# 2007 Bandit B2's



## deadheadskier (Sep 13, 2007)

So....I've always wanted a pair of Rossi Bandit B2's.  I've found a brand new pair on Ebay, 2007 model in the size I want...182.  They've got a buy it now price of $299, includes shipping.

I'm on the fence.  It is a great price, but.....what do people think the chances of the price going down a tad further if I hold out?  

I'm real tempted, but the more I spend on gear, the less I'll have in my budget for lift tickets for the season.


----------



## Rushski (Sep 14, 2007)

I just picked up a pair of Blizzard Titan Eights for $339.  

So $299 for the B2s seems like a good deal.


----------



## Greg (Sep 14, 2007)

http://gear.alpinezone.com/bco/shop/P-7791/Rossignol_Bandit_B2_Alpine_Ski.html

It shows up at $299 there, but they are $240 once you click "Buy Now". Only 174cm in stock though. 21 pairs available right now.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 14, 2007)

Okay, now I'm real tempted, except for the sizing.  I'm still leary of picking up a set skis under 180cm.  Mind you, I haven't skied anything that has come out in the last four years.  I love my 2003 Bandit X, but am looking for something a bit beefer.  I'm not huge, 5'8" 195, but I'd be slightly concerned I might over power that size.  Thoughts?


----------



## Greg (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> I'm not huge, 5'8" 195, but I'd be slightly concerned I might over power that size.  Thoughts?



A 174 cm? Not at all. Actually sounds like a perfect size for you. In fact, the 174 is still the second to longest length for that ski. Mid-fats get a lot of stability just from their overall width. I would think the 182 would be reserved for bigger guys, i.e. 210+ and well over 6'.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 14, 2007)

...now the home dilema.  I've been promising the gf new end tables and a new coffee table set for months.....but, it is my birthday next saturday :lol:


----------



## Greg (Sep 14, 2007)




----------



## koreshot (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> So....I've always wanted a pair of Rossi Bandit B2's.  I've found a brand new pair on Ebay, 2007 model in the size I want...182.  They've got a buy it now price of $299, includes shipping.
> 
> I'm on the fence.  It is a great price, but.....what do people think the chances of the price going down a tad further if I hold out?
> 
> I'm real tempted, but the more I spend on gear, the less I'll have in my budget for lift tickets for the season.




Not that $299 for the B2s is not a respectable deal, but it isn't that great either.  Sierra Snowboards had a bunch of B2s in every size for sale for $199 (including shipping) during their July/August blowout sale.  This guy on ebay might be flippin a pair he bought on sierra for a $100 profit.

I have seen more than one place liquidate B2s and B3s in the sub $300 range this spring and summer.  Either the skis aren't that great, or Rossi made a bit too many.  I did pick up a pair of B3s for 199 from Sierra.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 14, 2007)

Okay, how about a binding recommendation as I'm not to familiar with the 'new school' bindings out there.


----------



## marcski (Sep 14, 2007)

B-2's I believe have a foam core and apparently are supposed to feel great for about the first 20 days and then become a strand of spaghetti.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 14, 2007)

marcski said:


> B-2's I believe have a foam core and apparently are supposed to feel great for about the first 20 days and then become a strand of spaghetti.




curious where you read/heard this.  One of the reasons I've been loyal to Rossi for so many years is I've had great lluck with durability and ski life.


----------



## koreshot (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> Okay, how about a binding recommendation as I'm not to familiar with the 'new school' bindings out there.



I would recommend you get a pair of Rossi Axial 2 bindings in 12 or 14 DIN format.  Risers or not is up to you.  The higher the binding sits on the ski the more carving performance it will give you.  Mounting flat is better for natural snow and whatnot.

Going with a Rossi binding will extend the warranty on the skis to 2 years, instead of 1.


----------



## koreshot (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> curious where you read/heard this.  One of the reasons I've been loyal to Rossi for so many years is I've had great lluck with durability and ski life.



If I recall correctly, Rossi used to use wood is their bandit line, so they used to be much more durable as a result.  Since then (about 4 years ago maybe?) they switched over to foam core skis which in theory isn't nearly as durable as wood.  Salomon has been in the same boat with thier skis - feel great for about 30 days and then start to die fast and become noodly.  This is fine for many people that ski 15 days a year and upgrade pretty frequently, but those that ski 40 days a year choose to avoid foam core skis.

That said, I have seen some pretty amazing skiers rip it up on foam core skis...


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Sep 14, 2007)

They are not a true foam core ski.  Normally it is a injected foam, but the B2 is a carved foam core, just like the wood is carved.  Havent skied a pair long enough to give a opinion on durability, so take it fo what its worth.

All Atomics have foam cores like this.(Or at least their recreational skis, not familiar with race lines.)

For a binding, I really like the Axial 2's.  They are the most reliable that I function test, and plus they look cool.:lol:


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> Okay, now I'm real tempted, except for the sizing.  I'm still leary of picking up a set skis under 180cm.  Mind you, I haven't skied anything that has come out in the last four years.  I love my 2003 Bandit X, but am looking for something a bit beefer. * I'm not huge, 5'8" 195, but I'd be slightly concerned I might over power that size.*  Thoughts?




I'm 6'5" and weigh OVER 270 lbs.  I've skied Fischer RC4's in a 156 for a number of years now, and love them.

Long length is a thing of the past.  Let go of it.  The 174s will be fine.


----------



## koreshot (Sep 14, 2007)

SkiDork said:


> I'm 6'5" and weigh OVER 270 lbs.  I've skied Fischer RC4's in a 156 for a number of years now, and love them.
> 
> Long length is a thing of the past.  Let go of it.  The 174s will be fine.



What? Do you go faster than 5mph on those Fischers?  You are a big dude - something longer might give improved high speed stability.  Although, at that length you can probably lay down 5 foot deep trenches in short and medium length turns - probably pretty fun.

I have done the 167cm slaloms route, back when I took care of myself and was under 200lbs and that was a blast on the groomers, although i didn't feel like I needed to go any shorter, seemed like a nice balance between carving and high speed stability.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 14, 2007)

koreshot said:


> What? Do you go faster than 5mph on those Fischers?  You are a big dude - something longer might give improved high speed stability.  Although, at that length you can probably lay down 5 foot deep trenches in short and medium length turns - probably pretty fun.
> 
> I have done the 167cm slaloms route, back when I took care of myself and was under 200lbs and that was a blast on the groomers, although i didn't feel like I needed to go any shorter, seemed like a nice balance between carving and high speed stability.



Ask anyone thats seen me ski them.  I'm no Bode, but I certainly have a lot of fun with them.  They perform like nobodys business.  Really.


----------



## koreshot (Sep 14, 2007)

SkiDork said:


> Ask anyone thats seen me ski them.  I'm no Bode, but I certainly have a lot of fun with them.  They perform like nobodys business.  Really.



I don't doubt it.  I am just having trouble imaging a 270lb guy flying down the mountain at 50mph on 156cm skis.  I thought I was being silly buying the 167 Rossi 9S (those will be too short, what am I thinking?) but i was very pleasantly surprised.  Maybe going even shorter would have been more fun.

Speaking of Bode, aren't race slalom skis right around 150cm anyway?  So they must work some.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 14, 2007)

koreshot said:


> I don't doubt it.  I am just having trouble imaging a 270lb guy flying down the mountain at 50mph on 156cm skis.  I thought I was being silly buying the 167 Rossi 9S (those will be too short, what am I thinking?) but i was very pleasantly surprised.  Maybe going even shorter would have been more fun.
> 
> Speaking of Bode, aren't race slalom skis right around 150cm anyway?  So they must work some.



I don't like to do high speeds, so maybe thats why I don't need my 207's any more...  Yes, these days slalom skis are pretty darn short.  I just love leaving rails and gettin my hips really low.  Thats why the RC4s are perfect for that.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 14, 2007)

Greg said:


>



Hahaha..I'd go with the 180+ length over 174s..IMHO..you're short but a pretty big guy..


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 14, 2007)

SkiDork said:


> I'm 6'5" and weigh OVER 270 lbs.  I've skied Fischer RC4's in a 156 for a number of years now, and love them.
> 
> Long length is a thing of the past.  Let go of it.  The 174s will be fine.



Wowsers..on a guy your size those would look like clown skis...lol


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Sep 14, 2007)

koreshot said:


> I don't doubt it.  I am just having trouble imaging a 270lb guy flying down the mountain at 50mph on 156cm skis.  I thought I was being silly buying the 167 Rossi 9S (those will be too short, what am I thinking?) but i was very pleasantly surprised.  Maybe going even shorter would have been more fun.
> 
> Speaking of Bode, aren't race slalom skis right around 150cm anyway?  So they must work some.




For college racers..slalom skis must be 165cm for men..as far as I know


----------



## Greg (Sep 14, 2007)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Hahaha..I'd go with the 180+ length over 174s..IMHO..you're short but a pretty big guy..



I wouldn't call 5'8" and 190 "pretty big". He's pretty much average, maybe a tad on the short side. 182s are too long, IMHO..

BTW, learn to multi-quote ( 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 ). Of course that will cut down on your post-whoring...


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 14, 2007)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Wowsers..on a guy your size those would look like clown skis...lol



Again, you've never seen me ski.  let go of the past.  Embrace the future.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 14, 2007)

koreshot said:


> I don't doubt it.  I am just having trouble imaging a 270lb guy flying down the mountain at 50mph on 156cm skis.  I thought I was being silly buying the 167 Rossi 9S (those will be too short, what am I thinking?) but i was very pleasantly surprised.  Maybe going even shorter would have been more fun.
> 
> Speaking of Bode, aren't race slalom skis right around 150cm anyway?  So they must work some.



I think the RC4's that Dork has are race stock.

That said, I've tried skis shorter than my current skis (Fischer RX8's in 170) and I don't feel comfortable skiing on skis that short.


----------



## marcski (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> curious where you read/heard this.  One of the reasons I've been loyal to Rossi for so many years is I've had great lluck with durability and ski life.



At least 2 people I know had them and the same thing happened.   But like others' have said, if they work for you then go for it.  The Atomics do have a foam core as well but they also have their beta 4 or whatever they call it...which are the rails that run lengthwise that are added for more stiffness, including torsional stiffness which seems to give them more stability and durability over the longrun compared to Rossi's.  Caveat:  I have not done any recent research on this years skis.


----------



## skimore (Sep 14, 2007)

SkiDork said:


> I'm 6'5" and weigh OVER 270 lbs.  I've skied Fischer RC4's in a 156 for a number of years now, and love them.
> 
> Long length is a thing of the past.  Let go of it.  The 174s will be fine.



If your going after any powder..... go long


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 14, 2007)

Greg said:


> http://gear.alpinezone.com/bco/shop/P-7791/Rossignol_Bandit_B2_Alpine_Ski.html
> 
> It shows up at $299 there, but they are $240 once you click "Buy Now". Only 174cm in stock though. 21 pairs available right now.




THANK YOU GREG!!!!


I was able to talk them down to $220 including shipping.  Not the $199 that Koreshot got with Sierra, but still a DAMN good deal.  

I'm gonna give it a go with the 174.  I think I'll be just fine with them.  My primary use for this ski is on piste medium turns and bumps, which the 174 will be better for on the medium turns and the shorter length better for the bumps.  I have a set of 184 Axium Powder boards that are great for that when I need them.  Their old, but essentially indestructable.  I've got close to 150 days on them have noticed no decline in performance.

As for the B2's breaking down.  The shop Greg pointed me towards offers a lifetime guarantee, so if they go the way of the noodle after 25 days, I can exchange them or get a refund.

I'm psyched.  One of the best deals I've gotten on skis ever.  Now, maybe I'll buy my gf the new coffee table she wants before looking for bindings :lol:

Thanks again Greg!!!


----------



## Greg (Sep 14, 2007)

deadheadskier said:


> THANK YOU GREG!!!!
> 
> 
> I was able to talk them down to $220 including shipping.  Not the $199 that Koreshot got with Sierra, but still a DAMN good deal.
> ...



That's great! Congrats. I think you'll find the size is perfect based on your height/weight. Enjoy.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 21, 2007)

Just Arrived 

I think I'm going to put them in the bed and see what kind of reaction I get out of the girlfiend :lol:


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 21, 2007)

skimore said:


> If your going after any powder..... go long



agreed, its all about surface area in the deep...longer and wider = float better.  My powder skis are 189s.  
FIS rules are 165 for a mens slalom ski, 155 for ladies.  Length needs to be determined by more than your weight and size...I'm 60lbs lighter and 4" shorter than SkiDork but there's no way I'm going to have as good a time on a 157 as I do on my 176s, 182s, 184s, or 189s...but I like big turns and higher speeds on a variety of terrain...not short, quick carves.  I'll trench 'em...just bigger, longer trenches that probably aren't as deep as SkiDorks.  And I've let go of the past...haven't skied a 207 in a decade.


----------

