• Sidewinder by Arc'teryx
      • Ratings:
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Fit
        Tight
        Baggy
      • Waterproofing
        Wet
        Dry
      • Breathability
        Pourous
        Airtight
      • Warmth
        Cold
        Warm
      Reviewed on Jun 15, 2014 @ 5:17 PM Jackets 2012
      Comments:

      Specs... Materials: N80p-X face fabric, Gore Tex Pro lining, Fully Taped seams. Features: Underarm vents, Powder skirt, Helmet compatable hood, RECCO, Waterproof zippers. Pockets: 1 sleeve, 1 chest, 2 hand, 1 internal chest zip, 1 internal w/mesh. Weight: 690g (M) Me... Used where: Chamonix, Verbier, Interior BC, Sar Mountains Macedonia, Scotland. Days Used: 40 Days Used by the guy who had it before me: 4 This has been my go to jacket for the past two seasons now for the simple reason this its a bombproof jacket. Rain or snow, this thing fulfills Gore Tex's guarantee it keeps you dry; well most of the time. There were two occasion, where I was skiing in freezing rain and I did get a bit damp, when I took the jacket off in the car at the end of the day, the watermarks on my fleece indicated the water came in through the front zip and the underarm venting zips. My one plea after this experience was for beefier zippers, my sidewinder was one of the older sidewinders (2011/2012 I believe although I'm not 100% sure) and the zips were a little weedy in comparison to zips on my Narrona Trollveggen and on my other pieces of technical outerwear. However since then Arc'teryx have beefed up the zips, and from looking at newer sidewinders in shops they certainly seem more substantial; clearly I wasn't the only one having problems with the old zips. Fabric-wise, the jacket ticks all the boxes. 3L Gore Tex Pro Shell performs as one would expect and the N80p-X face fabric is absolutely bombproof, there's been more than one occasion where I thought certainly put a rip in it only to find it left nothing more than a scratch of scuff. After about 44 days off use and two different owners the DWR has started to wear off, and in places the fabric is wetting out, however this is nothing a little proper outerwear wash and reproof love can't take care of. One of the things I love about this jacket is the no frills design. The 2 f*ck off chest pockets allow you to store maps, skins or enough chocolate to bring forward the onset of type II diabetes by 3 years. And the snow skirt does an acceptable job, but in reality I'd still reccomend bibs as a better solution for keeping snow out of unwanted places. I managed to get this jacket on a killer deal 120USD with 4 days use, and before purchasing this I would never have dreamt of paying the full price of 480GBP (815USD). However after spending two solid seasons in it and seeing the updates Arc'teryx have brought to the table, I would be quite prepared to hand over such a vast sum of currency for a new one when the time comes to replace my current one. This should be at the top of any backcountry skiers list when looking around for a new jacket, just be prepared to remortgage your house to get one. If you've got any questions, feel free to pm me -Joey

    • Infamous by Atomic
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Flex
        Soft
        Stiff
      • Camber
        Cambered
        Rockered
      • Pop
        No Pop
        Poppy
      • Stability
        Jittery
        Stable
      Reviewed on Jun 13, 2014 @ 6:00 PM Skis 2013
      Comments:

      Dimensions: 117-85-117 @176 Profile - Rocker/Camber/Rocker Sidecut: Variable Boots: Atomic Waymaker 110 Bindings: FFG 12 Demo, DIN 10 Mount: Center Test Locations: XScape (Fridge) Days: Just the one Me: 6'0", 185lbs/85kg Demo'd these for a day earlier this season at a fridge here in the UK, so this is really just a first look. When I first picked these up, the first thing I noticed was how light they felt in the hand. They also felt similarly light on the feet, most likely helped by the step down sidewall construction which puts a cap wall construction infront of and behind the binding. So light hand flexing told of a soft flex tip and tail, which gets slightly stiffer underfoot. On snow the softer flex coupled with the tip and tail rocker allowed for almost effortless butters. However, the flex was not so soft as to buckle when landing jumps, this wasn't something I initially expected after initial hand flexing. The camber underfoot also allowed for some pop. I was also able to lean into the ski when skiing slightly faster and making bigger turns (well as much as I could in a fridge). If I had to describe the Infamous in one word it would be 'fun', they really did turn some very mediocre features into a tonne of fun. I was skiing 176s and for what I was doing (small jumps and jibs) they were fine for me at 6'0" and 185lbs, however if I were to be hitting larger jumps and other features as well hoping to get the most out of the skis all mountainwise, I would go for the 181. Thanks to the skis characteristics, this is a very approachable ski for most levels of skiers, and whilst it is primarily a park ski, it'll be able to get you to and from the park in relative comfort. Although it must be remembered that the Infamous is a price point ski, and so adage of cheap/light/durable, pick two is very revelant when discussing the pros and cons of the Infamous. Whilst I was not able to make much of a judgement on durability myself, I must mention that there seems to be a number of comments here of NS questions the ski's durability, even tip and tail rivets added by Atomic for 2013 seemed to do little to reduce the number of delam complaints.

    • F12 Tour by Marker
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Reliability
        Sketchy
        Trustworthy
      Reviewed on Jun 12, 2014 @ 5:54 PM Bindings 2013
      Comments:

      About Me: Height - 6'0" Weight - 185lbs/85kg/13 stone 3 Mounted on: 186 Faction Agent 100s (Mounted at Reccomended) Rode DIN at: 11/12 Days Skied: ~25 (80% BC) Locations Skied: Chamonix, Verbier and Scotland Binding Specs: DIN range: 4-12 Toe Piece: Triple Pivot Light Heel Piece: Hollow Linkage Weight: Size L - 2080g, Size S - 2040g Stand Height: 36mm Climing Aids - 7deg. and 13deg. Max Adjustment: Size L - 305 to 365 Size S - 265 to 325 I picked these up at the begining of the season and mounted them on a pair of Faction Agent 100s at recomended. I had intended to use this set up as a lighter complement to my other touring set up of Caylors w/Barons. In an ideal world I would have thrown a pair of tech bindings on the Agents, but at the time I simply didn't have the funds to do so, so I went for the F12 instead. I actually bought the F12s as a bit of an 'experiment', since I had broken a couple of pairs of Barons in the past, so I thought I'd see if the weight saving led to more durability issues. And infact I found the F12s to be comparatively more durable, something I was really unexpecting, and to be honest am still trying to undestand why. The worst I managed to do in 25 days was snap a climbing aid off on a steep icy side hill, but this would have happened on any marker AT binding, and it was easy enough to relace, so it couldn't really be considered a huge issue. The frame of the Tour F12 is the same basic shape as the Duke of Baron, however a number of tweaks have made these significantly lighter than their higher DIN relatives. Marker's hollow frame technology goes a long way to shave weight. Yes, if you're skiiing on F12s, the whole frame of your binding is hollow and gas injected; don't worry this prospect made me a little uneasy at first too. However after ~25 days of skiing in some fairly hairy places my mind has been put to rest. It is also worth noting that the F12 frame has lasted me longer than a Baron frame has; I will say it again, I still find the perplexing. In terms of how the binding skied, I found the performance to be more or less comparable to that of a Duke or a Baron. The stack height and mounting pattern of all three bindings are the same, so ski feel is fairly consistent across all three. For those who have not skied a frame AT binder before, if you're coming onto frames on a pair of skis you previously had alpine bindings on there's a good chance you will feel a slight performance drop off. However if you mounting onto a new unskied pair of skis, other possibly feeling a tad higher on than you do on your other rigs, you shouldn't notice much else. The main competitor to the F12 is the Fritschi Freeride Pro. Having skied both, I would chose F12s over Freeride Pros any day. Not only are F12s a touch lighter for the uphill, but they also boast a lower stack height and wider mount pattern, allowing for better ski feel and power transmission. The only instances in my opinion where Freeride Pros win out over the F12s, is at the pivot point which makes for a more comfortable skining action and the fact you can switch from walk to ski and back without removing your skis. However the benefits of the F12s far outweigh its shortcomings, and need to remove your ski to switch modes isn't too much of an inconvenience for your regular ski tourer. In short the F12 is suitable for lighter weight guys who want to charge inbounds and out, or guys of any size who spend most of their time in the backcountry and are looking for a lighter weight frame AT binding. Like with all touring bindings there are compromises, however I beleive that the tour F12 best bridges the gap between tech bindings and heavier frame bindings like dukes, guardians etc. So whether you're without tech boots, or just too cheap to shell out for tech bindings (like me) then the F12s might just be for you. Hope this helps, if you've got any questions or comments then just leave them at the bottom or pm me.

    • Rocker2 122 by Salomon
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Flex
        Soft
        Stiff
      • Camber
        Cambered
        Rockered
      • Pop
        No Pop
        Poppy
      • Stability
        Jittery
        Stable
      Reviewed on Feb 18, 2014 @ 8:35 AM Skis 2013
      Comments:

      Wrote this back in 2012 about the then new 2013 184 Salomon Rocker2 122. As far as I'm aware the Rocker2 122 remains unchanged for the 2014 season. Unfortunately I only spent a day on them, so this is more of a first look, hence why there are also no comments on durability. I am 5'10", 80kgs, 15 years old and a fairly aggressive skier I like skiing fast but I also enjoy skiing mellower gradient pow with a playful approach. I currently ride ON3P Caylors mounted right at recommended. The first day I managed to slap these on it was the day after a night of heavy snow fall; it was a pow day perfect test conditions for a ski like this. Ski Specs: 142-122-132, 26m and 2420g @184. Profile, Rocker/Camber/Rocker. First impression were good, the skis felt fairly light in hand thanks to the honeycomb inserts tip and tail, as well as the absence of edges in the rockered sections tip and tail. With hand flexing they felt like a pretty solid medium flex. Let's start with what they're meant for, ripping around in the deep stuff. To be honest they were amazing they were so smooth and felt really surfy, the low rocker style really plained the snow nicely allowing me to make pivoty turns no problem at all. However for charging I would want something stiffer. Hitting cliffs and drops was fun, the flex was solid enough, so you didn't wash out on landings even if you were a little back seat. As the pow started getting used up and it was time to start crud busting. The softer flex meant they weren't as great at driving through the piles of crud and bouncing over patched of crud but they were alright, for this I would have preferred something a little stiffer. As I headed down the mountain and started hitting some moguls, the R2s didn't cope that well. But this isn't really a huge issue as I would rather be in pow than moguls and no powder ski is phenomenal in moguls anyway. Although skis like these are designed for ripping around in the deep stuff groomer performance is always an good asset for a powder ski to have as you do want to be able to make it back to the lift in style. I could lay down some nice carve turns of varying lengths on the corduroy but they were a little slow edge to edge, remember however this is a 122 waisted ski. Chatter was minimal, even after straightling some stepper runs on the mountain. On icey patches their grip was good and confidence inspiring for a ski with such copious amounts of rocker and a wide waist. In conclusion these skis are for the connoisseur, somebody who isn't going to be going mach 10, more finessing and working what the next feature for them to jib with style before riding off laying down a nice tapestry of turns. The softer flex made this ski intuitive and forgiving, butters were easy and the swing weight was pretty god for a ski of this size. They're not perfect, I would have preferred a stiffer flex throughout. But they really are a fun ski, and if you were to pull the trigger on these to use as your twin rockered pow ski, you wouldn't be disappointed. JVD

    • Seth Morrison Pro Model Glove by Hestra
      • Ratings:
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Fit
        Tight
        Baggy
      • Waterproofing
        Wet
        Dry
      • Breathability
        Pourous
        Airtight
      • Warmth
        Cold
        Warm
      Reviewed on Feb 17, 2014 @ 11:16 AM Gloves 2012
      Comments:

      You'll see a lot of hype on here regarding the Seth Mos. A lot of this hype is indeed justified, they are a solid glove. However after putting close to 100 days on mine, I think I can provide some kind of review on the glove's performance. I've used the glove inbounds and out in BC, Europe and back home here in Scotland. When I got the Seths I was coming off a pair of fabric shell Dakine gloves. So when I first put on a pair of the Seth Mos I instantly noticed the warmth and improved waterproofing. I have from day one noticed a slight drop off in dexterity with the Seth Mos compared to other gloves, due mostly to the protection on the knuckles. Whilst the waterproofing is pretty optimal, it does require intermittent attention with leather balm, if you can keep on top of this then the waterproofing stays pretty prime. Unfortunately whilst they are good at keeping water out, they can get pretty sweaty inside and once they get like this, I've found they tend to stay like this for the rest of the day. Although at times they feel too warm, I've often found them to not be warm enough in the depths of winter. As soon as it gets below about -6/-7c (20F) I found the Seth Mos to simply not be up to the task, and if there is precipitation the tips of the fingers on the outside will start to freeze up. Whilst the leather of the glove (goat on the palm and cow hide on the back of the hide) stays intact for a long period of time, I've found on my pair after about 85 days of use the stitching has started to detiriorate and so, even with careful attention to leather balming I'm now finding myself fairly damp whenever there's precipitation. As a resuly they now sit at the bottom of my pack as a back up pair. Just one final thing to watch out for with these is that where the liner of the glove is stitched only to the wrist of the glove, if you take you hand out of the glove too quickly or without an inner glove on then you can pull the glove's liner out of place and get it tangled. Whilst these gloves certainly are superior to a great number of other gloves on the market, I wouldn't go so far as to say they are the best. Perhaps if you live somewhere mild and dry and don't do a huge amount of hiking, then these might just be the glove for you.

    • Axial 2 120 by Rossignol
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Reliability
        Sketchy
        Trustworthy
      Reviewed on Feb 16, 2014 @ 5:29 PM Bindings 2012
      Comments:

      Recently I have noticed quite a few threads on NS asking for opinions on 12 din bindings, and today I am writing a review on one of my favorite 12 din binding on the market the Rossignol Axial2 120. I skied the Axial2s for 65 days in BC last season, and here is the somewhat ordered collection of my thoughts on the binding. I chose to write up a review on the Axials because I felt it would fit many skiers needs, as it says in "the answer to what binding" sticky, created by NS user DHogg - "12 Din Bindings: I would usually recommend a 12 din binding for people between 145lbs and 170/175lbs or so depending on ability. For most people on here, a 12 din binding would be perfect. If you’re a more cautious skier and don’t go fast, take impact ect you should really go down to a 10 din or below binder. Likewise if your aggressive skier you can go up, but be realistic. Don’t get an 18 din binding because if makes you look cool. You won’t be thinking its cool when you’re getting knee surgery and can’t ski half the winter." So why buy the Axial2 120 over the other 12dins on the market? Just as a note to start off the Rossignol Axial2 120 is the same binding as the Look PX12, so when looking at your local ski shop don't get put off by the fact it's not fluro orange. The Axial2 series was created with the world cup in mind, so the saftey and performance of all bindings in the range is top quality. The heel piece on the Axial2 features the longest elastic travel on the marker (25mm). This not only allows the binding to have consistent/reliable release but also reduces prereleases, for me this sold the binding to me as I have had alot of problems with both my Jesters and Barons pre-releasing. The heel piece coupled with the Dual Action III toe piece, the same toe piece on the FKS140, gives great power transmission. I can vouch for this as I skied the Axails for about 65 days this season on my ON3P Caylors, and really liked how they drove the ski. I used these Bindings everywhere on the mountain except park, being on Caylors they spent alot of time floating around in deeper snow, and I never once had an issue with getting the ski on in deeper snow. I also paired up my Axails with a pair of BCA Alpine Trekkers (review coming soon if I feel there is need for one), and they didn't interface too well with the Axials due to the high Axail2/PX heel piece, the heel of my boot could never fully go down to the trekker platform. Just as a side note, if you are planning on using the BCA Alpine Trekkers, I wouldn't reccomend using them with Rossignol/Look bindings. Due to the high heel piece on the Axial 2/PX series, the boot heel isn't able to go down to the trekker platform and on the FKS/Pivot series the Trekker has trouble engaging the brake. The Axials have a din range of 3.5-12, so the would accomodate a wide range of skiers looking for a quality all mountain binding. The Axials are a little heavier than some other 12 din bindings on the market, nothing drastic though and they certainly didn't feel overly wieghty. I was prepared to sacrifice a bit of weight for the durability and performance of the Axials.

    • Couloir Glove by Mountain Equipment
      • Ratings:
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Fit
        Tight
        Baggy
      • Waterproofing
        Wet
        Dry
      • Breathability
        Pourous
        Airtight
      • Warmth
        Cold
        Warm
      Reviewed on Feb 15, 2014 @ 5:48 AM Gloves 2014
      Comments:

      Cowhide on the palms and digits provide durability where needed. GoreTex XCR insert provides ample breathability. Fibre pile on the top of the hand keeps you plenty warm, whilst the lower profile fleece is on the underside. This allows for warmth without inhibiting dexterity. My other Gloves are Hestra Seth Morrison Pro. So far my Couloirs have out performed my Seth Mos, the Couloirs felt warmer and have kept hands dry even when I've been skiing in the rain. Misc: Remember to balm the leather areas as you would with any leather glove. When choosing a size make sure the semi gauntlet interfaces with your jacket how you want it to. The overall fit of the glove feels fairly true to size. Updates to come if necessary!

    • STH 16 by Salomon
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Reliability
        Sketchy
        Trustworthy
      Reviewed on Oct 26, 2013 @ 6:43 PM Bindings 2012
      Comments:

      I was hoping to get more like 50 day on these before I wrote a review than the 25 or so days I've had on them so far. However due to the fact that for the 2013/2014 season, Salomon and Atomic will be releasing an updated STH16, I realized I should probably try and get a review of the current STH16s. As quite a lot of you guys might be looking to purchase them in the summer at the low clearance prices they'll be going for. To start, the STH16 is a 16 DIN binding, so I'm going to quote descriptors of a 16 DIN binding from "the Answer to what Binding" thread on NS created by user @DHogg -"14/15/16 Din Bindings: I would reccomend a 14/15/16 din binding generally only for people who are 175lbs+ as well as being a pretty aggressive skier. Basically if you're not rating yourself a level III skier and doing big jumps, cliff hucks, and skiing fast etc, you don't need it and you're better off saving your money." At this point it's worth noting that the Salomon STH16 is the same binding as the Atomic FFG16, the only difference is the colour and branding. This fact is being acknowledged next year with the release of the new STH16, both Salomon and Atomic are going to be selling the new STH16 with the same model name for both companies, - the STH2. Personal Details: Height - 6'0"/6'1" Weight - 185lbs, 85kg or 13 stone 3 Mounted on: 191 ON3P Wrenegade, this was going to be my inbounds/sidecountry charging setup Rode DIN at: 11/12 Days Skied: ~25 Locations Skied: Sar Mountains of Macedonia, Scotland and BC Interior Binding Specs: DIN range: 9-16 Toe Piece: Driver Heel Piece: STH Weight: 2322g (pair) Stand Height: 17.5mm Max Adjustment: 19mm (don't know who skiing a 16DIN would be changing their BSL by 19mm, but it's good to know, it's not like your feet are growing) Material: Steel Housing The current (2013) STH16 is based of the old Salomon binding design. However it replaces the metal toe and heel pieces present in some of Salomon's older designs such as the 916S. If you are looking for a full metal binding from Salomon then the STH16 Steel is the option for you, it's used by guys like Seth, and if you don't know who Seth is, then you probably don't need STH16 Steels. Whilst the STH16 has got a lot of plastic, I would argue this isn't a big issue, in my opinion it has metal in all the right places. The STH16 has a metal heel track and a full metal base plate. This is what you get by upgrading from the STH14 Driver to the STH16, the 14 features a plastic toe base, which isn't as rigid or hard wearing as the metal toe base of the STH16. I was using the STH16s to drive my Wrenegades, which are a pretty big ski. However the wide mounting pattern on the STH16s gave great power transmission. The STH16 also boasts the a lower stand height at 17.5mm compared to the Look Pivot18s and the Marker Jesters, at 20mm and 22mm respectively. Infact the only binding on the market which has a lower stand height than the STH16s is the Tyrollia Peak15TH and Peak18XTH which have a lower stand height by 0.5mm. The low stand height really gave great ski feel, there was a noticeable difference when skiing these coming off frame AT bindings with a stand height of 36mm. For me what really sold the STH16 to me was the toe piece. The Driver toe allows me adjust the toe to really fit the shape of my boot, thanks to the micro simultaneous wing adjustments, you adjust the wing height specific to your boot. This minimizes unwanted/unexpected prerelease, which in the past has been an issue for me with my Jesters. However due to the fact this is a manual process (unlike on the Salomon z toe which features automatic adjustment), the toe wings and height must be checked from time to time to make sure you've got them dialed. For next season Salomon will be replacing the STH heel piece with the Guardian heel piece, which users of both the STH and the Guardian have confirmed is a superior heel piece. Considering the changes to the design you guys should be able to snag some of the older STH16s at a great price, and if you've got the opportunity I would highly reccomend picking these up. Hope this helps and if you've got any comment just leave them in the comments section. JVD

    • Caylor by ON3P
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Flex
        Soft
        Stiff
      • Camber
        Cambered
        Rockered
      • Pop
        No Pop
        Poppy
      • Stability
        Jittery
        Stable
      Reviewed on Oct 20, 2013 @ 2:13 PM Skis 2011
      Comments:

      Dimensions: 148-120-140 Radius: 27.4m Boots: Lange Super Blasters (120 Flex) Bindings: Rossignol Axial2 120 & Marker Baron, DIN at 11 Mount: Reccomended (-3 from true center) Test Locations: Whistler, BC Interior, Sar Mountains Macedonia, Scotland Days: ~100 When I first came over to Canada for the 11-12 season, I managed to convince myself I needed a true powder ski. As before even despite my best efforts I would still spend more times skiing patchy Scottish hills rather than proper mountains, and so I never really had a need for a twin rockered 120 underfoot ski like the Caylor. Since I was only going to be spending a season in BC I wasn't willing to invest in more than one pair of deeper snow skis, and so I was looking for a versatile ski, that could jib and charge. Having now spent the best part of two seasons on this ski (writing this 9th of March 2013), I can honestly say I have skied this in pretty much all of the conditions you would be breaking this ski out for. Including some you really wouldn't normally take them out to ski on, I have even turned up to race training on these. I'm going to talk about deeper snow here, these really handle any snow conditions exceptionally. Interior of BC blower was incredible on these skis, I wouldn't say the medium stiff flex was in any way detrimental to the experience. The medium stiff flex is most appreciated however when you skiing less than desirable deeper snow conditions, such as rain soaked stuff and the generally heavier snow you get in a maritime climate. The Caylors really like to stomp as do I, despite the pretty 'heavy rockering' the flex is supportive enough for backseat landings. The flex is also forgiving on those less than perfect switch landings, and this is really appreciated. Out of the box Caylors feel fairly heavy, and no denying they are a beefy ski, well in excess of 2000+grams. However they area plenty nimble on you feet, and in the air the swing weight feels well balanced. They been taken on day tours at first with a ridiculous Trekker set up and then with some Barons, and for day tours they served me fine. Lugging a ridiculously heavy set up uphill for 'security when hucking those cliffs' is all part of the fun as a teenager on the skin track, so why deny myself that? The Caylors can make a whole variety of turns from long GS turns right through to tight trees, and if you ever are carrying too much speed through a section, the generous tail rocker will always be enough to scrub speed. If these were my primary pow ski and I was living somewhere 'out west', I wouldn't feel the need to go rush and buy a tree ski the Caylors are perfectly adequate in tight spaces. Whilst the Caylors can charge, if you're an out and out big mountain ripper, who never/rarely skis and lands switch or you're a guy looking for a chargy pow ski, I wouldn't point you in the direction of the Caylors, the twin rockered design and almost symmetrical dimensions don't help the chargers cause. If you're looking for more of a charger from ON3P, I'd look into the 193 Cease and Desist, 191 Billy Goat, 191 Wrenegade, depending on what your requirements are. In cut up snow and crud which you inevitably get after that epic pow day. In chopped up the larger tip on the 2010-2011 model can sometimes get deflected, however this has been combated by tip and tail taper on the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 models. On everyday groomers the ski feels pretty nice, there is some flapping from the rockered tips and tails, however the stiffer flex keeps this to a minimum. My main issue with the Caylors on piste, is on 'icey' groomers due to the flat nature of it's camber profile, and their short running length. However one shouldn't consider this at all in the pre-purchase decision process and these aren't conditions you would be breaking the Caylor out for. Maybe you'd encounter these on the way back to the lift after having just pillaged your secret spot, in which case the Caylors will do just fine, they wont carve like a GS ski, but the won't kill you either, which is more than you can say for quite a lot of other skis in the same category as the Caylor. So much so that I use these almost exclusively as my everyday ski now. These are an absolute bomber ski with incredible construction, I have one corshot from about 100 days of skiing, although I should have a lot more, many other skis would have been retired by now considering the amount of abuse the Caylors have been through. If you're looking for a deep day ski or even an everyday ski, you couldn't go wrong with the Caylors, they're an absolute blast and will serve you well.

    • S7 by Rossignol
      • Ratings:
      • Terrain
        Park
        Pow
      • Design
        Clean
        Busy
      • Durability
        Fragile
        Durable
      • Weight
        Light
        Heavy
      • Style
        Uncool
        Cool
      • Flex
        Soft
        Stiff
      • Camber
        Cambered
        Rockered
      • Pop
        No Pop
        Poppy
      • Stability
        Jittery
        Stable
      Reviewed on Feb 13, 2012 @ 4:30 PM Skis 2011
      Comments:

      Overall Overall these skis are an easy to use fun ski for the beginner/intermediate powder skier, they are not the quickest and on the 188s, I found I was wanting more ski ski (bear in mind I'm only 5'9"). They are responsive and pivoty (on groomers carving is a bit more work than with other powder skis), I think they would be a good tree-skiing sk (due to pivotyness), if you're looking to charge big lines go with the super7s Performance About Me/Summary: - 5'10", 80kgs, decent level powder skier, currently on 191 ON3P Caylors, wanting to try the S7s as I had heard so much about them. Tested them up at whistler, good range of condition bit of pow, bit crud,heavy, ice a good mixture for 'demoing' I got a chance to demo these today up at whistler. I managed to ski them in a got variety of conditions, powder,deep concrete, Crud,Slush,Groomers and Ice. In the powder they were great they were so responsive and easy to use, of sketchy situations was no trouble for the S7s and I had total confidence they would do what they wanted on my feet they felt light and manoeuvrable, however landing cliffs etc they didn't feel as stable as I would have wanted them to be. After a couple of powder runs I ran into some deeper snow that was heavy and a nightmare to ski, with the s7 no problem at all, again very confidence inspiring. Once I took theses out into the cut up crud these felt shakey at speed and didn't bust through it as well as I thought they would/should have and do not what ever you do take these anywhere near moguls. However in slushy snow they were no trouble at all and were an easy ride. On groomers there is a little bit of chatter but not a terrible amount, I didn't really feel like I could rail groomers carving was an issue on theses where as my ON3P caylors which are wider have a much better on piste ability. Overall these skis are an easy to use fun ski for the beginner/intermediate powder skier, they are not the quickest and on the 188s, I found I was wanting more ski ski (bear in mind I'm only 5'9"). THey are responsive and pivoty, I think they would be a good tree-skiing ski, if you're looking to charge big lines go with the super7s Durability Considering these have been up at whistler on demo since mid november they seemed to be holding up well, a little scuffing around the tip and tail, minimal chipping,and only 3 base scratches