or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Anyone know about the Rossignol 9SL I-Box?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Anyone know about the Rossignol 9SL I-Box?

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 

Well? Maybe looking for something non-FIS that still holds like it's on rails with a .5~75 and 3'ish tune. Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

post #2 of 52

Hi - I race Masters on a pair, .7/3 tune, the old 2009's or thereabouts. For a FIS SL, they're on the forgiving side, superior plate and damp, so work well for freeskiing harder conditions as long as you realize they're designed to be turning all the time. Can grumble through bumps, but not exactly fun. Surprisingly stabile in variable hardpack with piles of mild crud at speed. And of course, they laugh at transparent ice. I think the recent ones are a tough beefier but still have a rep for being more user friendly than say a Blizzard or Head. Those, not sure I'd want outside a course.

 

So IMO if you want a dedicated hard snow carver, and like to be on edge, these make more sense than a pair of rec carvers that cost twice as much. OTOH, if you're in the PNW, less clear how often you'd need them unless you race...

post #3 of 52

Similar comments as Beyond... Got the 2013 with i-box, 171 cm, 0.5/2 ( getting at 3 for next year more for curiosity than necessity...).

Amazed by how it can be a machine but also be doable in bumps and trees  and being fun even in spring conditions...

I do also own some carvers (rx12) but must admit that since I bought the sl9, my carvers don't touch snow that often...

post #4 of 52
Thread Starter 
Mogsie, what do you weigh?
post #5 of 52

210 pounds; 6 feet; green eyes, Brown hair...biggrin.gif

post #6 of 52
Thread Starter 
Hmmmmmm. Not my type, but I did know a very nice lass from Quebec City that was.... Strong skier too.smile.gif. I was thinking about ski length/weight when you mentioned you skied the 171. That'd be my choice, but it's not available. Next down is 166. If you see Helen, let me know. I might track her down and marry her. smile.gif
post #7 of 52

At the risk of breaking into the romantic interlude, would note that there are some pretty big WC guys on 165-166's. The 9S box is literally unbendable, and the ski in general can handle anybody lighter than a NFL linebacker. OTOH, the standard length requires a certain, ah, attention to fore-aft relations for taller guys (I'm 6' also, just vastly lighter). I like that, keeps me from getting sloppy. But some might consider it a PITA. 

post #8 of 52
Thread Starter 
Just looking for a more 'tech' race ski that rails and holds on hard snow and don't want to spend a ton pf money. Everything else is covered. I guess I was wondering how different these would ski compared to a FIS SL ski... They sound pretty darn nice and might do the trick.
post #9 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

At the risk of breaking into the romantic interlude, would note that there are some pretty big WC guys on 165-166's. The 9S box is literally unbendable, and the ski in general can handle anybody lighter than a NFL linebacker. OTOH, the standard length requires a certain, ah, attention to fore-aft relations for taller guys (I'm 6' also, just vastly lighter). I like that, keeps me from getting sloppy. But some might consider it a PITA. 

remember the current 9S is different from the old 9S which was the FIS ski.  Current iteration is the civilian model with a different plate to the proper FIS/race stock Sl. As i have suggested multiple times in the past I can not see any sensible reason to go with this version rather than the real race stock  despite all the scare stories perpetuated here about how they are not for mere mortals.  Being a mere mortal myself I would always stick with the race stock version.  There is a reason it is the almost universal ski of choice for coaches.....

 

Interestingly enough, I was out at Rose on closing day on sunday and, being end of season didnt go up till lunch time, by which time it was getting pretty sloppy.  I started out on my 165 Blizzard WC Sl and then switched to my Blizzard The One, 184, 110waist(?), rockered etc which, according to all the wide ski  fan boys biggrin.gifshould be good in these conditions..... well, Guess what, the FIS slalom ski was every bit as effective (and more fun!) if not better...  in conditions where it supposedly should not work....popcorn.gif

 

Oh, and the current Rossi/Dynastar race stock is a great ski, one of teh best Slaloms around.....and as the owner of a couple of pairs of genuine WC ones, I can testify that they are very skiable!

post #10 of 52
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the input SS!
post #11 of 52

Hi

I'm 6ft, also on the heavy side.

I've skied the following SLs:
- Head Rebels WC RD 165: grippiest thing Ive ever skied, heavy and not forgiving (but I guess that makes you a better person hehe, at least skier).
- Atomic D2 SL redster 165: also nice grip, but much more forgiving (really want to buy one of those D2, GS or SL)

Problem with both is that they are quite expensive.

I also skied the Rossi 8SL 165, which was a bit too soft, and also is an intermediate ski.

I wanted to try some fischers WC, but the day the renting only had GS ones, but by the looks of the GS, I cant see the SL of them being bad.

Except for the atomics, I saw lots of Volkl Racetiger around to sell (less pricey, maybe), so maybe take a look on this one? And I have a friend that swears on the Dynastars racing ones.


Cheers

post #12 of 52
post #13 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

remember the current 9S is different from the old 9S which was the FIS ski.  Current iteration is the civilian model with a different plate to the proper FIS/race stock Sl. 

Yep, I was wrong. Assumed that the I-Box had to be the FIS, cuz that's story for my year. But a quick trip to the Rossi site reveals all sorts of I-Box's. Which must be different; mine's milled alu thick enough that King Kong couldn't flex it. That said, the ski's a sweetheart for freeskiing on firm days, and quick quick quick. Doesn't threaten my RX12's for versatility, though. 

 

Question: A look at the Rossi tech manual shows that the R18 is a classic two piece plate. The I-Box, obviously, is a one piece. Do I assume that the current WC SL makes up for the loss of th I-Box torsion bar by internal means, eh, more Titanal there, or is it a different set of design assumptions altogether? Curious how it feels relative to my 2008-2009 sticks. 


Edited by beyond - 4/24/13 at 7:25am
post #14 of 52

Talk about confusing. Which Rossi Slalom are you talking about? They all have similar names.

Here's Rossi's list of slalom skis:

They all have "Power Turn" rocker.

 

 

From the top:

http://www.rossignol.com/US/US/alpine-men-skis-race.html

 

RADICAL WC SL FIS SLANTNOSE R18

http://www.rossignol.com/tzr/scripts/resizer.php?filename=CAT1011/zoom1/32/06/4orf4riaily0&mime=image%2Fjpeg&&originalname=RA2AW01_RC1A002_RADICAL-WC-SL-FIS-R18-SLANT-NOSE_AXIAL2-WC-150MFX.jpg&geometry=x904%3E&cli=-rotate+90

 

World Cup SL ski for world cup athletes and competitive racers. Our best competitors uses the same WC sandwich construction and wood core on the World Cup circuit. Specific Slant Nose tip technology with asymmetrical tips improves swing weight and inertia. FIS Approved.
100% Racing
RB: Axial² World Cup 200/150 MFX

 

Reference RA2AW01
Size Available 150,155,165
Structure RECTANGULAR SANDWICH
Core WOOD FIBRO/METAL
Camber height HIGH
Rocker height LOW
Camber length *90%*
Rocker length *10%*
Tip SLANT NOSE
Sidecut Confidential
Ski Radius 12m
System R18

 

This one is only available in 150cm:

RADICAL WC SL FIS iBox RACING

RADICAL WC SL FIS iBox RACING

World Cup SL ski designed for strong J4 and J3 athletes. Uses the same construction as the World Cup SL FIS ski with I-Box Composite Plate. Specific Slant Nose tip technology with asymmetrical tips improves swing weight and inertia. FIS powerful ski with softer plate for strong lighter weight athletes.
100% Racing
Recommended Binding: Axial² World Cup 120

 

Reference RA2AW02
Size Available 150

 

 

 

RADICAL 9SL SLANTNOSE TI IBOX

RADICAL 9SL SLANTNOSE TI IBOX

 

The new Radical 9SL Slant Nose Ti is a full-throttle, fall line slalom ski for technical and race league skiers. World Cup sandwich construction, Oversize technology and Power Turn Rocker combine for a powerful and agile short turn radius ripper. Power Turn Rocker delivers faster turn initiation for more aggressive lines, while Slant Nose asymmetrical tips improve swing weight to put the ski on edge even faster. The 9SL is a full-on uber-carve tool with a ton of energy and snap for precise, short turn arching.
100% On-Trail
RB: Axial² WC 140/120

 

Reference RA2BN01
Size Available 156,161,166,171
Structure MINICAP SANDWICH
Core WOOD FIBRO/METAL
Camber height HIGH
Rocker height LOW
Camber length *90%*
Rocker length *10%*
Tip SLANT NOSE
Sidecut 122-68-104
Profile sidecut OVERSIZE
Ski Radius 12.8
System IBOX

RADICAL 9SL SLANTNOSE TI TPX

 

RADICAL 9SL SLANTNOSE TI TPX

The new Radical 9SL Slant Nose Ti is a full-throttle, fall line slalom ski for technical and race league skiers. World Cup sandwich construction, Oversize technology and Power Turn Rocker combine for a powerful and agile short turn radius ripper. Power Turn Rocker delivers faster turn initiation for more aggressive lines, while Slant Nose asymmetrical tips improve swing weight to put the ski on edge even faster. The 9SL is a full-on uber-carve tool with a ton of energy and snap for precise, short turn arching.
100% On-Trail
IB: Axial² 120 TPX

 

Reference RA2BN02
Size Available 156,161,166,171
Structure MINICAP SANDWICH
Core WOOD FIBRO/METAL
Camber height HIGH
Rocker height LOW
Camber length *90%*
Rocker length *10%*
Tip SLANT NOSE
Sidecut 122-68-104
Profile sidecut OVERSIZE
Ski Radius 12.8
System TPX

 

 

Plate systems:

 

 I thought the old system used on the CS70 and CS80 was garbage. Practically ruined great skis. It sounds like this one is metal and not plastic and hopefully much better.

 

 

TPX

 

d68hw7sbkxa00&mime=image%2Fjpeg&&originalname=R1213_TPX.jpg&t=R1213_TPX.jpg

 

A new larger metal binding-to-plate interface increases torsional stiffness which translates to stronger performance and precision. A control beam combined with Twin Vas (Visco material) that absorbs vibrations, facilitates rebound directing pressure to the extremities. The tool-free binding simply slides on the integrated TPX system for easy adjustment.

 

IBOX

 

d68hw7rrq9ich&mime=image%2Fjpeg&&originalname=R1213_IBOX.jpg&t=R1213_IBOX.jpg

 

The i-Box plate combines a rigid center i-beam, minimizing torsion power loss under the foot. Two external lifters allow the ski to flex at the extremities, torsionally adapting to the terrain. Recommended bindings: World cup i-box Wc (adult): Axial2 Wc mxf only World Cup i-box composite (Junior): axial2, axium

 

 Power Turn Rocker:

 

This ski has high traditional camber for 90% of its length, delivering power as well as excellent snowfeel and grip on the piste. A slight rocker over the remaining 10%, at the tip, makes turn initiation easier and more controllable. Piste - Precision - Grip - Power - Speed - Acceleration.

 

 

post #15 of 52

Tog, Rossignol rivals Head in terms of "worst ski names imaginable".

post #16 of 52
Thread Starter 

Tog, ski #3.

post #17 of 52
Originally Posted by KevinF View Post

Tog, Rossignol rivals Head in terms of "worst ski names imaginable".

It's so ridiculous!

I mean once you spend a bunch of time and learn the names, you get it, but it's completely absurd. Then you have to remember them with all the other brands' absurdities too.

I've learned now it's this:

 

"World Cup Slalom" Called:

Radical WC SL FIS iBox Racing - full laminate construction, top level plate (I'm sure it's not really Wcup construction but whatever)

 

Recreational Slaloms:

Radical 9sl  Slant Nose Ti Ibox - "minicap" sandwich construction, top level plate

Radical 9sl  Slant Nose Ti Tpx   -  as above but with questionable plate system that is easily adjustable for different boots. Presumably softer due to plate.

 

How do people like the "Power Turn" rocker? Does it make the ski better in bumps and trees??


Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

Interestingly enough, I was out at Rose on closing day on sunday and, being end of season didnt go up till lunch time, by which time it was getting pretty sloppy.  I started out on my 165 Blizzard WC Sl and then switched to my Blizzard The One, 184, 110waist(?), rockered etc which, according to all the wide ski  fan boys biggrin.gifshould be good in these conditions..... well, Guess what, the FIS slalom ski was every bit as effective (and more fun!) if not better...  in conditions where it supposedly should not work....

 

Oh, and the current Rossi/Dynastar race stock is a great ski, one of teh best Slaloms around.....and as the owner of a couple of pairs of genuine WC ones, I can testify that they are very skiable!

Let's keep this quiet, shall we? Otherwise, you'll have to list your qualifications of exactly how many "modern skis" you've tried.

 

I saw your collection of Fischer race skis and they were are "prehistoric". Had they even discovered Bronze yet when they made those?

Besides, on The One's, while skiing in the slush, you could've turned around and pulled out a ham sandwich from your pack, eaten it, put the wrapper back, then pulled out a bottle of water, drunk that, returned the empty back to the pack, and then zipped everything up.  All that without falling down while skiing the mashed. Surely that's worth something?

 

Fwiw, I noticed a similar thing in skiing the Blizzard 8.5ti then my 5 yr old Blizzard slalom. The 8.5 was no huge slush slayer and I actually preferred the slalom ski.

 

   Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

post #18 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Yep, I was wrong. Assumed that the I-Box had to be the FIS, cuz that's story for my year. But a quick trip to the Rossi site reveals all sorts of I-Box's. Which must be different; mine's milled alu thick enough that King Kong couldn't flex it. That said, the ski's a sweetheart for freeskiing on firm days, and quick quick quick. Doesn't threaten my RX12's for versatility, though. 

 

Question: A look at the Rossi tech manual shows that the R18 is a classic two piece plate. The I-Box, obviously, is a one piece. Do I assume that the current WC SL makes up for the loss of th I-Box torsion bar by internal means, eh, more Titanal there, or is it a different set of design assumptions altogether? Curious how it feels relative to my 2008-2009 sticks. 

 

Not much experience of the older I-box plate.  My understanding was that the plate was more rigid because the Rossis of that era had a more noodly quality so tried to compensate with the plate.  When they went to the slant-nose slalom there was a pretty radical transformation of the ski, which made it a much stronger ski. The plate also changed and you can actually adjust it as well with the inserts.  Overall effect was to transform it into one of the best slalom skis around.   

 

Based on my experiences I would rate the Rossi/Dynastar, the atomic (now non D2) and the Blizzard/Nordica as the top trio of race stock slaloms currently.  The Fischer is good but always feels a little more dead IMHO, closer to the Atomic D2.  I like a bit more liveliness in a slalom ski.  Head gets some good reports , havent skied teh current model though and hated the ones I had a few years back - too heavy and clunky in gates

post #19 of 52

Thanks, this is helpful. Had a hunch the newer ones were different build altogether, sounds like the right direction. 

post #20 of 52

eek.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

 

 

How do people like the "Power Turn" rocker? Does it make the ski better in bumps and trees??

 

 Not sure how much it works but my Dynastar sl have the tip rocker, with a 2011 top sheet, as this was in place on thh WC skis before it filtered down to the regular race stock. All I know is that they work incredibly well, best slalom ski I have been on and have improved my results

 

 

Let's keep this quiet, shall we? Otherwise, you'll have to list your qualifications of exactly how many "modern skis" you've tried. wink.gif 

 

Dont you know that 65 is the new 110?  You are correct though, we must not let this dirty little secret out or everyone will want to skinny up again.  Once they do I guess it will be safe for me  to take the Patrons out of the closet so I can still be perceived as a dinosaur....

 

I saw your collection of Fischer race skis and they were are "prehistoric". Had they even discovered Bronze yet when they made those?

 

Ouchmad.gif, point taken, I have now officially got rid of all but one pair of them since I always wanted to get better than bronze.......  Blizzard it is for GS henceforth!

 

 

 

Besides, on The One's, while skiing in the slush, you could've turned around and pulled out a ham sandwich from your pack, eaten it, put the wrapper back, then pulled out a bottle of water, drunk that, returned the empty back to the pack, and then zipped everything up.  All that without falling down while skiing the mashed. Surely that's worth something?  

 

True dat!

 

Fwiw, I noticed a similar thing in skiing the Blizzard 8.5ti then my 5 yr old Blizzard slalom. The 8.5 was no huge slush slayer and I actually preferred the slalom ski.

 

Like I said earlier,  sshhhhh!!!!  biggrin.gif

   Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

post #21 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

Hmmmmmm. Not my type, but I did know a very nice lass from Quebec City that was.... Strong skier too.smile.gif. I was thinking about ski length/weight when you mentioned you skied the 171. That'd be my choice, but it's not available. Next down is 166. If you see Helen, let me know. I might track her down and marry her. smile.gif

Saw her last week...She gained 50 pounds, has 4 kids, is divorced and would really like to see you again... (Run!!!!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

At the risk of breaking into the romantic interlude, would note that there are some pretty big WC guys on 165-166's. The 9S box is literally unbendable, and the ski in general can handle anybody lighter than a NFL linebacker. OTOH, the standard length requires a certain, ah, attention to fore-aft relations for taller guys (I'm 6' also, just vastly lighter). I like that, keeps me from getting sloppy. But some might consider it a PITA. 

You're wright. I know a guy, solid skier, 6'4", around 270 pounds who own the 166... He always get the lenght on wich the ski was first develop...have fun with it but like you say, he has to be careful with fore-aft... I prefer my 171...He cannot be has comfy on 166 in some conditions like I can on my 171 ( like in spring conditions...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Yep, I was wrong. Assumed that the I-Box had to be the FIS, cuz that's story for my year. But a quick trip to the Rossi site reveals all sorts of I-Box's. Which must be different; mine's milled alu thick enough that King Kong couldn't flex it. That said, the ski's a sweetheart for freeskiing on firm days, and quick quick quick. Doesn't threaten my RX12's for versatility, though. 

 

Question: A look at the Rossi tech manual shows that the R18 is a classic two piece plate. The I-Box, obviously, is a one piece. Do I assume that the current WC SL makes up for the loss of th I-Box torsion bar by internal means, eh, more Titanal there, or is it a different set of design assumptions altogether? Curious how it feels relative to my 2008-2009 sticks. 

The i-box add a lot of power... if you compare to the tpx version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

It's so ridiculous!

I mean once you spend a bunch of time and learn the names, you get it, but it's completely absurd. Then you have to remember them with all the other brands' absurdities too.

I've learned now it's this:

 

"World Cup Slalom" Called:

Radical WC SL FIS iBox Racing - full laminate construction, top level plate (I'm sure it's not really Wcup construction but whatever)

 

Recreational Slaloms:

Radical 9sl  Slant Nose Ti Ibox - "minicap" sandwich construction, top level plate

Radical 9sl  Slant Nose Ti Tpx   -  as above but with questionable plate system that is easily adjustable for different boots. Presumably softer due to plate.

 

How do people like the "Power Turn" rocker? Does it make the ski better in bumps and trees?? Didn't tried the older version ( have the 2013) and very easy initiation... doable in bumps and even more in trees! Very surprising ! Is it due to the rocker??? Can't say!

Let's keep this quiet, shall we? Otherwise, you'll have to list your qualifications of exactly how many "modern skis" you've tried.

 

I saw your collection of Fischer race skis and they were are "prehistoric". Had they even discovered Bronze yet when they made those?

Besides, on The One's, while skiing in the slush, you could've turned around and pulled out a ham sandwich from your pack, eaten it, put the wrapper back, then pulled out a bottle of water, drunk that, returned the empty back to the pack, and then zipped everything up.  All that without falling down while skiing the mashed. Surely that's worth something?

 

Fwiw, I noticed a similar thing in skiing the Blizzard 8.5ti then my 5 yr old Blizzard slalom. The 8.5 was no huge slush slayer and I actually preferred the slalom ski.

 

   Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post

eek.gif
Ouch, point taken, I have now officially got rid of all but one pair of them since I always wanted to get better than bronze.......  Blizzard it is for GS henceforth!

Hehe.. Not because they're old, because they're skinny.
(Skis < 70mm) = Ancient
(Skis < 68mm) = (Man still in caves)
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Hehe.. Not because they're old, because they're skinny.
(Skis < 70mm) = Ancient
(Skis < 68mm) = (Man still in caves)

Hey,I resemble that

And I don't think I was on on a ski more than 66 waist more than 4 days out of 50.+ so, guilty as charged rolleyes.gif
post #24 of 52
How did the Blizzard slalom compare?
I tried for one run a this years or last years Blizzard with the piston plate.
It had a beautiful even flex testing it off the snow so I thought I'd really like it. Skiing it for the brief time I did I found it extrely damp to almost dead feeling. I could see it might be great in a course cause once locked in it would be super smooth. For free skiing didn't like it but the snow was odd and the time short.
Does the piston plate affect the feel?
post #25 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

How did the Blizzard slalom compare?
I tried for one run a this years or last years Blizzard with the piston plate.
It had a beautiful even flex testing it off the snow so I thought I'd really like it. Skiing it for the brief time I did I found it extrely damp to almost dead feeling. I could see it might be great in a course cause once locked in it would be super smooth. For free skiing didn't like it but the snow was odd and the time short.
Does the piston plate affect the feel?

I rate it up there with the best of the bunch.  I have the 2012 (the 2013 is pretty much the same) and use it as my coaching/go to when I am not on a GS ski.  I would  not categorize it as dead, maybe slightly less lively than the dynastar but we are talking very small margins here. Feels like it has a slightly wider shovel than the dynastar but they both perform pretty similar.  I have to admit I have not used them in gates but I am at a camp at Mammoth at the weekend so plan to run them back to back with the dynastar and will update next week.

 

 I have also had the earlier (2010) version with the Vist plate and the Marker plate just seems to work whole lot better.  I found the same with the GS.  i run M20s on them and not had any issues with that combo.  As I posted earlier I rate it in the top 3 with the Atomic and Rossi.  Well ahead of Fischer, Head  and Volkl for me

post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

It's so ridiculous!

I mean once you spend a bunch of time and learn the names, you get it, but it's completely absurd. Then you have to remember them with all the other brands' absurdities too.

I've learned now it's this:

 

"World Cup Slalom" Called:

Radical WC SL FIS iBox Racing - full laminate construction, top level plate (I'm sure it's not really Wcup construction but whatever)

Tog, nice job pasting the actual pics. Kinda agree about the naming issues, although keep in mind that the basic nomenclature setup is at least two decades old, and the I-Box thing I think goes back to mid-2000's. But like other companies, they've extensified a successful model name/design and are in danger of losing the cache. Going back and rereading this thread, think there may still be some cross-talk confusion:

 

1) Rossi's "real" WC ski (obviously not race stock cuz it's available to anyone who wants to slap down plastic, but same basic construction) is not this ^^^^ (that's for juniors) but the WC SL FIS R18 Racing. That one has a totally different plate (two pieces, no I-Box), slightly different sidecut and radius, and have a strong supposition (also see SS's post) a beefier internal construction. So functionally a different ski. I think that's the one that SS is recommending. It'll be a serious ski, although prolly not as punishing as say a Head iSL RD. 

 

2) I'd guess that for most of us looking for a recreational SL ski, #3 (the one OP mentions) is the ticket. Dubious about #4 (the TPX), have a hunch it's like the old 9S OS, really fun, user-friendly ski with a speed and grip limit. 

 

3) I'm also intrigued about the Blizzies. Has anyone tried the WC Full Suspension SL's? I have the G-Powers and like the dampness on ice or hardpack, especially when it's rutted, agree they can feel a touch numb just cruising or in softer snow. But I think the Marker plate is $$ for actual racing. 

post #27 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Tog, nice job pasting the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvawllR34Vg&feature=youtube_gdata_player to mid-2000's. But like other companies, they've extensified a successful model name/design and are in danger of losing the cache. Going back and rereading this thread, think there may still be some cross-talk confusion:

1) Rossi's "real" WC ski (obviously not race stock cuz it's available to anyone who wants to slap down plastic, but same basic construction) is not this ^^^^ (that's for juniors) but the WC SL FIS R18 Racing. That one has a totally different plate (two pieces, no I-Box), slightly different sidecut and radius, and have a strong supposition (also see SS's post) a beefier internal construction. So functionally a different ski. I think that's the one that SS is recommending. It'll be a serious ski, although prolly not as punishing as say a Head iSL RD. 

2) I'd guess that for most of us looking for a recreational SL ski, #3 (the one OP mentions) is the ticket. Dubious about #4 (the TPX), have a hunch it's like the old 9S OS, really fun, user-friendly ski with a speed and grip limit. 

3) I'm also intrigued about the Blizzies. Has anyone tried the WC Full Suspension SL's? I have the G-Powers and like the dampness on ice or hardpack, especially when it's rutted, agree they can feel a touch numb just cruising or in softer snow. But I think the Marker plate is $$ for actual racing. 
So that graphic is not the
WC Sl Fis Slantnose R18 ?
That's what Rossi had
So I take it that the R18 "system" is that beefy plate you're talking about.
post #28 of 52

Can't speak to the graphic, don't know why the first ski has a binding and the second does not, nor does it seem to have the I-Box. Went to a Rossi tech manual (page 18 below) to find out about the plates (I'm plate-obssessed. Nasty condition.) The R18 comes in two sections, like some VIST plates. The I-Box is a single plate, or really two bits connected by the I-beam. And the R18 (#1 in your site photos) is the real racing setup. The I-Box (#2) is for juniors; the language suggests it's the same specs as #1 but with a composite I-Box, which I assume softens up the flex a touch. #3 is the I-Box for adults, appears to be Rossi's beer league/club ski, pretty sure the I-Box is still solid alu

 

post #29 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Can't speak to the graphic, don't know why the first ski has a binding and the second does not, nor does it seem to have the I-Box. Went to a Rossi tech manual (page 18 below) to find out about the plates (I'm plate-obssessed. Nasty condition.) The R18 comes in two sections, like some VIST plates. The I-Box is a single plate, or really two bits connected by the I-beam. And the R18 (#1 in your site photos) is the real racing setup. The I-Box (#2) is for juniors; the language suggests it's the same specs as #1 but with a composite I-Box, which I assume softens up the flex a touch. #3 is the I-Box for adults, appears to be Rossi's beer league/club ski, pretty sure the I-Box is still solid alu

 

Seems to be some confusion here.  The R18 spec is the WC/race stock.  Would have to check on current year but my 2011 WC stocks have the connected plate, the X-box plate shown above, and all the genuine stuff i have seen uses this.     The plate is mainly plastic with ally inserts for the mounts.  Most plates seem to be going in this direction now rather than the solid ally plates from yesteryear.   The old Ibox from several years ago was mainly metal but that has not been used for a while.  Since they switch to the PX from the FKS IIRC or if not from about 2009.

 

You may be getting confused about the Blizz Slalom.  I thought the "full suspension" was on the GS ski.?   I have the race stock WC slalom (not true WC stock unfortunately - there are VERY few real deal WC Blizzard stock in the US).  However teh regular race stock with the Marker plate is an excellent ski, not just for gates

post #30 of 52

The shot above is from 2013 manual, so I assume that the change was made between 2011 and now. My I-Box is solid alu, so have a feeling that a while back they began to de-emphasize the role of the beam and put more reinforcement into the ski itself. 

 

As far as the Blizzard, their site, under "World Cup Race," shows a "SL Race Suspension" model that clearly has a Marker WC piston plate. http://www.blizzard-ski.com/int/products/detail/product/show/sl-race-suspension.html Not the same as the GS model, but a piston. I was surprised too. It's the only adult SL model shown. 

 

Good to know that the WC model works as a general ski. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Anyone know about the Rossignol 9SL I-Box?