EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Which Rossignol s7s for my weight and height? 143 lbs 5' 9.5""
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Which Rossignol s7s for my weight and height? 143 lbs 5' 9.5""

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Thats 143lbs naked in the morning before a good poop (half pound).
59 yrs old, 5' 9.5"

Not sure what the gear adds to my overall weight.

I currently am happily skiing on Mantra 170s.

I lost 40 lbs (everything) thanks to WWs and it made my skiing so much easier and funner. (visualize skiing with a 40lb backpack . . . .this means you)

I only want the the s7s for powder.

I love skiing trees, not fast, with lots of turning. might go faster with the right ski (and helmet and whistle).

I have my eyes on either the 166 length or the 176 length.

Open to almost all opinions, insights, and experiences in regards to this subject. (I don't care what your poop weighs hahahha).
post #2 of 13
 176
post #3 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 176

Definitely. I'm about your size, and I have the 176s, and I wish they were a little longer.
post #4 of 13
176

rocker + twin = silly easy to turn...

I'm #155, 5'10 and 39.    185 felt like snowblades...
post #5 of 13
176 for sure. If you're happy on the 170 Mantras, I think you will find the 166s really short considering the tip and tail rocker.
post #6 of 13
I ride the 188's and they ski like a 170 (5'11 188lbs), just my opinion but when a ski like this ski's like a 170, might as well go as long as you can for the pow.
post #7 of 13
Thread Starter 
So I looked all over the Internet, this new technology for finding things. . . . . and I couldn't find a 176 on sale lower than $800.

So I go around to local shops in Gresham/Portland Oregon area.
Bought 176's for $560 today.
Got Z12 Ti bindings for $154.
Hillcrest Sports in Gresham, Oregon, last pair.

I will mount bindings at minus 2, as per Mt Bachelor guys.

Found a pair of 188s at  "The Mountain Shop", portland, oregon for $640. today is april 2nd, 2010 -- in case someone runs into this 5 years from now. . . .

thank you for your replies
moelarrycheese
post #8 of 13
 MINUS 2?!? Noooooooo...... IMHO zero is too far back most of the time. I've never skied the 176, but I think the 188 skis much better ahead of the line.
post #9 of 13
Thread Starter 
Quote:
 MINUS 2?!? Noooooooo...... IMHO zero is too far back most of the time. I've never skied the 176, but I think the 188 skis much better ahead of the line.

oh oh
post #10 of 13
These kinds of ski's do great with a more center mount.
post #11 of 13
Thread Starter 

have skis in hand, 23" of new powder at Mt Bachelor, 19" right up the hill at Meadows. . . . .

I went with -2
That is what was recommended to me by Mark Elling and his other demo guy at Mt Bachelor. Mark was the one that talked me into s7's versus Gotama. Not to start a nanny-nanny about boot footers and book writers and ski reviewers but Mark is my favorite in all these areas.

Also, maybe slightly less credible in some people's eyes, is the Rossignol mounting guide document:
 

Subject:

Mid Mounting Points Flat Skis
Date: 10/23/09

 

Thor Verdonk Alpine Product Manager

S Series usage mounting recommendations
powder -2 cm
freeride 0 cm
jib +3 cm

park +6 cm
 

demo 0 cm


post #12 of 13
 I guess you'll find out how that mount point works soon enough then. Get out there and get after it.
post #13 of 13
Thread Starter 

 

Yes, -2 is good. Definitely took a second take when I got back on a groomer, however. But I have other skis for groomers.
thank you

side by side with 170 Mantra:

mantra_s7_side.jpg
 mantra_s7_top.jpg 

one should always keep their eye on their new skis. . . .

s7s_in_bed.jpg

 

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 › Which Rossignol s7s for my weight and height? 143 lbs 5' 9.5""