Salomon Rocker2

[SLSki]

Wierd, you skied it in bad conditions and it didn't feel good

[D(C)]

My April 2011 Rocker2 demo and my April 2010 El Dictator demo left with with the impression of washy, unreponsive and ungripping skis. The common denominator - the Z12 demo bindings. I don't understand how a company could willingly sabotage their demo experience with such a subpar binding. Given that I was levering out of the toes on GROOMERS, there was no way to test these skis to their full capability. The multiple double-ejections left me angry, and I will not be considering their product as a result. I let the rep know this. I bet they're great skis, but I had no way of knowing.

This review at doglotion had the same impression about the bindings: http://www.doglotion.com/essays/salo...view-and-video

[XavierD]

Wierd, you skied it in bad conditions and it didn't feel good

Ya, then I went back to my Cochise's and had a motherfucking blast...

D(C), you bring up a solid point, yet I still felt that it was the ski, and not just the binding that I was having trouble with.

[Wired2theT]

Thank you Xavier for your input. It seemed as if I was just stumbling through epic review after epic review. Nice to see some constructive criticism. Its good to hear what you didn't like as those are the details I will weigh when coming to a decision. I'm sure I can find a "these skis fucking kill it" post on just about any similar skis thread, and though I'm sure they do, it doesn't help as much as knowing its limitations and little quirks.

[JaytaeMoney]

I have been eye-banging the crap out of these skis for next season, and I have one concern:

I have been using the 182 Czars as my daily driver for the better part of the past two seasons and I'm wondering if there will be too much overlap between those and the 184 Rocker2. I think the 190 Rocker2 would be a little too much ski for Aspen/Snowmass (breaking news: most of the time we measure storms in inches, not feet).

About me: 6' 170lbs, AGGRO EX RACER and all that, ski about 80 days/season, like to spin/flip into pow and huck no bigger than like 30ft

[grskier]

I have been eye-banging the crap out of these skis for next season, and I have one concern:

I have been using the 182 Czars as my daily driver for the better part of the past two seasons and I'm wondering if there will be too much overlap between those and the 184 Rocker2. I think the 190 Rocker2 would be a little too much ski for Aspen/Snowmass (breaking news: most of the time we measure storms in inches, not feet).

About me: age 27, 6' 175lbs, AGGRO EX RACER and all that, ski about 80 days/season, like to spin/flip into pow and huck no bigger than like 30ft

How fast do you want to go? I think the spinny flippy stuff may be a little harder with the 190 length, but that length would give you a different ski.. think long slarves in the bowl and quick work of that area skiers left of Kristy's as opposed to late day laps through the soft bumps off of Bell...

[D(C)]

I have been eye-banging the crap out of these skis for next season, and I have one concern:

I have been using the 182 Czars as my daily driver for the better part of the past two seasons and I'm wondering if there will be too much overlap between those and the 184 Rocker2. I think the 190 Rocker2 would be a little too much ski for Aspen/Snowmass (breaking news: most of the time we measure storms in inches, not feet).

About me: 6' 170lbs, AGGRO EX RACER and all that, ski about 80 days/season, like to spin/flip into pow and huck no bigger than like 30ft

To me, the Czar and Rocker2 cover the same quiver spot and it comes down to preference. From what I could tell in demoing the Rocker2 (when not fighting the crap bindings) is that they'd be a pretty versatile ski and more fun on groomers than the Czar due to the tighter turn radius. That said, there is something special about the soft snow frictionlessness of the Czar, with minimal sidecut and long, gradual tip rocker. Regardless of length, I would choose one or the other if they're both being used in-bounds. However if I were building a Salomon quiver, I'd go Rocker2 for resort and Czar for touring, where groomer performance is not a factor.

[Skidog]

To me, the Czar and Rocker2 cover the same quiver spot and it comes down to preference. From what I could tell in demoing the Rocker2 (when not fighting the crap bindings) is that they'd be a pretty versatile ski and more fun on groomers than the Czar due to the tighter turn radius. That said, there is something special about the soft snow frictionlessness of the Czar, with minimal sidecut and long, gradual tip rocker. Regardless of length, I would choose one or the other if they're both being used in-bounds. However if I were building a Salomon quiver, I'd go Rocker2 for resort and Czar for touring, where groomer performance is not a factor.

Interersting assessment. I ski the czars now for about 100+ days and i love them, but i found the 190 R2 to be much more "playful" in pow.

[MJbumper1121]

How are the R2's in the crud? How you describe the stiffness of the ski in comparision to others in its class?

[TCK]

My 192s are mid-stiff. They definitely are not noodles like hellbents/EP Pros/etc. They flex a hair softer than my Praxis Protests.

[MJbumper1121]

Thx, TCK.

Would you say they are about the same stiffness of the super s7's?

[TCK]

They have a similar flex pattern as the super 7; stiff under foot with mid-stiff tips/tails. Overall, it's probably a bit softer than the Super 7, but more damp, and lighter. They ski stiffer than they flex.

[ectreeskier11]

They have a similar flex pattern as the super 7; stiff under foot with mid-stiff tips/tails. Overall, it's probably a bit softer than the Super 7, but more damp, and lighter. They ski stiffer than they flex.

the rocker 2 is not more damp than the super 7. just gonna throw that out there.

[TCK]

the rocker 2 is not more damp than the super 7. just gonna throw that out there.

I've skied the super 7, and own the rocker2. What blew me away about the rocker2 was how damp it was. In my opinion, more than the super 7.

[Alkasquawlik]

I've skied the super 7, and own the rocker2. What blew me away about the rocker2 was how damp it was. In my opinion, more than the super 7.

Having skied both skis this year I would agree with TCK, the Rocker2 is definitely more 'damp' than the Super S7.

[Skidog]

3rd on the damp.....but s7 and super s7 just dont do it for me at all period. so im slightly biased.

[ectreeskier11]

the rocker2s were a chatterfest when i skied on them in anything but totally untracked 18+inch deep pow

[Skidog]

the rocker2s were a chatterfest when i skied on them in anything but totally untracked 18+inch deep pow

Funny i hear dudes raving about them in every/any condition. I had no problems keeping them under control on hardpack. If you wanna go mach looney on em yeah..they chatter...

[JaytaeMoney]

the rocker2s were a chatterfest when i skied on them in anything but totally untracked 18+inch deep pow

great post, i think i speak for everyone when i say we love the hyperbole. so they'll chatter in 12" of untracked pow? and in the lift line? bummer.

[Caucasian Asian]

great post, i think i speak for everyone when i say we love the hyperbole. so they'll chatter in 12" of untracked pow? and in the lift line? bummer.

You should hear them chatter in the Thule

[lalligagger]

Somehow going for 480 on backcountry right now. 1 pair of 192's left and a few 184's. Can anyone compare these with the original rockers? I'll mainly be breaking them out on deeper days at Big Sky, so I want something I can get forward on and charge straigtlines/ big turns, but also be stable busting through a fair amount of crud. They seem like way different skis looking at the dimensions, so any help would rock.

[Bird Blaster]

$480 is a smoking deal. And it isn't even listed as on sale....5 skis left

[sqikunst]

^^That is cheap as FUCK!!!

[whyturn]

My name is fat ski bob and I have a gear whoring problem

[murph]

That didn't take long to sell out.