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? - Page 3

post #61 of 77
Thread Starter 

Sidecut in turning importance

How much is the sidecut of the 8800 going to make a difference? I would go from a 114-75-102 to a 117-89-110 (not sure on the tail of the 8800). All the archived reviews I read seem to really like the 8800...I'm just concerned that I will lose a lot on the groomers. I really like the feel of dynastars, though.

Thanks for all the input on skis! I'm going to start seeing what kind of deals I can get on them.


-Randall
post #62 of 77
The 8800's are a great all mountain ski for out west. They don't rip the groomers as well as some skis, but as long as it's not bullet proof, they are fine. If you’re trying to step up your game, performance on the groomers is the last thing I would worry about.
I am in the fatter ski camp, they are just so much easier in powder and crud, especially for someone that doesn't have much experience.
post #63 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters
I've been behind the curve all my life. I'm pretty sure the rest of the field lapped me long ago.

I'm giving serious thought to trying to come out to Tahoe for the '07 Gathering. Maybe would could make a turn or two together then?
Hell yes. You better ski with me. If I can keep up?
post #64 of 77
HEY UTAH SKIER.....Check this deal....

http://www.evogear.com/Ski%20Shop/At..._5188_753.aspx

They ski short and are tad noodley (so I hear - and atomics usually all have pretty good edge hold)...prolly light weight too so it might be good for someone your size....apparently not very good durability (but again you're not huge)....search a bit in tech talk over at tgr, I'm sure there's some first hand feedback....
post #65 of 77
Thread Starter 
I can't tell from the website if those have the binding plate or are flat skis. I also read elsewhere that the actual length is 182.5 cm.
post #66 of 77
Yeah...the site has two pictures....one that most definitely has the atomic hostage plate (which can be removed to mount flat with certain bindings - otherwise you'll need an atomic binder to fit) and one that's a newer model without....nothing a little phone wouldn't clean up...evogear has A+ service!! Judging by the year they say it's from I would gather that it is the one with the plate....fwiw - the plate does add a bit of stability and grip (stiffens up the middle a tad)...

Oh & in case you didn't notice...free shipping on anything over $100!!
post #67 of 77
They're the 2003's so they have the hostage plate on them. Search TGR and you can get info about taking it off and what bindings will mount. Because the ski is a twin, it'll ski shorter than a 186 "flat" tailed ski.

The 8000 is much more of a ski than the 4800. I skied them and liked them on the east. Don't be afraid of the longer turn radius of the 8800 if you are looking for a wider ski. You go wider for softer snow where too much sidecut is bad. They are still a good ski for the groomers, but you won't be carving perfect 18m radius turns. They'll be a little skidding in there, but who cares if you are having fun all over the mountain
post #68 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by utahskier
How much is the sidecut of the 8800 going to make a difference? I would go from a 114-75-102 to a 117-89-110 (not sure on the tail of the 8800). All the archived reviews I read seem to really like the 8800...I'm just concerned that I will lose a lot on the groomers. I really like the feel of dynastars, though.

Thanks for all the input on skis! I'm going to start seeing what kind of deals I can get on them.


-Randall
You will notice many differences - and will most likely need to be patient in learning the wider ski. Similarly to you, I went from a 74mm waist, recons, to the 8800 beginning of last season. Didnt like the 8800's too much the first day, or the second. After a few days on them I liked them a lot and then skied the recons to compare. In short, the recons did not perform off-piste like the 8800s and I eBayed them right away. Regarding groomers - as long as the snow is soft, west coast - no problem. However, they are definitely an off-piste ski. As you mentioned skiing 35% groomers - I would hesitate recommending the 8800. Never skied the 8000, but given your weight, hieght and the 35% groomer factor, narrower may be more appropriate.

Hope this is helpful and doesnt add to the confusion...
post #69 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarryZ
The b-4 and the b-squad are entirely differant skis. The squad is much stiffer and the Squad pro is even more stiff
I was gonna say.....isn't the B-squad a wood core construction and much stiffer than the B4, but with the same dimensions? :
post #70 of 77
For 2007 it looks like Whiteroom is correct. The B-4 will be no more and the b-squad will replace it.
They are much differant and I am not sure about the construction but I did hear somwhere when it was mounted some wood was found but I cannot verify that.

the B-4 was 94 at mid and the B-Squad is 100 and the squad is much stiffer
post #71 of 77

B-Squad

The B-Squad is 130-100-120 in lengths 184cm and shorter. The dimensions are 130-104-117 in lengths 189 and longer. The Squads are stiffer than the B4 and older B3's. They are great skis.
post #72 of 77

2007 dynastar

Dynastar have a ski with dims of 121/85/104 next year.
check it out
post #73 of 77
Thread Starter 
do you know what the ski is called or where I can get info on it?
post #74 of 77

Dynastar Exclusive Legend Powder

Quote:
Originally Posted by utahskier
do you know what the ski is called or where I can get info on it?
There is a Women's ski that fits those dimensions:

http://www.skipass.com/guide-matos/s...end-Power.html
post #75 of 77
post #76 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
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.
Wow, you seem to know this stuff. Didn't mean to make you so angry. Tell me then...Have been using the 2006 B3 as a powder ski. Skimag and such has it listed as good in powder.

Tell me what I should be using?
I'm 6-3, 225, in pretty good shape...was a college wrestler. Love to ski all conditions. Have skiied many versions of the Rossi Bandit - from the Cut 11.5, XXX, to the B3. Ski east and west, and ski Stowe often. What would you suggest? You work in a shop? Maybe I could come and buy them right from you.
post #77 of 77
You might look at the Atomic Snoop Daddy as well. I understand for it's width, it is a very versatile ski. Sierra Jim can tell you more. 88mm under foot, a good amount of sidecut for the groomers as well. They may be tough to demo being their first year of availablilty, but I'm exicted to try them.
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?