Not sure how useful this review will be, as people already interested in this ski will buy it and people who aren't won't. That said, here goes:
I've been on quite a few skis lately, and the 186 Renegade is the perfect ski for my size and style. I'm 5'11", 165# (though I'm recovering some surgery, so me in shape is 5# lighter and much stronger), and I mainly ski Stevens Pass (combo of tight trees and open faces). If you're over 175#, the 196 should be your weapon, as whyturn implies below. (I haven't been on the 196, but on TGR, whyturn claims it's easier to ski than the 186, FWIW.) I'd also consider the 196 if you ski mainly open bowls and you already have a smaller tree ski (I don't).
If I had to choose just one ski for the resort, this would probably be my pick. However, I've never had a ski with such a learning curve, including DPS L138, which is a full reverse/reverse. I had heard them described as playful and chargy, but after the first run, I told my friend they were neither. After some more time on them, I understood how to adapt my style.
They are so stable and love speed in the open. It takes a fairly-skilled pilot to manage the speed, but those who can will be rewarded with a stable platform at mach looney. For as much as it loves speed, the Rens perform exceptionally well in tight trees. I suspect this has to do with the full reverse camber much more than the sidecut (which is very small). I have not yet found a situation where the trees were too tight for the ski. As I continue to gain core and leg strength after surgery, I think the Renegade will gain even more agility in trees. On hardpack, the Rens, with full reverse, require a balanced stance and do not like to be driven from the tip, racer style. They do carve unexpectedly well, likely because of the matching rocker and sidecut.
Only gripe: Once or twice in the 10 or so days Ive spent on the Renegade, I have noticed the tips diving if I get too far forward. This is probably a combination of the full reverse (requires good fore-aft balance) and the smaller tip (which is awesome and not hooky at all). I attribute tip dive more to pilot error (not being as balanced as I should have been) than any inherent flaw in the ski. I have heard other skiers, mainly those who are heavier than I am, say they have float issues in low-angle pow, but I haven't experienced this too much.
Mount point seems to have a big effect on the ski: 86-88 from the tail is pretty much the range. Obviously, the further forward you are, the better they carve groomers and the farther back, the better they float. I went 87 because I'm on the bigger side of things but I still wanted to ski tight trees (this is my tree ski cuz it's the smallest ski I own) though. I might have gone 88 if I were 155#; if I were a little bigger and really strong, I might have went 86.
Also note that these skis are particularly picky as to how they're tuned. The factory tune is excellent, IMO, so stick with it. When you do need them tuned, 4FRNT recommends a 1* side and 1* base bevel with minimal base structure, which is how they come from the factory.