No.
No. You can change from 11 to 11 and 13 to 13 but not 11 to 13 or 13 to 11.
Sorry to dig up an old one, @Philpug, but I'm trawling through this thread due to a dilemma and this touches on it without quite being specific to my case - weight comes into play. I recently tested a Rossi GS ski with a Look Rockerace SPX15. Normally, this would be skied with a PX18, but I have a very long boot sole, so my Z-value is 8. I asked for an SPX12 to be in the middle range, and the SPX15's range starts at 7. Unfortunately, the test centre was out of 12s, so I had to give the 15 a go. Seriously liked the ski, so I bought it, but without the bindings, with the intention of getting a 12 elsewhere. However, now I'm thinking weight and lever-length mean that despite my relatively low setting, the SPX12 wasn't made for me - I'm 6'2 and around 210 lbs. As I'm sure you're aware, Rossi specifically recommends that the ski be used with a PX18, or an SPX 15 in the case of a LIGHTER athlete. Am I right in thinking that would put the SPX12 in the category of EVEN LIGHTER THAN LIGHTER ATHLETE? All this has me wondering whether having tested the ski with an SPX15, I might miss the feeling and performance I enjoyed with what I assume is a less substantial housing on the SPX12, and whether I should really be getting the SPX15. Feeding into this dilemma is that I preferred it to a Head with EVO 16s mounted, and that the greater weight of the binding might have played a role in the Rossi feeling much more substantial and stable.
I will be as simple as possible. Stay with the 15, it is a better, stronger, more rigid toe.
Thanks very much sir, much appreciated.
Those are 10 plus years old, so they won’t be GW compatible and IIRC had very large delta with the heel much higher than the toe. I wouldn’t buy skis or bindings that old as they are already obsolete.
Get what you're saying about bindings if it refers to indemnification, but there are some who think race skis were built better back then. Would an unused ten-year-old ski have deteriorated significantly?
I think what he's saying is that 10 year old skis and bindings would predate GW, so they won't be GW compatible.
And those some would be either wrong or non competitive. Now, a 10 year old race binding, at long as it is a 15 DIN or above ... you should be good. I don't think there are many 12 or 14 DIN bindings of that era that I would 100% trust, especially in a race environment even if they are new in the box.
I bet some of the binding are older than 40 years old.
I had in mind a comment by Bode Miller, is he wrong or non-competitive?
Well, he isn't competing is he?
Other than speed event skis (SG, DH and Speed) that need aging and up to months of hot boxing and waxing, I doubt there is anyone on a WC level on a ski that is more than two-three seasons old.I have no reason to doubt what you say. His criticism was that skis weren't as stiff as they used to be. Elsewhere, he's said that companies are making lighter skiers to save money and passing it off as a performance thing. I would have thought they couldn't afford to do that at the competitive level, and that the reason is to cheat the radius in GS, but that was his take on it.Well, he isn't competing is he?
The Stage is a bit lighter and does have 3mm more Delta. Assuming at 110lb she has a short BSL, that 3mm will make a difference. Out of these two, the Warden 11 would be my suggestion.
Thanks. She wears a 24.5 boot. I wonder why there is so much delta in the Stage. Is there another binding you’d suggest? Like Nx11?
