Salomon Equipe 10 2V and 3V recommended ski length?
Marty Pietruszka
Salomon used to have a tool that would provide a recommended ski length
based on the skiers weight. I cannot find that tool. Does anybody have
access to that information? If so, please provide via email or to the RSA.
Thanks very much...
--
Marty Pietruszka
m_p...@yahoo.com
Frédéric Perrenoud
Superaxe Equipe 3V : very good skiers :
about 70 kg : 168 cm
about 80 kg : 176 cm
Equipe 2V ( be careful, very special to use it well)
60->70kg : 172 cm
80 kg : 180 cm
90 kg : 188 cm
A new 3V with a large tail (like the 2V) comes for the winter does someone
alredy test it ?
under 65 kg, it's possible to use junior skis.
Marty Pietruszka
By the way, I looked at the new 3V at our local ski shop. The tip is still
wider than the tail (and even wider than last years 3V). Salomon's web site
lists the sidecut for the 3V as 94/64/105 (tip/waist/tail). However, when I
looked at the skis in the shop, the graphics on the ski listed the sidecut
as 105/64/94 (tip/waist/tail). Also, the 2001/2002 Salomon Catalog lists
the sidecut as 105/64/94. So, I'm pretty sure that the web page is wrong.
Oh well, if it skis any where near as well as last years 3V, then wow. If
it's better, then I must have it. :-)
Thanks again for the information Frédéric.
--
Marty
"Frédéric Perrenoud" <fperr...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:9nak9k$eih$1...@news5.isdnet.net...
Mike Speegle
> Salomon recomend to choose your ski length only with your weight :
>
> Superaxe Equipe 3V : very good skiers :
> about 70 kg : 168 cm
> about 80 kg : 176 cm
>
>
> Equipe 2V ( be careful, very special to use it well)
> 60->70kg : 172 cm
> 80 kg : 180 cm
> 90 kg : 188 cm
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My point about short skis! By the first scale, I should be on
212cm at 125 kg. The second scale says 216 cm! I think I'll stick
with my 210cm Elan slaloms and my 215cm PRE GS skis! I do hope to
take out my 223cm DH in spring at A-Basin for some long awaited
goshalmighty speed!
Mike
"Colorado Ski Country, USA"
Come often, ski hard, spend *lots* of money,
then leave as quickly as you can.
Marty Pietruszka
news:123dcf4b.01090...@posting.google.com...
> "Fr??ic Perrenoud" <fperr...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:<9nak9k$eih$1...@news5.isdnet.net>...
> > Salomon recomend to choose your ski length only with your weight :
> >
> > Superaxe Equipe 3V : very good skiers :
> > about 70 kg : 168 cm
> > about 80 kg : 176 cm
> >
> >
> > Equipe 2V ( be careful, very special to use it well)
> > 60->70kg : 172 cm
> > 80 kg : 180 cm
> > 90 kg : 188 cm
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> My point about short skis! By the first scale, I should be on
> 212cm at 125 kg. The second scale says 216 cm! I think I'll stick
> with my 210cm Elan slaloms and my 215cm PRE GS skis! I do hope to
> take out my 223cm DH in spring at A-Basin for some long awaited
> goshalmighty speed!
At 77 kg, the 176 cm 3V works great for me. Wasn't sure about the 2V (I got
the 180 with the info above from Mr. Perrenoud). My 205 cm Head Radial Race
SL (from 1990 I think?), ski okay too. But they are now rock skis. My 191
cm Fischer WorldCup SL and WorldCup GS (1999/2000) both ski pretty good too.
If I raced SG or GS in the Mountains, I'd ski the 191 cm WC GS all the time.
But I race in the Midwest (MN) and our 20 second GS courses are quite tight
sometimes. This is where a short carving SL ski can perform really well.
Then again, I don't weigh 125 kg, so I cannot know how the shaped skis work
for you.
For me, now that I've gone short and shaped, I'll never go back. Ever.
That's my point(s) about short skis.
Later.
--
Marty
Mike Speegle
> > My point about short skis! By the first scale, I should be on
> > 212cm at 125 kg. The second scale says 216 cm! I think I'll stick
> > with my 210cm Elan slaloms and my 215cm PRE GS skis! I do hope to
> > take out my 223cm DH in spring at A-Basin for some long awaited
> > goshalmighty speed!
> For me, now that I've gone short and shaped, I'll never go back. Ever.
>
> That's my point(s) about short skis.
An earlier thread started by me had to do with this subject. I
*have* demoed about a dozen or more shaped skis. I *can* ski them. I
just don't like the style they force me to ski to ski them well.
I know a lot of people feel like you and more power to you! It's
just that I like the way I ski and I hope longer skis will be
available in years to come. At 125kg, I can bend a straight slalom
ski just fine!
Marty Pietruszka
Actually, you're a lucky guy to be fan of the old school SL and SG skis. I
see so many of these skis for sale at local sporting goods stores for close
to nothing! You should be able to satisfy your need for speed on top of the
line straight race skis for years to come and at bargain prices to boot.
Good luck.
--
Marty
"Mike Speegle" <mikes...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:123dcf4b.01090...@posting.google.com...
lal_truckee
>
>Hey Mike,
>
>Actually, you're a lucky guy to be fan of the old school SL and SG skis. I
>see so many of these skis for sale at local sporting goods stores for close
>to nothing! You should be able to satisfy your need for speed on top of the
>line straight race skis for years to come and at bargain prices to boot.
>
My theory is, short skis have about run their marketing course. THe big makers
have staturated the wannabie (wannabie able to carve, wannabie able to turn,
wannabie able to ski deep powder) market, and the racers get their skis free or
pro-form so there's no money to be made from racing directly (I concede that
speciality skis do better in special conditions, like slalom courses
deliberately set for twitchy skis) so they need to re-invent skis (again) to
produce additional sales.
THerefore the pendulum is about to swing - within the next couple of years
longer skis will re-emerge from the big manufacturers with newly discovered
attributes like "stable at higher speeds" and "quick side-to-side" and "cuts
through the crude like a knife". Since modern materials allow skis to be
constructed that are both stiff in torsion and soft in flex these skis will be
as easy to ski as shorties - in fact just before the discovery that they could
re-sale the entire market with short skis, manufacturers were already making
soft flexing, torsion stiff skis (c.f. Authier Zubiflex) so they already know
how to do it.
Watch for it.
Anybody have a GLM shortie ski in the basement?
-----------------------------------------
lal_truckee
Aaron Daniel
"lal_truckee" <lal_t...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:Qm5n7.2340$%u4....@www.newsranger.com...
I'm sorry but I've gotta disagree with you on this. I believe skiers will
gravitate towards any ski that will make skiing easier for them.
Manufacturers have finally figured this out and are providing skis that make
skiing easier.
As you point out manufacturers tried this once before with the GLM shorties.
I point out that was an ill-though attempt to meet consumer demand. They
made intermediate skiing easier but did not improve skiing at its highest
levels.
On the other hand the short skis that are on the market today are technology
driven. They raise skiing performance at the highest levels. The technology
is now filtering down to skiers like us and soon to basic intermediates.
Lastly, I will point out that manufacturers are being very explicit about
the lengths they recommend for each model. While racing skis are being
recommended in staggeringly short lengths all mountain skis are being
recommended lengths that are long relative to recing skis (but short
relative to history). That is because they have not found ways to make skis
work well in powder without the extra length.
While time will tell which of us is correct I believe manufacturers will
stay with short skis this time around. When GLM occurred they met the
demand. Today they are driving the supply. If you take the time to ski
modernd skis correctly you will find that make high performance skiing
easier. That has never been true of short skis before.
Aar
lal_truckee
>
>
>"lal_truckee" <lal_t...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:Qm5n7.2340$%u4....@www.newsranger.com...
>> <CLIP> modern materials allow skis to be
>> constructed that are both stiff in torsion and soft in flex these skis
>will be
>> as easy to ski as shorties - in fact just before the discovery that they
>could
>> re-sale the entire market with short skis, manufacturers were already
>making
>> soft flexing, torsion stiff skis (c.f. Authier Zubiflex) so they already
>know
>> how to do it.
>>
>> Watch for it.
>If you take the time to ski
>modernd skis correctly you will find that make high performance skiing
>easier. That has never been true of short skis before.
I'm just wondering why you might think I haven't taken the time to learn to ski
"modern" skis correctly? Or to rephase your statement to what you really meant,
why you might think I haven't taken the time to learn to ski "short" skis
correctly?
And why do you think it's easier to ski a short ski than a long ski?
XXXXXCLIPCLIPCLIP
I was going to give you the litany by reciting the contents of the quiver but I
forego the pleasure.
bye bye
-----------------------------------------
lal_truckee
Good Ol' Ed
to easy to turn and less stable. Try the longer ones before you put bucks on
the short ones.
Good Ol' Ed
Try shoe skis and feel the worst ride ever.
Frédéric Perrenoud
if we are not high level competitors, we'd better not give an advice. Today,
shaped and short skis are fastest than "old school" skis, even in world cup.
It's a fact that they are better for the race.
For leisure, the advice change and I respect peoples who like big schuss,
Christiania, long skiddings, GTE turn and all the movements difficult to
make with shaped skis.
Marty Pietruszka
news:9nnqb6$1hdk$1...@news5.isdnet.net...
Exactly! And the correct size for skiing them is based on your weight,
which is why I posted in the first place. I did not mean to start a
old-school vs. new-school debate. All I know is that I've skied/raced
old-school long boards, newer-school yet still fairly long boards (My
Fischer World Cups), and new school shorties (Equipe 10 3V at 176 cm). All
I can say is that the 3Vs were just awesome! They are stable at high
speeds, able to carve wonderfully, both short and long radius turns, great
on ice, etc, etc. Now I'm on to the 2V and can't wait for our GS season to
start. I don't think that these skis make skiing easier, but I do know that
they make skiing/racing more fun and it shows in the results.
Later.
--
Marty
Aaron Daniel
to disagree with yours. No offense was intended.news:F4vn7.4312$%u4.2...@www.newsranger.com...
Aaron Daniel
for my size and the terrain I will be skiing. I don't find a rough ride on
the ones that happen to be short.
Aar
"Good Ol' Ed" <e...@sisna.com> wrote in message
news:3B9EB4C4...@sisna.com...
Christian Hilmersen
> THerefore the pendulum is about to swing - within the next couple of years
> longer skis will re-emerge from the big manufacturers with newly
discovered
> attributes like "stable at higher speeds" and "quick side-to-side" and
"cuts
> through the crude like a knife".
So, how much speed do you need? Are we taking super-G - or regular GS? The
short shaped skis are stable enough for any GS course, and I cannot see too
many people doing more than GS speed in the slopes.....I find that people
ski too fast already (hitting somebody should always be a concern in a
crowded slope) - so let's not give them skis that make them want to go even
faster.
Well, in a way I agree with you anyway. The stabillity of the last straight
Rossignol 3G was incredible, and I could do gs turns over bumps and any snow
(found on the slopes) - and yes you could carve. Carving isn't something
new, it has just been made easier. Because of this I shared your view for a
long time, and I even bought myself a new pair of straight skis (a pair of
head's sl race skis) - but now there is no way I would go back. I have too
many skis, but I will use my X-Scream Series 178 cm as an example (I am 85kg
and 184cm). On the slope these skis give me a versality that none of my old
skis had, especially concerning snow conditions, as I can ski super-softly
and just float on top of the snow, or ski powerfully on ice (short turns and
medium turns). No, I cannot do downhill on them - but so what? And they
are not too good on steep blue ice high speed GS turns (or is it just me -
that I fall back to old school technique in these conditions...and overpower
the ski?). But, hey - I bought these as a replacement for SL skis, and I
can use them at higher speeds (than sl skis) and in more conditions than
any ski I have ever had....so why go back?
(The stability of the x-sreams would be comparable, or a little better than
Rossignol 4s 203s (1988). The 1997 Rossignol 3G 197cm was, as already
stated incredibly stable - but needed soooo much power. Not an allround ski
at all).
Christian
Mike Speegle
news:9o4bvp$aun0m$1...@ID-52546.news.dfncis.de...
> So, how much speed do you need?
As much as conditions, crowds, skis, and mindset require!
>Are we taking super-G - or regular GS?
And slalom, and DH.
>The short shaped skis are stable enough for any GS course,
We don't ski race courses a lot. *Most* people don't ski gated
courses, SL, GS, or SG.
> and I cannot see too many people doing more than GS speed in the
slopes.
What is GS speed? I would guess around 35 or 40mph (metrics folks,
please do your own conversions). People, even newbies with marginal
ability are able to get too fast very quickly. Very competent skiers
can cruise at 35-40 regularly. Open, non-moguled runs are very friendly
at those speeds.
> ....I find that people ski too fast already
I totally agree. However, there is a growing mentality from
patrollers and area officials that...SPEED = OUT-OF-CONTROL. I *have*
passed patrollers at good speed, good edge control and not many skiers
around and nothing was said or done. I've also passed patrollers at
quite slow speed and been cautioned to "ski in control". Of course,
this usually happens with the Keystone Kops. ;-) There seems to be
great variability in how *patrolling* is done from area to area.
> (hitting somebody should always be a concern in a
> crowded slope) -
Again, no argument here. I enjoy speed and the wonderful rush of
adrenaline that comes with speed and acceleration. But I have NEVER run
into anybody, and have been run into by OOC skiers and boarders several
times. Fortunately, at 6'4" and 275, they always loose the momentum
contest. ;-) Great speed is only possible when conditions, visibility,
and lack of moving people gates allow it. I've brought my DH skis to
A-Basin for a spring day and had to put them away after one run due to
early crowds. Conditions of skiing are constantly variable, all the
time, every run, every turn. That's part of what makes it so fun.
> so let's not give them skis that make them want to go even faster.
Are you advocating regulating the industry and equipment available
so people can't go fast? Given what I see, if skis available are
unstable at speed, OOC newbies and intermediates will get going too fast
and crash due to the instability. Speed is relative (with nods to
Einstein). I've been too fast at 30mph and comfortable at 60mph. It
all depends on many variables. What is fast on a gated course is
sometimes leisurely on a wide open run. Just my thoughts, but I
strenuously object to the SPEED = OUT-OF-CONTROL mentality. Just a
normal child of the 60's mindset. Peace and love. ;-)
--