New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SLALOM SKIS

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 

Im a J2 racer in wisconsin. Im currently racing a pair of 150 Rossignol WC SL. i don't know what year they are but pre 2003. they were awesome until this year. Im looking at either the Fischer hole-in-skis or the Rossignol Slant Nose skis. The courses I ski are generally icy and rarely do my runs last more then 45 seconds. I am 5' 10" and growing and weigh about 145. I would probably get 165s. I was mainly looking at these two pairs because of their revolutionary ideas, but am not closed off to the idea of heads, blizzards, or volkls. any help would be great, thanks.

post #2 of 7

Hi - Welcome to Epic. I'm 165 lbs rec race (back east) on old Rossi WC 9S SL's (165), the gold/black/green ones with the box, so maybe a couple of years more recent than yours. NIce grip, but flexier than some SL's, smoother than most. If you like that feel, I see a lot of J's on the current Slant Noses. And also a lot on the new Fischers, assume like all Fischers, they are stiff, serious ice skates. Suspect it comes down to the feel and flex pattern you like, probably hard to go wrong with either. 

post #3 of 7

First, this Fischer hole idea is pure marketing thing, not "revolutionary idea" ;) I don't have enough experiences with Rossi, but I would say their tip fits into same category as Fischer's hole, so I wouldn't put my money into these skis just because of that.

Now to skis... I don't really know what "icy and hard" means for you, but on WC (most likely icy has different meaning there then on your races), Fischer skis are at the moment pretty much best thing you can get... at least for SL and GS. So if your icy track is really icy and not just "snow harder then on usual slopes", Fischer would be my choice.

PS: Before someone mentions, a little disclaimer from my side. I admit I have been on Fischer all my life.. before when I was still racing, then when I was tech on WC for few of Fischer guys, and even now, when I ski just for fun (now it's purely economical thing, since these are more or less only skis I can get for free biggrin.gif). But that's all connection I have with Fischer, so I don't need to "sell" their skis.

post #4 of 7
Thread Starter 

how about the slant nose dynastars. ive read they are pretty similar to the Rossi Sl skis but like 250 bucks less. I have a pair of Dynastar GS skis and they are awesome for how i ski the 'sconie' courses

post #5 of 7

I think you'll need to get yours hands on some and test the flex patterns cause at 145 you're pretty light and could struggle to really work some of the mentioned skis.

 

 

if you can get hold of a pair, there is a fischer without the hole, which is softer, they call it the S tune. Still a RD ski, just without the hole and softer

 

I've not played with a new one, but 2 seasons ago blizzard was quite soft in the tip with a nice spring in the tail. All other mentioned skis, and most RD SL skis for that matter, are pretty stiff.

 

 

Not to kick off an argument or anything (especially with my first post!!) but the hole and slant nose are more than marketing schemes. Looking at them from a purely scientific point of view, the skis are both lighter in the tip (think i read somewhere around 20%) than most skis, enabling you to go from turn to turn faster as the swing weight is reduced.

 

Thats not to say you'll notice it though, as I skied on fischer for years and didnt notice the difference when i first got the holey ones. However i do know guys skiing on the slant nose (both rossi and dynastar) who say its like skiing on a shorter ski and really them.

 

 

 

post #6 of 7
I will be racing on Blizzard Race SLR Mag IQ 160 this season in my adult league. So far I have only skied them one day for fun and one day at a race clinic and I am liking them.

I missed my frst slalom race of the season last weekend as I was on my way home from the Beav, but am looking forward to this weekend's races. I will post up what I think after Sundays race.

Rick G
post #7 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by jknock View Post
Not to kick off an argument or anything (especially with my first post!!) but the hole and slant nose are more than marketing schemes. Looking at them from a purely scientific point of view, the skis are both lighter in the tip (think i read somewhere around 20%) than most skis, enabling you to go from turn to turn faster as the swing weight is reduced.


Theoretically this is true, but you need to look on this from different point of view. For beginning let's stay with alpine skis. This year's SL skis have 2 times smaller hole in tip then previous versions. Reason is, that tip was breaking from gate hits, so they made it stronger by making hole smaller. I'm pretty sure, you could do same thing with picking different materials, while keeping hole same, and keeping weight down. I was also talking with quite few Fischer riders on WC, when hole skis came out, and many of them were claiming, you see difference (personally I don't, but that doesn't mean a thing), while on the other side, quite few of them didn't notice a thing.

Now to part, which definitely made me believe this hole thing is pure marketing... xc skis. Before Fischer started to put holes into their xc skis, they had really nice looking ski with carbon tip. Tip was extremely light, and you could actually feel difference between carbon tip ski and old ski. Tip was just 2cm or so high, with a bit thicker center part of tip, and extremely thin sides. When they put hole in ski, tip went up to 10 years old standard height (about 5cm), whole tip is back to 5mm or so thickness and when you swing "old" carbon tip ski, or new hole ski, you actually feel difference... carbon tip swing is a whole lot nicer with less weight and less inertia. But it doesn't fit into new Fischer hole profile, so hole it is.

So that's why I believe all this hole thing is just marketing and nothing more. But of course I might be wrong.

PS: No argument, just opinions exchange :)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion