Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594

    REVIEW: 186 Rossi Sickle

    Me:
    5'7", ~160 pounds, skiing about 24 years.

    Skis I've owned and liked:
    186 Race room Legend Pro, 186 ON3P Vicik, 191 ON3P Wren, 181 Coomba (non-rockered), 186 Spatula

    Skis I've skied a few times and liked:
    185 Bonafide, 189 Obsethed, 189 Maestro

    Skis I didn't like:
    186 S3, 178 Wailer 105, (it pains me to say it, but) 186 Billy Goat

    I should begin by saying that it was largely the review on Blister that sold me on the ski. If you haven't read it, you really should since they surely do a better job than I will...

    http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...ignol-s6-186cm

    They flex medium-ish in tip and tail, and feel quite stiff to me under foot. The first day I skied this I really liked the ski a lot, and a friend I ski with told me it's the fastest he's seen me ski. I ski pretty fast, so that's saying something. That day was cut short by a quality crash that tore my Achilles tendon and I didn't get back on skis until last week, and I've since put 3 more days on the ski in conditions ranging from tracked powder, breakable crust, crud in various forms, soft groomers, firm groomers, moguls and trees.

    The only place I've found them not great was breakable crust. They hooked up a but more than I would like. I'm not sure if I can think of a ski I've tried before that would handle this better, other than Spatulas. The gentle continuous rocker profile is so loose and fun in any other condition. Think about sliding the tails out for a speed check and they do it.

    In powder (maybe 14" or so) the float was great and slow to medium speeds... very smooth feeling, making large or short radius turns with ease and fluidity... so fun! I haven't yet had them in an open powder field and very high speeds. They ride over crud instead of plowing through, but are very stable and smooth.

    The thing that has really been blowing me away with these skis is their firm snow performance. They don't initiate a turn intuitively at first (probably because I'm used to driving the tips and that's not how I ski these), but it did not take long at all to find the sweet spot and they really rail turns! The flex is substantial enough to roll smoothly over terrain irregularities, but the wood core allows them to pop off features as well if you load up the tips first... which is surprising for a full reverse camber profile. They are also very quick edge-to-edge, and excellent in moguls and very tight trees, which puts this right in the "do everything" category, and why I tend to agree with the Blister review calling this "the most versatile ski ever".

    Honestly, these are so good in every condition I've had them in that I'm almost certain I'm going to sell my previous go-to low-snow ski, a 178cm Dynastar 8800 with PX12's. The Sickles with demo Griffons actually weight exactly the same amount as the smaller and narrower 8800's with PX12, and the Sickles actually carve better at 110mm under foot than the 88mm under foot Dynastars... pretty amazing!

    I've leaving the mount point discussion to the end because it's a bit of a topic unto itself. With the Griffon demos on the ski I've played around with mounting points, and while I've seen all the discussions on whether or not you can notice a 1cm (or more or less) difference in the mount point, and I'm here to tell you that I've noticed up to 1/2cm difference in the mount point... easily.

    The ski has mount lines called "0" (which I interpret as a free-style/jib mount) and a "-2" (which I interpret as a more traditional mount). I started at the -2 line and they felt very good. They still seem to have a lot more tail than I was used to so I tried moving the ski back 1/2cm, 1 cm, and 1.5cm. At 1.5 cm back of the -2 line, the ski is night and day different than at the -2 line. That far back, the tips were hooky and over-engaged. At my mount point they are very well balanced for my style. Basically I moved them back, and kept moving them forward in small increments until that feeling went away and left it there. I ended up at about -0.5cm from the "-2" line. For me, this ski doesn't like to be driven hard from the tip, but likes a centered stance and possibly even driven from the heel (not back seat, but centre-weighted and driven from the heel). There it feels super stable and still very agile, and still carves like a dream.

    Others may disagree, but I'm really starting to think that while some skis are more susceptible than others to small changes, all skis can benefit from this kind of fine-tuning in mount point, and I personally intend to mount adjustable bindings on all my future skis so I can spend some time and find that spot. Your mileage may vary, but I've convinced myself of this unequivocally.

    Bottom line: I really love this ski!
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    1,586
    Fully agree with you on mount point. Nice review.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Le Lavancher pour le weekend
    Posts
    3,343
    Maybe you should slow down a bit
    'waxman is correct, and so far with 40+ days of tasting them there is no way my tongue can tell the difference between wood, and plastic made to taste like wood...but i'm a weirdo and lick my gear...' -kidwoo

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    Quote Originally Posted by ulty_guy View Post
    Maybe you should slow down a bit
    Where's the fun in that?

    In all seriousness, I have slowed down a bit since the Achilles, but not too much.
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    113
    Nice review. Were you able to move your bindings to 0? If so, how did they compare? Skied mine most of last year and found myself taking my everyday ski (Slicer) out less and less. Really impressed with the groomer performance. Mine are mounted at 0 and I do get a bit of tip dive, not sure if that's just inevitable with my weight (180lb) or if moving mount back would help...
    Will there ever be a boy born who can swim faster than a shark?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    I didn't go up to 0 as that looked VERY center mounted. Maybe I'll give it a try, but tip dive would be a worry for me.
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pyongyang
    Posts
    678
    I've played around on this ski a bit as well, and like it a lot. Its very underrated imho, and a steal if you can find a set of leftovers. I'm 6'2 195 and I would buy a pair if it came longer. I understand its a jibby type ski, but since I spend more time going forward, and less backward, it skis short for me. So I don't know if its the length, or the ski, but the downside is it gets nervous at higher speeds.
    Last edited by Kim Jong-un; 11-27-2012 at 09:40 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    961
    I blacked out after reading that blister review and just woke up to an email saying that I bought a pair of these.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by JaytaeMoney View Post
    I blacked out after reading that blister review and just woke up to an email saying that I bought a pair of these.
    There's probably worse things you could wake up to...
    Will there ever be a boy born who can swim faster than a shark?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Jong-un View Post
    I've played around on this ski a bit as well, and like it a lot. Its very underrated imho, and a steal if you can find a set of leftovers. I'm 6'2 195 and I would buy a pair if it came longer. I understand its a jibby type ski, but since I spend more time going forward, and less backward, it skis short for me. So I don't know if its the length, or the ski, but the downside is it gets nervous at higher speeds.
    I agree it skis short. I don't ski backwards either, but I'm having fun exploring a more playful skiing style on these.
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    Quote Originally Posted by JaytaeMoney View Post
    I blacked out after reading that blister review and just woke up to an email saying that I bought a pair of these.
    Wicked! I wonder if that explanation would work in my wife if I end up with another pair of skis...
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,194
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorty_J View Post
    Wicked! I wonder if that explanation would work in my wife if I end up with another pair of skis...
    Interesting slip of the tongue there.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    ^^^ Holy hell... I wonder what must be in the back of my mind!
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    237
    Anybody else played around on the mount or have an opinion either way. I mounted mine up at +2 after reading the blister review, which ultimately sold me on these. I really love the skis ability to handle everything well but they do feel short. Before I put a bunch of holes in my skis I want to get some more input.

    Basically, I am considering mounting them at the zero line or -2 line (or somewhere in between). I'd rather keep them further forward if I can do so without them feeling too short. Will I notice much of a difference going back to the zero line?
    Quote Originally Posted by bite me View Post
    Texas is better than Hell? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with Hell, but it would be hard to imagine it being worse than Texas.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    290
    W2T-
    I picked some up midwinter and did more research than I shoulda on mount points.
    Ended up using the - (minus) mark on the -2 for boot center and couldn't be happier.
    Used only as a directional ski- not a flippy/spinny kinda skier.
    That would be for Tahoe type snow conditions, i mean WHEN it snows at Tahoe.
    "if you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind..."

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    961
    I mounted mine +1 and loved them there. I bought these because of the blister review as well, I decided on +1 after reading the comments section of the article.

    FYI I like a more forward mount on all of my newer school skis, and +2 seemed too far forward even for me. I wouldn't hesitate to move back if it's bugging you.

    Changing the subject, I got mine before last season started and skied the absolute shit out of them. Definitely my favorite ski I have owned simply for the versatility but sadly since I used them so much they are completely trashed (blown edge and an unfixable core shot that literally split the base wood like it was hit with a hatchet). I don't know how I'm going to replace them, since Rossi first neutered the 12-13 model and then discontinued the ski all together. I can't find them online anywhere which is not surprising for a 2 year old under appreciated ski.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    237
    I haven't heard much about the new ones but with the shorter length I can't imagine I would enjoy it as much. Lots of people are talking about the praxis MVP which has similar dimensions. They have a couple skis I've been looking at.

    Rossi is completely overhauling their line for next year with nothing similar. They Are making a longer Sir Francis Bacon next year that's supposed to be a little stiffer. Good luck finding a worthy replacement.
    Quote Originally Posted by bite me View Post
    Texas is better than Hell? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with Hell, but it would be hard to imagine it being worse than Texas.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,552
    I got mine at -2, but I'm old school. No flippy spinny. Love them there, quick edge to edge, well balanced in crude, rail groomers.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,594
    I'm either at the -2 line, or maybe half a centimeter in front of that (demo bindings). I kept moving them back until they felt different/hooky, then moved them 0.5 cm forward.

    The change when they got hooky was a night and day difference to me.

    I'm starting to like more forward mounts, but I even feel like the -2 line is pretty forward on these.



    Sent from my SGH-I717D using TGR Forums
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1
    I used a 11-12 model extensively last year in the resort, sidecountry, and some east-coast backcountry. I was told the tail had a manufacturing defect and would still be covered under warranty. I realize that the model is no longer made, but what do you think would be a reasonable replacement for them? The sickles were originally marketed as a park/freestyle ski, but I really don't want to receive one of these as replacements.

    What do people think is an 'equivalent' ski from this year's Rossi line? Should I just stick with these skis, which I know I like, or should I try to get a brand new pair?

Posting Permissions

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