or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Bring Back Straight Skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bring Back Straight Skis - Page 12

post #331 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolskier View Post

I think a little more like a GS ski straight ski isn't it?

I may have gotten my datapoints confused.  A few years ago a friend and I skied with an old K2 Kvc (195 or 200 cm, considered a "slalom" if I recall correctly) on one foot and a k2 coomba (188 cm, 102 mm modern-before-rocker design) on the other.  We were on an intermediate groomed run.  We were amazed how similar the two skis felt.  The only difference I noticed was that I caught an inside edge a lot more ofter on the kvc.  And I thoght the reason that never happened anymore was because I got better !

 

But now that I think about it, the coomba may be more like 25 meter radius.  The 40 m skis are those "big mountain chargers" that I don't like, aren't they?

 

One other revelation -- I skied those kvc's much better than back when they were my everydsy skis.  A couple of years on various 12 to 15 m radius skis (and a lot of outside feedback) taught me to carve, even though I used to think I was hot stuff.

post #332 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdf View Post

I may have gotten my datapoints confused.  A few years ago a friend and I skied with an old K2 Kvc (195 or 200 cm, considered a "slalom" if I recall correctly) on one foot and a k2 coomba (188 cm, 102 mm modern-before-rocker design) on the other.  We were on an intermediate groomed run.  We were amazed how similar the two skis felt.  The only difference I noticed was that I caught an inside edge a lot more ofter on the kvc.  And I thoght the reason that never happened anymore was because I got better !

 

But now that I think about it, the coomba may be more like 25 meter radius.  The 40 m skis are those "big mountain chargers" that I don't like, aren't they?

 

One other revelation -- I skied those kvc's much better than back when they were my everydsy skis.  A couple of years on various 12 to 15 m radius skis (and a lot of outside feedback) taught me to carve, even though I used to think I was hot stuff.

Last season I just switched from 205 GS skis to 176 GS FIS skis (yes there was a little learning curve about 16hrs), now I also have a set of FIS SL skis to match the set.

 

The difference between my 200 SL's and 205 GS is the SL are designed to do J turns, were as the GS are more of the shape that we are used to seeing currently (mind you in about a 45m radius and over 2m long).

 

I still have my old straight skis ready to go if I get bored biggrin.gif, but currently I'm having fun feeling 17 again.

post #333 of 360
My 1977 210 ROCs have a radius of 71m. My 207 STs can't be less than 50m. The DHs of the same vintage are 110m.

It really depends how far back you go. A 90's GS ski might be 40m. I have some Kastle SpeedMachines that I haven't put into Physicmans's radius calculator. I will soon.
post #334 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdf View Post


One other revelation -- I skied those kvc's much better than back when they were my everydsy skis.  A couple of years on various 12 to 15 m radius skis (and a lot of outside feedback) taught me to carve, even though I used to think I was hot stuff.

 

Did the episode with the kvc improve your steering sensitivity on modern skis?

post #335 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastersRacer View Post

My 1977 210 ROCs have a radius of 71m. My 207 STs can't be less than 50m. The DHs of the same vintage are 110m.

It really depends how far back you go. A 90's GS ski might be 40m. I have some Kastle SpeedMachines that I haven't put into Physicmans's radius calculator. I will soon.

MR  would those be similar to these?  210cm  any idea of the year?  I was just working on these this evening.  can't wait to get out on them.

royal

 

post #336 of 360

Really  ?

 

I have a pair of 200 cm Hart Javelin`s that say otherwise.

 

Ski these , then try yours .

 

I am betting that you going to feel muscles in the back of your legs you didn`t even know you had .

 

I used the compairson of looking at a watch......................analog vs digital....................................I was wrong .

 

  I think a better compairson is like driving a car with a automatic transmission vs a standard transmission .

 

Now in all fairness , we may get some people here that say those Javelins (Metal) skied like logs when they were brand new (1967) . And , they`d be right.

 

But, they were hot stuff when first introduced.

 

Now , you take a pair of 1976 Rossignol ST650`s (Glass & wood ) and ski them over the same trail or run , and you have one smooth turning ski with a lot less effort.

 

Some  called it swing weight ,torque or responsiveness .  I think its evolution .

 

Plus there is a factor of being a person of taste.

 

My example is this :

 

  A lot of guys here ride motorcycles .

 

Your invited over to a persons house to ride motorcycles. He has two and offers you first pick .

One is a 1970 Triumph Bonneville ............ The  other a Yamaha R6

 

Some guys have Classic Cars . What would you want to drive a 1963 split window coupe or Subaru WRX .

 

Me ...............I am a retro, old school  ,  kind of guy.............it just strikes a chord of what seems to be exciting to me.

 

Thanks for hearing my side of the story

 

- POLSKI -

post #337 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastersRacer View Post

My 1977 210 ROCs have a radius of 71m. My 207 STs can't be less than 50m. The DHs of the same vintage are 110m.

It really depends how far back you go. A 90's GS ski might be 40m. I have some Kastle SpeedMachines that I haven't put into Physicmans's radius calculator. I will soon.

 

 

Really?? 110 as in Meters?

OK, I just got a pair of 223 Rossi Equipe DH; the ones that are gray with the 3 tapering black stripes running the length (I'll try to post a pic). What do you suppose the TR is for them? Also, anyone have an idea of the model year?

 

 

post #338 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezSkis View Post

 

 

Really?? 110 as in Meters?

 

 

For a downhill ski of that vintage, 110 meter sidecut "radius" is completely believable.

post #339 of 360
I used Physicman's radius calculator,http://www.epicski.com/t/2681/physicsmans-ski-sidecut-radius-calculator, to calculate the radius. The skis are still very fun to ski, especially the ROCs. I have to finish a mount of rotamats on the SLs. Video of the DHs at Ski Cooper : http://youtu.be/iam7JIGSM8I
post #340 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ski2die View Post

Does anyone out there long for the days of 204 slalom's and no groomers? Long rithmic moguls and back country with verticle lines with no side slips?

No.  Cannot believe we're still posting in a 2005 thread. 

post #341 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

 

 

For a downhill ski of that vintage, 110 meter sidecut "radius" is completely believable.

 

 

OK, I measured the dims of the Rossi Equipe DH 223s: 90/72/77, which puts the TR at roughly 84M using PM's calc. So, if I just lay these on edge crossing the fall line, I'll be 264 meters further down the slope before I cross the fall line again... :)

 

Still wondering if anyone knows the approx year of these...

 

Oh, and for me - 2005 isn't a very old thread. :)

post #342 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

No.  Cannot believe we're still posting in a 2005 thread. 

At least they didn't start yet another new one on the same subject

post #343 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post

At least they didn't start yet another new one on the same subject

 

Just wait, someone will.

 

2005 is ancient and I'm older than dirt.wink.gif

post #344 of 360
Quote:
My example is this :

 

  A lot of guys here ride motorcycles .

 

Your invited over to a persons house to ride motorcycles. He has two and offers you first pick .

One is a 1970 Triumph Bonneville ............ The  other a Yamaha R6

 

I wanted to use that because I just did it with my Dad.  1968 Triumph Bonneville vs. a 2006 Triumph Tiger, we switched mid ride.  I'm surprised my teeth didn't fall out on the 68.

 

~S

post #345 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by a68cord View Post

Really  ?

 

I have a pair of 200 cm Hart Javelin`s that say otherwise.

 

Ski these , then try yours .

 

I am betting that you going to feel muscles in the back of your legs you didn`t even know you had .

 

I used the compairson of looking at a watch......................analog vs digital....................................I was wrong .

 

  I think a better compairson is like driving a car with a automatic transmission vs a standard transmission .

 

Now in all fairness , we may get some people here that say those Javelins (Metal) skied like logs when they were brand new (1967) . And , they`d be right.

 

But, they were hot stuff when first introduced.

 

Now , you take a pair of 1976 Rossignol ST650`s (Glass & wood ) and ski them over the same trail or run , and you have one smooth turning ski with a lot less effort.

 

Some  called it swing weight ,torque or responsiveness .  I think its evolution .

 

Plus there is a factor of being a person of taste.

 

My example is this :

 

  A lot of guys here ride motorcycles .

 

Your invited over to a persons house to ride motorcycles. He has two and offers you first pick .

One is a 1970 Triumph Bonneville ............ The  other a Yamaha R6

 

Some guys have Classic Cars . What would you want to drive a 1963 split window coupe or Subaru WRX .

 

Me ...............I am a retro, old school  ,  kind of guy.............it just strikes a chord of what seems to be exciting to me.

 

Thanks for hearing my side of the story

 

- POLSKI -


Hmm, interesting.

 

I think, depending on the road of course, I would rather go for a rip in a 1970 Super Bee than a 2012 Subaru WRX.

You know for high speed riding on poorly maintained roads, I would rather have an old Ninja 900.  Compared the the old Bonneville, the R6 would win hands down, but in 1970 I would be riding a heavily worked on ( Cams, carbs, exhaust, piston kit, all matched up to come together) CB750, not a bonneville.  Still I get the point, modern 1 L bike takes the prize.  I might really enjoy a ride an old Vincent Black Shadow or antique Indian (so long as I didn't get an opportunity to notice how bad the brakes were back then !)


Edited by Ghost - 4/11/13 at 3:34pm
post #346 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezSkis View Post

 

 

Really?? 110 as in Meters?

OK, I just got a pair of 223 Rossi Equipe DH; the ones that are gray with the 3 tapering black stripes running the length (I'll try to post a pic). What do you suppose the TR is for them? Also, anyone have an idea of the model year?

 

 

I think these date to the mid to late 80's  85 to 87? .  I just picked up a pristine pair of  4S in the same graphic but only for the perfect 747 EQUIPE bindings they were wearing.

post #347 of 360

The model year for these DH skis were 1984-1986. Also, it was during the introduction of this vintage of skis that Rossi went from FP and SM slalom and GS skis to the in-house race room names 4S and 4G. While the Sl and GS versions of these skis were not very well recieved, the SG and DH skis were very good. The next version of SL ski after this vintage of Rossi was the 4SK and it turned out to be one of the best selling skis of all time.       

post #348 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier
Absolutely not. If you are hanging up the tails you aren't skiing them properly. End of story. Take a lesson or two and learn to use them. The technique to get them to work is vastly different from "old school" skiing.
Later
GREG
Maybe this question should be in the technique section, but....
I've always been prone to "drive" my skis instead of riding them. My husband, on the other hand tends to go along for the ride. He has more difficulty with the tail "hanging up" than I do.

Is this because the "shaped ski is designed to be driven"?

 

Every ski needs to be driven. As LeMaster pointed out at one of his talks in Boulder, the fundamentals of any turn on an skis is the following:

 

- Quiet upper body.

 

- Early new edge.

 

- Bend the forebody to start the turn.

 

- Pressure predominantly on the outside ski.

post #349 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezSkis View Post

 

 

OK, I measured the dims of the Rossi Equipe DH 223s: 90/72/77, which puts the TR at roughly 84M using PM's calc. So, if I just lay these on edge crossing the fall line, I'll be 264 meters further down the slope before I cross the fall line again... :)

 

Still wondering if anyone knows the approx year of these...

 

Oh, and for me - 2005 isn't a very old thread. :)

 

I had a pair of these, and used them in my first Master's DH. They were great skis, especially for a novice speed skier. They were incredibly wide, almost like water skis, very soft in the tip, pretty beefy in the tail, so if you just kept your feet hip width and somewhere near the center of the ski front to back, you had a stable platform that would take you through any micro terrain like a stretch limo. But I've gone down in length and up in sidecut; what I use for Masters DH is Atomic D2 210 Super Gs, which is a men's WC SG ski...works fine for me...

post #350 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderguy View Post

The model year for these DH skis were 1984-1986. Also, it was during the introduction of this vintage of skis that Rossi went from FP and SM slalom and GS skis to the in-house race room names 4S and 4G. While the Sl and GS versions of these skis were not very well recieved, the SG and DH skis were very good. The next version of SL ski after this vintage of Rossi was the 4SK and it turned out to be one of the best selling skis of all time.       

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiRacer55 View Post

 

I had a pair of these, and used them in my first Master's DH. They were great skis, especially for a novice speed skier. They were incredibly wide, almost like water skis, very soft in the tip, pretty beefy in the tail, so if you just kept your feet hip width and somewhere near the center of the ski front to back, you had a stable platform that would take you through any micro terrain like a stretch limo. But I've gone down in length and up in sidecut; what I use for Masters DH is Atomic D2 210 Super Gs, which is a men's WC SG ski...works fine for me...

 

 

Thanks guys! Sure love this place!

 

Can't wait to ride these Rossis nxt season (or perhaps yet at Bachelor if I can get over there before May closing).

 

I have newer carvers & really enjoy them, but still like the stretch-limo effect of the oldies. Although, with the DH's 72mm waist, maybe they could be my new all-mtn skis!

 

Here's a pic for comparison:

 

post #351 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderguy View Post

The model year for these DH skis were 1984-1986. Also, it was during the introduction of this vintage of skis that Rossi went from FP and SM slalom and GS skis to the in-house race room names 4S and 4G. While the Sl and GS versions of these skis were not very well recieved, the SG and DH skis were very good. The next version of SL ski after this vintage of Rossi was the 4SK and it turned out to be one of the best selling skis of all time.       

Fail on "not very well received." I bought the grey/black pattern, an SL, in Feb 1985, at Banff. 1984's, which I demoed there, were differently colored, dark blue and red I think, similar pattern, identical construction with VAS. The in-house 4S/4G's were very popular, actually, you saw them everywhere by 1986. Perceived by both instructors and civilians as the hot ski. Positioned the company for the definitive teal 4S's. Which I also owned. And every Rossi after that through the 9S. (Get a sense of a pattern here? wink.gif )

post #352 of 360

"Not well recieved" in the sense of sales, not performance. I worked at Rossi at this time in Williston, Vt and there were issues with low sales and dealers sitting on inventory on these models. In terms of how they skied, I agree they were rock solid products. So good in fact the 3G replaced the SM which was a long time fave of many good skiers. Another interesteing thing to note is the Equipe DH pictured above was issued with the stock racing tip while the very limited edition Equipe SG used the low profiled World Cup tip which we later saw on the purple and silver Rossi 7G, which was one of my favorites.

 

Also, 4SK (teal ski) was released in 1986 along with the white 3GK (K for kevlar), the 4GK as you mention wasn't introduced until Mid model-year 1987, not 1986. The stock 4GK purple skis had white sintered bases with purple word-art Rossignol graphics, but the race stock version of this ski had black "graphite" bases which were issued to clubs and FIS racers.   

 

On a side note, take a good look at the bindings on GeezSkis DH boards - they are the '88 Calgary Olympic Edition Tyrolia. Sweet! 


Edited by boulderguy - 4/13/13 at 4:37pm
post #353 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezSkis View Post

 

 

Really?? 110 as in Meters?

OK, I just got a pair of 223 Rossi Equipe DH; the ones that are gray with the 3 tapering black stripes running the length (I'll try to post a pic). What do you suppose the TR is for them? Also, anyone have an idea of the model year?

 

 

Infinity and beyond!

post #354 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderguy View Post

"Not well recieved" in the sense of sales, not performance. I worked at Rossi at this time in Williston, Vt and there were issues with low sales and dealers sitting on inventory on these models. In terms of how they skied, I agree they were rock solid products. So good in fact the 3G replaced the SM which was a long time fave of many good skiers. Another interesteing thing to note is the Equipe DH pictured above was issued with the stock racing tip while the very limited edition Equipe SG used the low profiled World Cup tip which we later saw on the purple and silver Rossi 7G, which was one of my favorites.

 

Also, 4SK (teal ski) was released in 1986 along with the white 3GK (K for kevlar), the 4GK as you mention wasn't introduced until Mid model-year 1987, not 1986. The stock 4GK purple skis had white sintered bases with purple word-art Rossignol graphics, but the race stock version of this ski had black "graphite" bases which were issued to clubs and FIS racers.   

 

On a side note, take a good look at the bindings on GeezSkis DH boards - they are the '88 Calgary Olympic Edition Tyrolia. Sweet! 

I remember the teal 4SK's as winter 86-87 and into the 90's (I bought them in 88 or 89), this is substantiated by this thread: http://www.epicski.com/t/81680/rossignol-4s-kevlar-ski  as well as several reviews from the time. Cannot speak to the 4GK, since I never owned a pair. Will take your word they were released a bit later. As far as sales of the grey/black model, we may have been speaking from different sources of information; I recall the dealer in Banff said he was already down to his last pair (which I bought), and several other stores in town were already out. That, and the number of the blue and red versions I saw on the mountain, suggested they were doing fine. Maybe Canada ran ahead of the U.S., sorta like Rossis and Heads do so well up there today? 

post #355 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderguy View Post

"Not well recieved" in the sense of sales, not performance. I worked at Rossi at this time in Williston, Vt and there were issues with low sales and dealers sitting on inventory on these models. In terms of how they skied, I agree they were rock solid products. So good in fact the 3G replaced the SM which was a long time fave of many good skiers. Another interesteing thing to note is the Equipe DH pictured above was issued with the stock racing tip while the very limited edition Equipe SG used the low profiled World Cup tip which we later saw on the purple and silver Rossi 7G, which was one of my favorites.

 

Also, 4SK (teal ski) was released in 1986 along with the white 3GK (K for kevlar), the 4GK as you mention wasn't introduced until Mid model-year 1987, not 1986. The stock 4GK purple skis had white sintered bases with purple word-art Rossignol graphics, but the race stock version of this ski had black "graphite" bases which were issued to clubs and FIS racers.   

 

On a side note, take a good look at the bindings on GeezSkis DH boards - they are the '88 Calgary Olympic Edition Tyrolia. Sweet! 

 

Thanks for the info about the Tyr binders! Couldn't really place them. As for the tips, it's hard to see in the pix, but these are def lower profile than my others of the same vintage (the Pre's in the pic above also have much higher tips), so does that mean that perhaps these were using an early version of the WC tip you're talking about?

post #356 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeezSkis View Post

 

Thanks for the info about the Tyr binders! Couldn't really place them. As for the tips, it's hard to see in the pix, but these are def lower profile than my others of the same vintage (the Pre's in the pic above also have much higher tips), so does that mean that perhaps these were using an early version of the WC tip you're talking about?

The SG tips were slightly lower profile than your DH skis which were in turn lower profile than the 4G and 3G skis of this vintage. The SG also had a more rounded tip, somewhat reminiscent of today's WC skis. Unclear on why they chose to use this for SG and not for the DH skis. 

 

Those Calgary Edition bindings from Tyrolia were pretty cool. Tyrolia was distributed with Head and Raichle at the time, and each company for 1988 had Olympic Edition products released to celebrate that years Olympic Games.     

post #357 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulderguy View Post

The SG tips were slightly lower profile than your DH skis which were in turn lower profile than the 4G and 3G skis of this vintage. The SG also had a more rounded tip, somewhat reminiscent of today's WC skis. Unclear on why they chose to use this for SG and not for the DH skis. 

 

Those Calgary Edition bindings from Tyrolia were pretty cool. Tyrolia was distributed with Head and Raichle at the time, and each company for 1988 had Olympic Edition products released to celebrate that years Olympic Games.     

 

Thanks BG!

 

Fun to know this stuff. Now 2 wait for November........

post #358 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ski2die View Post

Does anyone out there long for the days of 204 slalom's and no groomers? Long rithmic moguls and back country with verticle lines with no side slips?

ABSOLUTELY!  I started skiing again this season after a few decades off.  Lot's of things changed and not much of it good.  Skied all season and saw no moguls!  And what's with frozen corduroy?

Went to Grand Targhee this spring and they groomed daily after the lifts closed and the snow was quite damp, so we woke up to frozen corduroy.  Didn't like that at all..

I remember skiing little nell at Aspen in the late 60's and early 70's...  Wow  VW sized moguls that went on forever.  You could stand up pretty straight at 60 MPH and stay on the snow, unless you wanted some air.  Then you just go over the top of one and resist!  Great fun..

post #359 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratfactor View Post

ABSOLUTELY!  I started skiing again this season after a few decades off.  Lot's of things changed and not much of it good.  Skied all season and saw no moguls!  And what's with frozen corduroy?

Went to Grand Targhee this spring and they groomed daily after the lifts closed and the snow was quite damp, so we woke up to frozen corduroy.  Didn't like that at all..

I remember skiing little nell at Aspen in the late 60's and early 70's...  Wow  VW sized moguls that went on forever.  You could stand up pretty straight at 60 MPH and stay on the snow, unless you wanted some air.  Then you just go over the top of one and resist!  Great fun..

I skied straight skis until Jan 2012, and still love them.  However, I have been skiing my new GS and SL skis that are significantly shorter and what fun after I adjusted,  Both have their strong suits and both have their negatives.  I'm glad I learned on straights as it made me an overall better skier with the larger skill set required to do what we did on straights, but now that I'm older the ease at which I can ski with the shaped skis is so much fun.  The second is edge hold...wow.....for the GS skis.

 

Love both, but I do think a little has been lost for the newer skiers that have never skied the old stuff.

post #360 of 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolskier View Post

I skied straight skis until Jan 2012, and still love them.  However, I have been skiing my new GS and SL skis that are significantly shorter and what fun after I adjusted,  Both have their strong suits and both have their negatives.  I'm glad I learned on straights as it made me an overall better skier with the larger skill set required to do what we did on straights, but now that I'm older the ease at which I can ski with the shaped skis is so much fun.  The second is edge hold...wow.....for the GS skis.

 

Love both, but I do think a little has been lost for the newer skiers that have never skied the old stuff.

My original post sounds pretty negative.  I actually enjoyed my first season back on skis after an extended vacation from the sport.  I missed the entire transition from skis with grooves to the newer skis with more side cut, wider, and missing groove.  None of my old stuff was serviceable, so I had to get new stuff for the season.  I must say I've gone a bit overboard with ski accumulation!  Most of what I picked up was "new old stock", as the freshest, latest and greatest, is out of my budget.  First I picked up some 174 Olin Kenetics, which turned out to be WAY to soft for my weight and ability.  I found some 190 Head Cyber World Cups in the back room at a local ski shop (never mounted trade-ins) which I got for a great price!  These have been my ski of choice all season.  

What I really miss from the old days is the un-groomed, medium pitched slopes.  They produced the larger rounded moguls that were such fun to ski through.  The shorter skis produce smaller, sharper moguls though, so I guess that is one of the reasons that everything is groomed to death.  Oh well, guess I'll have to get used to some of the changes, like Boarders sitting on their butts side by side and blocking off much of the access at the top of runs, plopping their boards down on the tails of your skis as you try to get off the lift, and the mogul murdering!  

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 › Bring Back Straight Skis