Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 61
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Because they are rossignol / dynastar?

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    222
    I understand the slagging large manufacturers, and I am not a fan of the old OG S7 or the new "S" series... they do what they promise well, yet there is a certain something missing. Maybe it is just that they are kinda boring and easy and everyone has them.
    These Black OPs are something different.
    I wonder how much these puppies weigh... They do feel like they have metal in them.
    Also... This must mean some murdered out Look P18s are in the pipeline.
    What do you mean why do I have duct tape on my skis!?! It improves edge hold, increases pop, adds durability, and most importantly, boosts horsepower by like 30%... what? your skis don't have horsepower?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    8530' MST/200' EST
    Posts
    2,638
    I mounted mine up at -2cm back last Thursday. Skied Alta Friday, Snowbird Saturday and have some preliminary impressions.
    Me: 6ft, 215(winter weight came on a bit strong in the fall)
    Agressive skiier
    Conditions were generally pow-ish, cream cheese, and the cirque at the bird.
    Skis I currently own:
    '13 RMU Professor prototype(Stiffer/More camber than production) 186
    '15 RMU North Shore proto (Metal) 186
    '15 RMU Apostle 186 Every day
    I did some work for RMU and worked for discounted skis, I like the skis and the Prof is really similar to the black ops.

    The Black Ops is a very fun ski. Took me maybe 1 run to get used to, and it definitely demands a centered/new school stance when you are in anything other than groomers. So far, I really like these skis, they have a ton of pop, really good edge hold and torsional rigidity. More to come after more snow/terrain opens.
    "If we can't bring the mountain to the party, let's bring the PARTY to the MOUNTAIN!"

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,354
    Quote Originally Posted by Phall View Post
    I mounted mine up at -2cm back last Thursday. Skied Alta Friday, Snowbird Saturday and have some preliminary impressions.
    Me: 6ft, 215(winter weight came on a bit strong in the fall)
    Agressive skiier
    Conditions were generally pow-ish, cream cheese, and the cirque at the bird.
    Skis I currently own:
    '13 RMU Professor prototype(Stiffer/More camber than production) 186
    '15 RMU North Shore proto (Metal) 186
    '15 RMU Apostle 186 Every day
    I did some work for RMU and worked for discounted skis, I like the skis and the Prof is really similar to the black ops.

    The Black Ops is a very fun ski. Took me maybe 1 run to get used to, and it definitely demands a centered/new school stance when you are in anything other than groomers. So far, I really like these skis, they have a ton of pop, really good edge hold and torsional rigidity. More to come after more snow/terrain opens.
    Any more updates? I picked up a pair too, but am worried they might be shorter than what I"m looking for. Deciding if i should mount them or not as they've got quite a bit more tail rocker than I thought they would and I'm worried they'll ski short.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Golden B.C.
    Posts
    311
    Quick review - me 5'9, 140lbs, 33, aggressive. Mounted a -2cm. This ski is the best ski hill soft snow ski I've ever used. Incredibly damp, powerful, but easy to smear at a moments notice. Rocker profile makes it impossible to bury a tip it seems. Stomps drops confidently. Really I can't find a fault with this ski for the way I ski. If you like a snappy, flat tail ski, you will hate it. This thing is made to drift through stuff, smash through it, and not give any feed back about it.

    Skis (in the pow ski catagory) I think this is better than that I've owned or skied
    Candide 4.0
    Line Prophet 130
    Blizzard Bodacious
    Bluehouse Maestro
    Salomon rocker1

    Just my opinion, but if you like fat floaty, powerful but easy to control twin tips but with no speed limit, you might like these.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    8530' MST/200' EST
    Posts
    2,638
    Quote Originally Posted by samthaman View Post
    Any more updates? I picked up a pair too, but am worried they might be shorter than what I"m looking for. Deciding if i should mount them or not as they've got quite a bit more tail rocker than I thought they would and I'm worried they'll ski short.
    Sorry Sam, just saw this. did you get them mounted up? They do ski a bit short, I would like this ski in a 195.
    "If we can't bring the mountain to the party, let's bring the PARTY to the MOUNTAIN!"

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    575
    Anybody have a pair of these they want to get rid of?

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,354
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Anybody have a pair of these they want to get rid of?
    Yeah, me. Never mounted. Pm me if you're interested

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    575
    Pm'd

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Jackson Hole, WY
    Posts
    61
    Bunch of peeps here in JH ski them and absolutely love them. Wish I had more info or could say I've tried them.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    243
    Would love to try these. I'm kinda in between sizes though so don't know what I would do. Wish they made them in a ~182

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    8530' MST/200' EST
    Posts
    2,638
    You'd be fine on the 86 especially if you mount them more towards the recommended mount.
    "If we can't bring the mountain to the party, let's bring the PARTY to the MOUNTAIN!"

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Golden B.C.
    Posts
    311
    SillyGoat - no metal in the BO. 4.1mm drill bit not requested on top sheet. 2500g per ski.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    8530' MST/200' EST
    Posts
    2,638
    I'm selling my pair! $400+ship for skis and look p18's mounted at ~296. One season old, no coreshots.
    "If we can't bring the mountain to the party, let's bring the PARTY to the MOUNTAIN!"

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    363
    Any more TGR feedback on these? The Blister reviewer calling it his “favorite inbounds pow ski of all time” has me intrigued. A heavy, progressively mounted, super damp bulldozer of a ski sounds like the metal Katana/Rossi Sickle combo I’ve always been looking for. Perfect for those deep, soft chop inbounds days in the Wasatch...

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    575
    It's a really great ski, it's heavy and likes to stay on the ground, great on hardback and not too bad in bumps. Awesome in chop and fresh snow.

    I mounted mine -5 from center and the ski responded well to a forward stance at that position. I'm 90% sure that it doesn't have metal in it though, it's just heavy.

    For me the issue was that they are just too short, a true length measurement of 184 is just not enough for me in a pow ski, but if the length sounds good to you I would give them a go, they are really fun.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    363
    Thanks pretzel. How tall/heavy are you? At 5’9” and 150lbs, a true length of 184cm doesn’t sound too bad as a pow ski length for me.

    Lastly, how easy are they to pivot? I usually ride skis with flat camber or subtle reverse camber, so the amount of positive underfoot camber on the Ops 118 makes wonder if they retain the same loose pivoty feel of the Sickle/Devastator/Katana?

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    867
    The squad 7 had a shit ton of camber yet pivoted really easily, so Iím hoping to hear itís the same here

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    49
    Not super pivoty, but maneuverable enough for a ski thats so damn stable in chop/variable at speed. Don't have metal feel, just very very heavy wood core. I'm at -5 as well and like them there, factory line was too centered for me. I own Candide 3.0s as well and the black ops are basically a better, stronger, stompier, more stable, wider version of them. Super super solid on landings. It takes a pretty special ski to make me love straightlining down a groomer covered in soft chop but these had me launching off everything in sight and grinning ear to ear.

    Edit: Really nothing at all similar between these and squad 7 except the rossi name

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Thanks pretzel. How tall/heavy are you? At 5’9” and 150lbs, a true length of 184cm doesn’t sound too bad as a pow ski length for me.

    Lastly, how easy are they to pivot? I usually ride skis with flat camber or subtle reverse camber, so the amount of positive underfoot camber on the Ops 118 makes wonder if they retain the same loose pivoty feel of the Sickle/Devastator/Katana?
    I'm 6,1 165lbs, but I also like big skis.

    They are not as pivoty as a full reverse camber ski, but they are not super locked in either if you're concerned.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    145
    Own em, ride em... They are heavy and if you don't mind a bit of weight then you'll be rewarded. In-bounds pow ski cuz of that imo. Couple years ago on my first pair my legs cramped so bad at the bottom of the run after hoofin it skating and poling on a backcountry ridgeline. Heavy wind hammered but smooth on top. Was not skinning just boot packin for like 25-30 minutes. But they rip the front side and can be driven hell should be driven and I dig em...won't be my only pow ski although I love these most of the time. Even with a few inches of fresh over a hard surface you will be stoked on these.
    Attached Images Attached Images    
    Last edited by Crystal Skier; 02-02-2019 at 10:20 AM.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by SUPERIOR View Post
    Hand fucked a pair today. They is nice!

    Stiff underfoot and more flexible toward tip and tail. Blister just reviewed the ski, but only had preliminary info.

    IMO - Would be great Pow ski for someone who doesn't weigh 195 pounds like I do. Why not make a 192 or the like? 186 is a bit limiting...
    you don't need these in a 192...seriously fuck they would weigh 28-2900gr ++ . They are stable as hell in a 186 on edge. Anybody who has owned these in a 186 and its just not enough ski well you got somethin goinn not sure what. Its not like they are directional they just have a lot of dampening and substance.
    Last edited by Crystal Skier; 02-02-2019 at 10:08 AM.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Crystal Skier View Post
    you don't need these in a 192...seriously fuck they would way 28-2900gr and they are stable as hell in a 186 on edge. Anybody who has owned these in a 186 and its just not enough ski well you got somethin goinn not sure what. Its not like they are directional they just have a lot of dampening and substance.
    I skied the 186 and it felt tiny, but my quiver is almost all between 194 and 196 with a few outliers at 188 (weight weeny touring ski) and 203 (Shiro). So yeah, Iím not going to look at or consider the Black Ops again until Rossi makes it in an adult length.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    49
    Stop eating donuts

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    56
    I have a set at 176 cm i'd part with. just out of the package and skied 2 runs/ not my style. mounted for look pivots at 315 bsl on the dot. $300 for local pick up in the Denver area.

Posting Permissions

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