# Should I get the Rossignol Experience 2011



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

A buddy of mine who I frequently ride with just got that exact board and absolutely loves it. His physical stature and riding style are almost identical to what you are describing for yourself. He mainly just bombs steeps, finds tight tree lines, and pops off of every roller and lip he can find on the mountain. Doesn't spend any time is the park, unless he's just doing some straight airs off of kickers. When he is on the groomers, he can striahgt line it with great stability, and turn on a dime at any speed. The Magnetraction held up great when we were heading through some very icy terrain that I felt squirly on. I know for a fact he would recommend it. Hope this helps.


----------



## bioject (Dec 30, 2010)

)(ood said:


> A buddy of mine who I frequently ride with just got that exact board and absolutely loves it. His physical stature and riding style are almost identical to what you are describing for yourself. He mainly just bombs steeps, finds tight tree lines, and pops off of every roller and lip he can find on the mountain. Doesn't spend any time is the park, unless he's just doing some straight airs off of kickers. When he is on the groomers, he can striahgt line it with great stability, and turn on a dime at any speed. The Magnetraction held up great when we were heading through some very icy terrain that I felt squirly on. I know for a fact he would recommend it. Hope this helps.


Yep your advice helps a bunch. You're referring to the rossignol experience right? I plan on using the Union bindings off my last board. Will this be a problem? I really want to avoid shelling out more than I have to and I like my current bindings so I don't see too many reasons to change them unless there is a major performance gain from a newer version of bindings. What do you think?


----------



## ryannorthcott (Dec 17, 2010)

why not go for the turbo dream right off the bat? it's the raygun's big brother. check out my review of it, sounds like you are a similar rider to me.

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/equipment-reviews/34621-k2-complete-setup-review-darko-formula.html

plus it's available in wide, which it sounds like you need.


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

bioject said:


> Yep your advice helps a bunch. You're referring to the rossignol experience right? I plan on using the Union bindings off my last board. Will this be a problem? I really want to avoid shelling out more than I have to and I like my current bindings so I don't see too many reasons to change them unless there is a major performance gain from a newer version of bindings. What do you think?


Yeah, I'm referring to the Experience. It's got the clear laminate over the topsheet that shows the wood core and carbon stringers. If you're running Union's, I wouldn't run anything softer than the Union Force, as the board is pretty stiff. Basically, Force, Data, Force SL, or Force MC and you'll be good.


----------



## bioject (Dec 30, 2010)

)(ood said:


> Yeah, I'm referring to the Experience. It's got the clear laminate over the topsheet that shows the wood core and carbon stringers. If you're running Union's, I wouldn't run anything softer than the Union Force, as the board is pretty stiff. Basically, Force, Data, Force SL, or Force MC and you'll be good.


Yeah I have white Union Force bindings. They are about 3-4 years old. I can't remember the exact age. Still in good condition.


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

Those should do great. Not much has changed besides some of the padding design on the footbed and highback, and the new toe straps for 2011... You sir, are gonna have a sick freeride setup.


----------



## bioject (Dec 30, 2010)

)(ood said:


> Those should do great. Not much has changed besides some of the padding design on the footbed and highback, and the new toe straps for 2011... You sir, are gonna have a sick freeride setup.


Yay!


If I got a 164 inch board, would that be too long? I was hoping for something a little wider so my feet aren't hanging off the edges.
Save on Rossignol The Experience Magtek Midwide Snowboard 164 - Mens Snowboards Snowboarding Gear Equipment


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

bioject said:


> Yay!
> 
> 
> If I got a 164 inch board, would that be too long? I was hoping for something a little wider so my feet aren't hanging off the edges.
> Save on Rossignol The Experience Magtek Midwide Snowboard 164 - Mens Snowboards Snowboarding Gear Equipment





bioject said:


> Yay!
> 
> 
> If I got a 164 inch board, would that be too long? I was hoping for something a little wider so my feet aren't hanging off the edges.
> Save on Rossignol The Experience Magtek Midwide Snowboard 164 - Mens Snowboards Snowboarding Gear Equipment


164 inch would be like 15 feet tall... but you could run a 164cm if you don't think it'll be too much board. My friend rides the 159 and he's your same height and about the same weight with some CLUNKY size 12 or 13 boots, and he wasn't experiencing any drag... In fact, I just checked the specs, and other than the length, when you size up on this board, they all have the same waist, nose, and tail width. The only differences are going to be the weight cap, which you are in the mix for each size, and the effective edge length. If you were comfortable with the size of your old board, then get something close to that size. A lot of the decision has to do with personal preference.


----------



## bioject (Dec 30, 2010)

)(ood said:


> 164 inch would be like 15 feet tall... but you could run a 164cm if you don't think it'll be too much board. My friend rides the 159 and he's your same height and about the same weight with some CLUNKY size 12 or 13 boots, and he wasn't experiencing any drag... In fact, I just checked the specs, and other than the length, when you size up on this board, they all have the same waist, nose, and tail width. The only differences are going to be the weight cap, which you are in the mix for each size, and the effective edge length. If you were comfortable with the size of your old board, then get something close to that size. A lot of the decision has to do with personal preference.


Woops I meant cm. I just measured my current snowboard and it's about 63 inches which is 160.02 cm. The 159 looks like the it could work. The 164 version seems a bit too long.


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

bioject said:


> Woops I meant cm. I just measured my current snowboard and it's about 63 inches which is 160.02 cm. The 159 looks like the it could work. The 164 version seems a bit too long.


I would go with the 159. This board is most likely going to be a lot stiffer than you are used to, so having a length close to what you've been riding should make it a great upgrade.


----------



## pinkrobe (Sep 29, 2008)

*Rossignol Experience Review*

I picked up a Rossignol Experience just before x-mas, and was able to ride it on three different hills in 5 days. I had two days at Mt Washington, one at Blackcomb and one at Revelstoke. Conditions ranged from over-the-head blower pow to polished hardpack. Here is a quick review of the board...

My stats: 175 lbs + gear, 5'10", 22.5" stance +9/0, setback 1" from reference, started riding Dec. 25, 1993
Board: 2011 Rossignol Experience 163
Binding: 2010 K2 Auto-Ever, forward lean set to "5"
Boot: 2010 ThirtyTwo Prime, sz 9.5
Previous board: 2006 Ride Timeless 164, 1-degree base and side bevels

Initial Impressions
Excellent finish on this board. The clear topsheet is a very nice touch, as are the inlaid insignia. The bolt inserts were clean and free of burrs. All seams are smooth, with no high/low spots or odd finishes. The edges were sharp and ready to ride out of the bag. I did not detune the edges or re-sharpen the board before riding it, just a coat of all-temp wax and a good scraping.

The Ride
My first ride on the Experience was at Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island. This was our first trip to this hill, and we were lucky enough to be there during a ridiculously heavy snowfall. As I am not a big believer in warm-up runs, I headed straight for the nearest set of trees and just let it rip. My first thought was "WOO HOO! POWDER!", which also happened to be my second through nth thoughts. Somewhere near the bottom of that tree run, I started thinking about how well the board turned when pushed hard.

For the rest of that day and the next, I rode the trees almost exclusively. Visibility was not great out on the main runs, but I was able to get the speed up on some fresh corduroy. Edge-to-edge was smooth and easy, edge hold was _staggering_ - more on that later. In fresh, deep, slightly heavy powder, the Experience was confident, agile and easy to move. Transitioning from powder to groomed run mid-turn was natural.

Next up was Blackcomb. Whistler/Blackcomb got some of the snow that fell on Mt. Washington, but definitely not as much, and it was heavier. This was our first trip to the Whiz, so we relied on intuition, intel from friends who had been there before and chatting up locals on the chair in order to find the goods. The main runs were pretty hard-packed, and there was an un-ending line of people heading to Spanky's Ladder, so we headed for the trees off of the Crystal chair. 

The snow was decent, and the masses didn't make it that far into the woods, so we got decent turns in all day. Some sections were very tracked out, so I was able to see how the board handled fast panic-turns in the trees. Very well, as it turns out. On at least a couple of occasions, the board enabled me to rip a turn that saved me from a pretty decent bail and a guaranteed beat-down from a frozen tree.

At the end of the day, it was time to head for the base. Eventually we ran out of trees to ride in, and had to dice it out on the main runs. By that time, I had forgotten that I was on a new board. Imagine my surprise when a hard turn on the bulletproof bottom third of the hill didn't result in the usual powerslide. The edges hooked up. I turned. I turned like I was on fresh, first chair corduroy. The board made a little farting noise with every turn, and it was the best sound in the world. I stopped to wait for a clearing to appear in the crowd, then made the last few hundred metres at speed, doing quick carves. The edges held, edge-to-edge transition was like buttah. At the bottom, I unstrapped and just stared at the board for a bit. "What are you - magic?"

Final day of the trip - Revelstoke. First run was the North Bowl. Visibility was non-existent, so the first couple of turns were tentative. Then I realized that almost nobody had dropped in before us - there were no tracks. The Experience rolled easily from turn to turn, all the way down through two feet of light pow. Effortless. We exited parallel to a creek, which meant riding the toe-side up and down and around trees and rocks. Great grip, easy speed. The rest of the day was spent - you guessed it - in the trees. Lots of untracked snow, mini pillow lines and small drops made for a fun day. The few times I rode groomers, the results were the same as before - great grip at speed. It also passed the cat-track test - it's just as fast on the long flats as my old cambered boards. 

The Short Version
Great in powder. This will be my board to take on cat trips.
Great in the trees. It turns much quicker than the length would indicate.
Great on hardpack. Despite the soft, pow-friendly nose, the Magnetraction edges really work with the stiffness of the board through the middle and tail.

Would I buy it again? In a heartbeat. :thumbsup:


----------



## bioject (Dec 30, 2010)

Originally I was considering the 159cm Experience, but my friend has been recommending that I get the 164cm since I'm 6'1" and he thinks I should try something a little longer than my original board. I think my 2005 Nitro Magnum is a 160cm but I don't remember exactly. Before I make the purchase, I just wanted to get a final okay from other people. It sounds like a good idea.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Great review pinkrobe :thumbsup:
I ride European Alps. Looking forward to the Nth. American experience one day...

bioject
I´m 5´8 120~130lbs and I´m looking at getting a Jones Flagship (only I can´t get one) I currently ride 157, and 159 size boards. 
When I get a Flagship, it would be 161.
If I were your size, I´d get 164 for sure.


----------



## MI_canuck (Feb 29, 2008)

looking to get a 2011 Rossi Experience...

my current board is a 159 T6... my stats are 5'6", and 180lbs without gear.


wondering if i should get a 159 or 163 Experience... from all I've heard, it handles a lot shorter than the length indicates, but who knows... this will be an all purpose board... steeps, trees, pow, crud, groomers, etc... just no park at all... 


159 or 163?


----------



## dknj (Nov 7, 2010)

Great Review pinkrobe. I just got this board a week ago, size 159. My stats are 5'9" / 155 these days. I easily could have gone longer, but I like the shape at these dimensions for my size and will ride it in all conditions. I have been riding many years, really like this board so far. Full review coming out in a few days.


----------



## Sick-Pow (May 5, 2008)

You are goofy, it will not work, they redesigned it for regular riders.


----------

