- Home
- Ski
- Alpine Skiing
- Big Mountain Freeride Skis
- Rossignol S7 Caballero Alpine Ski
- Big Mountain Freeride Skis
- Alpine Skiing
- Ski
Rossignol S7 Caballero Alpine Ski
More
Rossignol S7 Caballero Alpine Ski
Rossignol designed the S7 Caballero to split the difference between powder-only, reverse-camber, reverse-sidecut skis and traditionally-shaped fat skis, and the result is one of the most hotly-anticipated planks of the season. The S7 has a fat, rockered tip and tail profile, with an early taper at both ends for surfy, smeary pow turns with minimal hooking. Underfoot, traditional sidecut and camber let you not only make it back to the lift, but do so with style and ease. A full wood core and traditional sidewall construction give you damp, consistent flex in soft snow, and solid edge hold when you tip it over on hardpack. The whole radical package makes the S7 incredibly well-suited for Western big-mountain backcountry terrain, a quick and responsive partner that plays hard no matter where you find yourself—from waist-deep Solitude trees and chopped-up Squallywood chutes, to fluffy Crested Butte pillows and wide-open steeps at Big Sky. The bold graphic comes courtesy of Mr. Steve Caballero, another icon of innovation in the progressive sports arena and a participant in Rossignol’s Seven Artistic Sins cross-creation program.
Bottom Line: When you ski it, you’ll know.
Talk shop with all the gear freaks out there: ask 'em questions, upload/browse photos, and give your 2¢.
Alta to AK.
By: Cody Barnhill
December 23, 2008
These skis make pow turns feel like surf slashes. The early rise points make the stiffer under foot part of the ski crank turns like a race ski, but the softer extra tip and tail adds the extra lift you need in any snow. The only weak point that I would point out is that they are skinnier in the tail than the tip, so they are not a very strong switch-in-pow ski. Forward however, I know no better pillow ski, full speed line ski, spine ski (as Sage showed us all in under the influence,) they even shred groomers very well. Have fun!
C
Can anyone tell me how these might compare to my 09 ObSETHeds.
Can anyone tell me how these might compare to my 09 ObSETHeds. The s7's look to be an awesome addition to the quiver but possibly too similar to my ObSETHeds which i skied just about exclusively this past season and now even into early summer!
By: jmpilo
June 27, 2009
Thanks Shane, you nailed it although the Seth's are most excellent in the Pow i was looking for something more geared toward the deep stuff and was considering a pair of "Toon's" prior to looking into the S7's.
Thank again – Joe
By: jmpilo
6 days ago
Well the S7 skis differently than the ObSeth's, more floaty, and a little touch different in the flex. If you are looking for something pure pow, then these are sick skis, and can even get you back to the chair on the groomers. If you want a very diverse quiver there are other skis more different than the ObSeth's, like Pontoons, but this ski has all the float you need and is super playful at the same time.
By: Shane O'Donnell
June 28, 2009
creative riding divice...
By: sage cattabriga-alosa
October 17, 2008
Well I spent all most all of last year riding on the S7, once I clicked in I was hooked on this fun, versatile, ski. I really liked the way that this ski can handle a wide range of terrain and snow conditions. It excels in all forms of powder, but can carve a nice turn on the groomer, handles gnarly trails like the High traverse at Alta no problem, and blasts through crud and chunder. The ski allows you to slash and swivel turns in new ways and makes for some creative skiing all over the mountain.
I mounted my skis on the +3 line, (3cms) and had improved tail support when landing airs or recovering from the back seat.
Any opinions out there on how the S7 might fare on the East Coast?
Any opinions out there on how the S7 might fare on the East Coast? I'm thinking of getting a pair for when it dumps out here. I know it skis well on groomers. But what about the hardpack? Thanks!
By: baystate74
May 7, 2009
Don't do it unless you've got another pair of skis for non-powder days. Rocker skis aren't fun on hardpack. Period. The S7 doesn't actually ski very well on groomers. In a relative sense, it skis better than most powder-oriented skis, but compared to a ski with traditional camber/sidecut, there's no comparison. If you're only going to ski one ski, but want some better powder performance, I'd look into a look into a fatter ski that still has a regualr cambered profile. The Volkl Gotamas (http://www.backcountry.com/store/VKL0042/Volkl-Gotama-Alpin
By: Alexander Klivecka
May 7, 2009
You should look into next seasons S3's. Similar style of modified reverse camber but a bit smaller in dimentions with what seemsed to be a bit more camber. It was one of my favorite of all around skis during demo days. As far as how the S7 rides in the pow vs the other skis mentioned. Ive tested all of the above listed with exception to the Shaman and I have to say they are not half as fun in the Powder. As far as all round, the S7 will preform well in most conditions, will turn on a dime, solid on the groomers but not at high speed, but who buys the S7 to use it outside of a primary powder ski?
By: Cascade Concrete
May 8, 2009
Yeah, next years koopman's are pretty rad. I can ski the 3 on hardpack and in manky snow without a problem. Its 98 underfoot and I ski it in the 186 and its definitely manageable. I wouldnt recommend going with the seven unless you have more than a one ski quiver but i definitely shralped em in the east on a deep day. However, if youre looking for a great ski for making surf turns in the deep stuff this ski is for you
By: John Klemchuk
May 29, 2009
#1 Rossi
By: Shane O'Donnell
May 1, 2009
This is a great everything ski, and opened my eyes to Rossignol after years of neglect. The early rise make floating of the deep a breeze, and so much fun. With a traditional underfoot sidecut makes this ski super versatile, and makes it love to crank turns pretty much anywhere you go. Slashing trees is as easy as thinking about it, and charging hard lines is no trouble. I know a guy that even throws these around the park, better than most guys on park sticks. Super solid base for stomping booters all day. Way to make a comeback into my heart Rossi!
What size? I'm 5'8" 155lbs and usually ski 182
What size? I'm 5'8" 155lbs and usually ski 182 4frnt VCT's.
By: ohnjaykim2111204
April 20, 2009
Well if you are already used to the 182 ski, then stepping up to the 188 isn't that big of a deal, especially with the rocker making the effective edge shorter anyway. But I'm gonna say that the 176 is probably enough of a ski for you, and would probably be more fun to play around on.
By: Shane O'Donnell
April 20, 2009
Feels sooooo goood!
By: James McCalvy
March 23, 2009
So I don't know what you would define as big, I'm 6'2" and probly around 200lbs with all my gear on and these skis felt unreal! In a good way. I was skiing the 188's and the first run I made with these reqired a nice little hike into the sidecountry to find some freshies that were still untracked. Once I got there and clicked in it was game on, basically what Sage and others have siad earlier applies. My first turns were through tracked up snow and wind lips of various sizes... they were awsome and buttery smooth. Once I got to the good stuff I could not believe how well they floated and how easy they were to play on from short to long turns they did it all! Super surfy and slashable wich I really like and landing on these things is easy. I got some groomers and bumps and crud also and these skis just handled everything better than I thought they would, ecspecially in the bumps. Bottom line is this is probly the most fun powder ski I have been on and I'am not getting paid to say that.
What size? I'm 5"11", 140, and used to all-mountain
What size? I'm 5"11", 140, and used to all-mountain skis in the mid 170s.
By: quiverquiz
April 15, 2009
Well, I'm light and not super-aggro, so I'm usually hesitant to step up to the longest length of any ski, but I feel like with the short sidecut and the big rocker on this thing I might not lose much maneuverability while gaining that much more float. Maybe shorter would be more versatile though?
By: quiverquiz
April 15, 2009
I would say that if you wanted something a little more backcountry playful, the 175 would be about right, but if you wanted something for deeper conditions and stuff like that, and you ski aggressively, then you could handle the 185. Up to you.
By: Shane O'Donnell
April 15, 2009
2010 S7
By: jerry garcia
June 17, 2009
The 2010 S7 model is selling on Ebay for 599.00. Thats alot cheaper then last years S7 that backcountry is selling now for 639.00.
Although last years graphics are much tighter.
I am 135 pounds, 5'10" and an advanced skier. i currently
I am 135 pounds, 5'10" and an advanced skier. i currently ski on 172 line blends but want a more backcountry/pow oriented ski as well. what size would be best for me seeing as i'm used to around 170 on a normal ski. also, i ski mainly resorts but would this ski work with an AT binding for short tours and resort accessed back country?
By: nathan boyer-rechlin
April 14, 2009
I wouldn't go up to the 188 for you, just because you are a lighter skier and don't need that extra float, so look at the 176. As for getting into the slackcountry, you could definitely do it with these skis, not the best at all for it, but not really a big deal. The best touring binding for it though would probably be the Duke or Baron, because they are made more for slackcountry with bigger skis.
By: Shane O'Donnell
April 14, 2009
A revalation
By: Howard Worton
March 17, 2009
I am 182cm(5' 11") and am 205 lbs.
My regular skis are : K2 Seth 07/08 179, 4Frnt MSP 07/08 181.
I demoed the S7 at Park City the day after last weeks' big storm and was blown away. I had never tried a true rockered ski - the Seth does not count - and was slightly nervous of their performance. I needn't have been. They are super easy to get on with - as long as you don't take liberties on the hardpack. As everyone has said, they crush everything even remotely soft. I won't repeat everyone elses comments but it is true, they rock. I skied the 188 and it felt no longer than my MSPs, if in doubt go longer. These skis are almost impossible to find in the 2009 guise but as a forewarning for 2010 - which I believe are very similar but with a slightly narrower waist - buy 'em now before they sell out.
Skinning up with S7's?I was going to mount up a pair of Baron's
Skinning up with S7's?I was going to mount up a pair of Baron's on these and use it for slackcountry/light backcountry. With the rockered tail, is this a bad idea? Is anyone skinning on these?
By: Cody Gauer
March 3, 2009
With the large base area on these skis, you shouldn't have any big problems skinning except on steep hardpack or ice.
By: ESTtoMST
March 19, 2009
Sweets Balls
By: Dirsky
March 20, 2009
Well I must say that these do indeed tear the mountain a new A. My only recommendation is NOT to mount them +3 if you are a more traditional skier like me. I had to move the binding back to +1 to create more tip so I could get some turns when there is not 12 inches (sorry ladies)....
Size Matters. Was finally convinced from the posts here to get
Size Matters. Was finally convinced from the posts here to get the 176 then saw Rossi is introducing a 168 (or close to it) next year along with a mid 190s. I'm early 40s agressive skier ex-pro mtb racer but greyhound weight. 5'7" and 140 wet. Have variety of skis but current fav is Rossi B4 168. Should I wait for shorter next year or go with 176? Looks like 176 skis much shorter than it is. Any thoughts? Thanks.
By: 9094heel
February 28, 2009
I just demoed a set of these in 6" of fresh snow. first off I am 5'5" and 150 lbs and I am a fairly aggressive skier. I took out the 188 cm S7's. When I picked them up, I thought "holy crap, these are huge" Once I got them on my feet they felt a lot shorter. As I started riding them I was so impressed with the maneuverability and feel, I almost forgot I was on 188's. I skied a variety of terrain on them too. I was at Alyeska Resort in AK, so for the first half of the day I skied the north face, wide open slightly steeper pitch (maybe 35-40 deg??) with 6" of fresh. The S7's did whatever i wanted. If I wanted to open them up and make big turns, they did it. Slashing the tails out, no problem. Tight turns in a bumped out chute? bring it on. Even cruising back to the lift on a crude covered groomer I was leaving trenches. The only place I felt the extra length was when I was in the tight trees. I found throwing them around between trees to be a little more work than I wanted. So all that being said, I ordered a pair of 176 cm S7's. Why? I felt that they will still hold the speed I want but the shorter length will be way more fun in the trees, and I love skiing the trees.
By: Cody Gauer
March 2, 2009
Concern Resolved
By: Wasquatch
November 28, 2008
Against my better judgment, I rode my brand new s7's (instead of my rock skis) at the Bird on Nov 15th. I was so anxious to resolve a concern I had that I couldn't wait for more coverage. Bad news: I have a couple minor scratches. Good News: They can hold an edge (concern resolved). With camber in the tip and 115 under foot it doesn't take a pro skier to tell me they will float in pow or "blast through crud and chunder". That is expected. I believe the reason anyone would buy these skis is because they want everything a full rocker ski can do for them.... and hold an edge on the groomers. Don't get me wrong, they hold an edge like a 160 size ski, but they DO hold an edge.... and I can't wait to experience them in 3 feet of Utah's finest.
can anyone tell me how much rocker is in the tip and tail? can't
can anyone tell me how much rocker is in the tip and tail? can't find the info anywhere...
By: r4usch
February 27, 2009
I've got your answer on this one. It is a fraction for the tip and tail. The top number represents the amount in mm that the tip/tail is raised and the bottom number in cm is the length from the tip back/tail forward that the ski is rockered.
Tip: 22mm/27cm
Tail: 22mm/20cm
So, there is more length to the rocker in the tip than in the tail, but the amount the tip and tail are raised is the same.
By: Wally Phillips
March 23, 2009
i dunno for sure, but i do know that total riding space is about on each ski, due to the camber is about 3 feet
By: Freeskier_justin
March 3, 2009
Sweet
By: screamnCman
December 15, 2008
I skied the 188's in early December in Alta for a couple of days. I got to take them out in powder, crud, and groomers.
These skis are sweet - It was almost impossible for me to dive the tip in powder. They float amazingly, and will turn on a dime. On the hard pack, they rail! They have the sidecut of a slalom race ski - and about the running length of one as well (166CM +/-). It was fun to lay down some arcs on the way back to the lift.
Downside - I am 6'/210#'s and often found myself over powering them at speed. They ski much shorter than the 188 length suggests. When I pointed them straight though crud, the tips started flopping all over the place. I found myself wanting more stability at speed in the crud - but that's probably a function of my size. Also, the tail rocker will make you wheelie if you land an air in the back seat.
Bottom line - for the non-fat-asses this ski will make you a more versatile skier. Even for the heavy set (me) they were tons of fun. They are fun and playful and I can see these things blowing up like pocket rockets did a couple of years ago.
i just got a pair of these in 188 length. i am wondering about
i just got a pair of these in 188 length. i am wondering about mounting and bindings? i am 6ft 200lbs. don't ski jib much. please someone point me in right direction.
By: r4usch
February 19, 2009
I called Rossignol today and according to "Nick" you should locate the centerline of your boot 80.4 cm from the tail of the ski on the 176 cm ski. Measure a straight line from the ski tail without letting your tape follow the contour of the ski. He had a different number which I don't remember for the 188cm long ski. He said don't pay attention to the markings on the ski as they may be in error.I skied a set this weekend and they were 188's mounted at +3 cm. I had a blast on them. I heard the pro's are mounting these at +3 cm as well.
By: Cody Gauer
March 2, 2009
Tried a pair
By: Freeskier_justin
March 5, 2009
Let me start by sayin they have a tighter turn radius then most racing skis. the total space your riding on is about 3 feet and the makes it more manuverable, good enough for anything from heavy sticky groomer to light fluffy pow pow. These skis can do anything. i'm alomost 6 foot 150lbs and used the 176cm. I loved it. i'm buyin a pair next season. ALSO!!! the "magnetraction" at the tips.(fatter midway through the ski rather than the tip)allow it to have such a tight turn radius and it grabs any kind of snow. I'can;t say mush more other than WAY TO GO ROSSI!!!
i am wondering how these compare to the JJ's? i am looking
i am wondering how these compare to the JJ's? i am looking for a versatile powder ski and iam thinking jj or s7. any other recomendations?
By: r4usch
February 18, 2009
I gotcha on this one. The JJ is more responsive, playful and loves a lighter touch. They both float and plow through crud very similarly, but the S7 carves a better turn on the groomed and it does better when it is driven. So, it really does depend on the skier on this case and how much energy one puts into their skiing.
By: Wally Phillips
March 23, 2009
I have heard that even though they are the same dimensions, the S7 really outperforms the JJ for reasons unknown.
By: zth2572724
February 25, 2009
Pretty Much Best Ski Ever
By: Stevens Pass Guy
December 29, 2008
Bringing the PNW to this discussion... this is the true one ski quiver for WA state. As I'm sure most folks know, we've had a bit of a slow start snow-wise out here. The good news, lower snowpack = more pillowy smaller features. The S7 inspires confidence... It floats, but is still super nimble and can be powered through the somewhat mixed bag of terrain that we're riding at present.
Bottom Line, I'm a 5'10, 150 pound skier that works at a resort, rides 120+ days a year, but is by no means close to pro. I mounted them at +2 with a pair of Dukes, and I've been nothing but impressed with this ski. If you want to do it all, s7 is all you need to know.
Thanks to everybody else who's reviewing, sage and cody especially... your opinions are appreciated.
Anyone Tele'ing on these? I was thinking of settin up with
Anyone Tele'ing on these? I was thinking of settin up with Bishops, more for resort and sidecountry than touring. Also, any experience w Tele mounting?
By: panditah134798
February 8, 2009
Check out this telemarktips forum post on the topic of S7's on tele:http://www.telemarktalk.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=76951
By: WishfulThinking
March 17, 2009
So I just bought these skis and skied them last weekend (Mar21/22,09) at Whistler after about 80+ cm of fresh. I mounted them tele (Black Diamond O2 bindings) at -1cm. My style of skiing is primarily freeride; I don't do any park or switch-style skiing.
In the pow: The ski was phonomenal as expected. I need not say more.
Not in the pow: The ski was surprisingly good even on groomers and on ice (as I skied out to the village at the end of the day). The camber and 18m sidecut/radius really makes the ski work more like a normal ski when you need it. Just put it on edge and you'll be making some quick turns. There is a noticable lack of edge grip at the tips for turn initiation (due to the rockered tip and hence very short effective edge) when compared to a traditional ski, especially when needing to turn quick in the bumps. However,this is expected from an early rise/rockered ski, and this deficiency is compensated by the short-radius sidecut underfoot.
Landing drops/jumps: I was slightly concerned about a short tail due to a soft/rockered tail and mounting -1cm instead of the +3 the Sage recommends. However, I had no problems putting on the brakes when I needed to emergency stop or when landing big drops where I was too far in the backseat. Swing weight while doing 360's was noticable, since I'm used to much lighter skis (G3 Saints).
In summary, I love these skis. They are not a one ski quiver though. For hardpack and touring days, I'll go with my G3 Saints. But if there's any semblance of soft snow off-piste (where I spend the majority of my time), I'll be breaking out my S7 clown-shoes.
By: WishfulThinking
March 25, 2009
First day in AK
By: akskier
December 15, 2008
Just picked up a pair of these and mounted them with some slighty older Marker Piston controls. Conditions were deep cut-up and windblown Alaskan powder in the 2-3 foot deep range. I mounted these on the +3cm line and the Jury is still on that decision for me, but the skis worked fantastic for me... you can drive forward hard into the cut up crud. The pintail makes the board stable and predictable, with the added benifit of throwing up a wicked rooster tail. These skis ski short. Easy to initiate even in less than ideal conditions. The tail is very well behaved considering it's length, stays our of the way. The only time they bothered me was when climbing the high traverse. I kept stepping on my own tails and the hiking was awkward and clumsy. I am sure I just need to get used to them, and would be a minor irritation anyway. These things carve surprisingly well on the groomers. There is a speed limit on them, especially as the groomers got hard and bumpy. They won't dump your ass on ice either. I found some navigating around some rocks and I had sufficient control. I would NOT want to take these down an icy couloir, but that's not why you are buying these, right? This is a dedicated pow board and a fantastic one at that! I am also 52 and generally ski with guys half my age, so I am thrilled these skis reduce the effort required. More accurately though, you'll just kick it up a notch or two and burn your legs out just the same. :-)
how do the S7's compare to the 4rnt EHP's? I've
how do the S7's compare to the 4rnt EHP's? I've been able to check out the S7's, but not the EHP's. Look to have a pretty similar profile (twinish, soft flex, rockered)... anyone who rode both have any comments?
By: JAG85
January 17, 2009
The 186 EHPs are a bit stiffer and more damp. Not as playful but still excel in tight turns. Definitely a bit more stable in nasty conditions. They don't seem to carve as well on the groomers, but still managable. Other than that they are pretty similar-----------------------------------------------------
By: JAG85
February 26, 2009
Easiest Pow Ski of All Time
By: Powkill
December 15, 2008
These skis make skiing crud and powder so easy it's retarded. Even skiing some fresh man-made zipper crust is stupidly easy. They're a fast, stable ski that can get into trouble as easy as it can get you out of it. You can scruff speed super easy. Just a little flick and they're sideways. There is a ton of sidecut so beware. This will only help intermediate skiers and expert skiers should be able to adjust to the quick turn radius. All the sidecut makes them that much easier to carve the hardpack and maneuver through the trees. These skis are so versatile I'm not sure why I will ever ski my Scratch STZ's again. Now I need to get my girl friend a pair so she can keep up.
hi am 13 years old and love to ski everything in the backcountry
hi am 13 years old and love to ski everything in the backcountry that comes to me. i am 5 foot 4 and am wondering if the 176 length would be the right way to go.
By: Elliot Davis
January 11, 2009
yea i think the 176 is a good length for you, i am 5'8" and am skiing the 188 but i like a big ski. the 176 will give you versatility, put a pair of marker barrons and you will have a killer side county set of planks. back to the lenght, it would also depend on how much you weigh. if you are under 160 than the 176 would be good. if you are a little bigger you might want to think of a longer ski. i hope this helps. have a fun and safe time. remember if you are in the backcounty to ski with a buddy, beacon, probe, shovel, and take an avy class.
By: Gabe Westheimer
January 11, 2009
Yeh these would be sweet for you.
I'm 14 (nearly 15) and am gonna save up for next years, mainly cause the graphic looks sick.
I wouldn't use these as a one ski quiver though - I will use them for when it dumps and will use some lighter BD's with naxo's for the other days.
By: Jamie Bristow
May 24, 2009
these things are like determined sluts
By: skifr85353162800
March 10, 2009
just spent almost a day on these little guys (188 length) and damn. they are like a determined little slut...it says put me wherever you want, do me however you like, and it promises it will be the best ride of your life! you need these skis. why havent you bought them yet?
in all seriousness, my usual all-mountain ride is 184 b-squad and these felt almost as burly. sure at high speed chop, they were a bit squirely but not really that bad (wish i had the super 7 - 195 length, im sure that thing is perfect!). and i was so surprised as to how far i could lay them over on the groomers...seriously an amazing ski!
I am PNW skier currently riding 1st gen Seth Pistols in a 168cm,
I am PNW skier currently riding 1st gen Seth Pistols in a 168cm, im 5,6' 158lbs and im wondering if the 176cm S7's may be a bit much in terms of length? I am also wondering if the 176cm is ok should I still stick with the +3 mounting or go to the +2?
By: Cascade Concrete
January 7, 2009
You can ski the rossignol s7 ski in a longer length than a traditional ski because there is not as much effective edge as your 168 Seth Pistols due to the rocker tip. Binding mounting point is personal preference I would start with the markings Rossignol puts on the S7.
By: Dustin Robertson
January 8, 2009
Finally dropped the cash and purchased...review and mounting info follows...
By: ColoradoMan
January 27, 2009
Yo,
So I dropped the 700 bones and bought these bad boys. They live up to the hype that is for sure. 6'2", 190lbs, I ski Abasin/Vail/Beav mostly. Took these out 3 times to date. Once on a 2 inch day at Basin. The 2 inches of pow felt like 6. These puppies can carve!!! Unless it is solid solid ice (in which case you are spinning like a top), these hold an edge really well and you can really carve some turns on 'em. Day 2 - groomer day at Basin. Results - fun, except for super hard pack, then you are kinda effed on the control but all reverse/reverse skis are like that.
Day 3 - Snowcat day at Monarch. Super sick! Rockered skis are the bomb! Makes turning effortless. Tight tree pow is now my friend. Plus these things throw a sweet "stay the hell off my ass" tail of snow everywhere.
MOUNTING - I read every thread on here and tgr forums about mounting these and everyone said anywhere from 0 to +3. Do not listen to the posers on this site (JFe) that don't have this ski, haven't ridden it, and are posting mounting advice!! Go back to bed losers! Get a job and buy some skis! Anyways, +3 is ridiculous. It is so far forward you have no tip in front of you (you are already limited by the huge rocker) and your tail is long. Don't get me wrong, you could rip them, but unless you've skied true park ski center mounts, +3 is whack. I mounted at +1.5. That seemed to hit the spot real nice. Not too much tail, effortless float. +1.5 BABY!!!
ps Mounting at 0 would rock too but if you're an inboundser like me, and your pow days fall apart at 1pm when all the pow has been chewed up...you will love the +1.5 mount. +1.5!!!!!!!
Hi..So i think ive finally settled on the s7 for my all mountain/pow
Hi..So i think ive finally settled on the s7 for my all mountain/pow ski and was wondering where to mount these bad boys and with what bindings; im 5'10 146. I ride hard, fast, like to ski bowls and trees, drop cliffs, and jib the natural terrain features all over the mountain but also will be coming down through the park at the end of my runs so id like to have good swing weight for tricks..ive seen a lot of ppl mounting + centre but ive never even skied a centre mount ski before not even for park my 08 dumonts are mounted -1 so im not sure where to go could anyone advise based on my size/skiing style and what bindings to go for aswell?ps -Does the rockered tip and tail make it ski a lot shorter so i could go 188?Thanks, J
By: jmike
January 6, 2009
Definitely mount them up at +3cm forward. Sage himself said that's what works good. As for your binding, you should be looking into the Marker Jester, or the Marker Griffin. They are the same binding made with different materials and different DIN settings. You could choose which one would be best for you based on your weight. Everyone is mounting these on their wider skis and loves them. I have a pair of Jesters, and I love them too. As for the ski feeling shorter with the rockered platform, you should just stick with a ski pretty close to your usual ski length. They do carve groomers like a shorter ski, but you are still throwing around the weight of a long ski. When you get in the soft snow, you will be using the entire length of the ski, and you won't want a ski much longer than you usually ski because it will be hard to throw around. this guy is whack don't listen to him he doesnt know a thing besides bindings. i am currently skiing on a pair of the rossignol steezes in a 185 and have no trouble spinning them floating them in powder or carving up the groomers and im 5' 10'' and wiegh the same as you go with the 188 you wont regret it especially if you like skiing fast and dropping cliffs the extra length will make it alot nicer remember rossi skis ski short and their rockered so it'll be even shorter. if you mount them as far forward as you planned you will be able to spin them easy
By: Andre Lovett
January 7, 2009
Sin for Sure
By: justin.kru2038807
January 4, 2009
I almost felt guilty - like I was cheating against flat boards. The turns were so incredibly fluid and responsive in the power and trees today in Colorado. The S7 is an incredibly fun ride! Effortless! Marker bindings were perfectly mounted forward +3 for 6ft 165 lbs aggressive skier. Obviously. blue ice at the end of the hill is not you friend on these supper wide sticks.
How does the weight of the S7 compare with the Armada JJ in
How does the weight of the S7 compare with the Armada JJ in 176?
By: t_hladky824398
January 5, 2009
The JJ's are about a pound lighter per/pair.
By: Elias the Terrible
January 16, 2009
Blown Away
By: Michael Kern
May 11, 2009
I had been skiing both Armada ARG's and Armada JJ's, this ski replaced both. Rossi has truly taken a step up in my book, they seem to hold every single line you put them on, and have just enough stiffness under foot and in the tail to stomp sketchier lines, but still float with easy in deep pow. The best all around one quiver ski for the West.
Are these skis ok for backcountry booters/kickers
Are these skis ok for backcountry booters/kickers
By: connor McCarron
January 4, 2009
This ski, along with the S6, would be fine for your backcountry kicker needs.---Adding--- These are not true twin tips, so you will really want a true twin tip if you are going to be doing a lot of backcountry kickers and possibly doing switch take offs and landings. If you want fat skis, I would recommend the K2 Hellbent or the Line EP Pro, for the best rockered fatty twin tip. They're cheaper too.
By: Seth Ferguson
January 7, 2009
if you are going to get clown shoes, you might as well get clown shoes
By: che2675856
March 11, 2009
The S7's are the steeze for pow, chunder, and crud. I bought them thinking the would be my pow only skis but they have quickly become my 4 day after storm crud busters as well. They are amazing in the pow as well though. The huge shovel and rockered tip will simply not sink into the pow, not matter how far you lean forward. Only complaint is I am 6 2 180 and I have the 188s and I wish they were longer. Definitely get a rockered ski longer then you would get a regular ski. They are sick skis and recommend them to anyone in the market for clown shoes.
i am 5ft 4 and ski a rossi b3 in 168cm. how will the longer rossi
i am 5ft 4 and ski a rossi b3 in 168cm. how will the longer rossi s7 be for me in a 176cm.
By: bill connely
December 29, 2008
All indications are that due to the rocker these ski very short. You should be ok in a 176
By: sick chicken
December 30, 2008
WOW
By: Steve
February 27, 2009
Just got the S7s today and took them out even tho there was no powder to ride. So just took them on groomed run and they performed very well for a 115mm wide ski. Love them and cant wait to get into some pow
So does anyone have any 411 on their mounting position?
So does anyone have any 411 on their mounting position?
By: ColoradoMan
December 24, 2008
+3, but make sure your shop knows Rossi messed up the topsheet prints. The line isn't where it's supposed to be. But mount em at true +3 and you can't go wrong. I'm 6'3 180, aggressive, and they get me super pumped. Nastiest skis you can get.
By: Hugh G. Rection
December 24, 2008
S7 = S Awesome
By: D. Joshua Christensen
May 1, 2009
These are hands down one of the most fun skis I have ever used. In super deep pow there are some other skis that I would say are more fun, but all in all this ski rides the whole mountain better than almost any other ski out there.
Pros: Turns Crud into Pow, Turns easily but not too easily, Floats well, stomps everything
Cons: Narrower tail makes them feel sloppy on traverses and really hard pack. They don't float quite as well in super deep pow as you would expect them too. Nose flops a little bit.
Similar Items Used: Armada JJ, Moment Bibby
All in All: If you want one ski that can do everything on the mountain (even surprisingly pipe, but not rails) well, then this ski is for you. I would say it is best for someone that skis about 40% crud, 40% powder, 30% everything else. If you ski at Jackson, Alta, Snowbird, Solitude, Tahoe, or anywhere else similar...check these out for sure!
So I just ordered these...super stoked.QUESTION!! Where is the
So I just ordered these...super stoked.QUESTION!! Where is the ideal mount location????? Help!! Where have you been mounting these? I see one reviewer has said +3 but the jury is still out!! Help! 6'2"/200lbs/aggressive. I ski the '06 Seth's at +2.5 right now but the K2's mounting grid is all messed up anyways...
By: ColoradoMan
December 22, 2008
Sage himself is riding these at +3... Here's what he has to say in his review, "I mounted my skis on the +3 line, (3cms) and had improved tail support when landing airs or recovering from the back seat."That's where I would mount them too.
By: Seth Ferguson
January 4, 2009
Rossignol S7 - Do it all
By: Brian Limoges
May 2, 2009
These skis are far more versatile than I gave them credit for prior to riding them. I had read all of the reviews, blogs, and general hype that this ski had received, but was still leary of its ability to "do everything." In past experiences with bikes and surfboards a "do it all" tool typically means that it CAN do everything decently, but sacrifices top end performance at either end of the spectrum or for a particular task (in this case powder skiing, groomers, steeps, straight-lining, etc.). Anyways, after half of the season at Alta had passed me by I decided to get on a pair and see what they can do. Well it turns out they can do just about everything! The rocker skis pow exceptionally. The tight 17.5m turning radius slays groomers. The fairly stiff flatter section underfoot allows the ski to take speed...even in crud. Again the rocker performs well in spring slush helping to prevent "grabby" snow from pulling you down. These skis even ski well through bumps! All in all I have been extremely impressed not only with their versatility, but with their ability to be versatile and still perform in all conditions. These truly are a one ski quiver for out west. If I do have any one complaint about the ski, it is that is a little too soft for really mocking in my opinion. Luckily with the Super 7 coming out next year, this problem will be alleviated! I'm sold!!!
sage,which bindings do you have mounted on them?
sage,which bindings do you have mounted on them?
By: nik
November 12, 2008
Sage has the Rossignol SAS 150 Binding on his S7s.
By: Cody Barnhill
December 21, 2008
Holy Crap!
By: Joe Quinlan
April 1, 2009
These skis are by far one of the best skis I have ever ridden. The rockered tip and and tail with the camber make this ski one of the most versatile set of boards out there. In the pow they charge and float with no sign of the bottom in sight. Put them on the chop after the amazing pow session and the still charged and just slashed everything left in sight. On the groomers a little slow edge to edge b/c of the waist width but still held an edge and carved great once you got them over there. Awesome ski would recommend them to anyone.
Take them everywhere!
By: SpaceMac
February 23, 2009
This ski is very versatile. It's early rise tip and 115 underfoot width help to keep the ski floating on powder. The ski has some side-cut that allows the ski to carve on the groomers while making your way back to the lift. The tip and tail are soft while the middle of the ski remains fairly stiff to keep the ski stable in crud and tracked snow. Would highly recommend to anyone who is looking for one ski to do it all!
Not a fan, little guys probably love this ski
By: chunky no-funky
February 12, 2009
For me these skis were not all that great. I have skied them in all conditions, ranging from powder to ice and wasn't as impressed as I thought I would be. The only place these skis really excelled was in tight trees. They are super fun and you can make the tightest turns possible. This is probably due to their super short running length, its like skiing snowblades without the chairlift ridicule. In powder the float was not that great, the skis just felt really short and wimpy. Performance in choppy cruddy snow was good, as long as you stay balanced you can carve through some pretty junky snow. They were stable landing airs, and pretty decent in moguls as well. I am not sure if it was the tune (or lack thereof) but I had to almost lean back into the backseat to get the sidecut to hook up and get the skis to carve on hard snow. Eventually I got used to it, but I would rather be able to drive my skis from a more athletic stance. The truth with these, is that if you are a smaller dude (or dudette) these skis probably rip like none other, but for bigger dudes look elsewhere.
Rossignol S7 Caballero Alpine Ski
By: Bob Baldwin
March 20, 2009
Super fun, slashy skis that are great in the chop and pow. Really fun
Short skis that were still fun
By: Andrew Bornstein
March 20, 2009
Hey Rossi! Make some skis for men! 188 isn't long enough in a rockered ski for anyone over 6'! That being said, I did really enjoy skiing on the S7s. They seemed to be able to go just about anywhere with ease. The bell tip,115 waist, and rocker made for some fun in the pow and more beat up snow. The traditional camber underfoot made getting back to the lift no problem.
I would highly recommend these for someone who skis out West in pow a good percentage of the time, but doesn't want a 1 trick pony. They aren't dedicated pow sticks, but they are certainly a lot of fun in the deep stuff!
Easy and Versatile
By: Christopher Smith
March 2, 2009
I rode these in some pretty good snow at Snowbasin a few weeks ago and loved them. They're almost as maneuverable as Pontoons in powder, but way more manageable on groomed snow. You can definitely feel the short running length when on a groomer, but I still felt comfortable going pretty fast. These are, by far, the most versatile and easy-to-ski powder-specific ski I've tried so far.
S7 is versatile and playful
By: Justin Altman
February 11, 2009
This ski really blew me away in terms of how fun and forgiving it is. The way the tip is designed with the widest point located slightly back from the tip make the ski refuse to hook in crusty or heavy snow. The flex is medium in my opinion which makes the ski forgiving and doesn't beat you up by lunchtime. This is a ski I could ski in so many conditions from a couple inches of fresh snow to 30" of blower. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a one ski quiver, but if you're looking for a powder ski this is one that you would not worry about taking out if the conditions were variable.
Does Everyting!
By: Wally Phillips
February 11, 2009
Makes everything almost too easy. The rockered tip and tail help to keep the ski from getting swallowed in bigger pow amounts and the amount of effective edge and sidecut actually gives some good/great short turn carving. The only negative on this ski is it doesn't handle the icy crud too well.
As for the mounting of these skis, I've seen a lot of opinions and I figured I would give mine as well. I put the Marker Dukes on these skis at +3. Yes, it does lessen the tip, but then I just treat it like a slalom ski and keep my balance point near the middle of the ski.
Overall, this ski is for any all mountain or big mountain skiers who get into big pow as much as they do groomers. Also, the topsheet is cool, it definitely grows on you.
Super Fun!!
By: Chris Matheson
January 29, 2009
These skis are so much fun and very easy to ski. They take no effort to turn and with a subtle touch you can make a variety of turn shapes. They seem to excel in playful, bouncy turns, but they are capable of high speed charging as well. A bit soft for an everyday resort ski, but they would make an awesome backcountry ski. Definitely not for hard chargers who like stiff, planky boards.
Surprisingly(or maybe not) these ski just like my 185cm Ravens(Scratch Steeze) only they feel a little shorter.
fun skis
By: Ryan Wheeler
January 8, 2009
These are really fun skis. They float very well in the powder! The thing that came as a suprise to me was how decent they did on the groomers as well. I thought that they were going to be complete dogs on groomers but were actually pretty playful and carved alright. The place where I wasn't such a fan or these ski's was in the crud, has very soft tip and tail and I just felt like I was getting tossed around a lot on these. I would recommend these for those deep powder days!
agreed
By: Dirsky
November 21, 2008
Agreed Shedd...but hell it worked...I have the s7 on order as we speak....I guess I can always come back here and share if they don't "blast through chunder"...looking forward to riding 'em....stay tuned
Is there a more versatile ski on the market right now?? ...
By: xover
February 17, 2009
... and even next year.
I have skied alot (and I mean alot of skis) over the last 15 years and this is without a doubt the most versatile ski in the above mentioned timeframe. This is the best ski Rossi has made since the Cut 11.5!!! (Which for you Ol' Timers and Soul Boyz know) Coincidentally, that was "THE" ski that absolutely, blew the F'ing doors off the hinges as far as just what is possible on skis. If you can still find this ski in a 188cm, buy it; no matter the price. It rails on hardpack due to it's short, underfoot sidecut + it slays crud due to rocker'd tip + pow is literally orgasmic = smiles all around.
p.s. Rossi, you best be pressing a shit-ton of these this summer and early fall ....
hmmmm...
By: Shedd
November 17, 2008
While I do trust Rossi skis and am stoked to see them getting into the reverse camber world, i'm inclined to be slightly skeptical of a glowing review from a sponsored rider. Although if he was involved in designing them, they obviously work for him quite well. But name dropping a resort that he doesn't have to pay to ski at? C'mon. I'm sure the S7 rips, but I want reviews from real people that paid for the ski. Everyone who has looked at any magazine recently (or ridden the tram at snowbird) knows Sage rides the S7. Let's hear from somebody else.
${title}
${body}
By: ${user.display_name}
{if user.badges}
{for badge in user.badges}
${badge.image_el}
{/for}
{/if}
${date}
${answer.body}
By: ${answer.user.display_name}
{if answer.user.badges}
{for badge in answer.user.badges}
${badge.image_el}
{/for}
{/if}
${answer.date}
Change me.






