EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › metron B5 172 vs Rossi Z9 170
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

metron B5 172 vs Rossi Z9 170

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
I purchased metrom b5s at the first of this season. I am an aggressive expert (subjective) ski mostly Whistler /Blackomb, blacks double blacks comfortably. the occasional triple black (not on trail map but out there). I am 207 lbs in shape 6' 45 yrs old. More of a power than finesse skier. I love the stability of the metrons at any speed any condition. Found that they go thru anything crud, avy crap etc. very stable. I particulrly like them when dropping cornices very stable landing. My friend who is a level two instructor at W/B about the same size slightly older and less fit swears by the zenith 170s. He is more of a finesse skier than I and skiis slower on the steeps and frozen crud. He let me try his Z9s 170s. I was skiing them on frozen crud and found them MUCH less stable on such, actually getting displaced on occasion. They were quite smooth at high speed GS groomed a little less wobbly when run straight at high speeds. Is this feeling because of skiing styles? i have skiied atomics for years but was willing to give anything a fair shake. Is is possible they were not enough ski for me off piste??
all comments advise etc. graciously accepted

regards extremeskier
post #2 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskier
I purchased metrom b5s at the first of this season. I am an aggressive expert (subjective) ski mostly Whistler /Blackomb, blacks double blacks comfortably. the occasional triple black (not on trail map but out there). I am 207 lbs in shape 6' 45 yrs old. More of a power than finesse skier. I love the stability of the metrons at any speed any condition.
(my bolding)

I guess skiing is believing. I have trouble believing you are skiing a ski with that short a turn radius at the high speeds on the steeps of W/B and finding them stable.:
post #3 of 27
The 162 metron is damn stable as long as it is slightly on edge... Skied mine all day today in fact.

pretty much unshakable.

I am heading to Whistler may 18th, but i have skied mine at amny palces that you can haul balls!

Liike sun Valley, Snowbird, snowbasin,

Sun Valley is a very fast hill (3,100 feet of groomer on the Warm Springs side!

162 B5, solid as a rock!
post #4 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
I guess skiing is believing. I have trouble believing you are skiing a ski with that short a turn radius at the high speeds on the steeps of W/B and finding them stable.:
I also have the 172 cm Metron B:5's. These skis are a powerhouse, and they demand full attention.

It's true that they're curvey (12 meter radius). But, they're also large, stiff and heavy. They'll chew-up anything, including frozen crud and chickenheads.

They wobble a bit at speed if you run them flat (rarely). But, if you keep 'em on edge, they hold like an ice-axe.

Some days, I'm just not up for the B:5 challenge, and revert to my Metron EX's - better for relaxed skiing.

But, if you bring the juice, the B:5's will handle almost anything you can throw them at 'em.
post #5 of 27

Metron B5s

I am 5'11" and 205 lbs and have skied B5s for two years now. They are surprisingly stable at high speeds despite their short carving radius. In fact, once you get used to skiing them you can keep them from going side to side when skiing at high speeds. They do demand your full attention, and are very stiff, beefy and heavy. For next year I am going to buy a pair of Dynastars all-mountain skis - I have Legend Pros and like them way better than the B5s in powder, off-piste and in deep crud.
post #6 of 27

Z9 A Great Mid Level Carver...It's No B5!...

howdy, kidz,


i (6ft 220lbs level 7/8) demoed the z9 mid season & really loved 'em. the conditions were spring like & i put the skis through their paces. it did everything very well; slamon turns w/o skidding, medium carves & big sweeps at speed (35+mph). A very responsive ski (read: soft) for intermediate skiers on groomers. it may have very good potential in shallow powder (guess, not from experience) as the dimensions are close to the b5.

all that said, it ain't no b5! the main difference is the stiffness btwn the two skis. the b5 wants to be upon edge due to the dampness/stiffness of the ski (response is just below a sl race), which is why is doesn't behave well running flat. whereas, the z9 being softer, is a ski you can relax on (as was noted before regarding wanting to relax on the m:ex's) unlike the b5's which demand constant attention.

which is mostly why your instructor friend is on the z9. it's a great comsumer level tool w a low level learning curve. his students will find it very attractive, whereas, i'm sure he would be quite hesitant recommending the b5 to your average skier.


just my 2 cents, boyz & gurlz, thx for listenin',

bruce marks
post #7 of 27
The new M11B5 has identical dimensions to the Z9. Knowing what I know of the Z9 and having skied the M11B5, I will take the Atomic.
post #8 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
162 B5, solid as a rock!
If its got a top speed I haven't found it yet.
post #9 of 27

B5"s vs Z9

Extremeskier, sorry late on this was off fishing for a couple of days tried/demo'd B5's and Z9's on same day, ran everywhere on mountain. Heres my opinion for what its worth: Z9 very good short radius turns and good in powder. B5 good in short, med. and s.g. turns very stable and solid, good in powder, crud, moguls, steeps. My rating: Short radius turns-equal, med rad turns B5 better, long radius turns B5 much better, powder-equal, crud B5, Moguls B5, ice B5, trees/off piste changeable snow conditions B5. Going fast B5 (on edge). I was looking for an all around ski that I could take off piste at anytime and have fun on. I bought the B5 in 162, I am 5'11 192. This year I yearned for the old days of fast skiing on my 201 straights and bought a pair of Fischer RX9's.
post #10 of 27
Apples and oranges. A Rossi just doesn't ski like an Atomic. That's not a judgement but rarely does someone not prefer one over the other. By that I mean that the Atomics tend to be stiffer, more demanding skis than Rossignols. If you like to relax more at moderate speeds then the Rossignols are more likely your cup of tea. Different strokes for different folks.
post #11 of 27
Everyone refers to how stiff the B5 is. Maybe it is stiff for an all-mountain ski, but it is not a stiff ski when looked at with groomer skis. I found the 172 metrons to be tolerable, but I think 12m is too much sidecut when you really bend them. When I took them up to speed on a steep slope, I found that they came around too fast when I bent them, making it difficult to get a rhythm at high speed. I just don't see why anyone needs that much sidecut. A 14.5 m ski can make the same turns with more power when you bend them.

As far as stiffness, let's look at how much the skis around the apex on a flat green at pretty slow speeds (excuse my crappy a-frame):

That outside ski is dramatically bent. I haven't tried them on ice, but I doubt I'd enjoy the experience. I still wish I got to try those Top Fuels...

Still, it is hard to find something that works in powder but still carves SL-ish arcs on the groomed. Let's be clear though: it is not a slalom ski, at all, much softer and more forgiving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruceacim
(response is just below a sl race)
I disagree. Have you skied a stock SL? There is a world of difference, believe me.
post #12 of 27
post #13 of 27
Beautiful...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
Veeerrry bent. The best in the world on WC ice is different from me on a green though.
post #14 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223
Beautiful...Veeerrry bent. The best in the world on WC ice is different from me on a green though.
Of course, but you said that the 172cm B5 was dramatically bent. I think Atomicman was showing us his view of a dramatically bent ski (and that is a much stiffer wc ski).

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223
I found the 172 metrons to be tolerable, but I think 12m is too much sidecut when you really bend them. When I took them up to speed on a steep slope, I found that they came around too fast when I bent them, making it difficult to get a rhythm at high speed. I just don't see why anyone needs that much sidecut. A 14.5 m ski can make the same turns with more power when you bend them.
This is an interesting comment. I know lots of strong skiers that love an 11m or 12m radius. Harald Harb skis on his SuperShapes with a 12 meter radius and he bends a ski in a big way. The question is what's throwing off your high speed tight turn rhythm?
post #15 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max501
This is an interesting comment. I know lots of strong skiers that love an 11m or 12m radius. Harald Harb skis on his SuperShapes with a 12 meter radius and he bends a ski in a big way. The question is what's throwing off your high speed tight turn rhythm?
Very good point. I'd wager that it's what Bob found from my videos:
Quote:
Originally Posted by My MA thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes
The second and more critical area is the transition. Because your continued efforts to get forward keep you pressed firmly up against your boot tongues, you tend to "crash" into them hard at the end of the turn. Just when you need to release everything and let your skis continue to run forward as your body crosses over into the new turn, everything just stops moving. Momentum dies here, and instead of a smooth glide into the new turn, your body gets pushed "up."
Quote:
Originally Posted by me
Again, this push up is definitely something I have noticed, especially on longer GS skis. In its most dramatic form, as it took when I was testing some LT:11s, this push up combines with the huge amount of energy stored in the deeply bent ski to shoot me into the air in transition. Fun, but sometimes hard to manage, as far as getting to the next turn without falling into the back seat.
I think that's probably what explains it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max501
Of course, but you said that the 172cm B5 was dramatically bent. I think Atomicman was showing us his view of a dramatically bent ski (and that is a much stiffer wc ski).
Indeed he was. I could get that much bend out of the ski on a steeper slope, ice, or, better yet, both. (Sorry for the blatant cop-out excuses lol )
post #16 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
Of course, but you said that the 172cm B5 was dramatically bent. I think Atomicman was showing us his view of a dramatically bent ski (and that is a much stiffer wc ski).



This is an interesting comment. I know lots of strong skiers that love an 11m or 12m radius. Harald Harb skis on his SuperShapes with a 12 meter radius and he bends a ski in a big way. The question is what's throwing off your high speed tight turn rhythm?
You got it!
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
This is an interesting comment. I know lots of strong skiers that love an 11m or 12m radius. Harald Harb skis on his SuperShapes with a 12 meter radius and he bends a ski in a big way. The question is what's throwing off your high speed tight turn rhythm?
Um, lets see if you have that 12 m-radius up at an angle the turn radius on hardpack/ice is going to be more like oh, say 8-m. High speed is to me like oh say 50 mph or about 22 m/s. a=V^2/R gives an acceleration of about 6 gs, and a bit more than one turn per second. That would throw a lot of people's rythm off.
post #18 of 27
That slam you just heard was my sphincter co-contracting.
post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Um, lets see if you have that 12 m-radius up at an angle the turn radius on hardpack/ice is going to be more like oh, say 8-m. High speed is to me like oh say 50 mph or about 22 m/s. a=V^2/R gives an acceleration of about 6 gs, and a bit more than one turn per second. That would throw a lot of people's rythm off.
post #20 of 27
Atomics have a much better construction and outta of box tune than the rossi's, my 162 b5 were damn near like razors when I bought them.

I still like this ski alot in fact going to try out the 172cm in hopes it takes away the stability issues I have had in the 162cm. oh by the way, they do have speed limit, you guys are just going too slow. On groomers is much higher than you think probably around 40-45 mph is when they start to feel squierrly on me, that the reasons you guys havent felt them get like that. But in soft/cut up snow condition there are tons of skis out there that ski this snow at a higher speed, many of them are longer/fatter/with less sidecut.
post #21 of 27
Bushwhacker: You may also want to give the new M11 B5's a try (next year's ski). They have less sidecut, and likely more stability at speed.

From the little I've heard, they're lighter and bit less demanding than the B:5's, but still feature Atomic's characteristic bite and power.
post #22 of 27
Will do I am just trying to find a replacement for my 160 day old 162 cm B5s. I am looking for ski that ski groomers well, skis in soft snow ok, and I can take my Level 3 skiing on.

My short list so far is...

172cm Atomic Metron B5s
174cm Atomic M11 B5s
168cm Elan Magfire 12

and if I sacrifice alittle off trail for alotto more quickness on groomers..

174cm Atomic Sx-B5s
170cm Elan Ripstix
168cm Volkl Allstar
168cm Volkl Supersport 5-star

I will probably start a new thread next year when i start demoing them, in the mean time I would never by a french ski, they ski much to dainty for me..
post #23 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA

and if I sacrifice alittle off trail for alotto more quickness on groomers..

174cm Atomic Sx-B5s
170cm Elan Ripstix
168cm Volkl Allstar
168cm Volkl Supersport 5-star
You might want to consider adding:

170cm Atomic SL9s
170cm Head SuperShape
post #24 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA
Will do I am just trying to find a replacement for my 160 day old 162 cm B5s. I am looking for ski that ski groomers well, skis in soft snow ok, and I can take my Level 3 skiing on.

My short list so far is...

172cm Atomic Metron B5s
174cm Atomic M11 B5s
168cm Elan Magfire 12

and if I sacrifice alittle off trail for alotto more quickness on groomers..

174cm Atomic Sx-B5s
170cm Elan Ripstix
168cm Volkl Allstar
168cm Volkl Supersport 5-star

I will probably start a new thread next year when i start demoing them, in the mean time I would never by a french ski, they ski much to dainty for me..
All of the skis you mention are really great skis. You wouldn't be unhappy with any of them.
post #25 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
You might want to consider adding:

170cm Atomic SL9s
170cm Head SuperShape
I have the SL9s already....in now decamber form.(shouldnt have done all those skiercross on them)

The ski sucks at bumps real bad, and is to soft for really high speeds. I have never been able to figure out why my Metrons are much better bumps skis. Heck I can do bumps better on my 173cm Sugar Daddies and 183cm Gotamas.

Now the Supershape do look intriging, hopefully will get to try a pair of those.
post #26 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA
I have the SL9s already....in now decamber form.(shouldnt have done all those skiercross on them)

The ski sucks at bumps real bad, and is to soft for really high speeds.
That's interesting. I've got the SL9 in a 170 and I like the way it handles the bumps. Do I like it more or less than my B5 for the bumps...Hmm...not sure.
post #27 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
That's interesting. I've got the SL9 in a 170 and I like the way it handles the bumps. Do I like it more or less than my B5 for the bumps...Hmm...not sure.
I had the same lenght too, maybe I should go back and reski a pair and see if my bump skiing just hasnt gotten better.
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 › metron B5 172 vs Rossi Z9 170