Yes, absolutely, and without a doubt. I skied the '75 last year and wish I had the '85. These skis rip all over the mountain with ease. The sidewall underfoot really helps with edge hold and they don't weigh a thing, which makes them super fun in tight trees and chutes. I used them on pow days, high pressure/inversion days, park, touring, trees, on and on. Here's the thing though: they have a snowboard-esque turning radius on harder snow. The running surface is quite small considering the length due to the twin/rocker design. These won't carve like you've been trained (your race background) and you'll have to develop a more 'loose' stance to really take advantage of the sidecut. Driving the tips of these skis doesn't do much on groomed since much of the tip is off the snow. As for durability, my first run involved a cliff-drop-to-buried-rock landing and I only dented the base, no core shot.
A last thought for you; it took a few days to really get a feel for these and similar skis (also skied the Bents, Alpha2, and Blog skis last year - best part of the gig!). They are SO light, and turn SO quick, all with a non-traditional stance. So give them a few days of hard skiing and you'll really dig them, even though your first few runs may feel a little funny. Cheers!

I got to test these out last year for a week of the season, and I totally dug it for an everything ski, as long as you stay out of the park. The waist makes super, super quick edge transitions not as quick, but still snappy enough. The float in the pow, gorgeous, just gorgeous. Personally I don't ski bumps at all, so I can't tell you how they hold up in there, but probably they manage. But if all you ski is pow, or groomers, this ski will keep you going if the industry turned to dust.

my personal recommendation would be the Marker Dukes. They will give you the best performance out of those skis. You can get the wide brakes which fit perfectly on the JJ's.

I toured with Marker Barons on mine (I ski at around a 10 DIN so I didn't want to shell out all the bucks for Dukes). I thought it was an okay setup for short trips and such, but the rocker tail makes it hard to get a grip on steep or icy approaches and the overall weight of the bindings kind of drained me on long days. If most of your touring is going to be quick jaunts out to fun lines, a Duke/Baron and JJ setup will be really fun. You won't lose any downhill performance when you're at the resort either so that's a major bonus!

85s. Without a doubt. These turn so quick and most of the front and back of the ski is off the ground on groomers. If you really like to 'rip groomers hard', you may not like the reduced edge length of a rocker-style ski. Check out the Armada ARV or AR6 for a great riding ski that will hold a better edge on the way back to the lift.

gotamas have a consistent low profile rocker throughout the ski, while the jjs have camber under foot. I've skied both and own the jj which i like alot more for all around conditions.

Backcountry has more 185's on the way. They should be here in the beginning of November.

Hey man, I know the technique that you're talking about, allows me to keep up with all my alpine buddies on big pow days. I've never seen anyone tele on the JJs, but I've tele'd on a few rocker skis (Kuro, megawatt) and had them right on center and they really worked for me. With the tail rocker in the JJs, I'd be concerned about wheelie-effect if you mount further back, especially if you're weighting and initiating the turn with your front foot. Your weight on that front ski is going to be more rear-wards than an alpine skier's would be, and I'd worry about the lack of stability in the short, rocker tail. If you do try this, post a review on how it turns out, I'm interested...

Dude if you had these in your quiver, you'd use the rest of your quiver a whole lot less. These are a top all-everything ski.

Its not crazy at all. I've used these skis every day for two years. It's amazing how well they perform in any conditions, anywhere. The design of the ski makes it really easy to make critical turns in tight, steep areas. They are very light which also makes turning easy. I highly recommend the JJ's as a 1 ski quiver.

I love these skis for an all-mountain rig, they seem fine for me in the tighter trees, and rip groomers still. Deep snow and side country is awesome, but I can't comment on the chutes, not a bunch around where I live.

You need the 185cm. I have used the JJ's and dukes as my one ski quiver for 2 years. I happily skied the lifts all day on this setup without ever holding back. The skis are really light and they tour quite well with the help of the camber under foot.

Easily 185. Rocker + twin tip means it will ski quite a bit shorter than nominal length.

4100g in 185

thank you for that great advice!

The tip rocker in the JJ's makes it easier to initiate a turn, so the 185 will ski shorter than their length, if you're an aggressive skier you'll appreciate the extra flotation and stability at speed in the longer length. I think the 185s would be just right...

S7 floats more in the traditional sense of a fat ski. The rocker allows it to charge hard and float even better. Makes crud feel softer. Washes out on groomers and traverses.

JJ carves great on groomers. Surfs rather than floats in pow. Cuts up crud.

Hello Tom. This is a comparison that has been raging on since both were released last year.

The long and short of it is, the only thing both have in common is how much float both skis have and how playful both are playful depending on the skier and how they ski. The JJ is a poppy, light ski which feels as if it bounces in each turn and has a nice light swing weight for tricks and spins. The S7, on the other hand, is definitely heavier and a little more of damp ski.

Overall, if you are a lighter skier or a skier that likes jibbing more than hard charging, the JJ is the way to go. If a skier is a little on the heavier or more powerful side and likes hard charging over throwing tricks, the S7 would work best.

Also, for the hardest chargers, Rossignol has produced the "Super 7." This 195cm version of the S7 has a 117mm waist which gives it more float and a little less sidecut and metal laminates in its construction for a very damp feel.

I ski the 185 and I'm 5'4" 135lbs.

I seem to find you don't need a lot of ski with these, and for your weight I would say that you would be happy with the 175. You could go bigger if you want, but you don't really need to.

Armada JJ 175 = 1980 g (Source= TGR message boards.)
Light enough for touring, and obviously light enough for park.

I would mount them at the recommended mounting point. That is were I have mine mounted.

-2 or -1 if you do a lot of switch because it will give you good enough forward stability while not sacrificing switch ability. Never center mount unless you will do 99% switch because you won't be able to ski forward.

you are comparing a fairly stiff rocked pow ski that handles all mountain fine and crud awesomely to two really soft pow skis that dont' ski anything but pow/groomers fine and can't ski crud at all.

What exactly are you looking for?

I am wondering the same thing !! I 've read 2 reviews that the Bent is better..it's like the JJ on the steroids..
I was going to test the bent on saturday but I had an accident so I will loose the ski test!
So that's why I am counting on other people's reviews..

Does anybody know which ski is lighter?
and is the 5 dimension thing that the JJ has better than the Bent's dimensions??

similar flexes too

The Bent Chet is just a bit wider in the waist (123mm) and only comes in a 183cm length. Otherwise, you are looking at very similar skis. Both have the whole rockered tip/tail, camber underfoot thing going on. Both are super light with wood cores. Both have sidewalls under foot. The Bent Chet has a dope looking tie-dye base graphic. If all goes well, we'll have our Bent Chets by early October.