or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Rossi B3 as the all-mtn ski?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rossi B3 as the all-mtn ski?

post #1 of 77
Thread Starter 
I am looking to replace my dynastar 4800's (114-75-102, wood core) with another ski for a single all-mountain quiver. I go up around 35-40 times a year, and need a ski that will last for two years. I ski mainly Alta and Solitude (when Alta is packed). I'm looking for something that will give me decent float and crud-busting ability, but I realistically think I'll spend at least 35% of my time on groomers (as the powder often gets tracked out quickly).

I'm thinking the Rossi B3, Salomon Foil, or K2 Apache Recon. Any suggestions about which ski might have the best longevity (ski it 80 times) for the above uses? I am 5'8", 160 lbs, level 7, and don't ski the park.

Thank you!
post #2 of 77
I loved the B-3 in soft snow. I liked the Recon in heavier snow but had reservations. The foil i haven't tried but I was told it is similar to the B-3 and that it is a nice ski also
The Recon seems to fit your expectations and intended uses.

I would expand your list. There are so many great skiis in the category you are looking into

B-3 is foam core some have reservations,some have stated they have skiied it for many , many trips and have no reservations.

Longivity would go to the Recon from it's construction.
post #3 of 77
Thread Starter 
My main concern w/ the Rossi is the tip -- I know it has the alleged "shark nose" metal layer in it which is supposed to help beat up crud. However, any demos I have seen have lots of chips in the top, perhaps that and the foam core are enough to make me hesitant.

I am more than open to other suggestions about skis in the "all-mountain / mid-fat" category. I like the wood core of the Dynastar 4800's, but the 8000/8800 don't have the sidecut that I want.

One concern about the k2 - I've read reviews that it is a "heavy" ski. Is this going to impact performance in powder? I imagine it would make the skier more responsive to hard, charging lines on the groomed (I prefer GS style turns, not quick short pops). I have thought about the head im monster 88, but feel it might be too stiff.

Basically, a ski with a 80-88 mm waist. So suggestions?
post #4 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by utahskier
My main concern w/ the Rossi is the tip -- I know it has the alleged "shark nose" metal layer in it which is supposed to help beat up crud. However, any demos I have seen have lots of chips in the top, perhaps that and the foam core are enough to make me hesitant.

I am more than open to other suggestions about skis in the "all-mountain / mid-fat" category. I like the wood core of the Dynastar 4800's, but the 8000/8800 don't have the sidecut that I want.

One concern about the k2 - I've read reviews that it is a "heavy" ski. Is this going to impact performance in powder? I imagine it would make the skier more responsive to hard, charging lines on the groomed (I prefer GS style turns, not quick short pops). I have thought about the head im monster 88, but feel it might be too stiff.

Basically, a ski with a 80-88 mm waist. So suggestions?
He is right about the Recon . It is similar to the Metron B-5 but are great all around skis if you like that sort of thing . I didn't like either for that reason.
The B-3 is very light but has some folks questioning it's durability. ..

Stockli Stormrider
Volkl Mantra
post #5 of 77
I tried a lot of skis before settling on the B3. I found the B3 was a good combination for what and how I ski. It is much more agile and fun to play with on groomers than many of the other skis with waists between 80 and 85mm. It does great in crud including heavy crud unless you're doing Scott Schmidt imitations. It is responsive enough and forgiving enough to take into moguls. I have numerous friends on 2004 B2s & B3s and none have had a problem with durability.

I would not recommend the Foil to anyone except someone who is very light and skis totally by finesse. The Recon is a nice ski but I didn't like it in crud piles, tight trees and moguls.
post #6 of 77
I have 21 days on my B3's (O6' version) and absolutely love them.

I'm a level 7-8 just like you and I'm 215 lbs, and they are still in very good shape, so they've held up well for carrying my fat ass around the mountain.

With this ski I've felt comfortable skiing anything w/in my capabilities and even stuff I probably shouldn't have attempted. This includes higher speeds (40-50mph-ish) w/out being worried about stability.

I also ski a Bandit X which I've beat the crap out of and they still ski just fine.
post #7 of 77
The B3 is a great ski for what you say you are looking for. It is a perfect one ski quiver.

Rossi USA just moved to Utah so if there IS a warranty issue you won't have to wait for resolution. Every ski can be broken, don't let Rossi's detractors convince you there are problems with them, there aren't.
post #8 of 77
FWIW, my cousin tried the b3. petite woman. level 7-ish skier. loved it in the deep snow and it noticeably improved her skiing. it was awful, however, in the cut up rather large bumps and she really, really struggled. we all did, but it was obvious that her skis were a handicap in those tougher conditions.

also FWIW My husband just moved to the foils. i'd say they are a totally different ski. he loves them and uses them as a one-ski quiver. but a lot of people don't like them. it's a matter of taste. I find that k2 people don't like salomons and vicaversa.

demo demo demo
post #9 of 77
Quote:
Basically, a ski with a 80-88 mm waist. So suggestions?
Elan 777? - I've got close to 100 days on a pair that still have pretty good pop left. Wood core, durable ptex, solid crud buster with decent float.
post #10 of 77
Demoed the B-3's last season at Snowbird, liked them so much in 10" of new chop that I bought a pair this summer. Probably run them with AT's. Ideal for lighter skiers. Not super quick edge to edge, but smooth and versatile, will do anything you ask, even bumps or hardpack. Feel very light, but ski solid. Takes a while to get used to their snow sensation - they flow down terrain instead of blasting through it - but they'll stay with you at serious speeds off-piste. Not my pick for habitual crust and frozen crud. Can't speak for durability, obviously, but I think Bob Peters and others here have owned them for a while with no probs.

Also can't compare to Recons - not a K2 fan - but B-3's are miles better than my old Pocket Rockets, which begat the Foils, and happier in bumps/tight spaces than similar length AC-4's.
post #11 of 77
I demoed the Elan 777s in cut up crud and powder and loved them. I also had alot of fun on metron M10s though I tend to prefer skis with less sidecut.
post #12 of 77
B3 is a powder ski. If you're looking for all mountain then the B2 is your ski.
post #13 of 77
I loved the B3 as well. I found it fine all Mt ski and it was good but not great in the tight bumps. I used it for 5 days at Crested Butte this year (as well as at Copper, MJ and Keystone) in 8-10 inches powder, crud, hard pack and spring conditions. It felt smooth and stable in all conditions and could carve on the groomers without a problem. I was surprised how nimble it was and how well it performed in the varied conditions. The recon was too heavy for me but a nice ski as well. The B2 won't be wide enough for all that Utah powder, but probably better back east as an all around ski. I like beyond's description above "quick edge to edge, but smooth and versatile". I've questioned many of the skiers on the Mt's with B3's and not one complained of durability.
post #14 of 77
Rossiskier, I like the authority and conviction with which you speak, unfortunately you don't know what the current (last years and this coming seasons) B3 is DO YOU???

Thats what I love about this site, advice from people who sort of seem to know what they are talking about, but in reality have no clue.

The B3, FOR EVERYONE NOT SURE WHAT IT IS: 120-83-110 17.3m Radius. NOT THEIR 'POWDER SKI'.

Beyond, sorry dude but the 'Free Absorber' mounting plate is going to cause a lot of headaches trying to mount an AT binding. They make the 'Powderbird' tele ski (same ski without free absorber)for use with AT bindings. AT bindings on a B3 will definately void any warranty. As long as no screws are off the metal area of the 'free absorber' you will probably be alright but that will be a crap shoot, it seems like they designed it to be a pain for any binding thats not a Rossi/Look.
post #15 of 77
I'm sure the B3's rip. Haven't ridden them, but have many other rossis and I like the B3's dimensions. but, if you are looking for a single ski, check out Volkl's AC4. I am assuming it's stiffer, but a drop more cut and their binding system is really way ahead of other companies that are still doing typical toe and heel mounts. I ski alot of rocky lines. My rossi's have blown to pieces at making contact with rocks. My Volkls have absorbed them with dents. So, no, my volkl edges aren't perfectly straight, but they are entact. Once I even wrote a letter to Volkl thanking them for their durable skis. I aired a very large drop and found a rock in my landing. I then told myself to break my skis as something would have to give. They dented. I had a golf-ball sized dent in the base under my foot. Once I felt a rock in my turn but kept skiing the waist deep snow. got to the bottom, took off my rossi, it was in half. I've broken four rossis, owned six. Owned five volkls, broken one.

By the way, I'm waaaaay Volkl biased. And I've never heard anyone say their rossi's don't rip.

(Volkl uses Auto-cad software to match flex patterns with side-cut. Most companies ask their pros what they want to change about existing models.)
post #16 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossiskier
B3 is a powder ski. If you're looking for all mountain then the B2 is your ski.
The original B3 was a powder ski. The current B3 is aimed at being an all mountain ski with a biased towards off-piste.
post #17 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rio
The original B3 was a powder ski. The current B3 is aimed at being an all mountain ski with a biased towards off-piste.

the shape has changed by a few milimeters. this year's "pow" skis are the biggest ever. choose your shape and your material. (choose wood)
post #18 of 77
Anybody who doesn't huck cliffs onto rocks have durability issues? If I catch air it's a mistake, but I do like some rocky lines. Samurai, how did you break the other three Rossi's? Did you break any skiing hard lines without jumps or hitting big rocks?
post #19 of 77
Samurai, "the shape has changed by a FEW milimeter."

Yeah, from 94mm to 83mm. Not much of a change, probably not even noticable.
post #20 of 77
those changes were from 2004-2005 to 2005-2006. I don't believe they are changing this upcoming season. I think the B1, B2 and B3 stay the same this year. B-Squads replace B4 I believe.

Having a bad hair day Whiteroom?
post #21 of 77
No, I'm tired of seeing flat-out WRONG information around here.

"this years pow skis are the biggest ever..."

Do you think he's talking about the B3 or do you suppose maybe he is unaware of the name change to 'B4' and is just speaking out of, Hmmm...what do you call it when you don't know the answer to something and try to answer anyway??

Here is how the Rossi fat ski line evolved:
Cut 11.5 > Bandit XXX
Bandit XXX > B3
B3 > B4 (name change)
B3 (new model) was introduced last year as a wide ski with shape, see dimensions in earlier post.
B4 > B-Squad (all new this coming season) 6 lengths available 2 different shapes and 3 different flexes.
post #22 of 77
Thread Starter 
Looked at the Elan 777 at a ski shop today: It seems like they are solid boards, but the sidecut was a little short to my liking. As I said originally, I ski a 114-75-102, which is a moderate cut. The 777 only adds 3 mm up top and 12 in the middle -- good for float, but not so good for the days when the high pressure settles over the valley here. The atomics have a little too much sidecut, and I've never liked any atomic I've been on.

If only volkl made the Karma's with a similar sidecut to the Mantra's. Have any of you skied both of the volkl's and know how they compare. Also, does their "free skiing" line feel at all like the five or six stars (not grip, but response and general ski feel)?

Thanks!
post #23 of 77
OK, but I think Samurai wasn't talking about the B3 specifically, but powder skis in general (at least that is how I read it). The binding issue is a different story.
post #24 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpdad
OK, but I think Samurai wasn't talking about the B3 specifically, but powder skis in general (at least that is how I read it). The binding issue is a different story.
Yeah. Unless with Rossi you can choose your material...Whiteroom calm down man, he was trying to help someone. Anyways a few mms is kind of subjective. I mean going from a Bro to a Spat has MUCH more of a difference width-wise so if that would be a lot of difference then 11 mm isn't THAT much. Yes it is significant but I mean then what is "a few"? 5 mm? Basically 5 mm change would keep skis in the same category, so a few mm change would mean that he thought it was significant enough to note that there was a change and it would ski differently but it wasn't like the B3 changed from 83 to 130 mm or something.
post #25 of 77
HOW is giving bad information HELPFUL???

11mm narrower in the waist is...lets see...I want to use the right technical term here...A Whole Fricken' LOT. Yeah, that's it.

It takes the turn radius 23.6m to 17.3m.

The only way a skier wouldn't notice that difference is if they were in a vegatative state.
post #26 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai
I'm sure the B3's rip. Haven't ridden them, but have many other rossis and I like the B3's dimensions. but, if you are looking for a single ski, check out Volkl's AC4. I am assuming it's stiffer, but a drop more cut and their binding system is really way ahead of other companies that are still doing typical toe and heel mounts. I ski alot of rocky lines. My rossi's have blown to pieces at making contact with rocks. My Volkls have absorbed them with dents. So, no, my volkl edges aren't perfectly straight, but they are entact. Once I even wrote a letter to Volkl thanking them for their durable skis. I aired a very large drop and found a rock in my landing. I then told myself to break my skis as something would have to give. They dented. I had a golf-ball sized dent in the base under my foot. Once I felt a rock in my turn but kept skiing the waist deep snow. got to the bottom, took off my rossi, it was in half. I've broken four rossis, owned six. Owned five volkls, broken one.

By the way, I'm waaaaay Volkl biased. And I've never heard anyone say their rossi's don't rip.

(Volkl uses Auto-cad software to match flex patterns with side-cut. Most companies ask their pros what they want to change about existing models.)
the problems with volkl system skis is the ejector binding mounted on them.....my gotamas although not system skis came with markers and after several embassing prereleases I am not going to own markers again plain and simple, they are dangerous.

to answer the original question I think B3 would be fine all mountain skis for where you are skiing. there are people that use 100mm plus waist everyday where you are at.
post #27 of 77
Appreciate your info on the binding plate, Whiteroom. Makes sense. But it's left me confused, cuz I've seen several B-3's set up with Fritchi's. (Several guys have told me they prefer the beefier construction to the Snowbird.) And I've seen plenty of B-skis in general with Markers or other non-Look/Rossi alpine bindings that have a very different footprint.

According to Rossi's site, the racing skis with predrilled plates are the only ones that require Look/Rossi bindings. (The Z-'s obviously have dedicated systems; the B's, they say, are engineered to benefit from Look/Rossi bindings, but can use any. Assume they mean the Rossi stance about stored heel energy for rebound.)

So maybe all these skiers are just lucky about where they mounted? Anyone else out there know about this issue?
post #28 of 77
Are you referencing last years B series skis? The 'Free Absorber' was new this last season. I'm not saying an AT binding absolutely won't fit, on Fritschi and Naxo bindings the heal has a screw that is centered on the ski (three screws in triangle pointing toward the ski tail) that central screw is the issue. It usually (the times I've tried) falls into the visco elastic (black) portion of the 'free absorber' plate. You may very well get lucky and have it not be an issue. Dynafit may also work with no problems.

The 'Powderbird' is the exact same ski as the B3, without the binding mount plate, not softer or lighter construction. I had a conversation about this exact thing with the head of telemark ski development for Rossi, different graphic marketed as a tele ski. Pretty darn common really.
post #29 of 77
The b-4 and the b-squad are entirely differant skis. The squad is much stiffer and the Squad pro is even more stiff
post #30 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom
Rossiskier, I like the authority and conviction with which you speak, unfortunately you don't know what the current (last years and this coming seasons) B3 is DO YOU???

Thats what I love about this site, advice from people who sort of seem to know what they are talking about, but in reality have no clue.

The B3, FOR EVERYONE NOT SURE WHAT IT IS: 120-83-110 17.3m Radius. NOT THEIR 'POWDER SKI'.

Beyond, sorry dude but the 'Free Absorber' mounting plate is going to cause a lot of headaches trying to mount an AT binding. They make the 'Powderbird' tele ski (same ski without free absorber)for use with AT bindings. AT bindings on a B3 will definately void any warranty. As long as no screws are off the metal area of the 'free absorber' you will probably be alright but that will be a crap shoot, it seems like they designed it to be a pain for any binding thats not a Rossi/Look.
Whiteroom:

There are somewhat more diplomatic ways to suggest someone's information is wrong than to suggest that people have no clue. And SHOUTING (with caps) doesn't necessarily get your point across BETTER!

I'm pretty sure that the recommendations you're peeved about were made in completely good faith.

Unless you're piped directly into the Rossi tech organization, it's extremely difficult to figure out where on the spectrum all these B-Series models (and their backcountry counterparts) fall. Here is my impression; none of this is correct and I'm making it all up, but you get the point:

"The 2003 B3 has essentially the same dimensions as the 2002 B2 except for a millimeter or two somewhere along the ski. The 2005 B4 is the 2004 B3 but a little stiffer/softer/narrower/wider than the Sickbird/Snowbird except for the ________________. And the 2007 B4 is sorta like the B-Squad but that depends on whether you're talking about the 184cm B-Squad or the 193cm because they're completely different skis aimed at totally different skiers."

I'm sorry, but how in the world is anyone supposed to keep all that straight? :

Even if Rossi didn't *intentionally* hash this all up to confuse the casual ski buyer, they have succeeded in making it really difficult for an awful lot of people.

Anyway, you have great input and it appears that your knowledge of Rossi's is light years better than mine. I just think your tone could be a tiny bit more civil.
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 › Rossi B3 as the all-mtn ski?