Rossignol S7 Barras Ski - 2010 BCS

You'd be good-to-go with either. I'd take the 130mm brake since you'd only have 7.5 'extra' millimeters (less than the width of your thumbnail) on each side. Besides, bindings last longer than skis so a 130mm brake means that those Jesters might end up on a mega-fat ski in a few years.

Hey, i tried out the S3's at a demo once. They are amazing. With a 98 underfoot they are perfect for powder. But still rock when on groomed. The only thing is that its a REALLY flexible ski. Like spaghetti. Wich makes it fun. But one step up from that is the S7. Thats why im getting the S7. Its fatter. And not as flexible. But still kinda like spaghetti for fun

Well im coming from a pair of line anthems so i definetly want something wider (around 110) and with some rocker. I will be skiing off piste as much as possible (planning on putting some barons/dukes on them). But i want a ski that can handle fresh and variable snow in the resort. I love a playful ski that can really slash turns and i heard the s7 is like that

A good Rossi option for you would be the Rossignol S3 Koopman.

http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Rossignol-S3-Koopman-Alpine-Ski/ROS0387M.html

It's a blend of park shape and all mountain performance. You get a similar rocker profile as the S7 here, but a more piste oriented shape. The S7 is pretty fun on groomers, but is definitely more suited to deep, natural snow. If you spend most time on groomed terrain, the S7 may feel too wide (less agile). Rossi sets up dozens of resorts with demo fleets. Go try out the S3. You'll end up pretty stoked!

My buddy had these mounted both at true center which I believe is +6 and he hated it... then he mounted them at 0 and it was tolerable but they are a little soft behind the boot for a teleski... I would go with the Mancini version of these which I believe is a bit stiffer underfoot and behind the boot.

This is the ski for you, once you get past the playfulness. I have found these to be far more versatile than any ski I have ever owned before, and that includes both gotama's and the much lauded JJ's. If you need stiffer get the Super S7's but these skis really are unbelievable.

I just demo'ed these and both are good powder skis. There wasn't a ton of deep snow, but they both were easy to turn and maneuver in the powder, especially the S7. The Gotama was the stiffer ski and in the really icy chop was smoother. The S7 had the definite advantage on hardpack and you can carve using the short traditionally cambered section. The S7 was versatile, forgiving at low speed, and great in powder, but the Gotama might be the better choice for a more aggressive skier not too worried about groomer performance.

the shoguns r a more hardpack allmountain ski when these shine in the really deep stuff. iev heard the shoguns are anazeing but if i want a pow ski this is the pick.

I am rollin +1 1/2 and I think it's the hot ticket for me @ 5'8, 165 lbs on 188s and I think it's the hot ticket!

Factory recommendation is +3, I've also heard people going +2. I believe +3 is 86cm direct pull from the tail. Some people say +3 skis too short, depends on how you ski i guess...

I'm 6'2" 215 lbs.
I ordered the Super 7's and have yet to put a binding on them.
I demo'd the 188's and am quite glad I went with the 195. The 188 skied a little nervous.

Jon has since broken trail with these on a DEEP powder day and true to expectation, they worked like a charm

Yeah, I have them mounted with Dukes. A little heavy, but enough underfoot there is no issue in terms of contact with the skin during sidehilling or on icy tracks. I haven't broken trail with them yet, but I've heard rocker only helps with that too.

Do the 188. I'm 5'10" and 150 and went with the 188. Best choice of my life. Since there is real camber underneath the ski and the tips and tails follow a reverse camber layout the ski skis much shorter on the groomers and you use the extra in the pow. Trust me. You want the 188.

the 176 would be a great ski for you. because of the "upturned mustache" shape you would still be able to get some turns on groomers on these guys. if you do a lot of skiing in the park though or live somewhere where there isnt a lot of snow all the time the s3 has the same shape and it a bit smaller underfoot

if you are skiing on the 166 then i think you are on the right tract -- go with the 176. it will be a good match.

It isn't super soft, and actually they are stiffer than comparative skis in this genre, like the Hellbents or the EP Pros.

Just got my 195's mounted yesterday, pick them up today, I'll try and post a pick of the new graphic. They look sick. too much white on the previous graphic for a powder ski IMHO

Magro,

It is true that the 195 will have the 2010/2011 graphic. I have personally seen it and it definitely looks hot. Unfortunately Rossignol will not allow us to post pictures of the ski, but I can tell you that the ski has hits of hunter orange, like the FKS binding being released around the same time. We should see this ski by mid November.

I've been looking into this myself. I've talked to a Rossi rep and he confirmed that they will have 2010 graphics. I don't know what they look like and can't find a pic anywhere on the net. I was told they would be 'koopman graphics,' whatever that means. As for release, you are correct, as far as I know, but I wouldn't necessarily count on every ski shop getting a hold of one of them. I preordered online just to make sure I'd get mine.

I'm 6'4" and I ride the 188 just fine. Rossignol came out with the 195 because the pros were asking for it when slaying HUGE mountain lines in AK (like Sage). If you ever venture into trees or aren't on a wide open face you will probably regret going so long. Just because some girl is skiing the 188's doesn't mean you have to be "manlier" and go longer. That's ridiculous! Look at all the awesome reviews of this ski, they're all on the 188. Go for it, you'll be fine!

This chick rides 188's, you for damn sure better be able to ski the 195's at your size if you're really expert.

http://www.rossignol.com/US/the-system_Q0600_product_home-telemark.html

You should go with the 195. The ski, skis really short as it is due to the massive amount of rocker. The 188s are going to look and feel like snowblades for you. Just for reference I'm 5'8" 160 and the 188 was the version I was on. I am an expert skier and for me the ski length felt just right. I know a lot of people my size or just a little bigger who thought the 188 was too small. So at your height and weight, you shouldn't consider anything but the 195.

On the porterstahoe website they have a weight chart for this ski. Don't know where the weights came from but they've got anyone over 180 pounds on the 195.

They are more stable than many rockered skis on the hardpack, and able to tear it up if you want them to. As for bumps, I would say that it is possibly, if you wanted to try, but I wouldn't. Too much ski for bumps, plus I don't like bumps anyway.

Rossignol is supposed to have the ski within the next few weeks. As soon as they have it you should see it on our site for purchase. Unfortunately at this time we cannot offer the 195 for pre-order.

That would be a question to hit up the live chat about, since those guys know about the stocking issues, or can find out. It's a great ski though man, hope you get it.

They do ski short, but the 188 should be a good length for you.

Pretty light thanks to the WRS system. I wouldn't want to do multi-day tours, but when it's deep and safe in the backcountry they will definitely be my go-to ski.

Backcountry magazine says 10 pounds 8 ounces for the 188.

I picked up a set of the S7's last year and I love them. I am 5'5" and 150 lbs. I demo'd the skis at Alyeska, Alaska in a 188 and they were great. They ski very short and I found that the 188 was perfect for high speed and stability for me. Where I felt the length was a problem was in the tight trees, at that point they were a little tougher for me to maneuver. In the end I bought the 176 because I ski a lot of trees, but if I was any taller/heavier I would have gone 188. The down side to the 176 is that I have sacrificed the high speed stability.

What you need to decide is what is most important; maneuverability in tight quarters or (very) high speed stability.

I hope that helps.

10 pounds 8 ounces for the 188.

scott,
for the groomers the S6 definitely handles the corduroy better. for the pow the S7s are your go to ski. you have to decide if you want a totally traditional fun poppy ski with relatively low turning radius (S6) or a pow oriented ski with wider dimensions and a rockered tip and tail, fun ski that does surprisingly well on groomers with an even smaller turning radius (S7). two different skis...

They carry it, just are currently out of stock. You can get on the live chat to check up on restocking.

Factory recommendation is +3, I've also heard people going +2. I believe +3 is 86cm direct pull from the tail. Some people say +3 skis too short, depends on how you ski i guess...

Hey 9094. This is the same ski as last season with an updated graphic. It has a moderate flex underfoot which helps to grab hard snow and keep it from getting too chattery at speed and in crud. Where the rocker starts, it gets real soft real fast. So the tips and tails ride up over soft and cut up snow. This also helps to make the ski really nimble despite its wide platform. The 195cm version (coming soon!) has a bunch of metal in it and is significantly stiffer than the three smaller sizes.

The JJ is lighter and shorter than the S7, with lower camber in the tip and tail and a center mount. The JJ's tail is also fatter and slightly stiffer, making for a ski that lands and rides switch better. The S7 is very directional, with a pinned, raised tail and generous rocker in the tip, but it's slightly heavier and longer. I'd say if you are seeking a new-shape bc jib ski for spins and switch riding, go with the JJ. If you ski mostly forwards and you want to charge a bit harder, go with the S7. No doubt about it, they are both great skis. Tough call.

hellbents

195cm Super 7s are going to be a late release from Rossi. We're looking at another month or two. I've seen some prototypes and they're worth the wait!

go bigger. I'd say at least 105 mm underfoot. i went from dynastar troublemakers (90 mm) to volkl gotama and i'm never looking back! I haven't skied the S7's yet but from all the comments they look pretty bomber! If you love to ski pow, just wait til you try a fat ski... The seth's are sweet but you'll notice even more of a difference if you go wider..

The rockered tip and tail make this ski really smearable. It pivots really easily and allows you turn and slash on a dime. This ski is super fun in the trees thanks to its shape and flex.

The S7 Barras are AWESOME in trees and tight spaces, the rocker tip and early rise tail, combined with a generous amount of sidecut allow these skis to swivel, smear, and slash turns on a dime.

Got an update on this one. Backcountry.com will be carrying a few of the 195cm version of this ski or the "Super 7" this Winter. The Super 7 will have a wider waist at 117mm and metal laminates in the construction to make the ski beefier.