EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Salomon Equipe 3V vs. Rossi 9S
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Salomon Equipe 3V vs. Rossi 9S

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
Any thoughts?
post #2 of 17
The rossi, no question at all. Even assuming the salomon is an SL Lab, still no question. The equipe 10 3v is shit, no stability at speed and lousy power, imho. The lab is a little better, but the big boys (rossi atomic volkl fischer nordica...) kick their ass. Get the 9s if you are committed to one of the skis you mention, otherwise demo the sl skis of the manufacturers I mentioned. Just my opinionated $.02 .
post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 
Yes, it's Salomon or Rossi as I get a good discount. I'm not planning to really race - just race training. I'm a BASI 3 and was advised to get a slalom ski to work on my short radius turns. Is it the Oversize or the World Cup 9S that you're referring to? It's the Oversize I'm thinking of.
post #4 of 17
The 9S, if youre comparing retail race skis. I don't however think that SL LAB ski is as bad as was said above. Depending on skier size, the SL LAb will hang with the best of whats out there. Its speed is not in its power, like you find with Atomic race stock skis, and others that run the same type of flex. The speed is in the quickness. They are fast edge to edge and light - very easy for a lighter weight skier - thus their success on the women's WC. I ski on either Nordicas or Elans, but have a pair of LAB skis to mess around on when i dont want to put the effort into my skiing.
Later
GREG
post #5 of 17
If I remember correctly, the 3V was an excellent ski (even as a retail version) when new in 2000 or 2001. Salomon was the first to offer a SL ski with more sidecut as early as September 1998. I was at our rep´s office the moment he got a fax from France with the offer of such race skis "for junior racers". We wondered who would offer a new ski as late as that. Then, February 1999 in Vail/BC, Florence Masnada was 3rd in the combined race mostly thanks to this SL ski and the pack of the WC ladies started to switch skis soon after. Salomon was a pioneer and the 3V at the top.

Unfortunetely, they somehow slept on the laurels, hadn´t improved the ski while other manufacturers did.

I don´t think the 9S Oversize is up to much but it might have been the 9X I demoed, I´m not sure.

I fully agree with Greg that the current 3V LAB can´t be that bad. Skiers like Kostelic and Paerson are not "big boys" but still good and aggressive enough to be a measure for big boys of our calibre . And how about the ex-Sallie Mario Matt?
I´m no fan of Salomon but they can make race skis.
"Shit" as well...
post #6 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier
The 9S, if youre comparing retail race skis. I don't however think that SL LAB ski is as bad as was said above. Depending on skier size, the SL LAb will hang with the best of whats out there. Its speed is not in its power, like you find with Atomic race stock skis, and others that run the same type of flex. The speed is in the quickness. They are fast edge to edge and light - very easy for a lighter weight skier - thus their success on the women's WC. I ski on either Nordicas or Elans, but have a pair of LAB skis to mess around on when i dont want to put the effort into my skiing.
Later
GREG
I am 6'2 and weigh 200, that's probably why I didn't like them. Light, "finesse" skis aren't my favorite in general.

(I'm Greg too, lol)
post #7 of 17
Thread Starter 
So for me, a female weighing about 8.5 stone (sorry don't know it in pounds) which would you suggest?
post #8 of 17
Hmmmm, Thats one I havent dealt with. Whats the conversion to metric? If you can snatch a pair of 3V LAB's I would get them. I skied them in a course two seasons ago and loved them. They are really really really really easy to ski on. Definitely not a power ski, but they are easy to toss around, so you can be right on each gate/turn, plus giving the ski a little extra power won't send you out of the course/into the trees, so tightening your radius is very simple.

The Rossi has more snap to it as i recall (its been awhile), and in my opinion the retail ski is a waste of time for women to even try to bend. If you flex it in a shop - it is STIFF. I rode a pair for a few runs awhile back and they will toss you around. If youre set on rossi go to the 155 race stock SL - they are much softer and have better performance. They do however require more energy to ski on, as well as being more precise with your turns - in comparison to the retail model.

Later

GREG

DD223: Being 200lbs, that may explain it. They can be skied on, but at that weight, if youre not careful you can over power them. I max out at about 160 during the season, so a finese ski isnt a problem for me... although i prefer a power ski... or at least a ski that still has a lot of energy in it that can be released if you need it. The lower end stuff (like with most companies) is useless... some of the higher end stuff is over rated as well. Although, if I were teaching a lot of PSIA lessons i would ski on a crossmax 10 just because they are sooooooo easy, and I wouldnt care if someone skied over them - they arent that pretty.
post #9 of 17
Thread Starter 
Thanks!
8.5 stone is 119 pounds or about 57kgs.
Showing my lack of equipment knowledge here - but why are the Rossi race stock ski softer than the retail ski?
The Salomons I could get are the Equipe 3V Race Poweraxe SL
post #10 of 17
Some companies make a longitudinally softer race stock ski. This ski will however be stiffer torsionally. This feature allows for better edgehold (due to torsion) and easier tight turns due to the slightly softer longitudinal flex. Rossignol, is one company that has employed this in recent years. I don't know if they will follow the trend for next year, but I would think that it is likely. Since you are only 119lbs, I would steer you toward Salomon - especially if youre not looking at race stock skis. If you have the chance put both skis next to each other and flex them. See which is softer. I know youre only looking at those two skis, but nordica's retail SL ski is quite a nice ride. I ski the race stock nordica SL's (will be getting my second pair with the next few months) and they rip. Great edgehold, and very quick. Plus they are very damp and smooth until you really pressure them, then they have an unbelieveable about of snap.
Later
GREG
post #11 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanie
- but why are the Rossi race stock ski softer than the retail ski?
I don´t want to make a paper out of this but I think it´s an interesting question.
It´s not just Rossi. I noticed more such skis about three years ago when there still were retail slalom skis available which were very close to race stock (e.g. Atomic, Head).
I have never found or seen an official explanation or comment so that all I say is just my personal reasoning.

A race ski with softer flex (and torsionally stiff) is not so easy to handle and less forgiving. It requires good fore-aft balance. The moment it gets on edge it flexes easily and dictates a tight arc. If the ski doesn´t get enough adge angle (let´s say if you want a longer arc) its stability suffers.

A stiffer performance ski is ready to accept less sophisticated technique, less edge angle, longer turns, worse balance skills. It doesn´t serve as a purebred slalom short turner but also as a high-performance allrounder with short turn bias. Sometimes it has more sidecut than the race stock slalom to compensate for the smaller amount of pressure it gets from the skier, for moderate edge angles and for less speed. Being stiffer it holds a longer arc and doesn´t enforce a new turn so fast.

That´s at least what I think. I hope it´s understandable English.
I´d appreciate if you have any corrections or different comments.

Btw, cf. http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=27744 about Rossis and the flex changes in their race stock slaloms, post 5,6, and 7.
post #12 of 17
Good explanation Checkracer. Not much I would change, I think you reiterated what I was thinking... not sure if it came out as well as you said it though.
Later
GREG
post #13 of 17
That´s very flattering, Greg. Thanks.
post #14 of 17
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the advice guys, think I'm going to go for the 3V then.
post #15 of 17
If I understand what Checkracer is saying, then a stiffer ski is preferable for a skier with a "less ophisticated technique" (that would be me)? Is this correct?

This may explain why I enjoyed the 2006 Head iSL's I demoed at the end of the season. I've been skiing on Dynastar Omeglass for the last 2 seasons but maybe I should be looking for a stiffer ski (although McKinley72 has posted that the 2006 D-stars are the stiffest ski out there at the Mt. Hood test center.
post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanie
So for me, a female weighing about 8.5 stone (sorry don't know it in pounds) which would you suggest?
about 119 pounds (by way of quick google search)
post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiNut
If I understand what Checkracer is saying, then a stiffer ski is preferable for a skier with a "less ophisticated technique" (that would be me)? Is this correct?
Afaik, not all stiff skis, of course. But given the choice between a softer and stiffer SL ski (e.g. Atomic SL:11 and SL:9 from 2-3 years ago, the same were the Heads - that´s for examples I know) it might be so.
Back then, the recreational Atomics were also rather stiff.
The explanation I formulated is the best I could find so far.
There might be more factors involved, the general and forebody/aftebody stiffness, skiers weight, his/her skiing level, skiing style...
There´s definitely not a simple truth like "a stiffer ski is ALWAYS better for less sophisticated technique". But I see you´re getting my point right.

We always end up saying the same anyway: demo...
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 › Salomon Equipe 3V vs. Rossi 9S