EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews ›  Rossignol S7 Ski-Gear Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rossignol S7 Ski-Gear Review - Page 2

post #31 of 50

The funny thing is now that you have turned to the dark side, it will not be long before conventional skis start to look skinny and funny and a bit silly to you! eek.gif

 

God on you for getting out there with your buddy!

post #32 of 50

^^^Yeah, hope you both rock in bottomless pow. OTOH, I have S7's and my 70 mm skis don't look silly and narrow when I'm carving down hardpack. They look about right. wink.gif

post #33 of 50
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

The funny thing is now that you have turned to the dark side, it will not be long before conventional skis start to look skinny and funny and a bit silly to you! eek.gif

 

God on you for getting out there with your buddy!


How true it is - already!    10 inches at Lookout tommorrow and no corduroy-cool.  Did you guys get rained on over there.   We did will check it out tommorrow and take some pic's if it is clear enough.
 

post #34 of 50

Did that make you a bit uneasy at first?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetonpwdrjunkie View Post

I don't do anything really different on the groomers with the S7 over any other ski.  They require a high edge angle because of the width and a fair amount of vertical separation between my feet to move my hips inside the turn. Only the center of the ski really engages in a carved turn on groomers.  This causes the tips to flap a bit a speed.  I was using them in a level 2 childrens assessment the last few days and the examiner was laughing at how funny it looked to see me come ripping down a groomer with the tip flapping and the center of the ski holding solid in a carve.  He liked it.  Of course the groomers were not rock hard.  They can do RR type turns very well.  I ski them pretty two footed and allow myself to move a bit towards the tails at the end of the turn.  

post #35 of 50

Not so much.  It only bothers me when I look down at them.  I like to look ahead, so no problem.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post

Did that make you a bit uneasy at first?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetonpwdrjunkie View Post

I don't do anything really different on the groomers with the S7 over any other ski.  They require a high edge angle because of the width and a fair amount of vertical separation between my feet to move my hips inside the turn. Only the center of the ski really engages in a carved turn on groomers.  This causes the tips to flap a bit a speed.  I was using them in a level 2 childrens assessment the last few days and the examiner was laughing at how funny it looked to see me come ripping down a groomer with the tip flapping and the center of the ski holding solid in a carve.  He liked it.  Of course the groomers were not rock hard.  They can do RR type turns very well.  I ski them pretty two footed and allow myself to move a bit towards the tails at the end of the turn.  


 
post #36 of 50

Today was my second full day on the S7's.  I will report my overall impressions as I gather more information & experiment in more conditions.  So far I am smiling!

Today:

Victor & JF on No Name 001.JPG

 

Thanks,

smile.gif

JF

post #37 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

Today was my second full day on the S7's.  I will report my overall impressions as I gather more information & experiment in more conditions.  So far I am smiling!

Today:

Victor & JF on No Name 001.JPG

 

Thanks,

smile.gif

JF



Next time there is a powder thread that says you have to put your feet together and ski them as a single platform, I am linking to this picture. Really wish I was there. I've been rediscovering my boiler-plate technique. My S7s are sad.

post #38 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

Today was my second full day on the S7's.  I will report my overall impressions as I gather more information & experiment in more conditions.  So far I am smiling!

Today:

Victor & JF on No Name 001.JPG

 

Thanks,

smile.gif

JF



Next time there is a powder thread that says you have to put your feet together and ski them as a single platform, I am linking to this picture. Really wish I was there. I've been rediscovering my boiler-plate technique. My S7s are sad.


It is tough research, but I will force myself to continue wink.gif.  The funny thing is that this is the same way I look on boiler plate...  Well sort of th_dunno-1[1].gif.

JF

post #39 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post


It is tough research, but I will force myself to continue wink.gif.  The funny thing is that this is the same way I look on boiler plate...  Well sort of th_dunno-1[1].gif.

JF


My point exactly. Good skiing transfers from one medium to another. Well sort of.

post #40 of 50

Okay, I have skied on the 188cm S7 almost exclusively for the past week.  I have skied them in a pretty wide variety of conditions & terrain.  My first impression was that they felt a bit clumsy.  Those feelings vanished after a few more runs, & I am now convinced that this ski lives up to all the hype.  Their versatility is beyond expectations & exceeds the performance of other narrower, shorter slightly rockered or fat skis I have tried.  Would they be my first choice for carving firm groomers or tight bumps?  No, but they will do it if necessary...  Just don't look down & you won't really know the difference.

 

JF

post #41 of 50

Very much my impression as well.  Very fun and very versatile.  They can feel clumsy if they aren't driven with intent and confidence.  The center of the ski is strong if you believe it and the "flapping" tips don't really matter if the center is engaged.  In more 3D snow, the whole ski comes into play and it feels more stable.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

Okay, I have skied on the 188cm S7 almost exclusively for the past week.  I have skied them in a pretty wide variety of conditions & terrain.  My first impression was that they felt a bit clumsy.  Those feelings vanished after a few more runs, & I am now convinced that this ski lives up to all the hype.  Their versatility is beyond expectations & exceeds the performance of other narrower, shorter slightly rockered or fat skis I have tried.  Would they be my first choice for carving firm groomers or tight bumps?  No, but they will do it if necessary...  Just don't look down & you won't really know the difference.

 

JF

post #42 of 50

Pete, do you know Greg Cooperider?

post #43 of 50

Me: 6ft, 200lbs, 51yrs old

Where: Castle Mountain all conditions from powder, crud, wind-loaded, moguls, groomers.

 

I've skied the S7 188 for a year now in all conditions in all types of snow and have a pretty good feel for the ski.  For pure powder skiing the day of the storm, day after the storm this is a game changing ski.  It is so easy, and so good that you don't really think about line you just point them down hill and go. You can make any kind of turn.  At my hight, weight and ability the 188 is short enough that it limits my top speed. This is not a bomber ski for a big guy. This ski is very turny.  When the snow gets heavy and wind loaded this ski feels too soft and too turny but still OK.

On groomers these carve fine but not the ski of choice for steep icy groomers.  A few days after the storm when the snow is crud and moguls starting to form, the ski feels like a trampoline - wide and soft.  I'd rather have somthing stiffer, narrower ie: around 100mm under foot.  At Castle where it snows a  lot, I use this ski about 80% of the time.  One of the truly great skis for the right conditions - makes it effortless to cover lots of vertical.   My first impression when mounted at the zero line was not enough tip and I hated the ski and put it on the self for a while.  Then moved the bindings back -2 and it came alive for me.  I ski in the front seat so -2 is the sweet spot for me.  Very different feel depending on where you mount.  I've moved into the Super 7 195 and going for my first ride on those tomorow.

 

John P.

post #44 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete No. Idaho View Post

Dawgcadtching.    No I didn't try any others.  It is really difficult to get a ride on good demos up here.  Very limited on selection etc.  I mainly ski stashes and trees and after probably reading 200 reviews here, tgr and other places on the web I decided on the S7's.  Looks like I made a good decision this time, makes up for some of the bad ones over the years.



Congratulations Pete... ;) Welcome to the club... :) Today I did one nice day of heliskiing here in Slovenia with S7.... had again very good experience... WIsh you a lot of fun Pete

 

Best regards,

Zokinjo

post #45 of 50

Just spent 3 days in Utah on the 2011/12 S7,s (188) and I am happy I bought this ski.  It is far more versatile than I thought it would be, and much quicker turning than I expected for a fat ski.  I skied a variety of conditions, somewhat (for Utah) heavy powder, cut up, and packed snow and the ski performed great in all of those conditions.  I found myself a little back on the ski at first, but now have adjusted.  I had them mounted at the 0 position.

 

Me: older dude, 5' 11, 185.  Advanced skier.  My other fat skis (Dynastar 6th Sense Huge 184 ) are for sale.

post #46 of 50
Quote:

I've moved into the Super 7 195 and going for my first ride on those tomorow.


I loved to hear your thoughts on the differences between the S7 and Super S7.  The 188 is available in both varieties for next year and I am trying decide between the two.

 

post #47 of 50

PNI, we are about the same age and weight and your impressions of the S7s are very similar to mine.

post #48 of 50

Well, it was instant hate on the Super 7 195.  Totally different ski.  All I can say is, massive, heavy, full of metal and, did I mention, massive.  Nuff said. I'm selling them.

 

I will say, though, that I railed a groomer on those things and went faster than I've ever skied before.  These things are just so heavy.  Not the ski for me.

 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcross View Post




I loved to hear your thoughts on the differences between the S7 and Super S7.  The 188 is available in both varieties for next year and I am trying decide between the two.

 



 

post #49 of 50

^^^^ If god had meant for skis this big to have metal in them, she would have kept Volant solvent. 

post #50 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

^^^^ If god had meant for skis this big to have metal in them, she would have kept Volant solvent. 



Indeed.  The SS7 in a 195 is a really big ski and the two sheets of metal add up to something that is a really different animal than the fiberglass S7 188.  There are some other significant differneces as well.  Rossi took quite a bit of sidecut out of the SS7 by widening the tail and narrowing the tip.  The turn radius is around 22m.  Also, it skies much stiffer than it flexes in the store due to very high tortional stiffness.  This is not a playfull ski in any sense of the word.  My guess is this ski is required by about 1% of the population who ski down Alaskan spines at 70mph.  Having said all this, I bet the SS7 in a 188 would have been a better choice.  No problem - I"m keeping the jibby lilttle S7's they are very fun.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews ›  Rossignol S7 Ski-Gear Review