Rossignol Arcade W 78 XP10
By PTO Team, read off Rossignol's own published geometry, construction and binding data - no verified independent on-snow test of this ski exists, and no carryover claim is made · Spec analysis on this ski
The take
“A light, short-turning groomer ski that is easy to like on a first blue run - and easy to outgrow the moment you start to carry speed.”
Start with the honest part. No one has independently tested the Arcade W 78 on snow in a way we could verify, so what follows is read off Rossignol's published geometry, not off a ride. What the numbers make plain: on every construction field Rossignol publishes - cap, poplar core, fiberglass, tip-and-tail rocker, the same technology list, the same radius and weight arrays, the same binding - the Arcade W 78 is the Arcade W 80. What separates them is the width of the waist and $100, and this is the cheaper one.
One more difference runs in the W 78's favor. Rossignol's copy for the Arcade W 80 says carbon layers reduce overall weight; the W 78's copy makes no carbon claim at all, yet both skis list the identical fiberglass and the identical weights. Same glass, same weights, and the cheaper ski is the one nobody bothered to dress up.
On snow the shape does the talking. The radius is 9 m on the 140, 10 m on the 148, 11 m on the 156 - short, and with both contact points rockered clear of the snow it starts a turn almost before it is asked. An edge that hooks up late is slow to catch, which matters most in a first season. Per ski it runs 1.2 to 1.4 kg, genuinely light. But there is no metal in the layup to steady it at speed.
Edge grip is where it runs out. A cap chassis feeds less of your input into the edge than a sidewall ski, and both contact points sit rockered off the snow, so at speed on hard snow it washes out. Rossignol shelves the ski under All Mountain on its site; its own sentence about the ski says on-piste, twice. Four names on the list - LCT, Assist Flex, Premium Hardtop, Extended Sidecut - are printed and never explained, and V-A-S, which Rossignol says absorbs shock, is one more. A name in a list is not metal.
For the woman already ducking off the side of the groomer, the Arcade is the wrong tool, and a longer one is not the fix. Rossignol's Soul W 92 is a different ski: a titanal beam, a full sidewall, 90-93 mm underfoot and a 13-15 m radius - the metal, the width and the edge the Arcade does without. It is sold flat at $699.95, so a binding and a mount go on top.
Two notes to close. The sintered base is a real feature at this price and a slow one if it is never waxed. And we stock the 140, the 148 and the 156 - three of Rossignol's five lengths, which is why the radius has to be read off the length, not off a spec table.
Bindings we'd pair with it
Mount point: Factory-mounted integrated system (Xpress W 10 GW B83). Our pick: Xpress W 10 GW B83, included in the price.
Rossignol includes the binding, so there is nothing to mount separately and nothing to shop for. Its release span is DIN 2.5-10 - the range the hardware covers, not a setting. A skier's number comes out of five inputs - weight, height, age, boot sole length and skier type - and a certified technician sets it and tests it against the actual boot; PTO does not put a DIN number on a web page. On sole norms, from Rossignol's own compatibility table: adult alpine ISO 5355 'A' is a yes and adult GripWalk 'A' is a yes, so the boot has to be an adult sole in one of those two norms and measure inside the binding's 261-332 mm range. Junior soles are a no on both counts, and most junior boots fall under that 261 mm floor anyway. Tech inserts are a no - this is an alpine binding, and no touring boot belongs in it. Bring the boot to the shop; the sole gets checked before the size conversation, not after.
Common Questions
- How is the Arcade W 78 different from the Arcade W 80?
- On every construction field Rossignol publishes they are the same ski - cap chassis, poplar core, fiberglass, the same rocker, the same technology list, the same radius and weight arrays, and the same binding model. The differences are the width of the waist and $100, and the W 78 is the cheaper one. There is one more: Rossignol's copy for the W 80 claims carbon, while the W 78's copy makes no carbon claim, and both skis list the same fiberglass. If price is the question, the W 78 is the honest buy. The real decision is which length fits, because the two size runs never line up.
- Can my daughter ride this in her junior boots?
- No. The included Xpress W 10 GW is officially incompatible with children's and junior soles - Rossignol's own table prints a NO against both norms - and its sole-length adjustment does not go below 261 mm, which rules out most junior boots on length alone. Short skis invite the question, so here is the straight answer: an adult boot, or a different setup. Bring her boot in and we will check the norm stamped on it and measure the sole before anyone picks a length.
- What length should I get, and what is the turn radius?
- We stock the 140, the 148 and the 156. Radius goes with length, not with the model: 9 m on the 140, 10 m on the 148, 11 m on the 156. Rossignol publishes a five-length run and keys the radius to that run, not to whatever a shop happens to stock, which is how a listing can end up printing these one column off. Length is a fitting conversation, and it wants your boots in the room.
- Is it any good off the groomer or in powder?
- No, and Rossignol effectively says so - its own copy scopes the ski to on-piste snow, twice. The All Mountain label on the site is the bucket the whole Arcade W family sits in, not a claim about this ski. At 78 mm with no metal and both ends rockered, soft snow is not what it was built for. If you are leaving the groomer, look at the Soul W 92 instead, and budget for a binding, because it is sold flat.
- Is the 26/27 the same as last year's Arcade W 78?
- We cannot say for certain. Rossignol does not badge it as new for 26/27, but we could not obtain a previous-season spec sheet to compare against, so we make no carryover claim and we do not point you at last year's reviews as if they described this ski. What we stand behind is the current published geometry and construction, and that is what this write-up is built on.
