EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Yet another Soul 7 thread but found a size anomaly
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet another Soul 7 thread but found a size anomaly

post #1 of 2
Thread Starter 

Hi - Like many I have been agonizing about which size to get.  I've read many posts on this subject and still would like opinions...


I'm 5'8" 160 lbs with gear.  I'm a 50 year old aggressive skier (steep powder runs) but do not seek to jolt my knees on hard bumps or hard landings.  More a finesse guy…  Use would be for East Coast soft snow days and 2 trips out west every year…  I currently ski the Volkl Karma (87mm under foot) in a 169.  




When I put the 180 Soul 7 up to my body it topped out at the top of my head.  I'm 173 cm tall.  I was in my dress shoes that raise me up at most 3 cm.  The ski and myself were on a hard floor so no spongy carpet effect.  Maybe my unscientific method of putting my hand on my head and feeling across to the ski has a 2 cm (+ or -) error factor.  SO I estimate the 180 cm Rossignol Soul 7 to be 176 to 178 cm long from tip to tail.


I then went and grabbed another company's 177 cm ski and it was 3cm LONGER than the 180 cm Soul 7…  So that means that ski companies have different methods of measuring skis.  I did not have a measuring tape to verify the numbers but clearly the 177 was longer than the 180 Soul.  And clearly the 180 Soul was less than 180...


This made me happy because I have been worrying about the 180 Soul being too big and that I should go with the 172 Soul.  It will be "head high" in ski boots.


HOWEVER I read one post somewhere from a rider who said that the 172 and 180 Souls are very close in "edge on snow length" and only the tips protrude out longer on the 180.  So that confuses me…  Do the longer "flappy" tips on the 180 actually help in "float"?


Certainly the 106mm  underfoot on the Soul 180 compared to the 104mm underfoot on the 172 Soul will help in flotation but how much?


But are the 172 Souls actually less as well?  Maybe they're actually more like 169's?







I'm pretty set on a Rossignol binding to lengthen the warranty to 2 years plus the store has a good supply.  Would riders recommend the FKS 120 (same as Look Pivot 12 I think) vs the new Axial 3?  I guess I figured that at $50 more for the FKS that I would have better knee protection with the pivoting heel...


I'm a Din setting of 7 (maybe 6 now) and don't see the need for heavier burlier binding which is why I chose the lower Din binding...




I won't use them that much and they're on sale for a very fair price vs other skis the store has like Line Sick Day which are $200 more.  Presumably this price discrepancy is because the Souls are last years model.  Fat skis are a tough sell in my neck of the woods and these Souls seem to be "left over" and they're being very aggressive on the price….


We had a 2' powder day 3 weeks ago and the Soul's would have been perfect because my Karma's were sinking...


Any thoughts on the size and binding choice - Thanks!

post #2 of 2

Go with the 180.

They ski shorter than the pulished length.

I went from some line 173s to the soul 188s and find no issues.


I think you will be happy with the 180s.

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 › Yet another Soul 7 thread but found a size anomaly