or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › iM77 vs B2 vs Legend 8000
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iM77 vs B2 vs Legend 8000

post #1 of 31
Thread Starter 
Well, I have been researching. Slowly but surely I'm whittling down the list to top 3-4 contenders to demo. I think I'm down to these three with the possible addition of the iM72. iM77(non-chip), B2 or Legend 8000 (might check out 4800 too).

Anyone who has tried more than one of these skis, please tell me your comparison views of them against each other. Also, if you think I missed a ski, please tell me which one and why. I begin demoing this weekend and plan to report my own findings..but it would be nice to have other thoughts in mind before I get into this and start spending on demos.

My criteria for a ski:

- Ski primarily in the Pacific Northwest and Utah/Idaho area. western. That is supposed to mean lots of soft snow. in recent years that has not exactly been the case. I'm not looking for fat skiis here or else I'd just get some pocket rockets and be done.

- Handles all conditions reasonably well, can't suck at any of them...and that includes bumps, groomers, ice, pow, crud, deep pow, etc..everything....one quiver ski. It doesn't have to be brilliant at any one..there is always some specialized ski that will do that. But it shouldn't be too mediocre either.

- 195 pound aggresive expert skier, all types of skiing.

- Handles short, medium and long turns without issues

- Not too dampened and not too jumpy either. I like a ski with some energy in it and some zip at the end of turns..but I'm not looking for a slalom ski amount of energy either. But zip is more important to me than smooth ride dampness.

- Did I mention it needs to be able to float in powder for a 195 pound guy..and cruise through crud. I don't care if it dives and floats like old school...but needs to hammer through cut up pow and crud like its nothing.

- Hopefully not too much of an upper speed limit on hardpack, but obviously I'm not expecting race ski performance. Seems like lots of the skis today are doing really good at groomer carving, so I'm not that worried about this issue. I'm more worried about finding a ski that will float on the powder and still rip zipper lines through the bumps or handle short fall line slalom-esc turns when there is no new snow.
post #2 of 31
I can't speak for the im77. I can tell you that the Rossie IMHO is a rather dull ride. Nothing about it stood out or impressed me. Vary bland and boring. Did everything OK just in a ho hum way.
I will tell you that I was never a big fan of dynastar skis. That is until I was talked into a demo on the the legend 8000. The 8000 is a an exciting ski. For a wide ski it is quick from edge to edge you can lay it over and carve a turn or smear your turns. It doesn't seem to have a preferred turn shape long turns medium turns or short swing turns all work. This might be one of the most versatile skis on the market. I can't say that I have put it to the test in bumps I have skied it in some really soft bumps. For a light ski I was surprised at how they held up in the crud. The tip is wide and semi soft, they tend to rise in Powder rather then dive like my Atomic Rex did. I wasn't planning on buying skis this season. But I found a good deal on the Legend 8000 and pulled the trigger.
post #3 of 31
Thread Starter 
Just to be clear..which year model of the B2 did you ride on that you found bland? Rossi has been making some rather large design changes year to year and supposedly the 05/06 model is a lot better than a couple years before it.
post #4 of 31
I think that unless a radical shift happens at Rossi, what Utah49 is describing will apply, even if there's an incremental addition of "flavor" to the B2. Rossis are smooth stable quiet skis that do their job and disappear under your feet. They would not be my first choice if I wanted noticeable rebound, power or energy.

this is relative, though. there are probably skis with less "flavor" out there, I just haven't ever skied them.
post #5 of 31
Thread Starter 
my understanding is that 05/06 was in fact a pretty radical shift out of the crappy design that they had for a few years. This is not Rossi saying it, its Peter Keelty. In fact he even lists it as one of the skis of the year this year.

Anyway, any experiences with other years are inapplicable to this year..that big of a change.
post #6 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
my understanding is that 05/06 was in fact a pretty radical shift out of the crappy design that they had for a few years. This is not Rossi saying it, its Peter Keelty. In fact he even lists it as one of the skis of the year this year.

Anyway, any experiences with other years are inapplicable to this year..that big of a change.
other years inapplicable? if you say so.

let's look at this logically.

Keelty's review basically said they're less dead. I read his reviews. (PLEASE do not quote them verbatim here, he is entitled to subscriber $$ for that information.)

If you knew anything about the prior years' Rossi Bandits, with the exception of the biggest size of B3 or B4 (depends on the year) it was almost impossible for them to get MORE dead (quiet, lifeless). so take what you will from Keelty's commentary, but remember the context in which it's given.

FWIW, I find Keelty's resource invaluable. I think you are bringing an unwarranted background/bias into his review of the Bandits, because in order to understand the "less dead" line of comment you need to know what was the starting point, right?
post #7 of 31
Thread Starter 
whoa. easy does it dude.

I am only asking for opinions abou the current year. You are of course welcome to your opinion about any ski you want..and obviously you don't like the B2's. I will keep that in mind when I try them that you think this year's are also dead. Given the feedback that I have heard about B2's being substantially changed in this year, precisely because they were suck-ass in previous years and people like you were less than thrilled with them..MAYBE they fixed them this year.

Of course, you're entitled to believe in your heart its unlikely that they have been fixed much, but I'd really like to hear from people with actual experience on this year's B2 before I write it off entirely. Over the past 5 years the Bandits have gone through a lot of radical changes from year to year and ski like completely different skis at least 3 times with the same name on the skis. marketing blunder on their part if you ask me.

Secondly I did not quote anything from Keelty's site that is not freely available information to anyone that wants to surf his site as a guest. If anything I am doing him a service to bring more attention to him as a grade-A reviewer of ski gear. And yes, I paid for a subscription there too.

Please don't turn this thread into a debate.
post #8 of 31
I've skied the new B2's and they are still very damp and lifeless, IMO, especially compared to the im77 and the 8000. That doesn't mean they're a bad ski. Many people prefer that feel, as evidenced by the fact that Rossi sells a ton of those skis every year. If you like the feel of an energetic ski, I doubt you'll like the B2.

You mention that you're looking for a 1 ski quiver for out west. If so, I'd probably build a new list:

im88 or 82
Volkl Mantra
Legend 8800
Atomic MEX
Elan 777
post #9 of 31
Thread Starter 
Got you. You might be right.. I'm kind of written off K2 Recons and Crossfires for the same reason..I do like a bit more energy in my skis.

About your new list..I will look into a few of those. How is the iM88 in zipper line bumps? I'm actually trying to avoid going to such a fat ski. I am truly looking for an all-around ski, with a SLIGHT bent towards soft snow as we sometimes see out here. If I want some fatties for the big deep days maybe I will get a pair and be 2 quiver..but 95% of the time I see myself just using one pair of skis and covering all skiing...
post #10 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
Got you. You might be right.. I'm kind of written off K2 Recons and Crossfires for the same reason..I do like a bit more energy in my skis.

About your new list..I will look into a few of those. How is the iM88 in zipper line bumps? I'm actually trying to avoid going to such a fat ski. I am truly looking for an all-around ski, with a SLIGHT bent towards soft snow as we sometimes see out here. If I want some fatties for the big deep days maybe I will get a pair and be 2 quiver..but 95% of the time I see myself just using one pair of skis and covering all skiing...
FWIW, the Recon has more energy than the B2. That'll tell you how damp the B2 really is.

I can't answer how the 88 would be in zipper line bumps. I've only demoed them on hardpack and in crud. I'd guess that due to their stiffness they'd not be as good as say the 8800, but it would be just that-a guess.

Based on what you describe, I'd try to demo both the 8000 and the im77 and go from there. I love them both, but there are some subtle differences between the 2. The im82 may also be a good choice. If you can't demo then I'd recommend the 8000 based on the fact I've never met a good skier who didn't like this ski. It's the most versatile ski on the market, imo. You can ski it hard and it performs, or you can ski it easy and it still performs. It has a huge sweet spot and a huge performance window.
post #11 of 31
Thread Starter 
yea got you. I was going to demo the iM77 and B2 this weekend, but maybe I'll switch the B2 to the 8000 if they have it. If its more damp then Recon...I probably won't like. Or maybe I should just try it so that I know and can compare.

What do you think about the iM72 or Legend 4800? Those are the two narrower waisted skis I'm considering (well narrow compared to the 77 and 8000 anyway.

I'm getting a good gut reaction about the iM77 and legend 8000 though.
post #12 of 31
I haven't skied the im72 so I can't comment directly. My 1st reaction is that if you go this skinny, go to Fischer's RX 9 which is a fantastic hard snow ski with pretty decent versatility.

The 4800 skis a lot like the 8000, minus the float for soft snow and crud. I think when you go from a 79mm waist to a 75mm waist you should get some return in terms of quickness and/or edgehold, but that doesn't happen with these 2 skis. The only advantage the 4800 has over the 8000 is a lower price.
post #13 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach13
I haven't skied the im72 so I can't comment directly. My 1st reaction is that if you go this skinny, go to Fischer's RX 9 which is a fantastic hard snow ski with pretty decent versatility.
thanks.. another one to check out..though I have a feeling I'm going to like either the iM77 or 8000.
Quote:
The 4800 skis a lot like the 8000, minus the float for soft snow and crud. I think when you go from a 79mm waist to a 75mm waist you should get some return in terms of quickness and/or edgehold, but that doesn't happen with these 2 skis. The only advantage the 4800 has over the 8000 is a lower price.
That is good to know. There is no point in going to the 4800 if the narrow waist doesn't give me anything... I am just gonna have to try both. Anyway, I have demos of both lined up for Saturday now, so we'll see how it goes.
thanks again
post #14 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
Anyway, I have demos of both lined up for Saturday now, so we'll see how it goes.
thanks again
You're welcome. Good luck with your search.
post #15 of 31

legend

Go for the Legend 8000's. A fantastic ski!
post #16 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach13
I haven't skied the im72 so I can't comment directly. My 1st reaction is that if you go this skinny, go to Fischer's RX 9 which is a fantastic hard snow ski with pretty decent versatility.

The 4800 skis a lot like the 8000, minus the float for soft snow and crud. I think when you go from a 79mm waist to a 75mm waist you should get some return in terms of quickness and/or edgehold, but that doesn't happen with these 2 skis. The only advantage the 4800 has over the 8000 is a lower price.
I agree on the 4800. I've tried the '05 model and was really unimpressed by its performance on hard pack. (and I usualy love dynastar). I think it would be a great touring ski, as it is very light and easy going, but other wise I rather get a 8000.
post #17 of 31
I have the 4800 and have skied it back to back with the 8000. The 8000 is a stiffer, higher energy ski. It has a higher speed limit, and better grip. For good skiers, the 8000 is a better choice.

However the 4800 is my preferred bump ski. The slightly narrower profile, easier turning and forgiveness, make it work better for me. It really is easy to toss around, and 4800 does not tire me out at all. It is a friendly ski, ideal for intermediates and advanced skiers.

Outside of bumps, I prefer the 8000 and other skis. Current favorite: Head iXRC 1200.
post #18 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
whoa. easy does it dude. Please don't turn this thread into a debate.
choose your replies more carefully then. I don't want a debate. I want clarity of discussion. you said other years "don't apply." if you don't see how they do apply and create a background for discussion, it needs to be said and explained.

that's not debate.

that's clarification.

I think you're a bit hypersensitive to your poor choice of words, and you snapped. sorry.
post #19 of 31
You should add the Elan m666 to that list.
Superb mid-fat. Super stable at speed & through crud. Floaty in the powder. More work than my Recons in tight bumps but quite manageable.
Peter Keelty has been high on this ski for several years. Check out his reviews as well as the numerous praises on this website.
Only downside is that it can be hard to find. If interested, consider contacting Dawgcatching for great prices & service.
post #20 of 31
Thread Starter 
Some interesting posts. thanks. I'm deming the iM77 and Legend 8000 this weekend. Should be interesting. I'm also lately starting to think maybe I just give up on this one quiver ski idea and get two pairs...a fat pair and skinnier pair.. if i do that, then the 77 and/or 8000 may not be the right choice...but I'll know more about this weekend.

thanks again.
post #21 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
Some interesting posts. thanks. I'm deming the iM77 and Legend 8000 this weekend. Should be interesting. I'm also lately starting to think maybe I just give up on this one quiver ski idea and get two pairs...a fat pair and skinnier pair.. if i do that, then the 77 and/or 8000 may not be the right choice...but I'll know more about this weekend.

thanks again.
I have skied all three. There are enough comments about the B-2 that I won't add any more. The iM 77 is a very stiff ski that takes some serious input to bring it around at slower speeds and/or in softer snow. OTH, it offers serious grip and power for a midfat. I tested the 77 in a 177 and it felt like too much ski for most folks. (The 170 may be a different story)

SJ
post #22 of 31
Thread Starter 
SierraJim, you're right on about the iM77. read my lengthy review of this ski against the Dynastar Legend 8000 yesterday in a head-to-head comparison I did in lots of deep sloppy cascade crud.

http://www.realskiers.com/quest/viewtopic.php?t=65

Bottom line for me the iM77 was too long except when I was really on top of my skiing...and yea.now that I think about it...at speed. But there were plenty of moments where it under-performed. I am going to try the 170cm though because I really liked the general feel of the ski compared to the Legend. Both fun skiis though for different reasons..
post #23 of 31
The iM77 in 170cm and the Legend 8000 in 178cm are pretty comparable lengths. I found the Legend to be a little smoother, the Head to be a bit more powerful and ski longer. Both are great skis for most conditions. Also, the Legend feels a little bit more "GS-like" in terms of feel, the iM77 more of a SL/GS hybrid kind of feel. I liked the Head just a bit more, but that was more personal preference (I like more powerful skis) than anything, and the tighter turn radius is a little more fun, without tossing the tip around. FWIW, I will have the 2007 Legends in a week or so, if you are still in the market (I also have the iM77 Chip at $665 w/binding). The Legends w/P12 Lifter would be $725.
post #24 of 31
Thread Starter 
I'm going to try more skis in Utah next week. I'll let you know if I decide on something you're selling.

Someone corrected me that you were trying to say the 170cm Head compares to the Legend 178cm in length. I misunderstood you before. That is good, I will have to try the 170cm Head now. if that skis about like the 178 Legend, but perhaps a bit more rock solid and smooth...less tail squirely, then I'm going to like it.

I'll try the 170cm Head next week I hope. I would have liked to try the 177cm with the binding at +15. Oh well. Also, I would like to try that Legend with the binding "properly" mounted. I don't know what the manufacturer spec is, and this was an adjustable demo binding as well, but the toe was most definitely an inch more forward then the head was. We measured both skis looking for the center of the ski and the center of the ski was under my arch on the Legend and under the balls of my feet on the Head.

Peter Keelty has a recent article (its freely viewable even for guests) on this topic of binding location... For those that haven't read it yet, I'll summarize by saying that they did a blind test and 100% of ski testers found that when they rode on skis mounted properly with the balls of the feet exactly in the middle of the ski (between the two points where it touches the snow), they preferred the feel of the ski over the manufacturers reccomendation which is often different from that. Ski racers have for years always mounted the bindings the "proper" way I just described, regardless of the ski. Manufacturers now say they know best and just do what they say, but the blind study doesn't lie. Off the record it was also implied in this article that perhaps the reason manufacturers are doing this is because most recreational skiers actually want/need to skid their turns a little more..or something silly like that. Bottom line..its a bit of a crap shoot related to binding placement on the ski.

Anyway, it would be nice to know whether this binding on the Dynastar was mounted per spec or incorrectly mounted or what. A couple years ago when I tried the first gen Intuitiv 74's I had almost exactly the same experience...too squirely. I suspected the bindings were too far forward, but I didn't know enough about it at the time to check. I had foolishly bought a pair proforma without demoing first and i ended up selling them after half a day...they completely sucked for me. I don't think the Legend completely sucked, but there is no question that it skiied like a squirely short ski for me while the Head(which is actually 1cm shorter) skied like a much longer ski.

On groomers everything may have felt completely differently of course.
post #25 of 31
Just so there isn't any confusion I did not ski the new Bandit. IMHO, Rossie would have had to have made a quantum leap in how that ski feels for it to be anything life like. If you think the K2 Recon feels to damp then The B2 will be far less impressive.
post #26 of 31
DM42, I have skiied a couple of runs with the 8000's in Aussie Spring slush. It was my first time skiing on anything over 70mm underfoot and I thought they where fantastic. I have now spent 21 days on my new monster im77 chips over here in Canada across 10 different mountains in all kinds of conditions; ice, slush, crud fresh pow and I love em'. IMO they do everything well. Sure, I have been on better skis for ice but as an allrounder they are great. I don't spend a lot of time on the groomed, preferring to tackle anything that is steep with trees .
I don't tend to overanalyse skis, rather I adjust my skiing to suit different skis and conditions.
I agree with everything that has been written about the ability of these skis in chopped up snow, they are bullet proof.
I also demoed some Stockli Storrmrider xl's in New Zealand and I would have been happy with a pair of these as well for a "do it all" ski.
post #27 of 31
Thread Starter 
Dawg, I corrected my post above. Someone pointed out to me that you were trying to say the Head 170 skis like the legend 178..which is what lines up with my experience as well. Thanks all!
post #28 of 31
If you have time and have not totally written of Rossi's, try the B3 instead of the B2. This appears to be the star of Rossi's Bandit series of skis. I tried both the B2 and B3 and the B3 did not lose much in turn quickness but had much better float and better crud-bashing ability. Liked it a lot. I skied the 8000 for a day at Snowbird and agree with reviewers comments. It does it all with a little more effort than Rossi skis. I also like the Dynastar 8800, which is a good bump ski for its size.

You are bumping up against the proverbial problem -- finding a ski that does it all, or at least is not terribly weak in one area. May be impossible to find, but as someone says above, worry less about the ski and think about your technique based on the conditions of the day.

"It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools."
post #29 of 31
Thread Starter 
honestly, no I have not written off the Rossi's yet. I want to try the 170cm iM77 next. After that I want to try a set of iM72's. I also now want to try the Metron. I'll try to find the Rossi to. Honestly though, I may just get some monster 88's or pocket rockets for these big snow days..and then get something a little skinnier underneath for all the other days.

Naturally, I can make do on any ski and find a way to have fun..of course. But during demo time, this is when I feel it pays to be a little bit critical and pay attention to what the skis are doing. Try to make a good purchase because I will be looking for the joy of skiing on them for the next couple of years. Its true what you say about once you get a pair, spend some time on them, get used to them, make em rip and have fun. However its also true that equipment selection does matter..so please allow me to be a bit critical during this selection process..
post #30 of 31
You are discovering the phenomenon of skis that ski "big" vs those that don't. If anything, the Head and the Nordica TF are the clubhouse leaders in skiing big.

Now, if you are rethinking the quiver and wanted two skis, I'd think about a narrower mid-fat with really great edge grip like the Nordica Modified and then a Phatty to go with it. I could easily live with something like that over my uber-carvers.

I'm planning on doing some crud busting tomorrow and Wednesday with a herd of mid fats as a reminder before I start to write orders.

(Naturally if it's deep in the AM, I'll be on the Sugar Daddies............... )
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › iM77 vs B2 vs Legend 8000