or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

s7 should I buy it - Page 2

post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Williams View Post

I am 5'7"  155 lbs 50 years old , But Pretty athletic and don't want to believe I'm not 28 Years old , 


.

  SOOO  Started skiing 8 years ago probably skied 200 times, Didn't take enough lessons , So ....   I can make it down Upper international At crystal , Its double black , But make it down with wiping out is about it , Blue runs are easy , Smaller bumps usually more constant medium speed , Black runs with out bumps I can do much  Slower than the teenagers , Volkwagon sized jumps are Ok for me ,Mostly want something for The wet powder here in the Pacific northwest 



   The 2012 K2 Pontoon 179 cm w binding   300$  , 2012  S7  WBinding 420 $ ,2011 Dynastar LPR  115  w Bind $370 ,  2013 Soloman roocker2 122   115 waste $500,,, 



    I have MX 88s and Atomic Blackeye smoke Ti  . The atomics have a speed limit , But are better on hardpack , Then the MXs  are pretty easy in soft , But Nothing I have will stay afloat in any powder , I think I need something intermediate , The atomics are just too easy to reach the speed limit on , is that enough info ?


 


Wait a second, you mean Alpental, right?

I would not suggest getting the S7s if they're 168cm. That's way too short. And be wary of demo "deals" while those prices may be decent (they're not that great), you have to remember that they've been used by people who don't have any reason to care about their condition. As for the model, S7s are great in powder (I don't particularly like them out of it, but if this is your powder ski it's a good choice).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Williams View Post

 don't know what  5 point ski is , I will search the term , My last lessons last year were about using the tips and forward pressure ,Which I know about , But the instructor showed me something about pivot with the tips down , But not a hop turn ,  My atomic smoke ti turns with the tip pressure . And doesn't turn well any other way . But the MX88 turns  if I am in the back seat  and much better in soft groomed , Where as the Atomic have edge grip on hard pack Like no other ski ,,I can feel the power on them things in hard pack .I feel little on the MX88 in hardpack , They do not grip like the Atomic , Between the two , I feel I have everything I need in a front side , NOW ,,  At Crystal on a deep powder day , Like back past snorting elk in the numbered gates , Niether of those skis are any fun for me , Once the Pacific northwest heavy powder is over my boots , I tried leaning back etc , But the tips get under that SH!   I'm done , or one ski goes under and the other doesn't . FLAP ! ,Be right back I will tell where the powder was fun on B4 rossi ,  


 


5-point means the skis have 5 points of measure.
1) Point of the tip
2) Widest point of the tip
3) Waist width
4) Widest point of the tail
5) Point of the tail
In practice, it means the tip and tail are less prone to catching and allows the ski to have a tighter radius from the middle 3 points of measure.
post #32 of 41
Thread Starter 

Akira ,, Well Thats interesting . I think 5 point is an advertising phrase , , The guy at the ski shop told me to get a significantly bigger ski ,, Or I was just overlapping , So I have been looking at those measurements , But thats cool it solves the big mistery ,

   Oh yep Aplental , I was thinking snorting elk at crystal  , The side entrance from under green valley lift .And solves the ski length issue , 

post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Williams View Post

Akira ,, Well Thats interesting . I think 5 point is an advertising phrase , , The guy at the ski shop told me to get a significantly bigger ski ,, Or I was just overlapping , So I have been looking at those measurements , But thats cool it solves the big mistery ,



   Oh yep Aplental , I was thinking snorting elk at crystal  , The side entrance from under green valley lift .And solves the ski length issue , 


 


If you compare a standard 3-point ski to a 4- or 5-point shape, you'll see that the widest points are considerably closer to the middle, leaving a longer, tapered tip and tail. In my experience they handle like a shorter ski but still have the stability and float of a longer platform. You can see the difference in the images below (traditional sidecut being first and 5-point being last)

positive_camber.jpg

est_park_rocker.jpg


As for size, I'd suggest something in the 178-183 range. You could potentially go a bit longer if you want something more aggressive, but much shorter and you'll compromise any float you'd gain from the width.
post #34 of 41

Mark, as a skier from your neighborhood, based on what you say, I'd recommend the new Soul 7 (180 for you).  Demo it at Crystal next time you are up, they have a bunch of pairs.  But it will sell out this year before xmas, so you might want to pick a pair up in town, and keep them in plastic until you are convinced.  You will have no problem off loading an un-mounted pair for close enough to the purchase price that it wouldn't be unreasonable to by the option up front.

 

Combine the Soul 7 with your MX88 and Atomics and you have virtually any inbounds day at Crystal or the Summit covered.  In a good season, you'd ski a Soul 7 more than half the time at Crystal (one of your firm snow skis the other half).  I'd pull out the Soul 7 for anything softish, from 1" to 1 foot+.  Obviously, there are better skis for 2 feet+ but the Soul at 106 underfoot will be way more useful most of the time unless you are getting in a lot of days mid-week or regularly pushing out into Southback (ask yourself, in bounds, how many days did you get in last year where they reported over 12" and the snow on top was over your kneecaps?).

 

The Soul is light and crisp feeling, carves nicely for a ski 106 underfoot and will ski the soft snow worlds better than anything you've tried to date.  At your size, they will float through a foot or two of powder just fine.  I've said before here, the new Soul is also a very friendly ski, easy to ski and it should work well across the ability spectrum (intermediate to expert), as long as the rider isn't too heavy.  At your size you want the 180 in this ski because it skis pretty short.  I have a P100 in the garage and the Soul is a totally different feel.  Much lighter (it has what I consider the classic Rossi feel - crisp and glassy), much more modern shape that enables smeary slarve turns.  If it helps, my demo included a run through Gate 4 off Northway and I thought it was a perfect ski for that terrain (it was more slushy than powdery that day, but I can infer that it would be equally outstanding in softer lighter snow).  FWIW, I've got no dog in the fight.  I am not in the industry, I am not getting product, nor am I getting BIF $.  I don't care if anyone skis what I have in my garage.  And while I'd love to own the Soul. . . in truth, it isn't at the top of my list if I am buying.  But I think that it is a really great, well designed, versatile ski, appropriate for a lot of skier types, that a lot of people will really love.  Rossi will sell tons and the hype is deserved.

 

As for your shopping list, I get that you are looking for a deal, but some of the choices don't jive with the stated purpose and your current level.  If you are struggling on upper 'nash, the LPR115 is a bad call.  Too much ski.  Won't solve your problems, might make it worse.  The Pontoon only makes sense around here for huge dumps midweek.  The R2 122 is a powder ski you might like, but again you are somewhat limited on the number of days you'd pull it out.  An old S7 makes some sense, but the new Soul is even more versatile - it would get more use at Crystal or Alpy (it would be great any day where it the snow wasn't firm or slick, whereas the old S7 probably needs a bit of fresh to make sense over your MX 88).

 

Finally, one note. . .I know that the MX 88 is the "greatest ski ever made. . . blah, blah" (and priced accordingly), however, it is a pretty demanding ski and if you consider mere survival to be sound achievement on 'nash, I wonder whether you've got too much ski on your feet.  Your demo of the P100 suggests that maybe something more forgiving, less technically demanding (and maybe less critically heralded) might be better for you.  Or if it must be a Kastle, you might find the BMX 88 more tuned to your size and actual level (I thought that the BMX 88 was a pretty good ski and potentially great for the right conditions and skier).  Somewhat off-point, I thought that the FX94 (this new one for this season is what I demo'd) would make a great Crystal/Alpy daily driver - better than either 88 if I were to chose.

 

If your prime consideration is value, then consider the Atomic Access as your soft snow ski.  Appropriately, it has been one of Phil's "Steals and Deals" in past seasons and you could probably find a prior year's pair for a few hundred bucks somewhere.  Great soft snow performance, decent on pack (if it is somewhat soft) and super easy to ski.  It is also pretty easy to toss around in bumps.  Basically it feels like a baby version of the Chetlers - not as epic in deep stuff, but quicker and less clowny on pack.  This is a ski that will make you feel like a hero in most conditions and at 100 underfoot, at your weight, given the flex and shape it will be enough for most inbounds weekend skiing around here.  It is a ski that won't win you any style points around here, but a great value and there are good reasons why the Seattle area shops sold tons of these over the past few years.  I recommended it to a buddy last year (similar size, similar ability level as you describe) and he loved it as a daily driver at the Summit and the ski, along with mileage, helped improve his game.  At your size 173 in the Access would work fine and you'd get something shorter which seems to be a preference.  Length-wise 173 would probably feel like a similar amount of ski as your 168 MXs.

 

I hope that helps.  Good luck and get your snow dance going.  Maybe we will cross paths on the mountain this season.

post #35 of 41
Thread Starter 

I have older rossi b4s that are 94 at the waste ,no rocker in 178   , They float ok , hence why I would think a 115 waste would be good ,Because it is significantly bigger ,Thanks again for ALL the input , Everything helps to understand ,Thanks for the 5 point diagram , I have a clear ubderstanding of how these skis would ski considerably shorter , I would Imagine the ski is designed so the extra tip that doesn't contact hard or groomed ,But Would Contact and lift in Powder , Very interesting , Which Creates a believable versatility , My Atomics do One thing , Ski hardpack at medium High speed , Then get wobbly at High speed ,, So Since I bought those new , For more than My Ebay Mx88 2012 , I am leary of these ski terms saying they are versatile , Seems the MX88s perform in semi soft snow to light powder and go straighter at high speed , But don't do what the atomics do in hard pack . I really don't believe a ski can do everything , Because the B4s , Are ridiculous hard to steer on hard pack , Only perform in soft or or mashed potatoes , Not too deep , So all those ski's say they are versatile , And too me they are not , I now believe there is a need for three skis , 1, Hardpack , But needs to have a higher speed than Atomic Smoke Ti,.. 2   The Mx 88, I am Happy with its Area of performance. 3, I don't have a powder ski , Which is what this is about , No Doubt this is something that could never end , 

post #36 of 41
WAIST! Sorry - been trying really hard, but just can't get past it.
post #37 of 41

Oh come on. "Waste" is kinda cool. He's clearly channeling Josh. 

post #38 of 41
Thread Starter 

Slay me ! I spelt it wrong 

post #39 of 41

As noted by others, it is hard to tell how much rocker some skis have.

So as far as sizing, rossignol publishes a recommended sizing chart every year which is definitely useful.

 

Last year's chart with S7 is offline, but it's copied by various sources on the internet.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/117612509/rossignol-sizing-chart-2012-13

For @155lbs  S7 falls in the middle of 178.

 

Upcoming season with soul7 I was able to scrape from rossignol's site using google.

 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rossignol.com%2Ftzr%2Fscripts%2Fdownloader2.php%3Ffilename%3DLABELS%2FPICTO%2Ff5%2F30%2FUS.4jwtr9igynv9&ei=T4k6Us3KNaXT2QWG24CwCQ&usg=AFQjCNFs50OqMOw13LCBABYGINHfFNVOAw&sig2=KcF2uwI2JkT2B0h9PWlJNw&bvm=bv.52288139,d.b2I

 

Indeed it puts 155lbs as Soul7 180cm

post #40 of 41
My wife has a pair of them and they are a feel good ski, they turn easy and are good in powder. I am big and they are a bit soft for me. One of my friends has a pair and in the powder they are very good, he is not as good technicaly yet but working on it. when we go fast on the front side trails his skis vibrate a bit, but I am talking real FAST. From what you say of your self I say get them you will love them.
post #41 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomfifield View Post

My wife has a pair of them and they are a feel good ski, they turn easy and are good in powder. I am big and they are a bit soft for me. One of my friends has a pair and in the powder they are very good, he is not as good technicaly yet but working on it. when we go fast on the front side trails his skis vibrate a bit, but I am talking real FAST. From what you say of your self I say get them you will love them.

 

 

My wife picked up a pair of 178 CM S7W's at the tail end of last season.  Interestingly, she was able to instantly lay down much better railroad tracks than she could on her previous everyday ski- a set of 159 CM K2 Miisbehaveds.

 

She went from a skinnier, conventional sidecut ski with a longer running length, to a much wider, short running length ski and instantly skied better on hardpack.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion