Ted J Wiegandt writes:
>Well it is buying time again and I thought I'd just pass on some
>info. I broke two pair of rossi 7XK's last yaer and rossi
>screwed me over on both pair. The first pair broke at Crested
>Butte over turkey day break. The core of the ski completely
>dissintigrated between the bindings. The skis were only 9
>months old(under waranty) and rossi refused to cover them saying
>I must have abused them in order to break them. I had to pay
>$205 that I didn't have to get a new pair. And this was only
>after 5 weeks of arguing and missed skiing. The new pair broke
>the exact same way on my third day of midwest skiing. All rossi
>would do is remate the unbroken ski.
Yeah, I don't think I'll be buying Rossignol (skis, at least) any
time soon. My personal experience is that they are not a very
durable ski - lots of problems keeping my 7Ss together last year.
Still I got ~80 days on them before they needed to be retired, which
I consider to be at the bottom end of the acceptable range.
Several friends have had more blatant problems with their Rossis.
Like an edge and base collapsing into the core after nicking a rock
at low speed within the first minute that these 4SVs were skied on
(at least the store was nice and replaced them no charge.)
>I work in a ski shop and this is how they treat me. Just think
>of how they will treat you. I have friends in the east and in
>the Rockies who have had similar problems. So save yourself a
>big headache and buy a different brand of skis.
Working in a shop I'm surprised that you would seriously consider
Rossis. Good discount from the rep, I guess.
Ski manufacturers love to tout every whizzy feature of their ski yet
rarely mention the material their core is made from. I was glad to
see that POWDER indicated the core type on every ski they reviewed
this year. Is it a coincidence that Rossignol is the _only_ major
manufacturer who is still making their entire line of skis with foam
cores? Yep, everyone else is producing wood core (or something
besides foam) for at least their higher-end skis.
As other posters have replied, Atomic and K2 have a good long-term
reliability record and, from the anecdotes I've heard, both stand by
their products. I read something (I think in the WSJ) about how K2
was bending over backwards on customer service in order to push
themselves into the #1 sales position.
And John Oxley writes:
> Do you think it might have been a defective batch of skiis that you
>bought from. I am planning on buying a pair of the 7SKs as I really
>enjoyed them when I demoed them. Ideas?
And Xavier Martin writes:
>All other things equal, I'd rather have skis that ski well where they are
>supposed to and also do well in the bumps. That said, the 7XK is a giant
>Now when the racing is over I don't take my racing
>skis into the bumps. They are not designed for that.
Hey guys - nobody is claiming that Rossis aren't a good performing ski.
They are. They just aren't very reliable/durable.
>There's a tradeoff in everything.
Wrong. You CAN make a durable ski, SL, GS, whatever without trading
off performance. Of course, making better skis usually costs the
manufacture more, BUT over the long term it costs you less because
you don't need to buy a new pair of skis every other season.
Reliability is probably the most overlooked, underrated feature
of skis today. It is also one of the biggest differentiators.