New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2016 Super 7's

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 

First, big shout out to Peak Performance in Killington, for showing how it's done: They mis-mounted my 2015 Super 7's, put Pivots on forward line instead of rear during a particularly crazy week in late January. They suggested remounting. "OK," I think, "Here we come with inevitable argument over whether a remount is enough." I started to get hot.

 

Only no argument, because, they went on without pausing, that would take care of business for my upcoming  trip out west, and meanwhile they would order a new pair from Rossignol, swap out when I returned. When I showed up after the trip, they informed me that unfortunately there were no more 2015's in the factory, so they had a pair of next season's for me. Which they mounted, meticulously, and prepped, all no charge.

 

This is how you build costumer loyalty. 

 

Now to the ski: 

 

Me: 6', 165 lbs, advanced, technical, do some racing, getting to be an old guy. Etc. 

 

Manager said they've "tweaked" the ski. Slightly changed colors, same graphics mostly. Same graphic layout, but the orange is now an orange-red that exactly matches the Rossi bindings. There's a tiny transparent decal in front that says "Super 7." Otherwise all similar. Dims are mostly the same (mine are the 188's), although my measurement shows a tiny reduction in front rise, maybe 2 mm. Could be within factory tolerances. Everything else looks the same, sidecut, total length of rise, and so on. Skis still measure about 1.8 cm shorter than stated length. Haven't weighed them but they still feel about same as the 2015 model. Which was 4000 gm.  

 

Conditions back here are not favorable for 116 mm skis, so I only took one shakedown run on soft groomed. They felt and handled about the same as the 2015 model, although (maybe power of suggestion), they felt just a touch stiffer in front. Which still is not plank-like; these are moderate flex skis. Mainly I was happy they hadn't messed greatly with (for me) a winning design.

 

Which as of 2015 model, is weirdly easy in trees and tight places (these are 186.2 cm long, remember) using a variety of styles. Mounted on the directional line, they prefer to be driven with some tip pressure. In larger soft bumps, and even at decent speeds in soft open chop or pow (for instance Lenin and Castro chutes at Big Sky), making medium to long radius turns with some checks thrown in is silly easy, and no feeling of instability or folding that can show up with easy peasy skis. Super 7's default turn is a medium/long radius slarve, but they're game for almost anything. They can carve on groomers - slow edge to edge, but the deep sidecut works well once you're on it - although the tip and tail will need attention to keep from catch and release games. Lot of rocker there; not their main game. They are predictable on ice as long as it's moderately smooth. Meaning they skid well, no drama. They can smear, and I especially like how they can pivot and ricochet in irregular bumps (the low mass tips and tails here) such as you find around trees. What I think sets Super 7's apart from their competitors, in fact, is the low swing weight and moderate flex combined with some dampness. If needed, you can throw these around almost like a DPS 112RP, but they are significantly smoother when they hit a rough patch. 

 

For a while. They'll be begin to complain, however, if that rough patch lasts and you ask them to be a Big Mountain ski. Over 40 mph, death cookies, rubble, or heavy stiff crud want some real edge and an ability to shrug off front bounce. I found this even on skied out blue groomers. Never any feeling of imminent failure, but not pleasant anymore. Slow down 10 mph, all is right again even at flatter angles. I suspect some resonance frequency is reached, because the transition is fairly pronounced. Personally, this is fine because I don't need these to be chargers; they're for exploring powder and chop when/if there is some. Put another way, not a good OSQ. Really a good powder ski when you have a daily driver in the high 80's to high 90's. 

 

Also these don't seem to be for big guys. I'm a 6' lightweight on the longest model, and wouldn't want any less length, if I were 6'2 and 190, these wouldn't work IMO. I think Rossi expects you guys to migrate to the Squad 7. YMMV. Definitely demo. 

 

I will post again with any more updates on the 2016's, but we'll need fresh snow. 


Edited by beyond - 3/10/15 at 2:31pm
post #2 of 7

Really good description.  

 

This pretty much exactly fits my own experience on honeycomb Super 7s over going on two years now.  At ~15 lbs. lighter than you (5'10"), I could have gotten either the 188 or 180; demoed and enjoyed both.

 

Best snow days here in Colo get the Super 7s, for me.

 

Got k2 Pettitor 120s for the bombproof charging, death cookies and

uneven hard crust under powder, etc.   But that ski doesn't give such an enjoyable float.  

 

Interesting to hear the '16 model is mostly unchanged, probably.  

post #3 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

...Also these don't seem to be for big guys. I'm a 6' lightweight on the longest model, and wouldn't want any less length, if I were 6'2 and 190, these wouldn't work IMO. I think Rossi expects you guys to migrate to the Squad 7. YMMV. Definitely demo. 

 

I will post again with any more updates on the 2016's, but we'll need fresh snow. 

 

Did you happen to get any time on the new blue/orange Supers?

 

I'm kind of surprised you were on the 188 at your weight, seems like that length should've required some real effort to play with since it's the longest. I'd imagine those were meant for 190 lb + guys. The Squad is really wide and should be for big mountain chargers, or so I'd expect.

 

I'm in the middle of trying to decide between a Soul 7 HD and a Super HD, and then the length. I've gotten used to 180cm on my Head Motorhead RnR's, and wasn't planning to go longer on the next skis, kinda like having a little more maneuverability in the trees. Thoughts on these two models and lengths for a 6' 180 lb all-arounder (ex-racer in my previous life)?

 

I do like to ski fast, but like easy-turning, floaty-in-pow, do-anything skis that can also be fun to warp on, but feel light and soft when speeds are low making turns down the steeps. I don't jump anymore, so that's not a factor. No mas for this guy, just happy to be skiing and have legs and a spine that still functions. :)

 

Thank you.

post #4 of 7

As to the Soul 7's go one size bigger -- they ski shorter.   I am 6'1" and 220 -- I love my soul7's - 188 cm

post #5 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikebike View Post
 

As to the Soul 7's go one size bigger -- they ski shorter.   I am 6'1" and 220 -- I love my soul7's - 188 cm

 

Thanks, did you also try the Supers out by chance? 

 

From what I'm hearing, they're a little stiffer, might be a better bet for a cruiser/long turn guy like me.

post #6 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
 

 

Thanks, did you also try the Supers out by chance? 

 

From what I'm hearing, they're a little stiffer, might be a better bet for a cruiser/long turn guy like me.

I did not try the Supers as I ski for 2 months each year in Utah  ( I live in FL the rest of the year) so I only use 1 pair of skis.    I needed something I thought would work well in the trees ( where I primarily ski ) as well  as on piste when the woods areun-skiable 

post #7 of 7
Thread Starter 
Super D, have not tried the new ones that supposedly are beefed up a bit. Suspect they'd accommodate heavier guys than me, and I might not like them so much. As far as length, I tend to like flexier longer soft snow skis. I know how to drive the tips - which is the relevant issue about length, not cross sectional flex - since I race, and the length provides balance in undulating pow or chop.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews