or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Powder/Crud Ski Recommendations on a Budget
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Powder/Crud Ski Recommendations on a Budget - Page 2

post #31 of 49

Oh, wow, thanks for posting that!   So yet again my dilemma is:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

But I passed on the $249 Patron blems.... and I want to demo the Soul 7, Vagabond, Patron, and so many others.... but a $199 Sickle is a great deal!  Arggg...

 

So, if I'm a 177/178 in a Kendo, Mantra, E88, and a 186 in S3, is the 181 Sickle long enough for me at 180lbs for a Copper/Jane/A-basin ski for powder, soft bumps and trees to go along with my 178 Steadfasts?

 

Or should I just demo and find the powder ski I really like...  Or should I just buy the cheapo Sickles and make them my bitch.... Argggg!!!! 

 

I'm really tempted.  The reality is the Soul 7 is too hot to find a deal, and I'm too cheap and destroy too many skis, so that's off the list.  So I was planning to demo the Vagabond and Patron this year then pick up a pair cheap, hopefully blems from the Start Haus over the summer.

 

Anybody have any thoughts on a Sickle vs Vagabond vs Patron for a Copper/Mary Jane/A-basin ski for powder, soft bumps, steeps and trees to go along with my 178 Steadfasts?  I'm 5'11" 180lbs.

post #32 of 49

Only three left... 5 have sold in 44 mins.  Got yours?

post #33 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNSkiing10 View Post

The Sickle is now $209 at steep and cheap. Still some deals to be had!

 

I got me some 181 Sickles for $209, woohoo!  Anyone else?  They sold out 8 pairs in 56 mins.  Thanks again @MNSkiing10!   

 

Anyone have thoughts on where to mount them?  I read through the blister reviews and comments.  Mounting forward like everyone there doesn't seem right since I don't ski switch and they are a bit short in pow for me at 180lbs.  I'm thinking I should I mount them at 0 or maybe back a bit?

post #34 of 49
Thread Starter 
No problem smile.gif. I'm having the same dilemma, I just got my bindings, and I'm thinking about mounting them at 0 or +1. Anyone else have thoughts?
post #35 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

 

I'm really tempted.  The reality is the Soul 7 is too hot to find a deal, and I'm too cheap and destroy too many skis, so that's off the list.  So I was planning to demo the Vagabond and Patron this year then pick up a pair cheap, hopefully blems from the Start Haus over the summer.

 

Anybody have any thoughts on a Sickle vs Vagabond vs Patron for a Copper/Mary Jane/A-basin ski for powder, soft bumps, steeps and trees to go along with my 178 Steadfasts?  I'm 5'11" 180lbs.

Thoughts? Sure......I gots thoughts.........:D

 

The Sickle is a continuous rocker ski that like most skis of its ilk specialize in snow with depth and notsomuch in snow with no depth. The Patron is a powder specialty ski but has a cambered section underfoot so it has better manners for my tastes when the snow is shallow or firmish (think 2-3 days after). The Vagabond is a wide all mountain ski. It is highly powder capable but not a specialist. In normal weather, I would find the vagabond useful up to a week after a storm and passable all season long.

 

So, if you know how to ski powder and Co. powder ain't that tough, I'd say the Vagabond is the more useful ski and one that you find yourself skiing quite a bit. The Patron is probably the second choice for versatility and the Sickle a fairly distant third.

 

Something to put in the back of your mind is that the Unleashed Hell and the Patron are functionally the same ski.

 

Edit to add: whooopsie........I see you got 'em.........have fun.

 

SJ

post #36 of 49

^^^^^ Thanks much @SierraJim.  I still plan to demo the Vagabond and Patron this year so I'm ready to pull the trigger next summer.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MNSkiing10 View Post

No problem smile.gif. I'm having the same dilemma, I just got my bindings, and I'm thinking about mounting them at 0 or +1. Anyone else have thoughts?

 

And... any veteran Sicklers have mounting advice for us newbs?

post #37 of 49

Found this thread with Sickle mounting suggestions:

http://www.epicski.com/t/108039/rossi-sickle-186cm-on-going-review

post #38 of 49

when i asked in the thread that is hot-linked above, both Josh and Ecimmortal recommended mounting them at "zero."   That is exactly what i did, and have had no regrets about that decision; my regret is when there isn't enough fresh snow to make them really float like they're intended to.

post #39 of 49
The Sickles are very versatile and do well on hard pack. I've taken them down Headwall Face at Squaw when it was firm and they were very secure. I've also taken them in the park and half-pipe forward and switch, and I'm not even very good skiing switch. Fun ski, forgiving yet has a decently high speed limit.
post #40 of 49

Got my Sickles... now I need help on mount point.  I was just going to mount as 0, but then I lined up my quiver for the year to see this:

 

 

That's a 181 Sickle, 178 Steadfast and a 170 AC30 next to each other with their zero mount points aligned.   

 

My new powder ski, the Sickle, has the least tip of the three when mounted at zero.  Even less than a 170 AC30, Huh?  Crazy.

 

I'm thinking of using the -2 line marked on the Sickle.  Any thoughts?   Help!  Need to mount skis.... need to go skiing :) 

post #41 of 49

IME, cambered Volkls tend to have their traditional mount pretty far back, so that's not a great gauge for a continuous rocker ski.  If you look at the Blistergear review, the reviewer liked them at +2, which is too far forward for my taste.

 

I mounted my Sickles, which are the older 186s, at 0.  That said, I ski on them with my 7 y/o and ski switch about 10-15% of the time. If you have the 181, which supposedly measure about 177, you might go -1. I wouldn't go too far back.

 

edit:  see here for more comments about awesomeness of Sickles and mount point:  http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/254536-REVIEW-186-Rossi-Sickle


Edited by Dino - 11/19/13 at 3:02pm
post #42 of 49

Help!  I'm still struggling... where to mount my new Sickles to maximize bump performance?

 

I know that sounds like a ridiculous question, but I think that's the driving factor for me.  I'd like to be able to stay on them as long as possible as a powder day gets tracked up at Copper, Mary Jane and A-basin.  

 

Wed at the Jane was a perfect example of when I'd love to stay on them as long as they are still fun, and I think bump performance will be the limiting factor:

http://www.epicski.com/t/122138/today-i-skied-community-daily-trip-report-2013-14-edition/30#post_1651278

 

Or, am I asking too much and just plan to switch skis?

post #43 of 49

last years S7s, I've been told they are about the same as this years soul 7s. there's a few new pairs for sale on ebay

post #44 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by wthomaso View Post
 

last years S7s, I've been told they are about the same as this years soul 7s. there's a few new pairs for sale on ebay

 

You were told incorrectly.

 

SJ

post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

Help!  I'm still struggling... where to mount my new Sickles to maximize bump performance?

 

I know that sounds like a ridiculous question, but I think that's the driving factor for me.  I'd like to be able to stay on them as long as possible as a powder day gets tracked up at Copper, Mary Jane and A-basin.  

 

Wed at the Jane was a perfect example of when I'd love to stay on them as long as they are still fun, and I think bump performance will be the limiting factor:

http://www.epicski.com/t/122138/today-i-skied-community-daily-trip-report-2013-14-edition/30#post_1651278

 

Or, am I asking too much and just plan to switch skis?

 

 

schizo's..... no more stressing out.  Thumbs Up

post #46 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

Help!  I'm still struggling... where to mount my new Sickles to maximize bump performance?

 

I know that sounds like a ridiculous question, but I think that's the driving factor for me.  I'd like to be able to stay on them as long as possible as a powder day gets tracked up at Copper, Mary Jane and A-basin.  

 

Wed at the Jane was a perfect example of when I'd love to stay on them as long as they are still fun, and I think bump performance will be the limiting factor:

http://www.epicski.com/t/122138/today-i-skied-community-daily-trip-report-2013-14-edition/30#post_1651278

 

Or, am I asking too much and just plan to switch skis?

 

 

schizo's..... no more stressing out.  Thumbs Up

 

I know!!!  Unfortunately I just don't feel the world is quite right unless I'm connected to my skis by Salomon's, so I'm upgrading my fleet to sth2 13's.

 

This pic has me freaked out:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

 

That's a 181 Sickle, 178 Steadfast and a 170 AC30 next to each other with their zero mount points aligned.   

 

That sure seems like a lot of tail to get caught up in the bumps on the sickle.   Any other thoughts on where to mount the sickles for best bump performance?   If not, I think I'll just give them a try at the -2 line.

 

Funny, I've never really cared much about where to mount a ski and just went with the factory lines.  I've also never owned a backcountry jib twin tip that is marked with lines at +5, 0 and -2 either :) 

post #47 of 49

Just following up that I mounted my 181 Sickles -2 and I'm very happy with them there.  I got out on a nice powder day and couldn't be happier.  I posted a quick review in the thread about the 181 Rossignol Sickle.

 

Evo has them for $330.  Not a bad deal for mid-season.  Maybe they'll be el cheapo again sometime.... but given the large part of the country badly needing snow, there might be a lot of powder/crud skis being unloaded before long.   

 

@Finndog I was going to suggest the Sickle to you here but seems you are well aware up there ^^^^.  I think they would be a great Steamboat leftovers ski since they were super fun in Copper leftovers.

post #48 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

Just following up that I mounted my 181 Sickles -2 and I'm very happy with them there.  I got out on a nice powder day and couldn't be happier.  I posted a quick review in the thread about the 181 Rossignol Sickle.

 

Evo has them for $330.  Not a bad deal for mid-season.  Maybe they'll be el cheapo again sometime.... but given the large part of the country badly needing snow, there might be a lot of powder/crud skis being unloaded before long.   

 

@Finndog I was going to suggest the Sickle to you here but seems you are well aware up there ^^^^.  I think they would be a great Steamboat leftovers ski since they were super fun in Copper leftovers.

 

 

Thanks!  I wanted something narrower underfoot but its a super value!  I am in total agreement that skis like the sickle, Soul7 DPS 112 and others are even more fun for trees and tighter stuff at their shorter lengths. Although I own the Unleashed Hell in the 185 and love it, I would be interested to see how it ski's at the 178 length.  


Edited by Finndog - 1/20/14 at 11:47am
post #49 of 49

the funny thing about the sickle is IMO its better in bumps than the patron because its less precise and does not demand you are on your edges at all time. 

 

The continous rocker maintain better snow contact and low edge angles in bumps, than the cambered Patron with high rise tip and tail rocker. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Powder/Crud Ski Recommendations on a Budget