• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

The B...B...Bad Ski Purchase Thread.

dean_spirito

Freestyle Ski Coach
Skier
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Posts
628
Location
Breckenridge, CO
I acquired a pair of Rossignol S3s as the result of a warranty debacle. I agreed to them over the phone. I took them out for the first time on what should have been the most perfect day ever; Taos with 100% open on a bluebird day with 6" of blower on top of soft. Let's just say that the S3s almost (and I really must emphasize almost) ruined my day. They weren't a terrible ski. They were just a terrible ski for me. The whole day was spent dreaming about how much more fun I would be having on other skis I had in my quiver at the time. Needless to say, I sold them the very next day.
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
I have wondered why Rossignol stopped making the S3 as it was the most popular ski at the demo centre where I work, for both customers and staff. However it was not as popular among heavier skiers. I found it too soft and too turny for my tastes.
 

dean_spirito

Freestyle Ski Coach
Skier
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Posts
628
Location
Breckenridge, CO
I have wondered why Rossignol stopped making the S3 as it was the most popular ski at the demo centre where I work, for both customers and staff. However it was not as popular among heavier skiers. I found it too soft and too turny for my tastes.

At the time, I described the S3s as "the ski that tries to do everything, but doesn't really do anything." I found them to be lifeless and flimsy; way too soft for me. The rocker did very little to create float in powder, and at the same time, compromised their performance on hardpack. I suspect Rossignol was trying to incorporate many of the successes of the S7 into a narrower ski that could function as a one ski quiver. While the S3 may have been popular among intermediates and some jibbers, a lot of us out there felt that Rossignol completely missed the mark.
 

David Chaus

Beyond Help
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
5,529
Location
Stanwood, WA
Isn't the Sin7 basically the S3? I preferred the S3 to the S7, handled mixed conditions better for me. The S7 was just floundering like a fish out of water when I needed some edge grip, and was way too soft. Being narrower, the S3 had more torsional strength and was more stable. But that's just me, demoing on a crud/mixed conditions day.

Haven't really regretted any purchases. Well, OK, maybe my Kazama Ski Fever's from 1977 or '78 at 170cm. Too short, but what did I know, I thought it'd make me a good bump skier. My next pair was 1980 Dynastar Freestyle in 190cm and those lasted quite a while for me.
 

slowrider

Trencher
Skier
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Posts
4,534
Rossi Phantoms 105? But hey they looked nice. Donated to Adaptive Ski Dept.
 

Kent

Getting on the lift
Skier
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
129
Location
Spokane, Washington
Sooner or later I have regretted every pair of skis I have purchased including skis I demoed before buying and including skis I have loved. I eventually regret the purchase in the sense that I have found the ski's limits, or, more accurately, I have found my limits on those particular skis. I then am no longer satisfied with those skis and begin coveting "better" skis. I love the skis I now use as my daily driver - Stöckli Stormrider 88s - and yet ironically after my first day on them, I regretted my purchase. It wasn't that they didn't perform beautifully right from the get go; it was because I thought I wouldn't have much use for them!
 

oldschoolskier

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Posts
4,225
Location
Ontario Canada
One ski, and I didn't purchase it. The Elan GRAD......It was ok to ski, just ok. Everything else including the older skiers that replaced it were better by far. Everything else to date that I've purchased has been race skis and so far not a bad choice among them.

So I'll knock on wood and hope the trend continues.
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,788
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
The skis were a B...B...Bad ski purchase, so you gave them to the Adaptive Ski Dept? Not meant as a personal attack, but that sounds mean.

With today's skis there really are no bad skis, just skis that you or I may not like but someone else might love. Also with adaptive skiing, once a sit ski apparatus is attached to the ski, the ski might have a whole different feel to it.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
Isn't the Sin7 basically the S3? I preferred the S3 to the S7, handled mixed conditions better for me. The S7 was just floundering like a fish out of water when I needed some edge grip, and was way too soft. Being narrower, the S3 had more torsional strength and was more stable. But that's just me, demoing on a crud/mixed conditions day.

Haven't really regretted any purchases. Well, OK, maybe my Kazama Ski Fever's from 1977 or '78 at 170cm. Too short, but what did I know, I thought it'd make me a good bump skier. My next pair was 1980 Dynastar Freestyle in 190cm and those lasted quite a while for me.
The Sin 7 was a replacement for the S7 in the line, it does everything as badly as the S3 did but does it better. I tried the new Sin7 HD, hoping that the bew Basalt contruction would help it....not the case. I had to go to the 188 just not to scare myself going down the hill. I will say the back half of the ski is good, the front half needs a ton of work yet. This is where K2 made a better 7 collection with the new Pinnacle 88/95/105.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Lorenzzo

Lorenzzo

Be The Snow
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,984
Location
UT
K2 EPX 7.9 Carbon was probably the worst ski I've been on this century. Got them really cheap, hardly used, maybe once. Skied them for an hour and never again. They were complete noodles, zero torsional strength. Did they have a foam core? It could be that the core was dust due to age, not actual wear.. Anyway, tossed them in the trash with only about 3-4 laps on them.

It says something about how bad a ski was if you're remembering its awfulness in July.
 

David Chaus

Beyond Help
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
5,529
Location
Stanwood, WA
The Sin 7 was a replacement for the S7 in the line, it does everything as badly as the S3 did but does it better. I tried the new Sin7 HD, hoping that the bew Basalt contruction would help it....not the case. I had to go to the 188 just not to scare myself going down the hill. I will say the back half of the ski is good, the front half needs a ton of work yet. This is where K2 made a better 7 collection with the new Pinnacle 88/95/105.
I'm confused, I thought the Sin7 was 98mm wide, same as the S3 was, and the Soul 7 was the replacement for the S7. Not debating the degree of awfulness.
 

slowrider

Trencher
Skier
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Posts
4,534
The skis were a B...B...Bad ski purchase, so you gave them to the Adaptive Ski Dept? Not meant as a personal attack, but that sounds mean.
Have you been around adaptive skiing. Skied ok just planky. Perfect for sit skis.
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,215
Location
Boston Suburbs
Rossi Phantoms 105? But hey they looked nice. Donated to Adaptive Ski Dept.
I think I may have demoed those for half a run once. Put them on edge, no bending occurred, and I fell right over. Skidded directly back to the shop. Next ski, please! Was the topsheet brown or maybe dark burgundy?
 

crgildart

Gravity Slave
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
16,324
Location
The Bull City
My first brand new skis purchase was a B. B. Bad ski purchase. I was really small at age 12 as a low level intermediate skiing on 130s. The only hart gremlins that Daytons had left on clearance were 160cm. I begged my folks to buy them for me even though the sales person tried to sell me something more expensive in a 140. I struggled on them all season and bought 150 cm Dynsatar Tempest the next season. My skiing really improved a lot more on those..
 

slowrider

Trencher
Skier
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Posts
4,534
I think I may have demoed those for half a run once. Put them on edge, no bending occurred, and I fell right over. Skidded directly back to the shop. Next ski, please! Was the topsheet brown or maybe dark burgundy?
Found a pair on line. I had the same experience as you. No bendy until around 40 mph.
Ross.jpg
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
I'm confused, I thought the Sin7 was 98mm wide, same as the S3 was, and the Soul 7 was the replacement for the S7. Not debating the degree of awfulness.
Sorry, I was using the S as a series reference, Sin 7, Soul 7, Super 7, Squad 7...I wasn't clear enough.
 

Tony Warren

Me on the left, The Padre on the right
Skier
Joined
Jul 25, 2016
Posts
194
Location
I travel a lot.
1972 Atomic SL in 195. Boring ski, not bad in snow. 1973 Miller Downhill in 215, way too soft, nearly killed me. I have probably owned 150 pairs of skis, but those two really stand out.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
1972 Atomic SL in 195. Boring ski, not bad in snow. 1973 Miller Downhill in 215, way too soft, nearly killed me. I have probably owned 150 pairs of skis, but those two really stand out.
150 pair? You will fit right in here, but you might need some catching up to do. ;)
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top