gsxr1216 Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Here is a Rossignol board i have had for a while had it out today for the 1st time in many many years now that my kid skis fast enough i dont have to wait for him at all. It was fun to rip on it today but i need something a little different now as i must be getting old.... Anyway I'm looking for specs on this board to see what I'm starting with as i really want to find something that turns somewhat tighter as on the bigger inclines this board really gains a ton of speed and takes up a lot of hill to make good carves on it and the resort I'm usaually on gets crowded so making big carves is a good way to get hit as most people have no idea how fast you come back across the slope . ideally i want something that on the steeper terrain i can still carve good on it and not be going mach 1 and not have it chatter with my 200lb unsuited body on it either! so this board is a Rossi Race VAS 166 anyone have specs on what this board is? thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Guy... Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Honest question- where you riding where, at 200+ lbs (with gear and boots), you're unable to get a 166 to turn tight enough? I'm asking because we're probably about the same weight and my tiny board is a Kessler 168, and I can pretty much fold that thing in half when I put the beef to it. Metal boards will chatter less, but I do question if another board will really solve the issue of maneuverability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I have one identical in the demo pool. Best guess somewhere between 10.5 and 12m radius. Try moving your bindings progressively forward, and see if that helps. Appears they are mounted most/ all(?) of the way back on the pattern, and that will affect handling. The chatter is probably related to the binding mount location, and the apparent inward cant on the bindings, + a player to be named later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) The side cut radius of that Rossignol is 11.5 m. Mr Beckmans best guess is dead on if you play averages (wasted my time going to the gear room and measuring it ) Edited January 12, 2015 by lowrider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsxr1216 Posted January 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Honest question- where you riding where, at 200+ lbs (with gear and boots), you're unable to get a 166 to turn tight enough? I'm asking because we're probably about the same weight and my tiny board is a Kessler 168, and I can pretty much fold that thing in half when I put the beef to it. Metal boards will chatter less, but I do question if another board will really solve the issue of maneuverability. Well thats the odd thing about this board there are times if i really hammer on it the nose folds right up and makes a rather unpredictable turn when that happens I have one identical in the demo pool. Best guess somewhere between 10.5 and 12m radius. Try moving your bindings progressively forward, and see if that helps. Appears they are mounted most/ all(?) of the way back on the pattern, and that will affect handling. The chatter is probably related to the binding mount location, and the apparent inward cant on the bindings, + a player to be named later. They are not all the way back but for sure towards the back of the board. if i move them forward wont that cause the nose to fold up even easier? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 If the board bends easier with the bindings moved forward, you should be able to initiate your turns with a lighter touch/less effort. You should then have a better feel for when the board has 'had enough', so to speak, and then reduce your input as needed. If it takes 'oomph' to get things going, you'll miss the target more often than not. In other words, match the size of the hammer to the gauge of the nail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpletiesto Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Honest question- where you riding where, at 200+ lbs (with gear and boots), you're unable to get a 166 to turn tight enough? I'm asking because we're probably about the same weight and my tiny board is a Kessler 168, and I can pretty much fold that thing in half when I put the beef to it. Metal boards will chatter less, but I do question if another board will really solve the issue of maneuverability. Any chance you want to offload your K 168 to me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I have this board and can confirm. This is a stiff board with a foam core and no dampness, it has a nose that's too stiff and does NOT ride well on ice/hardpack and is prone to chatter, making it very demanding. I think it has a 10.5m sidecut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsxr1216 Posted January 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 If the board bends easier with the bindings moved forward, you should be able to initiate your turns with a lighter touch/less effort. You should then have a better feel for when the board has 'had enough', so to speak, and then reduce your input as needed. If it takes 'oomph' to get things going, you'll miss the target more often than not. In other words, match the size of the hammer to the gauge of the nail. I have not tried it with the bindings more forward, I just assumed it will flex more as more weight will be on the front of it? unfortunately my area is usually pretty busy also so its hard to get a baseline then make changes and try to hit that same line and see what the changes really did better or worse. in an hour a slope can go from not bad to scraped right off. If I was out west my riding life would probly be better! I have this board and can confirm. This is a stiff board with a foam core and no dampness, it has a nose that's too stiff and does NOT ride well on ice/hardpack and is prone to chatter, making it very demanding. I think it has a 10.5m sidecut. Ice and hardpack is all I ever get to ride this thing on.... oh and toss in a few snow piles here and there after the ice patchs.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Your Rossi is very old school mass produced borad with a 11.5 M side cut. Do your self a favour and get a newer metal construction "All Mountain" board with a much smaller SC it with fit your crowded icy slopes much better. Putting a plate on it will make it feel more damp and give better control on ice if you keep it tuned but a newer board with metal will be better still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordmetroland Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I have this board and can confirm. This is a stiff board with a foam core and no dampness, it has a nose that's too stiff and does NOT ride well on ice/hardpack and is prone to chatter, making it very demanding. I think it has a 10.5m sidecut. I assume this is pulled directly from Rossignol's marketing material... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carvedog Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 The longer the nose is, the more leverage from tip of nose to front of binding. You are definitely not in the sweet spot on that board. I had one very similar and it was too turny for me. I prefer to go a little longer on the carve and have that option here where I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowmatic Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Yes 10.5m thats right. (all datas/description out of the red booklet from Rossi) Rossignol 1997/1998 RACE VAS DUALTEC 146 - 156 - 166 - 171 Microcell foam core, Carbon-Kevlar stiffeneres, VAS dampers, centred base and integral Dualtec transmission. Cap for responce and livelines. Power transmission to the snow via 4mm thick sidewalls along the whole boardlength for extra grip and confidence-building contol. Program: (*) Racers, Super Carvers and totaly mad boarders like Jerome Ruby and Andre Rehm from the Chamonix Guide company who scored the 1st integral of the North Face of the Triolet on the Mont Blanc range. Date: June 95. Snowconditions: little snow / tons of ice average slope: 55° / one section at 65° (Guide Vallot) (click on link for 1500*1000 pixel) (click on link for 1500*1000 pixel) Size: 166cm Edge: 142cm SCR: 10.5m Tip and tail with: 235mm Waist: 190mm Stance: 41/49cm Tip lenght: 180mm Tail lenght: 50mm Weight: 3.3kg I found pictures in a magazine which show us a rider from a snowboard shop doing full laydowns on that GS board. Text beside: "Extremcarving does work with good balanced raceboards, no problem" Remark: that was in autumn 1997 ! Watch the high-res photo now and see what they ride. Chatter on ice/hardpack might be bringing death for them! So tell me pleas where the f*** I can find some pictures from that but a newer board with metal will be better -boards, which are able to compete! (*) please BlueB, don't read this and don't watch the photos! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charliechocolate Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Program: (*) Racers, Super Carvers and totaly mad boarders like Jerome Ruby and Andre Rehm from the Chamonix Guide company who scored the 1st integral of the North Face of the Triolet on the Mont Blanc range. Date: June 95. Snowconditions: little snow / tons of ice average slope: 55° / one section at 65° (Guide Vallot) (click on link for 1500*1000 pixel) (click on link for 1500*1000 pixel) Thanks for the photos. That's some truly gnarly no-fall zone stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 Why, I love those. That's what I wanted you to post of yourself, you know which slope ;) As for that Rossi, a friend of mine made a brake-through in his riding, switching from a way too stiff Prior 167 to VAS 166 that proved to be be more forgiving for his skill. Later he broke the foam core using the small footprint Catek 2 bindings. About month ago I bought a NOS 144, for my son when he gets bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 So tell me pleas where the f*** I can find some pictures from that but a newer board with metal will be better -boards, which are able to compete! Not sure what your point is here, exactly. There's nobody making those sorts of descents with hard boots anymore, so there's nothing to compare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I assume this is pulled directly from Rossignol's marketing material... I don't follow. That the board is prone to chatter and way too stiff for ice even for heavy riders? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordmetroland Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't follow. That the board is prone to chatter and way too stiff for ice even for heavy riders? It was tongue-in-cheek; if you were writing marketing copy for this board, that's probably exactly unlike what you'd write. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Guy... Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 Well thats the odd thing about this board there are times if i really hammer on it the nose folds right up and makes a rather unpredictable turn when that happens Part of that is the ancient geometry of that board rearing its head. Low profile, decambered noses of todays boards won't do that to you. I had the misfortune of riding an old Nitro Blazer, similar to the Rossi in geometry, and that was a scary, shitty board. It did the same things you've described. I hopped on a Kessler and haven't looked back. If you're in UT or will be vacationing at Powder Mountain at all, shoot me a PM and I'll let you spend a day on my Kessler 168. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Guy... Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Any chance you want to offload your K 168 to me? Not a chance, my friend. :) However, the same offer goes for you as I extended to the OP- if you're in UT or vacationing at Powder, you're welcome to spend a day on it. Edited January 13, 2015 by That Guy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsxr1216 Posted January 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) Part of that is the ancient geometry of that board rearing its head. Low profile, decambered noses of todays boards won't do that to you. I had the misfortune of riding an old Nitro Blazer, similar to the Rossi in geometry, and that was a scary, shitty board. It did the same things you've described. I hopped on a Kessler and haven't looked back. If you're in UT or will be vacationing at Powder Mountain at all, shoot me a PM and I'll let you spend a day on my Kessler 168. Yeah i kinda figured that being 16+ years old that there has to be a lot better board design out there now, honestly i cant imagine going back on the skis i was using 16 years ago!!!! Unfortunatley all i have is old iron in the snowboard department sitting in my basement, i have an old Burton PJ i started on, and then a Burton Prime that i moved up to then this old Rossi i use now Thanks for the loaner offer, unfortunately i do not see me headig west this year and usually when i do its to CO as i have a buddy who lives there. Edited January 13, 2015 by gsxr1216 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowmatic Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 That was the chute both Rossignol rider downhill with Alpine snowboards (Aig. de Triolet 3870m / 12'700ft): (click on this link for alternate view) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teach Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I had the Throttle from the previous year. Very similar specs, but totally different ride, I gather. The Throttle was really damp, extremely friendly, and, by the way, had a very low-profile nose. The only thing that sounds familiar in michael.a's description of the OP's board is that it's not great on ice (and by that I mean the east-coast definition, "clear frozen water"). I chalked that up to the 2 degree base bevel those boards came from the factory with. Could also be somewhat related to technique (cough, cough). Strange that Rossignol would mess things up so thoroughly in one year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I'm gonna take the VAS 166 out tomorrow and give it another spin, haven't ridden it in 3 years. Maybe do a throwback Friday, the Rossignol, a 1st gen Swoard and borrow a friend's Volant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 Old Priors, Burtons and Rossis have the best nose geometry out of all old school boards. Low, very gradual and smooth, with few cm of decamber. This might be the reason why these 3 brands won the most WC medals prior to the Kessler revolution. (Many Burtons and Rossis were actually Priors in disguise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.