shark persuades you to sue them (typically products liability--design or manufacturing defects--or negligence in mounting/adjusting), the manufacturer will back the retailer and the insurer will fund the defense, that's all.
Kazamas? That reminds me, apropos of the original post, that my first fiberglass skis were Yamaha Epoxi GSs in 1967. Having progressed through wood skis with screw-on edges and Hart Standard metal skis, they were a revelation...
... I have a pair of KAZAMA - Glory No. 2 - 205 cm combination specials that I rescued from a garbage dumpster aabout 20 years ago... They were produced for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics...
Are you perhaps thinking of the 1972 Sapporo Olympics? Tokyo in '64 were the Summer games. My sister had a pair of Kazamas. Ah, those were the days---not really
Seems some of you folks know a lot about old skis...
I'm a Canadian skier living in Austria, and besides my Black Diamond Aspect 176's, my Völkl Ractiger SL 170's and my Völkl Karma 177's I'd really like to get a good pair of fast, old straight skis. Partly for the skiing fun-factor, partly for the shock effect :D
I have ridden old 200-length, stiff straight skis in the past on several occasions and I really enjoyed them. However, I really don't know which pairs I find on Ebay are worth it.
I have found one pair not too far away, in Innsbruck: Atomic ARC Team Bionic RS 200 with Tyrolia 390 bindings.
Anyone know something about them? Thanks muchly :)
Andrew
The Kastle RX National Team SG is nice. It makes both short and long turns (says so right on the top sheet 
).
More importently I would look for a ski with a better (more reliable/ safer) binding. or consider mounting a newer (read still indemnified) binding. lots of the 80's 90's bindingsd have reached if not surpassed the lifespan of teh plastic housings and toe and heel wings.
I just checked out your link the the Atomic skis. I have the exact same ski/ binding combo except 207cm. Great skis very fast and stable at speed. high quality workmanship and materials. however the bindings may be suspect, especially if you do not know thier history. I've had mine since new and would probably still ski them but it wouldn't surprise me if the plastic decided to fail. I last skied these 3 or 4 years ago.
Royal
Actually, the slur was "Explodamat" for the elegantly simple and rock-solid Rotamat, whether in the original fixed base or the FD turntable, but only the Simplex toepiece also broke open and had to be reset. The groundbreaking M4 toepiece solved that with its independently releasing side wings. True, for those who crashed out of their bindings often, Markers of that era weren't the best, but we're talking about the years when front-throw cable bindings were still commonplace and the high-performance alternative was the LDR longthong turntable, which had no heel release at all but was crucial to good control with leather boots. If you didn't crash and release a lot, they were very lightweight and mechanically efficient.
Putting the Rotamat back together was really pretty simple and quick: engage the adjustable-length release pin first and squeeze the other end of the spring against the triangular frame with your hand. The Simplex also simply squeezed back from its double-pivot release.
The real virtue of those Markers was retention. I remember seeing an article about the percentage of release force required before there was any movement of the boot in the binding, and the Rotamat/M4 was up in the nineties (90 percent or more of release force before any movement), whereas the Look Nevada Grand Prix started to move at something like 60 percent.
The true key to making the Rotamat/Simplex work was a combination of accurate boot notching (to engage the teeth on the toepiece), height adjustment (pre-DIN standards), and balanced forward pressure. The Simplex would flex and return nicely with the right forward pressure, provided those notches were properly cut and carefully aligned when getting into the binding. Maladjusted, there was the dreaded "Marker-out" phenomenon, where the Simplex would spontaneously pop into release while skiing. They were not idiot-proof.
I still have a couple of pairs of vintage (1980s) skis with Rotamat FD/M4s, with some early Salomon rental-binding brakes I adapted. One cool thing was that I could rotate the FD turntable and hold the brakes up for tuning and waxing. I'd ski on them today, especially the Rossignol 3G 207s.
I'm new here and am glad that there are still some of you who still run the old school stuff.
Here's what I run..
Volkl Welt-Cup Explosive R (SL model) 195cm
Look HP99 Bindings
Salomon Exp boots
Scott Poles
Of all my stuff the bindings are the oldest. I got to say that the Look HP99 Bindings are amazing. They were bought new about 1985 I think and I got them as a hand-me-down.
They probably sat idle for a few years before I got them but from 1990 - 1992 I had them fitted to a pair of Fischer Vacuum 200's which I ran about 4 days a week up at Okemo Mt. Vermont. In 1993 I had them re-mounted to the Volkls.
I had posted in a few other forums that I'm trying to find parts for them. Any information is appreciated.
Thanks
Had a lady at the hill last Sunday skiing on Olin ballet skis with Salomon 444 bindings. I offered her $ 100.00 in the parking lot as they were leaving but no go. I think they just thought I was creepy.
Great Stuff on the Old Skis, I remember back in the day late 60s early 70's some of us simply could not afford new skis like some others in the team. I always wanted a new set of Atomics etc. Then Atomic for some reason brought out full lenght stickers orange with big black letters "Atomic Atomic" once they were on the old 210's you could not tell the difference from 50 meters against the real new ones, we thought they were fantastic for sure. i was around 12 at the time and on 210's needless to say my Slalom points were way worse than my GS etc. Now i regret every time i give away my old skis.
I still occasionally ski my 205cm Volkl P9 RS's and my 222cm Blizzard Thermo V20 DH boards, both with Ess bindings and Dynafit Comp 3f's.
Eric, you write "but I don't want easy. I don't want technology making me a better skier...I like my skillmaking me a better skier." My sentiments precisely!!! I like to earn my spurs; I don't want anything handed to me. And then I can take pride in my accomplishments. Conversely I have no one else to blame if I eff up--not the equipment, just me.
Cheers, (I don't dare use the showbiz expression, "Break a leg", LOL)
SunnyRainbowHeart
Eric, you write "but I don't want easy. I don't want technology making me a better skier...I like my skillmaking me a better skier." My sentiments precisely!!! I like to earn my spurs; I don't want anything handed to me. And then I can take pride in my accomplishments. Conversely I have no one else to blame if I eff up--not the equipment, just me.
Cheers, (I don't dare use the showbiz expression, "Break a leg", LOL)
SunnyRainbowHeart
This also applies to over large bold print.
mtcyclist, I cannot believe that I am being chastised and monitored by the INTERNET ETIQUETTE POLICE: you.
What harm is bolding my letters, making them a larger size than microscopic, and using colored font? NONE whatsoever.
And, BTW, I don't adhere to the arbitary, absurd "etiquette" guidelines, which God-knows-who thought up, that capitalization is "shouting". Capitalization is for emphasis and legibility. As are font colors and font size. They constitute style, not content.
In a world where so many people fail to say "please" and "thank you"; people are more insensitive than ever (e.g., they pass by injured people on the street without even looking); where lots of people in public burp, expel air from their nether regions, curse (e.g., the F word is all over printed literature, television and motion pictures as well as internet postings); more and more people ignore real laws, whether traffic regulations or more serious ones, I'm supposed to take seriously some stilted, abnormally sensitive "rule" that one should not CAPITALIZE??? And I'm supposed to knuckle under to another arbitary, senseless rule that I am not to use large print--or larger than conventional--or bold my text? This is phony etiquette and has as much to do with etiquette as plastic fruit in department store display windows has to do with real food.
Oh, please. Next thing someone will be trying to censor our dreams, LOL.
BTW, since you initiated the criticism, might I likewise indulge in criticism and point out that you committed a grammatical error when you wrote “over large”? The correct phrase you should have used is “overly large”, “large” being an adjective which modifies “print”. “Overly” is an adverb and only an adverb can modify an adjective. Now that’s a legitimate criticism--it’s an actual, not an arbitrary rule of grammar, LOL.
SunnyRainbowHeart
LOL@ the grammar and etiquette throw down in the old school ski thread..
All I have to say is..
P.S. Welcome to EpicSki Sunny..
Owwww. That hurt.
Wow. I guess he/she told me? And without even consulting a style guide at that!
Hi, mtcyclist. I am most definitely a "she", LOL.
My very best,
Sunny RainbowHeart
Given the age of this thread, I won't recount skis I've contributed to landfills. I will mention I still use 30 year old Reflex 7001 poles, the ones with the fluting on the lower third, every day out there. Been all around the continent with them and they're still pretty.
