• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

2017 Rossignol Sky HD

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Manufacturer: Rossignol
Model: 2017 Sky HD, with Look NX 12 demo bindings
Length: 172cm
Category & Dimensions: Narrow Powder/Freeride, 127-97-117, 16m

Tester: 5'7", 115 lbs, advanced trying to get to expert, but not quite getting there. Top speed of about 35mph on blues, stays around 10-20mph on steeper blacks.

Snow condition: 6" of fresh, wet, heavy snow on top of frozen crud. 32ºF (0ºC) to start with, warming up to about 40ºF (4.5ºC). Heavy snow, as in you can make a snowball, crush it between your hands, and you still have a snowball.

rossignol-sky-7-hd-skis-2017-164.jpg

I have a one-ski quiver of a pair of 2014 Temptation 88s, 170cm, (so, that should really be a one-pair quiver!) which has been pretty darn versatile, but they do tend to be a lot of work in powder. There was 6" of fresh, wet, heavy snow on the ground, with more falling and the sun warming the slopes at times. I was getting over a cold, and my legs were not in top shape, so I thought I would try something that would make the pow easier to handle. I've been eying the Sky HDs they had for demoing ("men's version", but supposedly identical in construction to the "HD W" version), as a potential candidate for the next OSQ, so, why not?

The Rossignol Sky HDs were redesigned for this season, to be damper and stiffer than last year's Saffron and Sin models. The main complaints that people had for the older models were their poor hard-snow performance and tip chatter at speed, hence the dampness and stiffness. If they can do groomers and powder, who could ask for anything more?

Unfortunately, right off the gate, I felt very uncertain on the Skies. I could not skate! I could not carve with confidence on groomers, which had been groomed after the snow fell, which meant there were a lot of vertical lumps of snow, and the Skies just could not hold their edges whenever going across them. The tail kept catching on the groomer grooves. I could not hockey stop aggressively. On powder, they kept throwing me into the backseat, and the tips kept diving into the snow. It felt like the tails were catching on things under the surface. They demanded that I use even pressure on both feet (something I am not very good at, a side-effect of being a lightweight with stiff skis), and the outside ski kept diving and/or bending under whenever I pressured them.

Then, during a fateful run, I gave in and just rode them in the back seat. Surprising result: absolute control! Smooth awesomeness! Buttery turns! So, the lightbulb went on: set the binding back! The first run after I had it moved back was on cruddy-steep blue leading to a cruddy-steep black, and instantly I had super confidence that I could handle it. And, boy, could I handle it! It was easy and smooth, and I did not need as much rest as I would have on the T88s.

By the end of the day, I had the bindings set back about 1.5cm, and I probably could have gone farther back. The boots' midline marker was at this point a little less than 1cm behind the mounting mark on the skis, which suggests that these bindings were mounted a bit too forward, but apparently the mounting mark was not right for me in the first place. I had read somewhere that some powder skis come marked with the assumption that people are gonna want to be in the back seat, and some of us don't! If I buy a pair of these, I would have to demo them more to make sure I know where I want the binding mounted, or stick with demo bindings. (The comments below are based on experience with this improved setting.)

Some first impressions. These skis are, most of all, softer than the Temptation 88s, and they glide slowly across the snow. In powder, it takes a while to get up to cruising speed. This is a bit of a plus, since T88s tend to pick up a lot of speed during turns, even in powder, but it does mean a lot of coasting and waiting for the speed to pick up before making a turn.

They are, also, damp and not very poppy. More cruise-y. Stable and calm when cruising, but not a lot of excitement.

And they are loud! I didn't have any true hardpack today, but even on the groomed powder there is this echo-y, resonant sound, presumably coming from the Air Tips. No tip flap, per se, but the sound will drive me nuts if I am on hardpack all day.


On to specifics:
1=Poor 2= Fair 3=Average 4=Very Good 5=Excellent

Short Turns: 5
They love to unedge and skid, and they will rotary-turn readily on groomers. HOWEVER, on powder, they do prefer that you just careen down with little coasting turns. I could not smear them in the wet snow. They do NOT like dynamic turns, period, and will sink into the snow when given too much pressure, hence:

Medium Turns: 3
GS turns are my "natural habitat", so this is crucial for me. The groomers were a little rough and uneven today, and the Skies kept getting thrown off the snow, leading to edge loss. T88s, by contrast, would have bitten into anything, so this was a big difference. The skies were fine on smooth groomers, of course, and felt pretty natural with GS turns. Turning on powder was not that much easier than on the T88s. The Skies prefer that you stay upright and coast, and take gentle bouncy-wavy turns, rather than carvy dynamic turns. This might sound weird, but the Skies were often buried under the snow even in conditions where the T88s would have floated; I think this is because of the softness, which makes the skis bend into the snow, which makes it take longer to get up to fully-floating speed.

Long Turns: 3.5
They are OK. Not surprisingly, edge loss remained an issue with longer turns at higher speed. The noise didn't help, either. On the other hand, although bouncy-wavy turns are small-width turns, they are long-radius turns, which these skis loved. Just not my cup of tea.

Rebound: 3
They are damp and coast-y. I didn't have any problem with rebound, but I didn't get the sense that the skis were helping me, either. The combination of soft and damp is a bit odd, and made me feel like the skis got to decide what I did. One way to put it: these skis like the status quo; just keep doing what you are doing, and they're awesome.

Stability: 5
Oh, this is where they shine!!! You will stay upright. Despite all my complaints about float and edge catching and what not, I did not fall once. Even as I was losing the edge or sinking into the powder, I never truly felt out of balance. Dampness means there are no annoying vibrations even as you hit lumps of hard snow. Edge loss, yes, but no shakiness or loss of posture.

Forgiveness: 4?
This is tricky for me to judge. They definitely wanted me to be in the back seat. With the binding set back, I could get away with a more normal balance, but at all times I needed to keep my weight on the heels; the most forward I could be was to be even on the ball and the heel. If I press on the balls, it was tip-dive time, with loss of control. That said, they did not throw me off or slide out from under me, either, which leads me to rate it medium-high.

Grip: 3
Meh. I didn't have trouble setting the edge, but had trouble keeping it. Easily thrown off the edge by uneven snow, even on packed fresh powder. Not good. On smooth hardpack, I suspect they are OK. Frozen chicken heads, not so much. Too much rocker, I assume. Maybe a steeper side edge would help?

Steeps: 4
The ease of rotary turns on groomers! Awesomeness! But, not so much on heavy powder. I guess that's normal; this snow cannot be smeared. Fortunately, the bit that I keep complaining about--soft skis that do not accelerate much--does cancel out the other bit that I keep complaining about--difficulty with dynamic turns--so it does make it easy to handle powdery steeps. They do tend to encourage you to straight-line down...

Crud: 5+++!!!!! :thumb:
Oh, this is where the Skies are totally awesome! As long as I kept my weight on the heels, it was like there was no crud. Seriously. Absolutely awesome. Can't say enough good things about it. Like running a hot knife over butter. Perfectly balanced turns, and confidence to go into another turn. The smooth float over the lumps of snow actually gives you enough pop and maneuverability to cancel out all other flaws. Man, are they nimble!

Powder: 4 (wet snow)
But, oddly, on smooth powder, I kept feeling confined and limited and forced to go in a straight line. Again, this is normal for wet powder, but I was hoping that powder skis would at least make this far easier. With my weight firmly on the heels, I could control them, but it was still as much work as with T88s. And, I just do not like to straight-line down, and heavy powder does not like to be smeared. I suspect they are better on dry powder, however.

Ice: not tested
Again, I suspect they are OK on smooth-groomed hardpack, not so much on true ice. The loudness is likely a problem.

Tested Length Felt: Just right
They ski short, and felt shorter than the T88s. I didn't come across any moguls; if I am purchasing them, I might go a bit shorter for moguls and frozen crud.

Ski Sidecut Felt: Just right
No problem with the sidecut radius. On smooth groomers, they love carving GS turns. Edge hold on rough groomers was problematic. The problems I had with turn shape in powder was more due to float than due to the sidecut, I think.

Ski Flex Felt: Too soft
I think I would like them to have a little less rocker and a little more and stiffer camber. Basically, Rossi, I want a pair of T88s with a little more rocker and a pointier tip...

Best Described As: Balanced between nimble and burly
I would actually characterize them as Meh... Like to climb over things rather than cut through them. Like to cruise rather than pop. Fantastic combo of nimble and burly, however, on wet powder crud, my archnemesis.
 

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
[the post was too long, so continuing on]

Overall Impression: I see the point, but not fabulous. A solid 4.

The one condition that I cannot handle with the T88s unless I am in super good shape is cruddy powder. In that condition, the Sky HDs are just fabulously awesome, effortless, and confidence-inspiring. In deeper powder, too, I suspect they are better to handle than the T88s. Still, I was not wowed enough by these skis to want to run out and get them; on powder crud days, I can/should just stay on groomers. Their poor performance on uneven, medium-packed snow means they cannot be true daily drivers for me. Still, if I keep having more powder days than ice days (the horror!), they do make perfect companions, and perhaps an adequate replacement, for the T88s.
 

Albertan ski girl

Angel Diva
This is a really great review! Thanks - I've been wondering about the Sky and Soul, and curious about how they perform. I'd like to be able to take them out at some point just to check them out. Interesting about the mount point as well. I noticed that you had them in a 172 - did that feel like the right length?
 

Albertan ski girl

Angel Diva
@Albertan ski girl - I skied the 2018 Soul and was pretty impressed. Not really my cup of tea, but fun nonetheless. Look for my 2017 Test Fest reviews for my full right up on them.

Totally going to take a look at that. I see the Souls all over here, and there were many at Whistler when I was there in December, so I am curious about them. I imagine with my weight and height, I will probably have to go long to try them. I figured spring might be a good time though...
 

Albertan ski girl

Angel Diva
@Albertan ski girl - I skied the 2018 Soul and was pretty impressed. Not really my cup of tea, but fun nonetheless. Look for my 2017 Test Fest reviews for my full right up on them.

wow - 180 felt short?!? any thoughts on how these might do in bumps?

Though I should say, I love my Santa Anas so much this season, that I can't really think about another ski :smile:
 

Gloria

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I have the 2017 Soul and love it. I have heard the 2018 is still along the same hd concept with the better edge grip, less tip flap etc. than previous version but less stiff. I don't find the 2017 to ski short, I demoed it in a size shorter than my old skis. One of the reasons I loved it was it felt as good as my longer ski stability wise erc and I always felt like my old skis had alot of excess ski that was rockered and ineffective in bumps, narrow steep places, trees etc. I love it in the trees, steep steeps, chutes and it skis well in between too. Really holds an edge on firm snow, crazy good for a wider ski. Bumps though its truly not the best. It's pretty stiff underfoot and the tail is fairly stiff so it's a doable ski in bumps but not forgiving by any means. I don't think it has the energy the Santa Ana has, it's a fun ski but it's damp, burly and tight more than playful.
Length preference I think could really depend on use and what you want out of them. I skied them recently at an area where there was alot of groomer action to get back to the lifts, in that case I could see wanting them longer.
 
Last edited:

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I noticed that you had them in a 172 - did that feel like the right length?
Yes, in terms of handling and maneuverability. They did not feel long at all, although they were longer than I am tall. They are not light skis to carry, but they felt very light on the snow, with no excess swing weight; much less swing weight than my 2014 T88s. (Rossi actually suggests height+5cm for powder skis for advanced skiers.)

Having said that, I think my next skis will be on the shorter side; I love the speed and stability of longer skis on groomers, but on mashed potatoes and moguls, just having that extra length and extra speed is a bit of a bother. Extra length and the extra power that requires also gave me some bad habits on rough snow; I don't weigh enough to flex both skis on anything but smooth snow, so I tend to be outside-ski-dependent.

The Souls have gotten consistently good reviews over the years. I would have tried them first, but they didn't have one for me to try. I think, if I'm thinking replacement, the Skies would work better, but the Souls would be a better bet if I'm expanding my quiver. I'd have to try them both on true hardpack next year. @Gloria's and @volklgirl's reports are encouraging, and consistent with what I've read. Counterintuitively, the Souls might even be better than the Skies on hardpack, and I probably would prefer their stiffness on powder.
 

Little Lightning

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
My impression of the Skye HD wasn't so glowing. One run and I couldn't wait to get off of it. It's nothing like my Saffron's or the older original S3. I thought my dislike might be due to so much time this season on the Goode skis. Yesterday, I skied my Saffron's and was in love again. When I demoed the Saffron's I was instantly impressed with the light and liveliness of the ski. I couldn't find any of the qualities of the Saffron in the Skye. Rossignol did a good job of designing wider skis that smaller and lighter women could handle. Sad that they've deserted us.
 

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Rossignol did a good job of designing wider skis that smaller and lighter women could handle. Sad that they've deserted us.
As I said before, I think they are switching to me as their target market. Perhaps they've lost you, and also failed to fully convince me...

Is there a pendulum toward "damp skis" happening in the market?
 

Gloria

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
The Souls seem to ski quite differntly than the sky does. I haven't skied both but based on impressions here. When I demoed it, the snowmakers had blown a bunch of ice and ice chunks the night before and I put them through the ringer skiing right under them and they never lost edgehold.

They were trying to give the skis better edge hold and less tip flap. Which they succeeded at but alot of women it seems did not like them ( planky ) and that is why they supposedly made them a bit softer for next year. I'm not sure about the men's version though.

Lengthwise, yes if you want to ski really fast on the groomers then definately go longer. I would say they can be slow like the sky is on groomers and not squirelly but do feel short here and you really have to work to get them to speed up. In deep snow they definately keep up, if not better. I wouldn't choose them as a ski that will be better in bumps as they just aren't the best for this. I think they are a great ski for an area where you don't have alot of groomed and don't necessarily always have great snow as they are very versatile that way.
 

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@Little Lightning, I am now coming around completely to your point of view. We had another 6-8" of powder today, somewhat drier to start with and heavier as the day went on, and the Temptation 88s handled it so much better than the Skies. The T88s are also damp skis, but they have plenty of pop as well, and I can use it as a spring to propel out of the powder and plunge into the turn. Although dampness and pop are usually opposed to each other, the T88s have enough stiff springiness in the camber such that there is still plenty of pop. By contrast, the Skies' combination of softness and dampness leaves them with no rebound.

Also, as I suspected, the T88s do have better float than the Skies, while coasting and during turns. I will post some photos. I think, being stiff, the T88s distribute the pressure evenly across the length, while the Skies, by sagging, focus the pressure in the middle, and break through the snow. Sagging into the snow also means I have farther to pop up, losing even more of the poppy feeling.

The Skies definitely do better in mashed potatoes. On crud, the T88s bite in rather than float, so that's not ideal. That's the only real advantage for the Skies I have found so far. They also do well with surfing in a straight line and with rotary turns on groomers. Those I can do without.
 

Fluffy Kitty

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Temptation 88 on the left, Sky 7 HD on the right, post-binding-correction. 6" heavy powder, freshly fallen; a bit warmed up and therefore heavier on the Sky shot. At a similar point on the same trail, with slope of about 20º. Speed is probably about 5mph higher on the T88. The camera is on a different location, centered on the helmet for the T88, on the left on the Sky; I'm probably inclined more on the T88 shot, applying more pressure.

I picked the frame where they are both at their buried-est on the right foot. On the T88, you can see that both the tip and the binding are right by the surface. On the Skies, the tip is just below the surface, but the binding is deeply buried. The Skies have much more dramatically upturned tips.

Sky vs. T88.jpg

This is what the T88s looks like at most of the peaks of the turns. (They are rated mediocre for float!)

S1180003b.jpg

And a proof of how deep the powder is when the skis are not in motion.

S1180005c.jpg
 
Last edited:

Gloria

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@Little Lightning, I am now coming around completely to your point of view. We had another 6-8" of powder today, somewhat drier to start with and heavier as the day went on, and the Temptation 88s handled it so much better than the Skies. The T88s are also damp skis, but they have plenty of pop as well, and I can use it as a spring to propel out of the powder and plunge into the turn. Although dampness and pop are usually opposed to each other, the T88s have enough stiff springiness in the camber such that there is still plenty of pop. By contrast, the Skies' combination of softness and dampness leaves them with no rebound.

Also, as I suspected, the T88s do have better float than the Skies, while coasting and during turns. I will post some photos. I think, being stiff, the T88s distribute the pressure evenly across the length, while the Skies, by sagging, focus the pressure in the middle, and break through the snow. Sagging into the snow also means I have farther to pop up, losing even more of the poppy feeling.

The Skies definitely do better in mashed potatoes. On crud, the T88s bite in rather than float, so that's not ideal. That's the only real advantage for the Skies I have found so far. They also do well with surfing in a straight line and with rotary turns on groomers. Those I can do without.
These might help:
https://www.ski.com/blog/rockered-ski-technology-explained/

https://www.realskiers.com/revelations/triumph-tapered-tip/
 

RVAskis

Diva in Training
I demoed the Sky in Winter Park a few weeks ago and really enjoyed it, it ended up being my favorite among the skis I was able to demo. With cold overnights refreezing everything and warm afternoons turning it back to mashed potatoes and slush, I was able to try them on about every condition except powder. I found that they held an edge well on hardpack, got chattery on frozen chop but still turned fine, were fun in bumps and trees, and felt stable at speed (35-40 mph for me). I am not sure why, except that I had a few more on my list that I wanted to try, but I've been hesitant to pull the trigger and buy them. From reading all the reviews here, it sounds like I would love the Santa Ana 93 and I'm sad I didn't get to try them. With the changes coming next year, I'm tempted to buy the 2017 SAs untried. I don't think I would like the metal addition.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
26,237
Messages
497,686
Members
8,503
Latest member
MermaidKelly
Top