Review: 186 Rossignol Ravyn (S6/Steeze)

[phattypowpow]

I now have three consecutive days on the 186 Rossignol Ravyns and can make a preliminary review. This is the same ski as the Steeze/S6.

Me: 6', 160 lbs, advanced but not superhero skier who likes big GS turns in pow, crud, and groomers. Limited switch skiing skills and too old school to know any jib or park tricks. Hometown hill: JH.

Setup: 186 Ravyns (same as S6), mounted with Look PX12, -5 cm behind the line. Yes, that's a big move back (~2 inches) but the ski was too center mounted for me and I was worried about them being a big too short up front since they are a very short 186 to begin with. In hindsight, I definitely would not mount them any further forward but even further back might still work. Jibbers/spinners might want to go back to the center, though.

Pow: I didn't get much untracked but the few turns I found were very nice. With a pretty wide shovel (140mm), a soft tip, and being mounted back, the Ravyns really want to float up front. Any while they're not overly fat underfoot (110) and have a bunch of sidecut, pseudo-slarving is possible. I was surprised by this. Perhaps the center mount and soft tip and tail offset the midfat waist and sidecut but I felt I could slide my turns in the pow better than my beloved Power Plus (115 waist) and Wide Glide (110 waist), both of which have a rounder flex, a less centered mount, and no twin. Perhaps the tip/tail are soft enough to just get out of the way and let you pressure underfoot more? I'm very curious to see how these feel in continuously deep snow but I'm cautiously optimistic. I am quite confident that the tips will stay up on they're own as they really want to climb on top of anything they encounter so traditional powder turns should be sweet, regardless of how slarvy I can get.

Soft chop: Really a completely different beast than firm crud so it gets its own category. These skis love the soft chop and just butter through everything. I was able blast big turns down the Hobacks pretty damn fast. Despite the shortish length, these held up fine at speed and the tip just absorbed everything that it ran into. Due to the significant sidecut, occasionally they would want to overturn a bit but did so predictably so, after a couple runs, the hooky feeling of the tails was completely forgotten. The upside of the sidecut and soft tip/tail is that at lower and moderate speeds, changing directory or turn shape as easy and fun. The tips/tails give the skis lots of pop really encourage you to play, fast or slow. Once I got a feel for the pop, I found myself loading the tips and tails intentionally and springing over/around features and bumps. Super fun!

Firm crud: I didn't ski any true gnar but today things had firmed up quite a bit in some places, including the lower faces. As conditions harden off trail, you start to pay a price for the playful nature and soft tip/tails. While I could still go moderately fast, the Ravyns wanted to goof around, so to speak, when there were more serious matters at hand like smashing through crud and giving a beat down to any punk-ass snow. My longer (192cm), slightly stiffer, rounder flexing Wateas were better at this. Still the Ravyns can hold their own so long as you try to fly over rougher terrain rather than blast through it. My boss, who is a little heavier than I and employs a more direct approach to crud (smash it), hated the S6/Ravyn after skiing it in this terrain. If you're someone who wants to destroy snow with a Squad or XXL, you will be disappointed in this ski in firm chop as it wasn't designed to blast through firm stuff. Personally, I dislike really stiff skis as have trouble bending them in the lengths I like (185-190 ish) so I feel it was the shorter length more than anything that made the Ravyn a so-so ski for set up snow.

Groomers: Here the sidecut is a ton of fun. Today was actually sunny and the groomers were in great shape. Additionally, the cold keep most people home so there was more room to let the skis run. Big GS as well as tigher arcs were no problem and the Ravyns could go as fast I wanted (pretty fast!) without getting squirrelly or unstable. Due to the soft tip/tail, you had to be careful not to overload them or your carving radius would get smaller REALLY fast. Once I figured them out, though, it was a piece of cake and I would sometimes load up the tip/tail just for fun to create a funky carve. I wouldn't want to try to straightline a groomer for fear of catching an edge on these turny skis but groomers are for carving, right? I could even drive the front of the ski a bit due to the rear mount. As I said, I'm old school, and think carving without pressure on the front of the ski is inherently less stable and should be reserved for the park and pipe where high speed GS turns are not as viable.

Ice: Didn't ski any but the big tip/tail/sidecut would make me nervous. Hookiness is very manageable in the conditions listed above but all bets are off on the icy slopes that I grew up on in NH. Probably fine if you're always on edge but don't stop paying attention or .....

Overall: I love this ski! So playful and versatile, this skis does all everything well for my size and style. Bigger skiers who prefer power to finesse will reach its limits but the only condition I was not absolutely loving it was in the firm chop where it was good but not great. Everywhere else it just inspired confidence and wanted be skied playfully. If you are an Pro Legend/Squad/XXL lover, stay away. The Ravyn may also alienate sidecut haters but if you want a do-everything ski that does not need to be (but can be) driven hard to perform, check these out. Personally, the only thing I would have changed was make the twin tail a little lower and narrower (less sidecut) and maybe add a few more cm of length but I'm splitting hairs here.

Letter grade: A-

[fouldsys]

thanks for that. i have been looking for a good review on these for a while. are they heavy? looking to grab a pair of these to put my dukes on although i was concerned about weight for touring.

[BigLineSeeker]

My wife has put 3 days on her 174cm S6s mounted with small Barons and loves them. She finds them very easy to pivot and carve but does feel they are a bit heavy. I think this is because she is coming from a set of 165cm PRs with P12s. She said the weight is not noticeable on the hill, just on the chairlift.

[smmokan]

I ski the 185's most days, and I wouldn't say they're heavy- average weight for the size of the ski. I previously skied the older Gotamas (183cm) and like the Steezes much more. They're a blast in just about everything except wind-crust and super thick pow.

[phattypowpow]

My wife has put 3 days on her 174cm S6s mounted with small Barons and loves them. She finds them very easy to pivot and carve but does feel they are a bit heavy. I think this is because she is coming from a set of 165cm PRs with P12s. She said the weight is not noticeable on the hill, just on the chairlift.

Coming from a PR, the S6 are heavier but I wouldn't call them heavy skis. I think around 9.5 lbs for the 186 which is pretty average, if not slighly light, for a ski of that size.

The S6 can be driven by medium sized guys like me (150-175 ish) and still perform, unlike the PR. 20 mm wider, too. I like soft skis in general but the PR was a mushy noodle that flexed like stick of gum and freaked out when the going got tough (speed, chop, etc) when I tried it. Of course, a 225 lb dude might have a similar description of the S6.

All is relative but the Ravyn/S6 is by no means a heavy ski unless you're looking for an ultralight setup. If you're putting Dukes on them (4 lbs heavier than a Dynafit!), then you shouldn't worry about an extra 0.5-1.0 lbs of ski.

[locknload]

Agree with your take, P3. I had these out yesterday in near, waist deep at the Bird. I liked the ski but the mount was way too forward (demo skis). I would move them way back as you suggest. Still...they were nice in the soft snow and butter up and over everything...including the cut-up POW later in the day. They weren't nearly as confidence inspiring on harder snow as my Gotamas and they felt lighter and less substantial than a Volkl ski. They also did feel quite short. I'm not quite sure where this ski would fit in my quiver. I ride the Gotama as my everyday ride and still trying to dial in a super big ski for fat days (have a Praxis RX). Its a nice ride and a solid offering from Rossi--in terms of them getting back into the freeride market--but its not a ski that totally wows me in any way.

[phattypowpow]

For anyone but a jibber, the mount point is WAY too far forward. I'm somewhat old school in my tastes but, even at -5cm, I could see going further back, maybe even to -10cm. At -5, the ski still carves effortlessly and the tail never washes out or feels short. It's been a money setup for me this season but I think I would hate it mounted on any of Rossi's lines. Short tip + long tail + soft snow = upright/back seat.

[locknload]

So true. I felt like I had to be backseat most of the day to keep the tips up..it made the day a bit tougher than it needed to be. The standard mount is easily 5 or 6 cm forward of where my Gots are mounted (boot center line). I'm sure, like you said, they do much better way further back. I'm actually even more intrigued by the S7s....they seem to be generating the most buzz out of this year's Rossi offerings.

[phattypowpow]

I also have the 09/10 Rossi S7 and it's a fantastic ski. I mounted on the -2cm line and would not consider moving it forward, although back a bit more might be even better. The 188 skis very short and I can't imagine going on or in front of the 0 line but that's just me.

The S6 and S7 are a great two-ski quiver for the lifts. The S7 absolutely kills it in anything soft. You can't sink the tip, the tail never gets hooked up on anything, and you can just motor across the top of anything. When things are firmer, though, floating over the top is not ideal and the S6 does a nice job (when mounted back) of blasting/slithering and it rails on the groomers and hard pack (which the S7 does not).

They're both really versatile so you're rarely going to feel like you chose the wrong ski for the day but they're completely different beasts. After skiing the S7, I'm getting addicted to the loose tail in soft snow. Rocker gets all the attention nowadays when talking about powder skis but I think the pintail should get just as much credit for changing how we ski powder and funk.

[cbrpaul]

I agree with your comment on the S6 "popability". They are a riot in the soft chop. I rode a demo pair at Snowbird, and it seemed like there were 2 boot sole midpoint lines, a center and a rear. I had it moved so I was 1 cm rearward of the rear line. That worked pretty well. The Dynastart Huge Troubles are just as fun, and maybe a bit better at blasting through stuff, and need to be mounted rearward as well. I didn't get a chance to move the bindings back on the HTs. On the line is too far forward for me - no tip float. (I'm 6'2, 220)

[duffski]

i've been skiing the 185 ravyns all year, about 30 days at resort, 20 days backcountry. i have barons mounted on the center line. i weigh 200lbs. they have been great in all conditions except the boilerplate but i can just cowboy that shit and they stay super stable. it would take a hurricane to knock me down in most any conditions. i just recently got back from a 5 day tour in the wallowas in oregon doing anywhere from 3000'-5000' vert each day. i would have to admit that this setup is way to heavy for that kind of touring. but they were sweet on the ski down where some of the lighter weight rando and tele boys were struggling. in the pow they just slay and landing big airs is so easy. so i would say a great setup for resort/sidecountry and short tours when yoyoing your fav session area but leave them at home for the big tours. i'm looking for a 90-100mm lightweight ski w/ dynafit bindings for that.

[locknload]

Ok...great stuff guys. P3...I think the S7 really sounds great. Now...I'd really like to see how that compares to some of the other big rockered skis like the Hellbent, Kuro etc. I think what I'm really looking for is a super rockered, fat ski. I do agree with you that the pintail gets lost in all the hype and that might really push that S7 over the top. I also believe the Llasa Pow has a pintail as well. I'm going to poke around to see what's selling cheap here at the end of the season.

[Sinfield]

thanks for that. i have been looking for a good review on these for a while. are they heavy? looking to grab a pair of these to put my dukes on although i was concerned about weight for touring.

With PX12s my dad's weighed in at 13.5lbs. on our bathroom scale. For reference, my sugar daddies with barons came in a pound lighter.

I haven't gotten to ski them yet, but my dad loves them, and he didn't really like my 188 S7s. I think if you are looking for a ski with a little more "traditional" shape that is still plenty playful in the soft stuff, and can crank on firmer, the S6/Ravyns are going to be great skis.

That said, I have to disagree with the comment above about the S7 not being good on groomers. If you know how to hold an edge/ crank a turn, they can absolutely crank the shit out of a GS turn on a groomer....you just have to have some finesse to keep them in the groove.

[shasti]

I dont know if this kind of input has any usefulness on this thread or not but I think this ski is not enough for a heavier guy. I skied them the other day on a long tour out of Rogers pass. It was my second time on the ski. Altogether I strongly dislike them. They were waaaayy hooky in the tips, unstable at speed, and just unpredictable. i am sure that given 10 more days on them I would find their sweet spot but so far I can see no reason I would want to. That being said, if you are trying to jib and just play around, I am sure they are pretty much perfect. I like to ski downhill, and for that they are not ideal ( not that one is better than the other they are simply different things to do one the mountain). Anyways, I am a big dude and I like to push my skis and I pretty much ski skis that are way different than these (explosivs, goliaths) so I'm probably giving them a poor review by comparison. However I do own coombas so its not that i hate soft skis, maybe the combo of soft ski with tons of sidecut is what kills them for me.

[Ira]

I dont know if this kind of input has any usefulness on this thread or not but I think this ski is not enough for a heavier guy. I skied them the other day on a long tour out of Rogers pass. It was my second time on the ski. Altogether I strongly dislike them. They were waaaayy hooky in the tips, unstable at speed, and just unpredictable. i am sure that given 10 more days on them I would find their sweet spot but so far I can see no reason I would want to. That being said, if you are trying to jib and just play around, I am sure they are pretty much perfect. I like to ski downhill, and for that they are not ideal ( not that one is better than the other they are simply different things to do one the mountain). Anyways, I am a big dude and I like to push my skis and I pretty much ski skis that are way different than these (explosivs, goliaths) so I'm probably giving them a poor review by comparison. However I do own coombas so its not that i hate soft skis, maybe the combo of soft ski with tons of sidecut is what kills them for me.

I ski these on NTN tele Bindings so I am not on fixed heel like many here.

Two BIG questions here: where is your boot mounted and what tune do you have? I am 6'4" and 230# geared up and I have no problem on these skis.

They are not for straightlining big cols, but they are fine at speed for me. They are a lot stiffer than Coombas, so I would not call them a soft ski. they are not a Bsquad though...

YMMV

Ira

[phattypowpow]

Again, I really think it's the mount point that ruins this ski for many. Being a heavier fellow is going to exacerbate the problems created with a too forward mount namely tip dive, hookiness, and unpredictability in the funk and crud.

I would be curious to hear from anyone who has a terrible experience on these skis after they've mounted them 5-10cm behind the 0 line.

After years of remounting my skis multiple times trying to find the right spot (always back for me), I've realized that the eyeball method ("looks good right here") is much more effective for me than unquestionably following the lines drawn on the ski by who knows who.

I'm not saying the mount lines are wrong for everyone but you can't trust the manufacturers to know what's going to work best for you. Trust your instincts! One look at the S6 and I knew that I would hate it anywhere near the Rossi lines. Aside from that, it's been a great ski for me - med flex, damp, and buttery smooth in most conditions.

[sf]

phattypowpow; -5 works out for you?
Mounted mine at -1 cm with NTNs after advise from Ira (thanx), but I've been skiing them in the rear position, in other words at -2,5 cm, which works out nicely.
I think I would have mounted them at -2\-2,5 if I were to do it again, but that would mainly be to open up a few more possibilities for adjusting them. As they are now I'll never adjust them forward.

The Ravyns have been my quiver of one this season, and compared to Ants they don't dive, and compared to BC Navis the are much more stable but also more forgiving.

Recommended

[phattypowpow]

phattypowpow; -5 works out for you?

It does. Honestly, I think I might like -7 or -8 even more. At -5, there is still plenty of tail and it never washes out. It's also still really easy to get the ski carving on edge.

I had my girlfriend's 174 S6s mounted at -4 and that seems pretty close to where her 170 BD Verdicts were mounted (on the line).

If the Phantom 108 has the same flex as the S6/Raven, I might have gone that route but it doesn't so I had to dejib-ify the S6 by moving the mount to make it perform more like a freeride ski.

[bio-smear]

I mounted my S6's at -2cm with BD01's and they've been a great ski. They float well and do a decent job putting down chopped up pow. I can't say I'm terribly fond of them in real crud or warbly hardpack, but on a soft and chopped up day they're super fun. It's my main touring ski too. I'm so over stiff-flexing skis, and I feel the S6/Rayvn is solidly medium in flex. It's not soft by any means. I'm 34 yo, 6'1" 195lb 18 year veteran intermediate, like long walks on the beach, drinking espresso, and der poopenhausen.

[123ski]

I mounted mine at +5 because I like to land backwards..but I pretty much agree with this entire review. Really fun in deep pow, pretty good in chopped pow, not very good for charging through hard crud.

[El Chupacabra]

I'm so over stiff-flexing skis

Pussy.

Actually, I'm past the "stiff as a board" type skis too -- too 1-dimensional. However, soft-to-medium tips, plus tip rocker, plus stiff under foot, plus flattish tail, equals what I like.

I remember demo'ing the Steeze (same as S6/ Raven/ Ravyn) and thought they were OK. Nothing spectacular, but fun and playful. Probably too much sidecut (too much tail) for what I like though.

I still think the Explosiv is the best ski ever made though... and I don't put it in the "stiff as a board" category at all.

[Ira]

Chup,

You should check out the New Rossi SC97 if they have them to demo near you... I ran them in a tele demo this weekend and they brought back memories of my old Wizard Explosiv...

Nice...

Ira

ps. Sorry for thread drift...

[The Dark Side]

I'm about to mount some dukes on 08-09 Ravyns (185cm) and am curious about the best mount point. Everyone (on this thread) is recommending -2 to -10 cm, but I think they are on the S6. Does this apply to the Ravyn as well. I.E. Is the center boot line on the S6 and Ravyns in the same place?

I'd hate to have to move the dukes.

Thanks.

[TCK]

I'm about to mount some dukes on 08-09 Ravyns (185cm) and am curious about the best mount point. Everyone (on this thread) is recommending -2 to -10 cm, but I think they are on the S6. Does this apply to the Ravyn as well. I.E. Is the center boot line on the S6 and Ravyns in the same place?

I'd hate to have to move the dukes.

Thanks.

The farthest back line on the S6 is the same as the line on the Ravens. I have my S6s mounted at the back line and I love them. They are the most versatile ski out there. I'm 5'9" 155, for reference. Some bigger guys go back, but I think it's perfect at 0.