EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Rossignol CLASSIC 80 VS Volkl AC50
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rossignol CLASSIC 80 VS Volkl AC50

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
 I set out to do a direct comparison between the AC50 and the Rossignol Classic 80.

I spent a full day at Mammoth on each ski on back to back days with exactly the same conditions and exactly the same temperatures and here are my results.

CX80:
The First day, I rode the CX 80. The day started out on the very hard pack side and turned into very soft conditions by mid day.

The Cx 80 is a great ski and I found my self really enjoying laying the ski down and running some quick edge to edge turns. 

The ski seemed really versatile on the type of turns I could make and it has enough spring to really crank out some slalom turns while having enough grip to run some GS turns.

The ski, however, does have a speed limit and did not fare well at speeds in excessive of 60mph.

Another downside to the ski was how it handled a couple inches of slushy snow. I found it almost impossible to keep both skis doing the same thing.

AC50:
The second day, I rode the AC50. The day started out very hard pack and like the previous day, ended on the slushy side.

The AC50 is not as playful of a ski as the CX 80. It did not initiate turns as fast or with as much spring. However, there is no comparison between how the AC50 and the CX80 handle speed. 

I wear a GPS when I ski and on the first day, I had only one run where I broke 60mph and my max speed was 61.3. With the AC50, I had seven runs with speeds in access of 60 mph and some runs breaking the 70mph barrier.

The AC50 has a very stiff tail in comparison to the CX80 which allows it to handle sliding better than the 80 which becomes unnerving when you need to slide the ski.




OVER ALL:

I personally will be looking for a pair of the 50s this off season. However, if I lived on the east coast or somewhere with narrower shorter slopes, I would definitely choose the 80s. 

PS, The 80s felt like a gown up pair of the Bandits:)
post #2 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuscopd View Post

 The ski, however, does have a speed limit and did not fare well at speeds in excessive of 60mph.


I wear a GPS when I ski and on the first day, I had only one run where I broke 60mph and my max speed was 61.3. With the AC50, I had seven runs with speeds in access of 60 mph and some runs breaking the 70mph barrier.

 


 


OK I'll bite, a recreation ski has a speed limit when it doesn't do well over 60 MPH?  

Your GPS told you you broke the 70 MPH barrier on the AC50S? And you believe that?

So, I'm going to get flamed by some who insist that good recreational rippers do 60-70 all the time.

And you're going to get flamed by those who know better.
OR, this will be ignored because we've been trolled on top speeds so many time that no one will bother to respond.

post #3 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric S View Post





OK I'll bite, a recreation ski has a speed limit when it doesn't do well over 60 MPH?  

Your GPS told you you broke the 70 MPH barrier on the AC50S? And you believe that?

So, I'm going to get flamed by some who insist that good recreational rippers do 60-70 all the time.

And you're going to get flamed by those who know better.
OR, this will be ignored because we've been trolled on top speeds so many time that no one will bother to respond.

You are correct,  a front side recreational ski is not expected to handle 60 MPH.My point, which admittedly I did not make very well, is that I didn't feel a ton of confidence on the ski at very high speeds. Because I was testing the ski, I pushed the ski to its upper bounds to see what it was capable of and I was surprised at the end of the day when I looked at the GPS data, that I really was not going that fast. 


AS for trusting the GPS,

I actually have 2 GPS, a garmin runner 305 and My Tracks from Google on my Droid. They both stated similar speeds.


Also, world cup skiers hit upwards to 90 MPH on DH courses so yes, I believe the gps that I was going 70 on a giant wide open black diamond with no requirements to make a gate. AND NO, I am not comparing myself to a WC skier, I am stating that a WC can do about 20 MPH more than I did while making gates on similar angled run. I am not sure if you have ever ridden at Mammoth, but they have groomed runs with a 38% grade that are wider than football fields so you can really ride fast with high confidence.
post #4 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuscopd View Post



You are correct,  a front side recreational ski is not expected to handle 60 MPH.My point, which admittedly I did not make very well, is that I didn't feel a ton of confidence on the ski at very high speeds. Because I was testing the ski, I pushed the ski to its upper bounds to see what it was capable of and I was surprised at the end of the day when I looked at the GPS data, that I really was not going that fast. 


AS for trusting the GPS,

I actually have 2 GPS, a garmin runner 305 and My Tracks from Google on my Droid. They both stated similar speeds.


Also, world cup skiers hit upwards to 90 MPH on DH courses so yes, I believe the gps that I was going 70 on a giant wide open black diamond with no requirements to make a gate. AND NO, I am not comparing myself to a WC skier, I am stating that a WC can do about 20 MPH more than I did while making gates on similar angled run. I am not sure if you have ever ridden at Mammoth, but they have groomed runs with a 38% grade that are wider than football fields so you can really ride fast with high confidence.

 

Sorry, I'm in the camp that doesn't buy the 70mph claims. No front side rec ski can be skied safely by anyone at 70mph. World cup skiers do hit 90 on their race skis but I can assure you anything over 60 gets their attention and that's with their race skis on.
post #5 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric S View Post


And you're going to get flamed by those who know better.
OR, this will be ignored because we've been trolled on top speeds so many time that no one will bother to respond.


post #6 of 21
Thread Starter 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sM2wUcobxw


how fast do you think this guy is going on back country powder?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric S View Post




Sorry, I'm in the camp that doesn't buy the 70mph claims. No front side rec ski can be skied safely by anyone at 70mph. World cup skiers do hit 90 on their race skis but I can assure you anything over 60 gets their attention and that's with their race skis on.
post #7 of 21
Thanks for the info fuscopd,  and welcome.  How did the CS80 fare and compare to the AC50 between 30 and 60 mph?  Have you tried any of Dynastar LPs, and if so how do they compare to the skis you tried.

Can I play too?

When you have spent a little more time on here you will realize that it is impossible, with a few exceptions, for a human to ski above 60 mph.  It was documented back in the days when the ludites opposed the steam engined locomotive that the human body cannot sustain such speeds.

The exceptions are people in movies, and people on WC race courses.  The presence of the film crew and camera distorts the fabric of time and space, and after a while the movie stars are able to do it without a camera being present.  I cannot explain using the laws of physics how forcing the skiers to turn around gates instead of following the fall line and thus take a longer path to the bottom increases their speed, but it has been proven by professorial intimidation.  Proofs are also a little different here.  Any time you find yourself in a disagreement with someone on epicski who cannot prove their position logically, they will revert to a book which you haven't read and they cannot explain, but if you read the book and explain it to them they will say you do not understand the book, and you should go out and buy the new book by that same author.

If you suggest that you have skied more than 60 mph, you will be told that you must be mistaken and a poor judge of speed.  If you get an expensive GPS and measure your speed, you will be told that GPS is inaccurate.   If you get a radar gun, you will be told that it was not properly calibrated.  The only way you will be believed is if you are timed with official FIS timing, and that will be in a course with gates, or a citizen's DH on a safe moderately flat slope.
post #8 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

Thanks for the info fuscopd,  and welcome.  How did the CS80 fare and compare to the AC50 between 30 and 60 mph?  Have you tried any of Dynastar LPs, and if so how do they compare to the skis you tried.

Can I play too?

When you have spent a little more time on here you will realize that it is impossible, with a few exceptions, for a human to ski above 60 mph.  It was documented back in the days when the ludites opposed the steam engined locomotive that the human body cannot sustain such speeds.

The exceptions are people in movies, and people on WC race courses.  The presence of the film crew and camera distorts the fabric of time and space, and after a while the movie stars are able to do it without a camera being present.  I cannot explain using the laws of physics how forcing the skiers to turn around gates instead of following the fall line and thus take a longer path to the bottom increases their speed, but it has been proven by professorial intimidation.  Proofs are also a little different here.  Any time you find yourself in a disagreement with someone on epicski who cannot prove their position logically, they will revert to a book which you haven't read and they cannot explain, but if you read the book and explain it to them they will say you do not understand the book, and you should go out and buy the new book by that same author.

If you suggest that you have skied more than 60 mph, you will be told that you must be mistaken and a poor judge of speed.  If you get an expensive GPS and measure your speed, you will be told that GPS is inaccurate.   If you get a radar gun, you will be told that it was not properly calibrated.  The only way you will be believed is if you are timed with official FIS timing, and that will be in a course with gates, or a citizen's DH on a safe moderately flat slope.




 
Ghost, I was expecting you.
post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric S View Post



Ghost, I was expecting you.

Did I get hooked or did I steal the bait.  I don't care, it's a fun topic to discuss while I lament the lack of snow.
post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post




Did I get hooked or did I steal the bait.  I don't care, it's a fun topic to discuss while I lament the lack of snow.
 
Just havin fun!!!
post #11 of 21
What I've learned from Ghost-

1. everyone skis within 20mph of WC downhill racer's max speeds... no need for a speedsuit or race skis or even a tuck.

2. it is impossible to carve a turn longer than a skis turn radius.

I'm going to go chew on some tinfoil while I stick my head in the microwave. GABBAGABBAGABBAGABBA...
post #12 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

What I've learned from Ghost-

1. everyone skis within 20mph of WC downhill racer's max speeds... no need for a speedsuit or race skis or even a tuck.

2. it is impossible to carve a turn longer than a skis turn radius.

I'm going to go chew on some tinfoil while I stick my head in the microwave. GABBAGABBAGABBAGABBA...

Not everyone!  Just 3%.

What do you mean by "carve"
post #13 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

What I've learned from Ghost-

1. everyone skis within 20mph of WC downhill racer's max speeds... no need for a speedsuit or race skis or even a tuck.

2. it is impossible to carve a turn longer than a skis turn radius.

I'm going to go chew on some tinfoil while I stick my head in the microwave. GABBAGABBAGABBAGABBA...


ahhhahaha

yeah I am calling BS on 70mph on Ac50 while just skiing. GPS quite often spikes your reading.

Use a radar gun calibrated or I am calling BS. I know what it took for me to go to 70mph, it took a tuck, and about 1000 vertical feet of 30 degree slope. It is way sketchy to go that fast. 
post #14 of 21
Thread Starter 
Hey Ghost, 

I would say that the 80 at average speed was more fun than the 50 due to its more "playful" feeling. It seemed to have more of a range than that of the AC50.

However, the ac50 did better in really sloppy snow.


As far as the argument goes, you are all missing the point. 

The point is that the AC50 gave me way more confidence to go fast. The one run I went fast on the 80s, I felt out of control and had no confidence. On the other hand, I felt like the sky is the limit on the AC50.

PS: I WAS IN A TUCK, ON A 38% GRADE SLOPE from about half way down Cornice which is 1500ft vertical at an average of 28% grade on a very hard pack slope. I only came out of my tuck to make the very sweeping turn at the bottom and the Ski held the speed no problem.

I will be back on the slope next week and will where my go pro and my GPS and will post the video on this thread. (Conditions Permitting)



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

Thanks for the info fuscopd,  and welcome.  How did the CS80 fare and compare to the AC50 between 30 and 60 mph?  Have you tried any of Dynastar LPs, and if so how do they compare to the skis you tried.

Can I play too?

When you have spent a little more time on here you will realize that it is impossible, with a few exceptions, for a human to ski above 60 mph.  It was documented back in the days when the ludites opposed the steam engined locomotive that the human body cannot sustain such speeds.

The exceptions are people in movies, and people on WC race courses.  The presence of the film crew and camera distorts the fabric of time and space, and after a while the movie stars are able to do it without a camera being present.  I cannot explain using the laws of physics how forcing the skiers to turn around gates instead of following the fall line and thus take a longer path to the bottom increases their speed, but it has been proven by professorial intimidation.  Proofs are also a little different here.  Any time you find yourself in a disagreement with someone on epicski who cannot prove their position logically, they will revert to a book which you haven't read and they cannot explain, but if you read the book and explain it to them they will say you do not understand the book, and you should go out and buy the new book by that same author.

If you suggest that you have skied more than 60 mph, you will be told that you must be mistaken and a poor judge of speed.  If you get an expensive GPS and measure your speed, you will be told that GPS is inaccurate.   If you get a radar gun, you will be told that it was not properly calibrated.  The only way you will be believed is if you are timed with official FIS timing, and that will be in a course with gates, or a citizen's DH on a safe moderately flat slope.



 
post #15 of 21
If I can make a suggestion, try Monster CHIP/ CHIP 78's from Head.
I find them amaizing how they make speed seem totally easy
and calm!

BTW: I was told that the CX 80 is the same thing as a S9, can you
confirm or deny? Does the CX80 have the sheet of metal that sperates it
from the S8?
post #16 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuscopd View Post



PS: I WAS IN A TUCK, ON A 38% GRADE SLOPE from about half way down Cornice which is 1500ft vertical at an average of 28% grade on a very hard pack slope. I only came out of my tuck to make the very sweeping turn at the bottom and the Ski held the speed no problem.





 
Tucking a 38 (degree) slope?  Like the confidence!  Thanks for the info on the skis. 
post #17 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuscopd View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sM2wUcobxw


how fast do you think this guy is going on back country powder?



 
LOL...Are you seriously comparing yourself to guys like Daron Rhalves, and Henrik Winstedt?
post #18 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post



LOL...Are you seriously comparing yourself to guys like Daron Rhalves, and Henrik Winstedt?
 
Not at all. I am proving that a person can go very fast without a skin suit, in a tuck, with DH skis on as some have suggested.

That was actually a pretty far jump for you to assume that me showing a video of professional skier in the back country going really fast would be the same as me stating that I can go fast on a well manicured groomers. But, I guess some people just need to argue. 

Everyone, move past the speed and take the review for what it was, a comparison between the Rossis and the AC50s.

My only point with the speed was to put numbers behind the confidence the 50's gave me over the Rossi's. The GPS confirmed what I felt, that I was going faster and felt more control at high speeds on the 50 over the Rossis. "According to the gps", I only had 1 run where I broke sixty on the Rossis and the run was very sketchy, I felt border line out of control. I did not however feel out of control and had to go a lot faster to put the AC50's in the uncomfortable zone.
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterGoa View Post

BTW: I was told that the CX 80 is the same thing as a S9, can you
confirm or deny? Does the CX80 have the sheet of metal that sperates it
from the S8?

What are S8 and S9?

The CX80 (North America) is the same ski as the Radical R9X Oversize (Europe) - a fat cheater GS.

  • Sizes : 160-165-170-175-180
  • Sidecut : 124/80/112

The Rossi websites don't agree about the radii (R9X = 15@170, CX80 = 16.5@170) but I suspect that's just sloppiness.

Similarly, the CS70 is the same as the Radical R9S Oversize.

Its all marketing - North America wants charging All Mountain skis, Europe wants citizen Race skis, and it turns out they're exactly the same beasts.
post #20 of 21

I know I'm late to the conversation, but there is a reason DH racers use skis that are 210 to 220 cm in today's downhill events. Stability. You just can't get that stability from a short ski. You see how bounced around they get at those speeds? On those Long Planks? Do the math.

post #21 of 21

Old thread, I know, but from that camera angle Rhalves and Winstedt aren't skiing - they're actually flying and trying desperately to maintain some contact with the snow.

 

A friend of mine (very good skier) was on AC50s and was clocked by radar in the Italian Dolomites (Saslong World Cup downhill course in Val Gardena) at 94.6km/h, which is just shy of 60mph. He was so proud he woke me up via text half way round the world to give me the good news.

 

He loved the AC50, but after demoing it myself I'm in the other camp - it's a plank.  He also loved the CX80 (170cm, tested in August 2009 - "a great ski").

 

Didn't know the R9X Oversize was the same as the CX80, nice to know. It's also known as the "Classic 80", no?

 

 

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 › Rossignol CLASSIC 80 VS Volkl AC50