EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Need skis-your thoughts on the 2008 Rossi B78
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need skis-your thoughts on the 2008 Rossi B78

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Hopefully I can find someone with some insight on the B78 or something else that may fit my needs.
I'm a solid intermediate-advanced intermediate. I ski out west in SLC or Colorado once, maybe twice a year. I own the Atomic SX:11 in a 180... way too much ski for me. I'm looking at the B78. I want a light-weight, easy to handle ski that I can actually carry back to my car at the end of the day. With the SX:11, I'm absolutely drained after a few hours. I spend most of my time on groomed runs. I also plan on hitting a few jumps here and there. Will the B78 be too stiff? I would definitely like some flex.
I'm 6'-0", 172lbs and looking at a 166cm length.
The only reason I'm considering buying rather than renting is because I can get a great deal on these skis. Not to mention the fact that renting is just a pain in the arse.
post #2 of 19
The B78 is a very nice mid performance level ski. For your described wants and needs, it's a good call. IMO, the fly in the ointment is the length, I think the 166 would feel a little insubstantial. I think the 174 would be a better choice.

post #3 of 19
I got a pair last year at the end of the season, so I only skied mashed potatoes and corn. I got the 174 and I'm the same size as you. I would not ski them any shorter. I loved them in the spring bumps and they handled everything else I went through.
I think that they will be a great ski in soft snow but I don't know how well they will hold the hard/firm conditions we typicaly see here in the midwest. I'm sure I'll be on my Z-11 most of the time.
It is a great ski and easy to ski, also pretty light, so if you can get a good deal I'd go for it!
BUT I think 166 would be a bit short.
good luck; art
post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
That's basically what I needed to hear. I was worried the 166 was going to be a bit short even though I'm more concerned with having a nimble ski than I am stability, I know that when I get out there I'll want to go fast.
post #5 of 19
Thread Starter 
Sierra Jim, are you the guy that does the ski reviews I've seen on youtube? I watched your review on the new Volkl AC20. From the way you described them, those would be perfect. Great review, very informative. Any chance I could snatch a good deal on a set of those?
post #6 of 19
Responded to your PM, and yes that's me............

The AC-20 is a fine choice in the advanced intermediate range. It honestly is not as easy going as the B78 but still, would be easier than what you have. Check those '07-'08s I told you about.

post #7 of 19
Thread Starter 
Thanks for your reply Jim. I'm going to start looking for a B78 in a 170+. Let me know if you have any other recommendations. I have no brand preference at this point.
post #8 of 19
There are some others that you might consider. One is the K2 Stryker/Sidewinder, another is the Nordie Nitrous, a third is the Dynastar L8K. IMO the Nitrous (and the Legend 8K) are possibly the best buys in performance available. Both those are skis that will suit 90% of the folks that classify themselves as L-8 skiers yet they are not overbearing for a L-6 either. The K2's are substantially softer and easier going like the Rossi.

post #9 of 19
I am 6' and 180ish and got a pair of B 78s last season in 176. I am probably a L-7/8 skier but closer to 7 as I am getting old. They worked very well in the soft snow of the west and busted through the crud quite well. When the snow got real deep they tended to submarine a bit. At your size I would definitely go longer than 166.
post #10 of 19
If you're not attached just to B2/78's, and this is mainly for the west, and you're even thinking about jumps, you'll have more fun and work less with a bit wider ski, maybe a twin or raised tail. Think about last year's K2 Public Enemy, Fischer Watea 84, Volkl Wall, or a ski I personally think is ignored for no good reason, the Scott Mission. Versatile, springy forgiving, will grow with you as you get interested in powder, can be had cheap right now online. And at your size, definitely something in the 170's.
post #11 of 19
Another thought is the Scott Punisher. I've heard it's the same basic ski as the Mission with a twin tip. Last year's models can be had for under $200. I got a pair in 191 from Tramdock for $213 including shipping. They had shorter lengths.
post #12 of 19
I ski on SX10 and Legend 8K. Got a change to demo the B78 last year. After a few runs on them, I would say that the B78 is quite a bit softer and damper than the 8k, and definitely much more so than the SX-10. IMHO, the B78s are good blue/black skis that are forgiving for those of us who need them to be -- like the old B2/3. If you want something a bit livelier, try looking at some of the other lines. Just bear in mind that some of the rivals are quite a bit heavier.
post #13 of 19
Thread Starter 
Weight is definitely something I need to keep in mind. I broke my tib/fib about 4 years ago and tried skiing on the SX:11 again 2 years later. I noticed that with the weight of the ski on the lift, I could feel a vein shifting over a screw head in my ankle. I can't begin to describe the feeling. So, yes... weight must be kept to a minimum.
post #14 of 19
Thread Starter 
Can someone tell me what the weight comparison is between the B78, AC20, and the Legend 8000?
post #15 of 19
FWIW ss6ixspeed:
  1. Unless you know that you will like the personality of the B78 you may want to look elsewhere. IMHO it is one of the deadest skis in its class (it does not react quickly to skier input and it doesn't give back much energy when transitioning between turns).
  2. The 8K is far livelier than the B78 while still being quite forgiving and easy to ski. SJ seems to have that recommendation nailed!
  3. Nordicas with system bindings are very heavy (based on my experience with the Afterburners - a wider version of the Nitrous). Think about that if considering the Nitrous. OTOH I didn't find the 8K's to feel noticeably heavier than the Rossi's I demo'd, though I can't quote actual weights for any of these.
My $0.02....
post #16 of 19
Thread Starter 
Awesome, thanks for the feedback! The more I read about the Legend 8K, the more I like them. I'm currently looking for a good deal on that setup.
post #17 of 19
If I were choicing a ski for myself and had to pick between the Legend 8000 and the B78 I'd go with the Legend. If someone I've never seen ski came up to me and asked which I'd choice for them I'd go with the B78 if they lived out west and the 8000 if they lived in the east. The B78 is a damp, predictable ski. For the majority of skier out west, that is good because they are very forgiving off-piste. Sure they're uninspiring on groomers compared to the 8000 but if you are looking for a groomer only ski you should be on something besides the 8000 or 78.
post #18 of 19

I know this thread is a bit old, but I dug it up while researching the B78.


Can anybody comment on how the Zenith Z11's compare to the B78? 

post #19 of 19

The best I can do is two earlier proxies: B2 vs Z9. Skied them same day. Much preferred the Z9 in all conditions from hardpack to chalk and crusty pow backside. Reminded me a bit of lighter K2 Recons with bit more quickness, same planted feel. B2's became 78's with very little change, far as I know, so still smooth, very light, good in soft bumps, mediocre on ice, surprisingly stable in crud, archetype vanilla ski. Less clear on Z9 to Z11 transition but assume a species resemblance.  

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 › Need skis-your thoughts on the 2008 Rossi B78