Salon rocker 2 108

Depends on the type of all mtn ski your after. It's based off the 122 an that is one of the best freestyle pow skis. The 108 is super bible thanks to the symmetrical rocker, its not a full on symmetrical shape however. They ski really well both forward and switch and pivot really easily. On the groomers they still ride well the camber underfoot holds an edge well. I have been on the 122 for the last 3 seasons and they are a great ski. I used them as my all mtn ski allot, but that was in whis, so unless you get a lot of deep snow the 108 is a better choice. If your looking for more of a charger look at the q105 but if you like to jib the whole mtn then the 108 is an awesome choice.
 
best ski I have ever skied on... I ski it everywhere park, groomers, pow, crud, ice. I have them center mounted so spinning is skiing is easy and spinning is even easier :)
 
Good skis but don't make the mistake I did and buy them too short. I'm 5'2 130lbs and I demoed the 174's which I loved. I then bought the 166's because I thought hey if anyone should be riding the shortest model (on a men's ski no less) it should be me. Wrong. The 166 is too short, even for me! I should've stuck with the 174's... I thought the 166's would be better for crossing over into the park. I still ride them but they feel like ski blades on groomers due the short contact length.

Make certain you size up.
 
I'm not sure I would agree with that lat statement. I'm 5'11 and 170lbs and I'm fine on the 181. I tried the 190 and its just too big to be playfull. It's great at cruising fast but once you just get in the trees it's too much. I ski the 122 in 184 too and never have an issue size wise. But just another reason why its great to demo.
 
Demoing isn't useful for getting a feel for how the different lengths ride as typically the demo tents only carry one or two sizes, and for me in particular they never seem to carry the smaller sizes. No where carries the 166 rocker 2 for demo. Typically when I demo pow skis I have to ride 180's and then hope when I buy the smaller size it works out. Which has been a successful strategy with every ski *except* the rocker 2.

If you look at the rocker 2 in profile the contact length is much shorter than most other hybrid rocker skis, and because it's got tapered (spoon shaped) tips no amount of laying it on edge is going to give you that full run length like you would in other rockered skis. I definitely think this is something to take note of before you buy them. Other all mountain powder skis would be fine at that length but the tapered tips means that extra bit of ski at the tip and tail effectively doesn't exist on groomers and hard pack, no matter how much you edge your turns.
 
You should be good at demos now as they have the rockettes which are the same skis just in smaller sizes. I agree the running length can be shorter then some skis but over 3 years selling them in whistler we did not find at all people were having to downsize. When we were first trying the original rocker 2 4 years ago we all thought the 192 was going to be the length but trying both nearly everyone agreed you did not need the length and te 184 was by far the best selling. And it was not just men in the rockette the largest size the 180 did not sell out the 166 was by far the eat seller. Maybe it's where you ski but certainly for the pnw we found people did not need to upsize.

I'm not trying to agrue this with you but rather inform the op of what we found selling Nd riding them for the last 3 years. Your pretty much the irat person who I ha e herd of wnting to upsize in this range of skis.
 
They look pretty sick and the 108 underfoot would make it a good all mountain ski. I think that they would work great, I would get them if you need a ski that you can ski all around the mountain, almost every day of the year.
 
Just wondering I'm 5.6. Should I get the 174 or 182 ? Planning on using them in the big mountains and in the trees.
 
Bump for anyone who still has interest in the rocker 2 108's. Blister gear review confirms what I was saying about this ski, and it's short effective edge.

I highly recommend you size up if you want a ski that feels stable charging in all conditions. Learn from my mistake.

I'm not sure why more people haven't felt the need to go up a size in this ski, in the case of the blister gear reviewer 190 is the largest they make. Maybe if they had a larger version some of the qualms he had with the ski would've disappeared. I found it to be an amazingly versatile ski in a size normally a little too large for me (174) but it felt much more limited when I bought the 166 due to the short effective edge.

I have never had a problem with men's skis feeling too short considering small I am, so this was a huge shock.
 
I think half your issues are your trying to do things on the 108 it's not really designed for. It's not a hard charging ski it's more a playfull jibby soft snow ski. It is going to feel somewhat unstable at speed in big turns. That I what there is the q range. They are the more charging skis rather then the playfull rocker range. You may find you prefer the q98 as that has the early rise tail rather then the rocker tail which gives more effective edge. If you can try the q range an see how you like those compared to the rockettes.
 
I don't think changing the tail shape would make any difference. Like it was explained in Blister gear review it's in front of the boot that you really feel the short effective edge.

I like to be able to aggressively lean forward in my boots and drive my skis from the tips. This style of riding was not a problem with the longer rocker 2's, but the shorter ones do not lend themselves to that kind of riding.
 
The early rise tail rather then rocker allows the mount point to be moved back though giving more ski infront of the binding while keeping the same amount of useable ski behind giving the effect of more usable edge in the same size ski. Honestly give the q range a try I think you will prefer them by the sounds of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top