Salomon Rocker2

**Marok** · 10-18-2011, 04:52 AM

Im planning to buy a par of Salmon rocker 2 but cannot decide with lenght to get. Im around 190 cm 80 kilos and a intermediate skier. Any tipps?

**travel_to_ski** · 10-18-2011, 06:28 AM

Is there eaven a choice???

192

**Mustonen** · 10-18-2011, 06:52 AM

Originally Posted by snej

Is there eaven a choice???

192

I concur. I got these in a 192, having never skied them, and need validation.

The team guys all apparently ski these in 184, which leads me to the inescapable conclusion that they're all pussies next to my raging hardgnarcoreness.

**travel_to_ski** · 10-18-2011, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Mustonen

I concur. I got these in a 192, having never skied them, and need validation.

The team guys all apparently ski these in 184, which leads me to the inescapable conclusion that they're all pussies next to my raging hardgnarcoreness.

yes, or they are all really small, but here's one vote for it depending on your hardgnarcoreness...

Fwiw I'm 172 cm 63kg and I will ski the 192 this winter...

And yes, I'm compensating...

**CarlE** · 10-18-2011, 02:01 PM

I got 10kg on you snej, and I got the 192 as well... But we Scandis got a more manly approach to skiing. I guess it has something to do with our weird idea to always use powder skis even though it is ice and dust-on-crust outside...Just look at Kaj, probably the smallest guy on the Salomon team, and probably one of few that rocks the 192s...

**Marok** · 10-18-2011, 03:08 PM

Well, i guess that i will order the 192 then with a par of Sth-16 steel then.

**Wasatch Ripper** · 10-18-2011, 06:43 PM

Ya, uhhh...you don't need sth16 steels. Just get normal ones without the weight penalty!

**ulty_guy** · 10-19-2011, 05:13 AM

Originally Posted by sqikunst

I was on a Pair of 2012 patrons is some chalked up snow and got bounced around. The shape might be similar but the Rocker2 is pretty damp. Its cool that the patron comes in a 195 but it is 10mm narrower underfoot with the contact points considerably nearer the nose and tail. Good ski without a doubt, on a side note it was the 185 and for a guy my height and weight talking about any ski in a length under 190 is not fair cause I can think of three pow skis under 190 that I enjoy. Nordica does some strange things though like only offering the Radict in a 185 when to really appreciate it, it needs to be 10cm longer.

Yeah the narrower profile is definitely different, but the shape itself and the rocker seemed so similar. Interesting that you found them a bit bouncy as I would generally say that historically I've found Nordicas to feel more solid that Sollys but times change I guess!

**murph** · 10-19-2011, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by JaytaeMoney

I just measured the 192s and the true center appears to be right at the +50 line on the ski (1cm back from the progressive line).

Interesting. For the 184, the true center appears to be right at the progressive reference.

**sqikunst** · 10-20-2011, 03:41 AM

Yeah the narrower profile is definitely different, but the shape itself and the rocker seemed so similar. Interesting that you found them a bit bouncy as I would generally say that historically I've found Nordicas to feel more solid that Sollys but times change I guess!

I would have to get on the 195 to really give the ski a fair review. Its not a pure noodle or anything its just well, in chalked and chopped up wind buff it was not loving it. Skis can be pretty soft without getting absolutely trashed. I think this year if I can get my hands on a 195 patron then I can compare the 192 Rocker2 directly to them. Thats the plan for the quiver anyway. Does have a nice low profile rocker which is similar to the Rocker2 and helps it track smoother over harder stuff as long as it is smooth.

**Marok** · 10-20-2011, 04:32 AM

How do you guys think the 192 will be compared to the 184 in tree sking?

**Mustonen** · 10-20-2011, 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by Marok

How do you guys think the 192 will be compared to the 184 in tree sking?

Not as good.

**travel_to_ski** · 10-20-2011, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by Mustonen

Not as good.

Depends on how tight the trees are

**JaytaeMoney** · 10-20-2011, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by murph

Interesting. For the 184, the true center appears to be right at the progressive reference.

There is a decent chance that I measured wrong, is there some sort of "proper" method to measuring skis? I just did a straight tape pull from the tip to tail though the air and then found the midpoint.

**murph** · 10-20-2011, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by JaytaeMoney

There is a decent chance that I measured wrong, is there some sort of "proper" method to measuring skis? I just did a straight tape pull from the tip to tail though the air and then found the midpoint.

I did the same. If the difference in true center between 192 and 184 is only 1 cm, I think that's not much. But a good thing to know regardless.

**HankScorpio** · 10-20-2011, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by Marok

How do you guys think the 192 will be compared to the 184 in tree sking?

I just got a pair of 184s because the 192s were sold out. After mounting them, I think the length will be appropriate for my Vermont tree skiing habit. I mounted them at the line furthest back from center, still has plenty of tip and tail to play with.

**Marok** · 10-20-2011, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by snej

Depends on how tight the trees are

Some rly tight ass trees :P going touse the skis here in scandinavia and alps for alot of tree Skiing.

**Skidog** · 10-20-2011, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by VTsession

still has plenty of tip and tail to play with.

Thats what she said...

And cmon...you know we all used to rip the VT Trees with 200+ cm beasts...least i did..moving to Oooootah has made me soft though..hardly ANY tight trees around here..id be skeered now in VT..

Enjoy the new toys.

**lccfreeskier** · 10-21-2011, 12:22 PM

The recomended mount point is very far forward on these. What is the farthest back I can mount these while maintaining max stability, without loosing the feeling of having a secure tail behind me?

**FattigBalle** · 10-25-2011, 04:52 PM

Hi

Im just about to order the Rocker2 in 192 length. The webshop gives me 3 alternatives for mounting; 0(traditional), +3 and +6(core center). Where are these mounting points related to the true center of the ski? I wanna mount about 2,5cm back from true center.

**JaytaeMoney** · 10-25-2011, 08:00 PM

When I measured the 192 the true center was at +5.5 so if you want 2.5 back from there, have them mount at +3

**Alkasquawlik** · 10-25-2011, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by lccfreeskier

The recomended mount point is very far forward on these. What is the farthest back I can mount these while maintaining max stability, without loosing the feeling of having a secure tail behind me?

The farther you go back on double rockered skis the less secure the tail will be. Think about it, the closer your heel is to the rocker, the more the ski turns into a saucer tail. That's the point of mounting double rockered skis so centered, it gives the ski stability and quickness.

**ccwaskier** · 10-26-2011, 11:15 PM

Also trying to decide between 184 and 192. Any feedback is appreciated. I am 5'10, 140lbs PNW skier. Not doing any spins or switch skiing. I am happy with my 186 Gotamas and 185 Kuros. I have 183 Katana's that feel short, especially on pow days. 189 obseths felt too long (the older non very rockered generation). Thanks.