2011 Model No Longer Available
Rossignol Sickle Ski - 2011 BCS
A Pacific storm took a big ole dump on the mountain last night, so you don't even think about the park when you and your Rossignol Sickle Ski slide onto first chair. You just wanna crush switch pow landings and pillow lines all day long. The jet stream is back on track, and you treat every powdery drop, step-up, and cat track as your next chance to add an unnatural spin to natural terrain. Thick curvy where it counts like your favorite ex-lady friend, the Sickle gives you the ability to slather on a buttery sweet and savory layer of style that boosts your pow days from epic to orgasmic.
- The Spin Turn Rocker means this plank is fully rockered like a banana for ultimate float, switch stompability, and amazing pop, even in the park the next day
- Mini Cap construction features 30-degree sidewalls to reduce weight and sturdy laminates that are incredibly durable for your 100-day-plus season
- A wood core flexes playfully but rebounds, remains stable for speed, and doesn't break down over time
- Extended sidecut along the rockered tip and tail means you get enhanced contact with the snow and better control when you lay into your ludicrously fast powder turns or runs through the pipe
- Jib Absorption System is a rubber layer between the edge and sidewall as well as in the tip and tail, and it reduces shock and stress during doodoo-inducing drops and hard park landings
- The rounded Jib Tip aids transitions in the park or pipe and gives you easy switch-skiing performance
Talk shop with all the gear freaks out there: ask 'em questions, upload/browse photos, and give your 2¢.
5'7'' 140lb eastern expert. Plan to setup with dynafits for backcountry bliss. 186 or 74's? First swim with rocker. Been riding the 170-174 range. Thinking 86's. Any suggestions?
September 27, 2012
Thanks for the question. Sizing for that sort of set up is going to depend on how much wide open space your BC routes will give you. If your BC routes will primarily be pretty to very wide open, go with the 186. If not, then 174 for optimal maneuverability when things get really tight.
By: Wally Phillips
September 27, 2012
April 26, 2012
I love them, they are great in deep snow, and feel surfier than wider boards I've used. As far as hardpack goes, they like to go very fast, and hold a wicked edge for such a wide ski. It hadn't snowed in a week and i was boosting 20+ feet off rocks and cat tracks onto icy morning groomers, they stomp. I've skied them in almost all conditions except for true blower and bulletproof ice. Don't imagine they'd do that well on hard ice, but better than most powder skis. The rocker is very subtle and will force you to ski on edge unless you enjoy tip flapping. When the edges are engaged, the sidecut arcs turns like butter. In a turn, there is more running legnth (active edge) than the S7's that are cambered underfoot. They are playful when asked to be, and solid when skied hard. They're a great tele ski, and surprisingly nimble in bumps. They ski like a snake, slithery.
Two drawbacks of this ski:
1. They get weird in super sticky, hot, wet snow
2. The topsheets look a little too worn for only having been skied for three weeks.
Can somebody give a weight for the 186? I'm looking at this
Can somebody give a weight for the 186? I'm looking at this ski for an AT setup and can't find any numbers.
By: Kevin Lalli
July 18, 2012
I can't tell you the exact weight but I can recommend this ski for touring. It has Rossignol's WRS (weight-reduction system) which basically consists of using lighter source materials in the structure of the ski. It's not a heavy ski, not a beast of a ski by any means, but definitely stable while having a fun and lively flex pattern. Remember, if the ski is constructed too light it won't ski very well (unless it's made of carbon fiber) because you lose stability and dampness when you go ultralight. This ski is a perfect balance of lightweight-minded construction while still having enough meat to it to ski properly. I highly recommend it for touring, general west-coast resort use, and backcountry booters. Hope that helps!
July 18, 2012
Recommended (very highly!)
October 20, 2011
I've been teaching skiing for 19 years, I have also done a few magazine and website ski tests the past few seasons and this is my go to ski for everyday (I went out of my way to get it, and even paid for it). I'm an x-racer gone powder junkie that can hold my own in the park (for an old guy).
Best thinig about this ski is the versatility. Flat camber (rocker) makes it easy to initiate a turn, but it's stiff enough to put on edge and set railroad tracks. Wide under foot for float, but with some shape to make if fun on the packed snow. I love the twin tip for jibbin around or when I'm in the park.
Just wish I had my touring bindings on these
I'm 5'4 and 95 pounds and I'm 13. Just wondering
I'm 5'4 and 95 pounds and I'm 13. Just wondering size and were to mount and if mounting with a touring binding would be a good idea? landing switch in pow is a concern
April 5, 2012
i have the baron right now. should i mount it in the middle or the reccomended way?
April 10, 2012
I would try a Marker Baron/Duke, or tour F12/10
By: Hayden Beck
April 9, 2012
unreal ski, all over the mountain
February 27, 2012
bought the 186 in this ski, and its ridiculous. totally flat under foot, with advertised rocker (nearly non-existent) holds up great in all conditions, truly a one ski quiver. for a ski 140/110/133 it is incredibly light, and stiff so if your blasting steep chutes, it wont get squirly on ya. If you want to take it to groomers, get up on its edge and you;ll forget your on powder skis. Incredibly responsive and the rubber layer dampens rails and park kickers really nice. The stiff tip/tail are great for popping and if you land a little back seat, its also very forgiving. Great ski, you will not be disappointed.
I'm 5'4", 190 lbs, 54 yrs old, have been skiing
I'm 5'4", 190 lbs, 54 yrs old, have been skiing since 8 yrs old, and I'm a solid skier. Considering the Sickle or the Armada JJ 185. I don't ski switch, park, or do jumps. I do steep, pow, crud, and 20 days of bumps at Mary Jane/year. Looking for the ski for for Vail-back bowls and Prima/Pronto, Highline. What do you think?
December 3, 2011
go with the sickle, its more versatile.
December 3, 2011
I like 'em
February 15, 2012
I was worried that the 186 might be a little too long (I'm 5'10 and weigh 160). But they've worked out great. I've spent a few days on them at Snowbird, under varied conditions (groomers, crud, skied-out steeps, untracked powder) and they've performed well for me. They charge. They float in the pow. They make for smooth landings off drops. I'm not really a park skier so I can't speak to that, but for all-mountain use, I really like these skis.
Suggestions on where to mount? Landing switch won't be
Suggestions on where to mount? Landing switch won't be a big concern
October 25, 2011
Mount it at the recommended point if you will not be doing any park or switch riding
November 26, 2011
Sickle is sick
February 3, 2012
These skis are terrific. They are amazing in that they float in the deep stuff, they bust crud like no other, they turn so easy that bump runs are no problem, and they carve on the hard pack. They should be in the all-mountain category and not the deep pow category. They are the perfect Vail ski.
Is there a difference in the construction or rocker of 2010 S6
Is there a difference in the construction or rocker of 2010 S6 and the 2011 Sickle?
October 23, 2011
Same ski, different graphics. Rossi shifted themes, and each ski is no longer a member of the 7 Deadly Sin Series, where each ski was emblematic of one of the seven deadly sins (S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, & S7). So to go along with the new name, there is a new graphic too. Same ski construction wise and dimensionally too. I don't know the specs of the rocker, but I doubt they would increase or decrease the rocker from last year.
By: Matthew Tabrys
October 23, 2011
The ski that does it all
October 18, 2011
A lot of people are a little confused as to what you can use this ski for. I have heard that this ski is great for park, great for powder, and great for big mountain. But lets break down the facts.
Full rocker definitely makes this ski a pure powder machine. Just like the infamous K2 Hellbents this ski is a dream in the powder. Its pretty much the little brother of the Hellbents. But. . .
This ski is stiffer than the hellbents. Making it better for big mountain lines. Personally though, the full rocker is a huge turn off to the big mountain scene because when you get on crappy snow conditions, that full rocker will handicap you more than help you.
As for a park ski. I guess if you like skiing the whole mountain and at the end of each run you head to the park this ski will be adequate. But don't buy this ski to go to the park with. The only type of "park" skiing this ski excels at is backcountry jibbing. Thats where its at for this ski.
If you are looking for a ski to head into the backcountry and hit massive booters, butter, smear, etc. this is your ski. The full rocker makes it extremely easy to stomp into deep pow, it gives you a lot of pop, and the stiffness keeps this ski from flexing so much that you biff it each time.
How does the full-rocker affect the ability for this ski to
How does the full-rocker affect the ability for this ski to tour?
October 8, 2011
It makes it easier to break trail, as the tip sits higher up. You lose a little bit of traction on firmer snow due to the tail rocker, but other than that there is no real difference. There are a ton of backcountry specific skis that have tail rocker...4Frnt Renegades, DPS Lotus 120, Moment Bibby Pros, Volkl Nantuq, just to name a few.
You see it mostly affecting the downhill part of your tour. It makes it more fun!
By: Matthew Tabrys
October 16, 2011