Results 26 to 44 of 44
-
10-10-2008, 06:38 PM #26
^^^^^impressive
I would definitely be interested in taking these out for a demo. Interesting concept, except I see two different shapes in my quiver. Something like the Czar, 110ish underfoot with flat to tip rocker. And a solid 90-something crud busting freighter, with a touch of camber.
So they just need to create pop in sidecut adjusters and pair that with their rod flex adjusters. Now we are talking.
-
10-10-2008, 06:45 PM #27
im with you on rossi as a whole
see that thread where people thought i was overly harsh on them when i said i wouldnt care if they died.
i dont see this as a gadget really
i mean, AT bindings are gadgets of a similar fashion, but theyre a tool with a means to and end. Similarly, BD01s.
i see this as being the same thing
the ratcheting lever looks $$ also
even if the cable does break, i bet its just something simple like a bike brake cable you can just string into tip housing, have it be affixed by the hammer end of the cable, and then just sinch it down on the lever end with hand pressure.
-
10-10-2008, 07:33 PM #28Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Cedar Flats
- Posts
- 8
Bandit Rocker?
I say Rossi needs to come up with something. Great ski company hasn't had a winner in a long time. They need to move beyond the Bandit.
How do you think they turn a "Rocker" on and off. Sounds like an SNL skit.
I will say I love the little rooster. I did say rooster didn't I?Last edited by xtrasteepski; 10-10-2008 at 09:52 PM.
-
10-10-2008, 09:19 PM #29
I have to agree about being intrigued and that it all hinges on the execution of the lever.
The one thing that I dislike about my Sallie Rockers is the disparity of how the skis handles in firm or shallow conditions. It is slow and cumbersome, but a totally different ski in deep stuff...agile and a charger. With this type of rocker, the ski does not need to but that wide to kill it in pow, while normal mode gives you a Squad that does everything else.
Imagine how lifting the tip will shorten that 195 and actually make a Squad-type ski "easy" to ski in trees!! Take away all the bad things about rocker and take away all the limitations of a Squad. Seems a bit silly, but it just might work...
p.s. - It blows that they put an integrated binding on the 95-mm waisted version. Kills it for the AT crowd...Last edited by Bandit Man; 10-10-2008 at 09:25 PM.
-
10-10-2008, 09:23 PM #30
^ fwiw, i was sure this was a good idea when i was skiing (or being taken for too many rides) on a pair or head im103s for the same reasons that parallel the ones that you draw out about squads and the sally rocker not needing to be so wide to preform well in pow
Last edited by pechelman; 10-10-2008 at 09:25 PM.
-
10-10-2008, 09:38 PM #31
I wonder how much the AT crowd would really be interested in this ski. the device certainly adds extra weight. I also wonder what effect the tension cable has on the flex of the ski. I'm sure that it feels stiffer, but what about when you flex it while skiing in the rocker position and the ski wants to return to it's natural state but as it retensions the cable "thunk" it stops.
Still, it seems crazy enough to work!
-
10-10-2008, 09:42 PM #32Hugh Conway Guest
< sniffs air >
smells like massive warranty returns
< sneezes >
-
10-10-2008, 10:12 PM #33
-
11-17-2008, 02:51 PM #34Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 2
I ordered a pair of these a few weeks ago and should take delivery of them soon. I've been a big fan of the Bandit B3s for a while now and have decided to invest in these to have some more fun in the powder.
I'll be heading to Val d'Isere in early december then instructing in italy soon after that - i'll put a little review of them here if anyone's interested?
Cheers,
Tom
-
11-17-2008, 03:39 PM #35Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Australian in Zürich, Switzerland
- Posts
- 31
-
11-17-2008, 04:15 PM #36
depends on who you ask. In my opinion, the reason a regularly cambered ski needs to be soft in the tip only because of its lack of rocker. You want the tip to be soft so it can bend up and create its own temporary rocker, but once it bends a certain amount it gets harder to bend it even more and acts stiffer. If the ski is already bent upwards at the tip, why the hell would you need the tip to be soft anymore? Think of how floppy it would feel and how far bent upwards it would be? My favorite ski is lotus 138's in a flex 3 because they have lots of tip rocker, and are stiff as all hell making them stable at speeds faster than you'd ever want to go. the flex 2's arent bad, and they arent that soft but when you got them going super fast they started to flop up and down too much making them more unstable than their stiffer counterpart. It does sacrifice some playfulness at slower speeds, but once you get them moving they can still turn on a dime.
Last edited by couloirman; 11-17-2008 at 05:00 PM.
-
11-17-2008, 04:54 PM #37Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Central VT
- Posts
- 4,806
the idea isn't half bad. better than that muti-x adjustable turning radius crap they use. i just don't think it will work well as a production ski. switches/moving parts/adjustments on a ski is a recipe for disaster. with less moving parts on a ski, there is a lot less than can go wrong.
its one thing to have adjustments on a resort alpine ski (ie Volkl Tigershark). if you're fancy ski breaks, you walk back to the lodge. but a rockered powder ski is more of a backcountry tool. i wouldn't want a ski like that to fail miles from civilization.
-
11-17-2008, 05:02 PM #38
nice video on the site. 140-108-120
185 or 195... interesting concept and looks pretty well put together.
-
11-17-2008, 11:22 PM #39i wouldn't want a ski like that to fail miles from civilization.
-
11-17-2008, 11:40 PM #40
Certainly seems more useful than the Volkl PowerFuckingSwitch.
not counting days 2016-17
-
11-18-2008, 11:23 AM #41Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 2
Just got a call from Rossi - they've had a few problems manufacturing them so won't be releasing them until next year. Shame
-
11-18-2008, 02:14 PM #42
I'm bummed about the new lengths 185 and 195, where's the 189. 185 is too short, and 195 is way too big, and rocker on/off doesn't help me much here. I can ski a 195 in pow, rockered or not, but I don't want to ski a 195 regular camber in chop/firm and I definitely don't want to ski a rockered 195 in the those conditions.
Go Sharks.
-
11-18-2008, 06:33 PM #43
He was one of many team-members breaking the shit out of this gimmick. From what I saw, the wires pulled through the tips, caused delamming in the tip and froze up all the time. Plus a massive amount of snow build would build up on the ski and there was nearly no way to scrape it off when in the 'rocker' was engaged. I'm only saying this stuff cause this is one of the dumbest ski 'technologies' invented in the last ten years. While the concept is good, the execution is poor at best.
-
11-18-2008, 08:25 PM #44
Should the designs of a traditional camber ski differ from the dimensions of a ski with rocker?
When I think of a ski with rocker, I look for some taper as well. As it is with the BROcker. I've never skied a pair of the proto 188's that got rockered, but I can't imagine they skied better than a design dedicated to a rockered ski.
Similar Threads
-
186 Rocker Review Thread
By pechelman in forum Tech TalkReplies: 113Last Post: 08-20-2010, 05:17 PM -
Advantages to more rocker?
By Below Zero in forum Tech TalkReplies: 38Last Post: 09-14-2009, 06:36 PM -
New DPS molds: 198cm Lotus 120 & 202cm Lotus 138
By dps in forum Tech TalkReplies: 424Last Post: 01-14-2008, 04:38 PM -
Quiksilver may have to sell Rossignol
By skier666 in forum General Ski / Snowboard DiscussionReplies: 41Last Post: 07-06-2007, 02:27 PM -
ROSSIGNOL TO MOVE HQ TO PARK CITY
By grizzle6 in forum General Ski / Snowboard DiscussionReplies: 16Last Post: 02-01-2006, 06:17 PM
Bookmarks