New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

8800 or B-3

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
I live in the Midwest and I want to add one of the above for a big mountain vacation ski. I'm a 47 yo level 7 or 8. 6'2" 230. This ski will purely be for trips when I get on the plane to go ski and drink beer (Colorado, Utah, ESA next year in Montana, etc...) Demoing these skis under the conditions in which they will be used doesn't happen in the Midwest and I want something in place for the standard December trip to Steamboat. If I don't like em, they'll get replaced.

It would be the 8800 in 178 or 188 or the B3 in 184, both 06/07 skis. Minimal price difference betweeen the two. Both mounted flat with Look / Rossi.

How about a short recommendation on one vs. the other. Thanks
post #2 of 22
8800 hands down for that choice. More versatile than the B-3 and a better investment as far as longivity. The B-3 is a foam core ski and the 8800 is wood. I like the B-3 as a light fun just after a dump ski. But the 8800's work a bit for more differing types of snow days .They do the heavier snow much better than the B-3 and hold ok on a firm surface as they are a bit stiffer.
The stability of a 188 would be better than the B-3 as the B-3 just doesn't handle speed as good as the 8800.
You know others are gonna recommend a fatter ski for the West but of these choices you won't go wrong with the 8800 in a 188. It's a great ski.
post #3 of 22
I totally agree with Garry. The 8800 is far more versatile and is a burlier ski than the B3. At your height and weight, I would go for the 188 unless you wanted to go into tight areas and/or trees. Just for reference I'm 5'8" and 175 lbs (and about the same level skier) and the 178 was just about perfect for me. Some other fat skis may give more float, but the 8800 will do just about everything you could ask for.
post #4 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmerz View Post
I live in the Midwest and I want to add one of the above for a big mountain vacation ski. I'm a 47 yo level 7 or 8. 6'2" 230. This ski will purely be for trips when I get on the plane to go ski and drink beer (Colorado, Utah, ESA next year in Montana, etc...) Demoing these skis under the conditions in which they will be used doesn't happen in the Midwest and I want something in place for the standard December trip to Steamboat. If I don't like em, they'll get replaced.

It would be the 8800 in 178 or 188 or the B3 in 184, both 06/07 skis. Minimal price difference betweeen the two. Both mounted flat with Look / Rossi.

How about a short recommendation on one vs. the other. Thanks
The B3 (I own both the 176, which is my everyday, and 184) is slightly more forgiving and slightly better in the crud and in the bumps. The B3 also floats a little better in pow than the 8800 also.

Both skis are great choices, but IMHO the B3 is slightly better all around.

With that in mind, neither is really considered a "big mountain" ski and would still work very well for the midwest.
post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberto View Post
I totally agree with Garry. The 8800 is far more versatile and is a burlier ski than the B3. At your height and weight, I would go for the 188 unless you wanted to go into tight areas and/or trees. Just for reference I'm 5'8" and 175 lbs (and about the same level skier) and the 178 was just about perfect for me. Some other fat skis may give more float, but the 8800 will do just about everything you could ask for.

I'm gonna have to disagree slightly with the 8800 being burlier and better at busting crud...The B3 has been touted as one the best crud busters available, and they aren't exactly noodles either. This coupled with the fact that it floats better, plays better in the bumps, and is generally more forgiving points to it being more versatile.

Don't get me wrong, I love the 8800 and either ski would be a great choice, but the B3 gets the nod, just slightly.

As for the foam core...It's already been proven that there aren't issues with this particular ski's reliability/strength and life expectancy.
I have about 30 days on my 176 and about 50 days on my 184...No issues at all. Plenty of camber and they ride just as well as the first day.

If I had to limit myself to a two ski quiver, it would be my B3's, in a 176, and my Armada ANT's...Fortunetely I don't have to be limited.
post #6 of 22
Two skis, similar specs, same company, and reportedly, very different experiences.

What do you ski now? What have you skied that you liked? Disliked?

The Rossi is going to tend towards the "deader," "damper" end of the spectrum. The Dynastar is going to be livelier.

And if SierraJim doesn't chime in soon, seek him out.
post #7 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
Two skis, similar specs, same company, and reportedly, very different experiences.

What do you ski now? What have you skied that you liked? Disliked?

The Rossi is going to tend towards the "deader," "damper" end of the spectrum. The Dynastar is going to be livelier.

And if SierraJim doesn't chime in soon, seek him out.
Currently ski 07 i.xrc 1200 in 170 (hard snow ski in the Midwest), 07 AC3 in 170 (too short, on the auction block), 06 Volkl Allstar in 175. Last year I sold a pair of Legend 8000's in 178 (shouldn't have sold them) that I really liked in the right conditions. I think the Legend line is a great product...
post #8 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmerz View Post
Currently ski 07 i.xrc 1200 in 170 (hard snow ski in the Midwest), 07 AC3 in 170 (too short, on the auction block), 06 Volkl Allstar in 175. Last year I sold a pair of Legend 8000's in 178 (shouldn't have sold them) that I really liked in the right conditions. I think the Legend line is a great product...
I think you pretty much answered your own question.
post #9 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
Two skis, similar specs, same company, and reportedly, very different experiences.

What do you ski now? What have you skied that you liked? Disliked?

The Rossi is going to tend towards the "deader," "damper" end of the spectrum. The Dynastar is going to be livelier.

And if SierraJim doesn't chime in soon, seek him out.
Same company. Rossi and Dynastar? They ski much differantly. One seems to favor the lighter snow and the other takes the heavier a bit better.
post #10 of 22

A different suggestion

I will throw in a different suggestion- if you are looking for a Western vacation ski, you may be much better served by a pair of 178 or 184 L8K's (AKA Legend 8000). Let's face it- not every day in the West is a powder heaven day, and most of the time you will encounter crud or chopped up snow or bumps. A midfat is a much better ski in those conditions than a "fatty".

If I am not mistaken, L8Ks have a fairly similar width to the B3 and are more versatile than 8800's. I skied my 178 L8Ks in powder and they work just fine. Since you are a big guy, you may be better off with 184s. Last year I got another ski, a B4 which is now used strictly for powder days. It is very damp, very good floater, and very stable, although I miss the qiuckness of my Legends. The b4 is a 185, which may explain the sluggishness a bit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmerz View Post
I live in the Midwest and I want to add one of the above for a big mountain vacation ski. I'm a 47 yo level 7 or 8. 6'2" 230. This ski will purely be for trips when I get on the plane to go ski and drink beer (Colorado, Utah, ESA next year in Montana, etc...) Demoing these skis under the conditions in which they will be used doesn't happen in the Midwest and I want something in place for the standard December trip to Steamboat. If I don't like em, they'll get replaced.

It would be the 8800 in 178 or 188 or the B3 in 184, both 06/07 skis. Minimal price difference betweeen the two. Both mounted flat with Look / Rossi.

How about a short recommendation on one vs. the other. Thanks
post #11 of 22

B3 vs 8800

Demoed them both; ended up buying the B3. For crud and powder anywhere on the mountain, the Rossi can't be beat! dg
post #12 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarryZ View Post
Same company. Rossi and Dynastar? They ski much differantly. One seems to favor the lighter snow and the other takes the heavier a bit better.
As I understand it, Rossi, Dynastar, and Look are commonly owned.
post #13 of 22
I'm 5'8" and 165 pounds. I ski the 8800 in 178 and find it a perfect ski for the Rockies. At your size, think about an LP in 186 or 194.
post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
As I understand it, Rossi, Dynastar, and Look are commonly owned.
Apparently by Quicksilver:
http://www.quiksilverinc.com/AnnualR...eport_2005.pdf

Who also owns Lange and a number of other companies.

See page 37 of their annual report. They don't make it particularly easy to track down.
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
As I understand it, Rossi, Dynastar, and Look are commonly owned.
Ok. Like other conglomerates but the ties between subcompaines stilll leave room for market differances and style. I wouldn't assume Ross and Dynastar have very much in common as far as the finer details of their construction.
The two skis of this discussion have many differance ,shape and core are the main ones.
post #16 of 22
Having owned both (B3's in 176, 8800's in 178), I'll toss in my .02:

1) 8800's are stiffer, burlier feeling, freight train solid at speed in big arcs, but also have that odd Legend tip that gets knocked around a bit in crud even though it never fails you. Less forgiving of pilot error, very old school feel which you either love or hate. Pivot/skid, don't carve, tight places. Well-built; they'll outlast you. Give them an A in pow and fresh chop, B+ in heavy wet snow or groomed, C- on hardpack or in trees/bumps.

2) B3's are damper, lighter, equally smooth, way quicker edge to edge because of the shorter radius, tips very stable in crud, more tolerant of pilot style, errors (which is why shops rent them to low intermediates, but you also see them on experts). Carve hardpack surprisingly well, pretty good in bumps and trees if you pay attention, not as solid at speed. Decent snow feel, but way less feedback from the edges, ability to tinker with radius, compared to the 8800; maybe a bit vague if you're used to carving skis. I've heard the shorter lengths wear out; the 176 and above have more metal, feel a lot stronger, but still probably not a 250 day ski. Sort of a Swiss Army Knife that gets a B+ to A- across the board.

So they're both nice rides, depends on your preferred terrain, really. If I had to choose one for my only ski, it'd be the B3 hands down. If I wanted one just for backside duties out west, it'd be the 8800. But if you see yourself as a 7, maybe the B3's will be a better choice either way.
post #17 of 22

8800 vrs b3

If you can, next year Dynastar is reworking th 8800, calling it
the Mythic. Dims are 122/88/110 which is the PERFECT fix
for the 8800. 184cm + for your height and weight.

Another option: Atomic Snoopdaddy in a 184cm.

Can't comment of B3's, I've skied the B4 and it's too damp and
sluggish.

Tom
( I'm 5'7" , 180lbs and ski the 8800 and 8000 in 178cm's.
perfect length for me )
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by t1henderson View Post
If you can, next year Dynastar is reworking th 8800, calling it
the Mythic. Dims are 122/88/110 which is the PERFECT fix
for the 8800. 184cm + for your height and weight.

Another option: Atomic Snoopdaddy in a 184cm.

Can't comment of B3's, I've skied the B4 and it's too damp and
sluggish.

Tom
( I'm 5'7" , 180lbs and ski the 8800 and 8000 in 178cm's.
perfect length for me )

The Atomic Snoopdaddy would also be an excellent choice in a 185...174 if you are more into bumps/trees. I own them in a 185 and they are tied with my B3's as my everyday ski.

The B3's handle crud/chop/slop a bit better, but the Atomics are a freeking blast on groomers/bumps/not to deep soft snow. The Atomics also handle ice better than the Rossi's. If you like a ski that's lively, with lots of feedback, and some snap at the end of the turn then this may very well be your ski.

On any given day, either ski works great as a do everything ski. The Atomics also make this wicked cool "whistling" sound that increases in pitch/volume as you ski faster.
post #19 of 22
Thread Starter 
I do like the looks of that Mythic Rider and will be looking for that as the coming season progresses. I found that REI has some good deals on leftover skis on their website and I snapped up a pair of i.m 82's in 183 to begin with...
post #20 of 22
Have you thought about the Rossi Scratch BC? I'd take a look just for fun. That's a GREAT all-mountain ski.
post #21 of 22
Every Rossi I ever owned skied great for a while then fell apart. I think their flimsy. I could ski all my Volkls across the parking lot and hardly ding them. I would go with any Dynastar over any Rossi for this reason. The 8800 in particular was a favorite locals ski here in JH
post #22 of 22
If you have the iM82, you probably won't need the Mythic, but they are a bit different. The Mythic is softer and will bend into multiple turn shapes easier, and also feels a little more maneuverable at slower speeds. The iM82 is more stable in chop and a bit beefier, and just wants to blast through anything in the way. Also, it is slightly more GS like and powerful on the groomers. I found the Elan 888 to be a bit more to my liking than the Mythic: stronger and a bit more stable than the Mythic, but a bit lighter and more maneverable than the Head. It was almost a combo of the better traits of each ski.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews