2013 Chronic or 2013 Rocker2 92

No.Quarter

No.Quarter

Active member
I'm 5'10"super skinny but strong legs

120lbs

These will mostly be used for all mountain with a little bit of park

mounted at recommended (true center for salomons, -4 for lines)

I ski at Keystone, A Basin, and Breck

Needs to handle some powder and chop but also good on groomers

Thank You
 
Holy. Im 5'7 and 135 and I'm really skinny. You must be blowing away in the wind. But chronics have been rated some of the best all mountains ever so I'd go with them
 
Depends what kind of all mountain.

Chronics are better on groomed and lighter in the park (-2cm feels better than -4 by the way).

Rocker 92s feel better in the deep stuff though. Much more rocker.
 
I just noticed that the 2012 and the rocker2 92 have totally different msrp's. The 2012 was 750 msrp and the rocker2 92 is 550 msrp. I always thought these were the same ski?
salomon-twenty-twelve.aspx

http://www.evo.com/skis/salomon-rocker2-92.aspx
 
I guess it depends how you ski, if you really do only ski all mountain and want to throw your weight forward and drive a ski then I guess -4cm might feel marginally better. But the ski has a symmetrical flex and symmetrical rocker, so running surface centre and flex centre are at true centre. I've skied 2 demo pairs at -2cm and -4cm as well as my own pair at true centre. I like true centre the best because I ski a lot of park.

On groomed I thought -2cm felt mariginally better, than true but I not different enough. At -4cm the balance just felt wrong in the air, and they didn't feel so good switch. Forwards on groomed they were fine but I didn't notice much improvement over -2cm. I'll probably get hated on and told I can't ski if I like a centre mount just as much, but I raced for 5 years and have no problem with back mounted skis except they are kind of dull and limiting in my opinion (except for groomed performance). If you really want groomer performance something super stiff is going to serve you better anyway.

(By the way sidecut centre on the rocker 92 is also something like -4cm, there is a recommended mount Xcm back and at/near true (running length centre).
 
The only spot we mount the rocker 92 is center, it just works the best there. If you mount it back your too much on the rockered tail of the ski and its unstable.

It is the same ski as the 2012, no changes, just a price drop.

Its a supper fun all mountain ski, carves well and handles deep pow surprisingly well. Its ok in the park, but I prefer a full camber ski in the park.
 
Not exactly sure. They used to have two mounts 'classic' was sidecut centre and progressive (true centre) was running surface centre. The ski hasn't changed, but everyone rides them at 'progressive' so i presume that is why they only mark that. The dimensions of the ski aren't symmetrical so true centre is not sidecut centre.
 
How much do you weigh, how tall are you, what do you ski the most (park, pow, groomers, etc.), what size do you/did you ride. Why did you chose the chronic's. Sorry if i sound creepy on the height/weight thing. thanks for being such a great help on this. you have probably been the most helpful
 
I'm around 5'9 and 140 lbs, not sure exactly but thats about right. I ski the 178 Chronics, 85% park 15% all-mountain/pow. I don't tend to ski a lot of groomed, I'm either in the park or in the trees/pow. I actually skied the Sir Francis Bacons all of last season for the exact same mix but decided they were too fat and Blends were too soft, so Chronics were the best everyday ski Line make for me.

The reason I would choose the Chronic over the Rocker 92 is that they just feel lighter and quicker in pretty much all situations. Lighter in the air, quicker turn initiation, better edge hold etc. I would rather have the rocker 92 on a pow day though, the longer rocker gives better float and they are easier to slash and turn with. If pow is a major influence on your decision I'd go wider underfoot than either of these though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top