Check Out Our Shop
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 140

Thread: S7 Mounting Point?

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Three-O-Three
    Posts
    15,673
    I'm 5'11", 190 lbs and mounted mine on the "0" line... they feel perfect to me in all conditions.

    The only fault I can find so far (after about 10-12 days on them) is that the bases seem fairly soft to me. Other than that, I love 'em.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Vallee Teton
    Posts
    2,729
    Quote Originally Posted by smmokan View Post
    I'm 5'11", 190 lbs and mounted mine on the "0" line... they feel perfect to me in all conditions.

    The only fault I can find so far (after about 10-12 days on them) is that the bases seem fairly soft to me. Other than that, I love 'em.
    Which S7 are your referring to in your post, the 188 or the Super 7 (195)?
    Last edited by whorehey; 02-25-2010 at 03:16 PM. Reason: punctuation
    Aggressive in my own mind

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Three-O-Three
    Posts
    15,673

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    MST
    Posts
    681
    smmokan, any hucks on them yet? if so, do you feel like you have enought tail?

    would you be worried about them diving on you at +3?
    go upside down.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,821
    Quote Originally Posted by RonMexico View Post
    smmokan, any hucks on them yet? if so, do you feel like you have enought tail?

    would you be worried about them diving on you at +3?
    I have my 188s at 0 and there is definitely enough tail on landings, although the balance point when landing is farther forward than on traditional skis due to the smaller contact length and massive tip. I actually find it easier to land drops forward than on the tails anyway. These have a really reassuring feel in that, the more forward you go, the more the tips seem to react by popping to the surface.

    I've been wondering how going forward would affect the ski, but I like them in turns on the 0 line too much to spend too much time worrying.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    JH
    Posts
    468
    I wish I had seen the pdf file. 6', 175lbs, 188 S7s, lots of holes, ended up at +1.5, which is not recommended for anything. None the less, like the ski alot, zero tip dive in powder. Other interested people, go download the pdf file on one of the earlier pages.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    MST
    Posts
    681
    6'1 185 and really torn between 0 and +3.

    Looking for it to be a deep day stick and for good size hucks.

    Any reason they put lines at certain intervals? Does the ski flex funny if you mount it in between those points?

    I'm thinking that +1.5 is the logical compromise since I'm trying to decide to between 0 and +3.
    go upside down.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Three-O-Three
    Posts
    15,673
    Quote Originally Posted by RonMexico View Post
    smmokan, any hucks on them yet? if so, do you feel like you have enought tail?

    would you be worried about them diving on you at +3?
    No hucks for me, so I can't comment there.

    I don't think I'd want to go +3 on the mounting point. I prefer a little more tip and I find that the "0" line is pretty spot on for how I ski.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    MST
    Posts
    681
    Finally got out on the 188s. Decided to mount +1.5.

    Skied well, very chargeable. Found myself getting a little too far over the tips, but I think its just a matter of getting used to the rocker. Really like having the extra tail for stomping landings. If you strictly looking for float in powder I would go back a little more on the mount, but for what I want them to do, +1.5 seems pretty perfect.
    go upside down.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    81
    Just got my 188s. Anyone mount these for tele binders?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    CO/CA
    Posts
    71
    I'm 5'9 about 170. Have the 195 S7 Koopman. Mounted at 0. Feels great to me.
    Repoman

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2

    Where to mount my alpine bindings on the Mancini?

    Hi everyone, just got a pair of Rossignol Mancini's in the 176cm (same as S7 but different graffic and designed for telemarkers hence different mounting points). Very excited! Only problem is I can't ski them yet because I don't know where to mount my alpine bindings in relation to the tele mounting point as there's no markers! Any advice? I am a girl weighing in at about 58kg and 5'1'' (good things come in small packages) Mainly going to use them for powder and backcountry crud and the odd bit of steep spring snow/couloirs (though I have another pair for this) Snow conditions are pretty variable here in Chamonix so I need some versatility for steep spring snow/crud/tight turns etc. Any ideas? Thanks for your help! Fi

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Franklin Lakes, NJ
    Posts
    352
    You should check with some of the shops that have the S7 in 176cm and ask them if they can do you a favor and measure them for you. You should be able to get the exact distance for what the 0 line would be on the Koopman version (made and marked for alpine binders). From there you can just measure it out on your own pair and mount em up accordingly.

    Good Luck
    northern lights and southern comfort...

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    554
    Check earlier in this thread:

    Take these measurements from the tail of the ski toward the tip. Keep the measuring tape tight & straight.

    This is what the 0 mark should measure:
    195 length = 89.3 cm
    188 length = 86 cm
    176 length = 80.4 cm
    166 length = 78 cm

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2
    Thanks guys, good advice. Now where do I find a tape measure on a thursday night in chamonix? I've also been in to a ski shop where they're going to look fro some s7s in the 176. Fingers crossed I can get these bad boys mounted before the snow comes!!!

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    LCC
    Posts
    291
    I have just aquired a pair of Max Mancini S7 in 166 for the spancer. I need to mount alpine, but pretty sure the one line that is marked on the top sheet is for Tele. I have a feeling this is not where I want to mount alpine. Anyone know where the line measures from the tail on the alpine version of a 166? I'm petty sure alpine and tele ski are the same, just with different topsheets.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westminster
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Baggins View Post
    So here's the official word on mounting S7's:

    Take these measurements from the tail of the ski toward the tip. Keep the measuring tape tight & straight.

    This is what the 0 mark should measure:
    195 length = 89.3 cm
    188 length = 86 cm
    176 length = 80.4 cm
    166 length = 78 cm

    If you never ski switch, or only rarely, mount your binding back -2 cm's:
    195 length = 87.3 cm
    188 length = 84 cm
    176 length = 78.4 cm
    166 length = 76 cm

    If you ski switch in Powder, mount your binding forward +3:
    195 length = 92.3 cm
    188 length = 89 cm
    176 length = 83.4 cm
    166 length = 81 cm

    About mount line changes from year to year:
    The original prototype had a different mount line compared to the production version. So if any of you have a rep's demo, athlete's ski or were able to get a pre release hookup from Rossi (Jan 2008 to end of season) the 0 mark on that ski was at -2. For example:
    0 mark for prototype S7 in 188 length = 84 cm
    0 mark for production S7 in 188 length = 86 cm

    I've had a demo binding on 188 S7's from Jan 2008 to today. With a demo binding you can try both mounts and 8 times out of 10 people like 84 cm.

    Cheers
    I'm obviously new to the board, but I shred with a crew TGR forum nuts here in Colorado. Anyway, I can really appreciate all the information I have found on here, but its almost information overload! On that subject, I was wondering if this mounting chart you shared still holds true according to Rossi? I rarely ski switch....

    I recently bought the 188 Max Mancini S7 after demoing a pair that totally changed my life. I had them mounted with Marker Barons, but never though to specify the mounting point (durf) and I have never gone with anything other than the manufacturers recommended..... After they were mounted and after I jumped on the board, I measured and it looks like the tech mounted my Barons at 84cm (-2) straight pull from the tail. He mentioned that he mounted me more traditional (Sounds subjective) They ski great, but I am wondering if I have lost any agility or quickness by mounting in the powder rec instead of the freeride rec. I have been using them all over the resort and in the backcountry. I have 342mm boot sole length, 6' 3" 205lbs if its any conciliation. Should I have them re-mounted at 86cm for any reason? I am totally over analyzing, but I want to get the most out of these boards.

    Thanks in advance!

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,821
    Quote Originally Posted by mtndescents View Post
    I'm obviously new to the board, but I shred with a crew TGR forum nuts here in Colorado. Anyway, I can really appreciate all the information I have found on here, but its almost information overload! On that subject, I was wondering if this mounting chart you shared still holds true according to Rossi? I rarely ski switch....

    I recently bought the 188 Max Mancini S7 after demoing a pair that totally changed my life. I had them mounted with Marker Barons, but never though to specify the mounting point (durf) and I have never gone with anything other than the manufacturers recommended..... After they were mounted and after I jumped on the board, I measured and it looks like the tech mounted my Barons at 84cm (-2) straight pull from the tail. He mentioned that he mounted me more traditional (Sounds subjective) They ski great, but I am wondering if I have lost any agility or quickness by mounting in the powder rec instead of the freeride rec. I have been using them all over the resort and in the backcountry. I have 342mm boot sole length, 6' 3" 205lbs if its any conciliation. Should I have them re-mounted at 86cm for any reason? I am totally over analyzing, but I want to get the most out of these boards.

    Thanks in advance!
    If you're enjoying them, I'd say just ski.

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Jack Tone Road
    Posts
    12,735
    I'm at +2 and wish I had gone 0. I've stuffed it over the bars a couple times and that's not cool- really can't remember the last time that happened. The skis are also less than confidence-inspiring in open terrain and when pointed through consolidated snow.

    Still super fun but I'm going to bite the bullet and re-drill at 0. 5'9", 180, pretty good skier although probably more physically strong than technically skilled.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    78
    Adding nothing of any value that hasn't been said before, but I have my 188's mounted at zero and I can't imagine wanting to change them. I don't ski switch unless I'm being silly, do some hucks, and have no problem with tip dive.

  21. #121
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    straight out the nickel & dime
    Posts
    1,208
    My Super 7's are mounted at zero, and they rock.
    imz-design
    industrial design • new product development
    http://www.imz-design.com/

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mt Baker
    Posts
    356
    Got mine at minus -1 on my 188's and I wouldn't change a thing. If I was wanting something more jibby, I might move forward 3 but I've got other boards for those times. The intentions of these were to punch a line speed, be stable but quick to change lanes. I couldn't be happier. I use them surprisingly more than I thought I would. Doesn't matter what the conditions, they rip.

  23. #123
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westminster
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the quick replies and useful input. It sounds as if the ski is designed to perform well in most conditions from 0 to -2. Obviously, if you intend to use them in the park or ride/land switch in pow a lot the +3 and +6 are there for such reasons.

    As some of you have noted.... I am skiing these a lot more than I thought I would. This ski has become my quiver and made my other boards obsolete.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Lost
    Posts
    328
    Demoed 195's for a few days this week at Snowbird. Snow was variable and mostly sucked balls. At -2 was closest to a GS race mount, 0 would annoy me, and the +5 mark scares the shit out of me.

    That said, I'm getting a pair and will be drilling at -2 (or maybe -1.5).

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    6
    just got my 188 (coopman). Have it on 0 marking (which i measured is 84cm from tail). Almost feels to easy to turn. Anyway snow suxs atm (wet) and will give it a few more days - not used to so little tip in front). but feel id like to mount at -2. Feels like the tails were hooking up in the mank (it was almost raining).

    also compared them to my touring setup - 181cm K2 coombacks - and they are about the same length yet the boot centre on coombacks is about 5cm back. I really like the feel of having lots of ski infront of me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •