Rank the Race Skis in Order...

[James]

I despise my Spx 15’s. Stepping in is horrible. Much worse than the Griffons, which for my 313-17mm sole weren’t that bad. I did have a shop offer to put in a 15 spring in an 18, I’d just have to buy both. At this point, I might consider it. The 18’s are very nice to step into.

 

[ski otter 2]

The two bindings I've found difficulty getting into are the Marker Jester 16, and the SPX15s, I gather because I'm only 150 lbs. With the 15s, it takes a really deliberate stomp, maybe a repeat. With the Jesters, it often takes more than one repeat. Not sure I'd want to be stuck in powder with the Jesters off, but the SPXes just barely are not a problem in powder, if I make sure I have a firm platform packed down out in the snow, on which I can stomp. By contrast, any of the Marker Comp race bindings are like butter to get into.

 

[Swede]

I'm curious, what makes the SPX 15 "plastic fantastic"? The SPX 12 and 14 are predominantly plastic, but to my untrained eye the 15 has the same toe piece as the PX 18, and while the heal is different and obviously has a weaker spring, the only piece that is metal on the PX that is plastic on the SPX is the carriage that connects the heal body to the track. I'm genuinely wondering for those of us not on the WC who set their DINs somewhere in the 10-12 range--is the performance of the PX significantly better than the SPX 15, aside from the upper bounds of its release tension?

The 15 is not a toy binding. It’s a great binding inme and it is used by a lot of athletes on lower levels (and the 12 too for SL up until u14/16). Haven’t seen the 14 on race skis, don’t know anything about it. The 18 adds more rigety to the ski. Binding+plate greatly influences the feel and aggressiveness of a set-up. To be at the level of where these things matter, means that you are an active racer with highly developed technique and are physically strong (as in building strength in the gym in a pre season program). But if one is easier to get into than another ... could be a reason too.

 

[Burton]

Thanks for the insightful responses. I've got several pair of SPX 15s across different race skis, and I agree they're pretty clunky to step into, though on the other hand, in the last five years of beer league and master's racing on that binding, I can only recall pre-releasing a couple of times. If memory serves, the releases happened either hitting a cross rut or when I was late and down in the chatter on some boilerplate. So really, they performed as designed, especially given I err on the side of a low DIN setting. It's interesting to hear that the 18 may add rigidity to the ski. I'm fairly confident I'm not a good enough skier to notice.

 

[maxwerks]

My daughter raced on Rossi her last four seasons. That was up until 2018 so don’t know after that. We had Dynastars as well as it happened a few times that we needed a new pair mid season (incredible how a course can tear up a ski) and was then sent Dynastars, because the ski wasn’t readily available with Rossi paint. But I can say that for normal FIS race skis, the Rossi/Dynastar were the same. There were individual differences between pairs, but had nothing to do with brand.

So I guess those metal "proptech" and "line control tech" strips on the Rossi but not the Dynastar are courtesy of the same meaningless dept.

 

[Swede]

So I guess those metal "proptech" and "line control tech" strips on the Rossi but not the Dynastar are courtesy of the same meaningless dept.

Dynastars may or may not have a marketing name for metal, can’t remember, but they have had the same layout/construction.

 

[maxwerks]

I ran into this pair of Rossignol SL. They are mounted with ISC din16 bindings, which l have not seen before but look similar to SPX. The skis are also marked with some codes. Any thoughts on these?

 

[James]

I ran into this pair of Rossignol SL. They are mounted with ISC din16 bindings, which l have not seen before but look similar to SPX. The skis are also marked with some codes. Any thoughts on these? View attachment 112941 View attachment 112942 View attachment 112943

What’s the flex like?
These numbers were on my slalom skis. As I remember, 54 was the flex, quite soft, the first two numbers. Not necess comparable between makers, but higher is softer. They measure deflection with a standard weight.

Thinking your last two numbers could be flex, 65.

 

[ScotsSkier]

I ran into this pair of Rossignol SL. They are mounted with ISC din16 bindings, which l have not seen before but look similar to SPX. The skis are also marked with some codes. Any thoughts on these

It is not ISC, actually it is 150. The binding is an Axial 3 150 Rockerflex, apart from the color the same binding as the SPX15 Tockerflex. I wouldn't read too much into the "codes" . they look more like "inventory/tuning" data, probably from a race club or ski academy. Every manufacturer has different identifiers so the 54T mentioned by James is just a Fischer code. The Rossignol model code, which includes the year of manufacture, - a single letter after RA - looks like E here which would be a 15/16 ski and is consistent with the plate and binding - is just above the bar code on the tail of the ski. There is a different model # for normal race stock and "Team" stock which goes to select racers. I am not aware of any flex coding on Rossi.

 

[maxwerks]

Ah yes, I thought the binding looks familiar

 

[maxwerks]

It is not ISC, actually it is 150. The binding is an Axial 3 150 Rockerflex, apart from the color the same binding as the SPX15 Tockerflex. I wouldn't read too much into the "codes" . they look more like "inventory/tuning" data, probably from a race club or ski academy. Every manufacturer has different identifiers so the 54T mentioned by James is just a Fischer code. The Rossignol model code, which includes the year of manufacture, - a single letter after RA - looks like E here which would be a 15/16 ski and is consistent with the plate and binding - is just above the bar code on the tail of the ski. There is a different model # for normal race stock and "Team" stock which goes to select racers. I am not aware of any flex coding on Rossi.

What would the model # be for Rossi team stock?

 

[maxwerks]

This? RAGY1SL https://www.skicenter.it/it/sci-da-gara/4004-rossignol-hero-fis-sl-dt-r21-wc-y-greca.html

 

[maxwerks]

Indeed the third letter indicates the season: RAHY1SL https://www.skicenter.it/en/senior-skis/4797-rossignol-hero-athlete-sl-ygreca-wc-fis-approved.html

 

[Primoz]

RAHY1SL is "general" model of the ski. It's year and and sort of ski (SL, GS...), but real model of the ski (depending on discipline, at least with Rossi there's between 5 and 15 different models of skis each year for racers to pick from) is in that number in photos above. 905165 tells what model of ski it really is, and from that you can actually see if ski was intended to be used for their WC racers or lower end racers, as certain models are available only for specific group of racers.

 

[James]

905165 tells what model of ski it really is, and from that you can actually see if ski was intended to be used for their WC racers or lower end racers, as certain models are available only for specific group of racers.

So how do you decode that number to tell what it is?

Enigma machine.

 

[maxwerks]

So how do you decode that number to tell what it is?
View attachment 113195
Enigma machine.

This would take thousands of years, we'll need inside information

 

[James]

This would take thousands of years, we'll need inside information

That’s what Colossus was for-

——————-
The existence of Colossus was not generally known until 1975 when a picture of it was declassified; in 1983, how it functioned was finally described; and in 1996, the US government - not the UK - declassified exactly what Colossus was used for.
————————-

UK Colossus Mark I First Started Cracking Wartime Codes 66 Years Ago Today

Required 1500 Valves (Vacuum Tubes)

spectrum.ieee.org

 

[maxwerks]

That’s what Colossus was for-

——————-
The existence of Colossus was not generally known until 1975 when a picture of it was declassified; in 1983, how it functioned was finally described; and in 1996, the US government - not the UK - declassified exactly what Colossus was used for.
————————-

UK Colossus Mark I First Started Cracking Wartime Codes 66 Years Ago Today

Required 1500 Valves (Vacuum Tubes)

spectrum.ieee.org

So much nicer than silicon, i want this as a watch

 

[Primoz]

So how do you decode that number to tell what it is?

Realistically... if you are not working for/with Rossi, you can't.

 

[maxwerks]

Here's another puzzler