Check Out Our Shop
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Rossignol S7 Sizing question

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5

    Rossignol S7 Sizing question

    Need help with which size S7 to go with. 178? or 188? I'm 5'6" 180lbs. 35 yrs old. Solid intermedite to moderately advanced skier. Typically ski tracked up poweder/crud. Not a whole lot of virgin powder but hoping to get into a lot more with this ski. I currently ski a Rossi Phantom SC80(170cm). Everyone says the S7 188's ski short. More like a 160. What do the 178's feel like? 150's? Conventional wisdom would say go with the 178's being that I'm only 5'6", but considering these are rockered, I don't know that conventional sizing applies. I want to be able to turn really well in the crud but still have enough width in the deeper powder. It just seems like a ski that is 6'2"(188cm) for someone 5'6" is a bit much, but again, if it REALLY ski's more like a 160 then maybe it is ok. Any help sorting this out would be appreciated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    107
    Those kind of threads get annoying. If you will really ski those in the powder, cut up, crud then you will definitely need the 188s. There is no problem at all skiing this kind of skis in their natural habitat. Though, if you plan on skiing the icy groomers as well you need a quiver.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banff
    Posts
    22,520
    188

    988766


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    entrapped
    Posts
    2,681
    188


    morecharactersmorecharactersmorecharacters
    No matter where you go, there you are. - BB

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5
    Ivan...then don't fucking read them. My apologies for annoying you, but I would kind of like to make sure that I'm not spending $1000+ on ski's and binding for the wrong size. 188's sound a bit long for someone who is 5'6". But everyone is saying they ski short so im leaning that way. The last time I checked the whole point of a forum was so people could bounce their ideas off of one another but because A-holes like you surf forums, people are to affraid to ask questioins for fear of asking a "dumb" question is the eyes of people who think they are experts such as yourself. Either be helpful and humble or shut the hell up!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    entrapped
    Posts
    2,681
    188

    FIGHTmorecharactersFIGHTmorecharactersFIGHT
    No matter where you go, there you are. - BB

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    967
    Quote Originally Posted by fultz1275 View Post
    Ivan...then don't fucking read them. My apologies for annoying you, but I would kind of like to make sure that I'm not spending $1000+ on ski's and binding for the wrong size. 188's sound a bit long for someone who is 5'6". But everyone is saying they ski short so im leaning that way. The last time I checked the whole point of a forum was so people could bounce their ideas off of one another but because A-holes like you surf forums, people are to affraid to ask questioins for fear of asking a "dumb" question is the eyes of people who think they are experts such as yourself. Either be helpful and humble or shut the hell up!
    How about you go fuck yourself... In stead of coming on here cunting up the forum with quesitons that have been asked a hundered times. Try seaching you douche... Or try this thing called DEMO. You got three responses that said 188, but cry like a little bitch because it wasn't presented in a fashion your delicate eyes could handle... Again, go fuck yourself. There are plent of people sub six foot that rip the shit out of skis 190+. With that said, there are plent of people who are taller than your midget ass that like shorter skis. It's called preference. And if you spend over a $1000 for these skis plus binding this time of year, you're a retard.

    And I would go with the 188......................................

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    2,986
    Quote Originally Posted by emr View Post
    How about you go fuck yourself... In stead of coming on here cunting up the forum with quesitons that have been asked a hundered times.
    What's wrong? Does it hurt when you pee again?

    Every time I think about going longer I break out my 188 Dynastar Bigs and after a few runs I realize that shorter is still better. All of my better stronger faster friends have gone shorter -- down to 165s in some cases. It has to do with spending a lot of time in the trees and no longer going mach speed. My daily skis are in the 174 - 180 range these days. I haven't tried the S7s but who cares if they "ski short" on the groomers.
    If you have a problem & think that someone else is going to solve it for you then you have two problems.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Slummit County Colorado/Minnesnowta
    Posts
    344
    I'm gonna say 178, maybe 188 but you are only 5'6'' and with skis now days top of your head and down to your nose is how I feel rockered/cambered skis should be now days. Most skiers in this forum tend to think you still need skis that are 6inches over your head as if the size of your junk was some how related to the size of ski you are on. The 178's are 110 underfoot as compared to 115 for the 188's. If you are on a 170 then 8more cm should be pretty good if you go with the 178 s7. And mount your binding's -1.5 to a -2.

    Colorado season clips 10-11, best season ever!
    https://vimeo.com/34420007

    G.N.A.R the movie, complete movie. Watch this!
    http://unofficialnetworks.com/gnar/

    Vail best day ever 18inches
    http://vimeo.com/19763959

    Shane McConkey is the shit! First chair?
    http://vimeo.com/4890512

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Ice Coast
    Posts
    945
    Quote Originally Posted by fultz1275 View Post
    ...The last time I checked the whole point of a forum was so people could bounce their ideas off of one another but because A-holes like you surf forums, people are to affraid to ask questioins for fear of asking a "dumb" question is the eyes of people who think they are experts such as yourself. Either be helpful and humble or shut the hell up!
    And the last time I checked, all that bouncing started with some self-education. Which includes searching. This is from Marshalolson's sticky at the top of this page: "1. it has been discussed almost assuredly before. so just search. its easy. GO HERE: http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=01...%3Agoe34wkkkv8 then enter what you need to know. if you find a thread with good info, bump it and keep it fresh. other people are probably wondering the same thing."

    Oh, sorry forgot you're too entitled to actually put in any effort. That's OK, we exist for your satisfaction...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    14,082
    Quote Originally Posted by emr View Post
    How about you go fuck yourself... In stead of coming on here cunting up the forum with quesitons that have been asked a hundered times. Try seaching you douche... Or try this thing called DEMO. You got three responses that said 188, but cry like a little bitch because it wasn't presented in a fashion your delicate eyes could handle... Again, go fuck yourself. There are plent of people sub six foot that rip the shit out of skis 190+. With that said, there are plent of people who are taller than your midget ass that like shorter skis. It's called preference. And if you spend over a $1000 for these skis plus binding this time of year, you're a retard.

    And I would go with the 188......................................
    This.


    Even if you are only 5'6", you weigh 180. Assuming you aren't fat, you've got to be pretty strong. If that's the case, you won't have any trouble with the 188 (unless your skills are weak). If that's the case, I'd still get the 188 and work at stepping up the game. Go demo the 188. If it's too much ski, then size down.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Slummit County Colorado/Minnesnowta
    Posts
    344
    Beyond, I do have to say the search feature in the forum is a bit weak as in it gives horrible results.
    I agree with demoing the 188 but going with a ski that is to big isin't stepping up the game, it's called making a mistake or buyers remorse.
    Wow, EMR must be having a bad day?

    Colorado season clips 10-11, best season ever!
    https://vimeo.com/34420007

    G.N.A.R the movie, complete movie. Watch this!
    http://unofficialnetworks.com/gnar/

    Vail best day ever 18inches
    http://vimeo.com/19763959

    Shane McConkey is the shit! First chair?
    http://vimeo.com/4890512

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,885
    188 at 180 lbs. I felt the 188s were the right length for me at 175 lbs, but just weren't the right skis for me.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    449
    I just picked up some 176s for my 120 pound sister...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Front Ranger
    Posts
    903
    I am 170 lbs and 5'11 and ride the 188s. I really love the way the ride in deeper pow but feel they could benefit from a slight beefing up in the crud (which is why i am looking into 188 super s7's).

    If i were you i would pick up a pair of 188 super s7's and see how they treat you.

    Good luck

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by fultz1275 View Post
    I'm 5'6" 180lbs. 35 yrs old. Solid intermedite to moderately advanced skier. I currently ski a Rossi Phantom SC80(170cm).
    Did no one read this part of the OP? A 188 S7 is going to be way more ski than this guy has probably ever tried to handle.

    My inclination is 178, but you should demo first to be sure.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    430
    Downsizing from the correct size (188) to make up for lack of skills is bad advice and the wrong move. If he can't handle the ski in the right size then it's the wrong ski for him. Simple.

    I betcha most of the forumtards recommending anything other than the 188 S7 have never even ridden the ski. The S7 skis short EVERYWHERE.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    da hood
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by wwwllw View Post
    I just picked up some 176s for my 120 pound sister...
    ^^^ useless without pictures!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild4umlauts View Post
    Downsizing from the correct size (188) to make up for lack of skills is bad advice and the wrong move. If he can't handle the ski in the right size then it's the wrong ski for him. Simple.

    I betcha most of the forumtards recommending anything other than the 188 S7 have never even ridden the ski. The S7 skis short EVERYWHERE.
    If that's the case, then I'd agree the s7 is entirely inappropriate for him, and question why so many here would recommend it to a self-proclaimed "solid intermedite to moderately advanced skier."



    But really, "the right size?" Every ski has one true and proper size for each possible height/weight combo and anything else is wrong? I'm not sure I accept that premise at face value.

    Many (most) skis have a shorter turning radius at shorter lengths. Does no one ever downsize because they prefer a shorter turning radius? Is it not possible that two skiers of similar height/weight might prefer different sizes of the same ski? Don't we put beginners & intermediates on shorter skis based entirely on ability?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5
    Everyone, thanks for the input. I really do appreciate the info. To the comments about "search" myself, that's exactly what I've been doing but thanks anyway.

    EMR's...go back to jacking off to the JCpenny's catalog because you can't land a real chick because you're to much of a punk trying to act like a badass on some forum. You're real tough behind a keyboard. I think I'll take your advise and get the 188's and shove them straight up your ass and then we'll see who is crying like a little bitch you prick!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Front Ranger
    Posts
    903
    188s ftw! When is the purchase happening and what bindings you throwing on?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    hamsterland
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by fultz1275 View Post
    EMR's...go back to jacking off to the JCpenny's catalog because you can't land a real chick because you're to much of a punk trying to act like a badass on some forum. You're real tough behind a keyboard.
    Quote Originally Posted by fultz1275 View Post
    I think I'll take your advise and get the 188's and shove them straight up your ass and then we'll see who is crying like a little bitch you prick!
    well now, this is just a smidge hypocritical, doncha think?

    get the 178s. you'll be skiing the same ski as me, a 5'3'', 120lb female "moderately advanced" skier. why are we helping this guy?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tahoe/SF
    Posts
    698
    For people recommending the 178 for this guy they really need to get a clue.

    Listen, a powder ski or a larger ski for that matter is going to take some time getting used too. I don't think you should immediately be able to ski a ski after 1 lap. It should take a couple of laps if not a couple of days. I will tell you as someone who is similar in weight but 6'3" that the 188 is WAY to small for me. It wheelies out of shit, I'm getting the super 7 and am pretty set on it.

    Where do you ski and how many days a year do you get in?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    4,854
    Quote Originally Posted by ikkin View Post
    well now, this is just a smidge hypocritical, doncha think?

    get the 178s. you'll be skiing the same ski as me, a 5'3'', 120lb female "moderately advanced" skier. why are we helping this guy?
    Not sure why either but what ever. He has 60lbs on you which makes a big difference in this ski since its uber soft.

    Quote Originally Posted by SkiNebraski View Post
    For people recommending the 178 for this guy they really need to get a clue.
    Agreed, especially since its a powder ski. I bet Ikkin is the only person to ski this ski that is recommending a 178. And she may be right if the OP is a 180lb gaper... I am going to pretend that he is not.... even though he is a little portly.

    My 5'4" 120lb girl friend rips 178's. Personally I skied the 188 for 2 months last season and never once felt they were to long, I am 5'7" 145 lbs.

    Snow Dog, while yes this ski skis chort on the groomers it turns like a short ski in the powder as well. Why comment about a ski you haven't skied? Not trying to start shit... just saying.

    This ski doesn't measure 188 cm by the way, more like 185 cm.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    15,874
    Aren't 188cm S7s the girls model?

Posting Permissions

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