Help me identify these skis please! (Advice about them welcome, too!)

January 19, 2015 11:02 AM

1.) Can someone identify these Rossignol race skis for me? 2.) And tell me if they are a good deal for $100? 3.) And give me some advice on buying used skis as an almost-expert skier whose parents always handled equipment?

Hi!

1.) Can someone identify the actual model of these skis for me?
Top
Bottom
Bindings
If you can identify the bindings too, that would be fantastic!

2.) Are these a good deal for $100?

They would probably be used less than ten times (the next 2 and a half seasons). My original plan, after I sold my skis, was to just rent, because I don't get to ski that frequently. I rented this weekend, however, and the skis were so light and bendy that I felt out of control. The pass I most frequently use doesn't have demos, unfortunately.

3.) Could I get some advice on buying used skis? My parents always dealt with this.

I'm 5', 115 pounds, and a hair below expert level (can and do ski double blacks, but with hesitation). The skis will be used on everything, mostly in the Cascades.

My big concern is that race skis will be really different from regular skis, especially since these are slightly longer (155 cm) than my old ones were (which by the end of skiing on them, were probably a bit too short). Is this a valid concern?

I don't know if I've ever skied on race skis. My old skis were Atomic Race 6 Jr. Skis (they looked exactly like this), but I don't know if those were actual race skis, or just juniors skis with RACE!!! on them to make kids feel cool. Internet research is giving conflicted answers. I'm pretty sure they were 152 cm. I remember them being much heavier than my brother's rentals.

posted by obviousresistance to Sports, Hobbies, & Recreation (8 answers total)

Best answer: They're the '07 version of the Rossignol Radical RS World Cup SL Race Skis (catalog info from Rossi here [pdf]). They came with integrated bindings (see below in the catalog) so they wouldn't be something sold separately, they'd be bundled with the skis.

They look to be in pretty good condition, but you might want to ask how much they've been ridden and whether they've had any base or edge repairs done (I can't tell from the photos). Also check and see what size boot was used with them. The bindings may need to be re-mounted. To make sure the DIN settings are appropriate for your riding abilities you'll want to take them to a ski shop to have them adjusted and that should be factored into the cost.

My experience with Rossignol (which ended right around the time these skis came out) was that their consumer "race" skis are really more aimed at the average consumer, but calling them "race" was a way to promote stiffness and camber. The Atomics you used to ski were probably a bit wider in the tips (junior skis of all types are often this way) and much softer than these adult Rossi skis. The actual difference between 152 junior skis and 155 adult skis will be the stiffness and energy in and out of turns. I wouldn't be worried about the length difference.

Sounds like they'd be a good fit with your abilities and I'd say $100 if you already have boots is a good price.
posted by komlord at 11:21 AM on January 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

I agree with what Komlord says. $100 seems like a decent price. Not sure those are the skis you want for what you're skiing. You might feel more confident on the double blacks if you tried out a ski that was less aggressive. Try to find something with a little bit of nose rocker and less camber. Don't be afraid to go slightly bigger, because a ski with rocker will ski shorter that a race ski like that and will turn and pivot more easily. If you had said you were racing or really like to rip turns, I'd say get those skis. But you sound like you're just cruising around having fun. I'd try out a different skis. Maybe find a good rental shop that rents out a variety of skis and try out a few different shapes and camber profiles. Just my two cents.
posted by trbrts at 12:27 PM on January 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

The bindings look like 2005ish at least ,(and on preview seconding komlord) but the ski bases themselves look in pretty good condition(no huge obvious gouges). I'd get them for $100. They might be a bit stiffer than what you are used too... but should still be plenty fun. A shop should be able to set the bindings/din to your level for relatively cheap ($20?ish). At the very least you'll probably breakeven on rentals this year.
posted by larthegreat at 12:29 PM on January 19, 2015

Call a ski shop and confirm that those bindings are on their list of equipment that they are allowed to work on. (Older bindings that fall outside of manufacturer's recommended duration of wear can be a pain this way.) Otherwise, you'll have to find someone who does work but doesn't indemnify it (a pain), or replace the bindings, or be really good at your own maintenance.
posted by deludingmyself at 1:27 PM on January 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

There's a lot of good advice in the previous comments. I'm with @trbrts, I wonder if these are the right skis for the kind of skiing you like to do. In the Northwest, double-black runs are generally not groomed runs, but "race" skis strike me as skis tuned for groomers. Are they the right skis for the terrain you like and the terrain you're going to be on in a year or two? If you're enjoying black runs and starting to try double black runs, and your skill continues to improve, you're going to be spending a lot of time off piste, I'd guess, and might want a different ski?

I don't know too much about lengths of current models, but a few thoughts: length is useful for higher speed, but speed is not my thing. I prefer turns and maneuverability in tight situations. I went from 190cm "all-terrain" shaped skis to stiffer 176cm's and am SUPER happy.

All that said, $100 is very little money for lightly used skis + bindings. I paid much more for my former rental-demos. (Fairly high-end Atomics at the time.)
posted by mvd at 4:57 PM on January 19, 2015

Response by poster: Thank you everyone so far! I'm pretty torn on this. I tend to be a fairly aggressive skier and felt really uncomfortable on the rentals when bombing groomers, but on the other hand I did appreciate the lighter skis on moguls. I do like carving and going fast, though, but as much fun as that is I also want to get better. Most of my friends prefer groomed runs so I tend to stay on those, and I feel like maybe on the rougher stuff I will wish I had a lighter/shorter ski, but it's not like it will prevent me from doing it, right?

I'm slightly leaning towards getting them right now, since in a few years I should be living closer to good skiing and it will be more worth it (and I should have the income) to invest in a good pair then. I also feel like it shouldn't be that hard to sell these if I don't like them, but I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong.
posted by obviousresistance at 9:22 PM on January 19, 2015

All previous comments seem spot-on to me. While I don't know that specific ski, it looks like a great deal. As in, you would be extremely hard-pressed to find skis that nice for a lower price.

Definitely a front-end ski for carving in firm or icy groomers. Great for going fast, and turning, turning, turning.

For that price, there is not much reason to not try them. You don't have to keep them as your only skis. If you hate them, you should be able to get back what you paid for them, and you'll be saving money you can spend on a pair of mogul or powder skis.
posted by Opposite George at 7:46 AM on January 20, 2015

All I can say as a lady who is I think a similar level of skiier is that for several years I had some quasi-race level boots and it was terrible - way too stiff, super uncomfortable, generally miserable. I have some pretty stiff Atomic skis now and they are right on the edge of what I can handle (by which I mean super fun) - I would not want anything stiffer or faster. On the other hand, if $100 is not too much of an outlay for you, I'd rather ski on those Rossi's than regular rentals...
posted by annie o at 6:27 AM on January 22, 2015