The most honest and in-depth reviews of outdoor sports equipment on the planet.

2016-2017 SCOTT Punisher 110

Garrett Altmann reviews the SCOTT Punisher 110 for Blister Gear Review

SCOTT Punisher 110

Ski: 2016-2017 Scott Punisher 110, 189cm

Available Lengths: 157, 163, 173, 183, 189 cm

Blister’s Measured Length (Straight Tape Pull): 187.5cm

Stated Dimensions (mm): 144-110-132

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 143.5-109-131 mm

Blister’s Measured Weight Per Ski: 2,191 grams & 2,204 grams

Stated Sidecut Radius: “3D”

Core Construction: Poplar/Beech/Paulownia + Fiberglass Laminate

Tip & Tail Splay: 64 / 55 mm

Traditional Camber Underfoot: 2 mm

Boots / Bindings: Rossignol Experience 130 / Marker Jester (DIN at 10)

Mount Location: Factory recommended

Days Skied: 9

Test Locations: Taos Ski Valley; Mammoth Mountain, California; Telluride, Colorado

[Editor’s Note: Our review was conducted on the 12/13 Punisher, which was not changed for 13/14, 14/15, 15/16, or 16/17 except for the graphics.]

The punchline: the Scott Punisher is the best ski I’ve ever used in chop and crud, period.

I’d previously known Scott for their poles, goggles and apparel, and was interested to see what they were up to on the ski design and manufacturing front. And what I’ve found is that the Scott Punisher is a hard-charging, stable, and fun all-mountain performer.

Featuring the most rocker in Scott’s line, the Punisher is marketed as a versatile ski that can rip all-mountain crud and boost backcountry airs. Or as Scott puts it, “A ski that defines backcountry freestyle.”

While the ski does provide poppy takeoffs and stable landings when jumping, the biggest story here is the Punisher’s ability to blow through chop and carve variable hardpack.

Features / Design

The Punisher features a wood core and metal-free top and bottom laminate with traditional sandwich sidewall construction. It is an extremely well constructed, durable ski that doesn’t chatter in variable conditions.

It also features Scott’s 3Dimension Sidecut, a combination of two turn radii (one in the tip, one in the tail) and a 50cm straight section (no sidecut) underfoot for an improved pivot point, all of which is supposed to enable easy turn initiation, improved edge control, predictability, and power underfoot.

Unlike five-point dimension designs (like the Rossignol S7, Armada TST, or Atomic Bent Chetler), which feature a narrower tip profile, the Punisher has a wide shovel (144 mm) that is nearly spoon-shaped at the tip. I found this design helped the ski blow through chop with less tip deflection than skis with a narrower, five-point tip profile.

The Punisher has more rocker than any other ski in Scott’s line, and while it might be modest compared to skis like the K2 Hellbent or Rossignol S7, the tip rocker is substantial, similar to the Coreupt Slasher. (Compared to another crud buster, the Moment Belafonte, the Punisher features a similarly deep rocker line, but the Belafonte has less tip rise or splay.)

The tail rocker of this ski, however, is fairly subtle, and I was thrilled to find that the Punisher allowed me to load the tail without ever washing out while carving—though it also means that the Punisher isn’t that interested in smearing pow turns. In deeper snow, the tail prefers to engage for a longer, rounded turn rather than a quick smear.

Overall, the rocker profile of the Punisher allows for the entire edge to engage when turning on soft or firm snow.

Garrett Altmann, Scott Punisher, Blister Gear Review

Garrett on the Scott Punisher, Castor, Taos. (photo by Michael Holmquist)

The Punisher is 110mm underfoot (like the 2006 Dynastar Legend XXL—one of my all-time favorites) and features traditional camber through the middle and most of the tail of the ski. The flex on the Punisher is stout like the XXL, and gives the ski the ability to carve at high speed and hold an edge in firm conditions.

Unlike the XXL, however, the Punisher features wider shovels, a twinned tail, and tip and tail rocker. This all translates to a ski that can not only rip across nearly any type of snow or terrain, but also one that can pivot, float, and carve turns more easily.

Groomers / Chop / Windbuff

My first run on the Punisher was on Porcupine at Taos. Seven inches of fresh snow had been skied up into soft powder piles interspersed with machine-made hard pack. The Punisher allowed smooth transitions and edge hold, whether carving larger GS turns or pivoting smaller, short-swing turns.

On steeper terrain off Lift #2, the skis continued to provide excellent edge hold. For the remainder of the weekend, I charged through crud off the ridge, ripped bumps on Reforma, and was able to rail GS turns back to the lift.

Garrett Altmann, Scott Punisher, Blister Gear Review

Garrett Altmann, Stauffenberg, Taos. (photo by Michael Holmquist)

After that first weekend at Taos, I tried the Punisher around Christmas at Mammoth Mountain, which had just received six feet of new on an eight-foot base. On the upper mountain, with a mix of powder, wind deposits, and avalanche debris, the ski permitted tight turns in the upper chutes, and race-style carves at various speeds and radii down the open bowls. The Punisher was able to charge, float, and transition through the various conditions, and its stability and edge hold allowed the ski to easily adapt to old, dry snow, chop, and wind deposits.

Wind buff was also a dream on the Punisher. When carving large GS turns on a previously slid avalanche track, then ripping through debris piles in the deposition zone below, the Punisher was the best big-mountain ski I’ve ridden since the Dynastar XXL. Even later in the season, skiing Kachina Peak back at Taos and the chutes off Gold Hill at Telluride, the Punisher again was able to carve amazing turns on firm wind deposits.

In short, the ski’s large size and twin tip rocker profile are effective in nearly all snow types. The design provides ample floatation in soft snow and chop, with easy turn initiation and full edge contact from tip to tail on firm snow. It can be skied aggressively forward for all-mountain charging, or neutral for controlled turns in steeps or when cruising groomers.

 

55 Comments

  1. Eric Edelstein March 8, 2013 Reply

    One of the most descriptive and useful reviews about a ski I have ever read…Good work Garrett. I have a buddy in France who swears by Scott skis, and from the review of the Punishers, I can see why. People say Scott skis are some of the most unknown great skis out there, and built really well for several seasons of hard playtime….it’s good to see Garrett put a pair through their paces and describe their behavior so well. Thanks.

  2. Christophe March 8, 2013 Reply

    Great review. I have four seasons (~100 days) on the original 182cm Punishers (89mm waist) and they just keep on going strong. Construction is top-notch and they have normal thickness, but very tough edges and bases. Variable-radius sidecut might be what makes these have such a versatile array of turn shapes. Can’t wait to try this new version.

  3. Speed March 12, 2013 Reply

    Tested the Scott line in Chamonix and was really impressed, looking forward to trying out this version of the Punisher. Thanks for a great review!

  4. Jimmy March 17, 2013 Reply

    Sounds like a realy good ski! Can you compare to the Cochise? Need a stable plank for variable conditions and I’ve been eyeing the cochise. I’m 190cm,75 kg intermediate skier in the alps.

  5. bungyfish March 23, 2013 Reply

    Great review.
    Demo’d the 2014 Punisher yesterday and I have to say – I was in love with them after half a run. They turn quick, feel light and are very responsive. I normally like a ski w/ titanium to keep it stable at speeds, but that wasn’t an issue w/ these. I went full out – they never chattered and I felt like I was digging a massive trench on the turns. The edges set and stay. There was plenty of crud from a recent storm and they ate it up. I can’t fully explain it – but they were just plain fun. I miss them already. I have been skiing Line’s for the last 6 seasons and I’ve never owned a Scott ski – but I think I will very soon.
    I have demo’d 12 skis this season and the only 2 that stood out and had me wanting them were the Scott Punisher and the Line Prophet 98. All the others were just so-so.

  6. Aaron September 26, 2013 Reply

    Maybe a stretch, but do you have any comparisons to last year’s Bibby? Just picked up a pair – have yet to ski on it – but I’m starting to have buyer’s remorse after reading your review of the Punisher. Most important qualities I’m looking for in a ski: (1) Feels lively edge to edge. (2) Ability to crush variable snow. (3) Good balance between tight turns (trees) and charging (open steeps). 5’11”, 160lbs, aggressive expert.

  7. m October 1, 2013 Reply

    How punisher compares to salomon rocker2 108 190cm and line sir francis bacon 190cm?

  8. Jason October 28, 2013 Reply

    I am 6’4″ and 240. I ski bumps and tight trees at Vail and Keystone, and also spend time at A basin.
    Would you go Scott Punisher 189, Cochise 185 or 193, or MOMENT Belafonte, 187cm or the new Sir Francis Bacon in 190. I am an expert skier and love to ski Pallavicini at A Basin but at 43 I now ski it with less reckless abandonment that I did in years past.
    Look forward to your thoughts and suggestion.

  9. bungyfish October 28, 2013 Reply

    Just a follow up to my March comments.
    First off – I bought a pair about a week after that review – 183’s. I loved them that much. I’m 35 yo – 6’2 – 200lbs – variable expert (some days charging – some days just playing – no park though).
    Aaron – never skied the Bibby – sorry. But to your points – 1. Very quick edge to edge and they hold great on long open turns. 2. They transition well. I can set the edge on a groomer and duck into the trees and back to the groomer while holding that solid edge. Very predictable. 3. They are quick ski and I love them in the trees – no metal so very light and quick turning. I haven’t had them on anything crazy steep yet so I can’t really vote there. But on the moderate steeps – they have been great. (for reference – I’d consider KT22 at Squaw to be crazy steep) I’m not a fan of super long skis – but if I was getting into the crazy steeps regularly – I would have gone w/ the 189’s.
    M / Jason – I skied last years Salomon Rocker2 and wasn’t a huge fan. They were decent but to much rocker for my style. I am a die hard Line fan and the Bacon’s are a great ski. Overall the Bacon’s are a heavier ski and they feel it – they are not as quick edge to edge and feel better the faster you go. The Punishers are more playful than the Bacon’s in my opinion. When on the Bacon’s you have to stay more aggressive all the time to keep them in check. They are less forgiving then the Punishers. They are similar skis and different at the same time.
    For me it came down to what I do now. My hard charging crazy steep days are over for the most part and I spend my days for lack of a better term – playing around. I still go for it on some days – but its not a daily thing anymore. I skied the Cochise the same day I fell in love w/ the Punishers – on that day – they were my 3rd favorite (Line Prophet 98 was second). Cochise is a solid ski and quick all around but when I got hauling on a groomer they chattered a bit – they held well but didn’t feel as solid overall – compared to the Punisher or Lines. That said – the Line Influence 105 was the MOST solid at speed – those skis love to run on the groomers – but they were a lot of work when going slow.
    I’ve never skied any Moment skis so I’m not help there either.
    I’ve had lots of skis over the years and I’ve learned that what works for me – may not work for you. It’s all a preference thing. I still have my Prophet 115’s and plan to break them out this year. I’m sure they will feel heavy but some days you drive the Caddy – some days the Vette.
    Hope this info helps. Whatever ski you pick – hope you have a GREAT season.

    • Jason November 4, 2013 Reply

      How do these skis do in the bumps?.

  10. Jason October 29, 2013 Reply

    I am 6’4″ and 240. I ski bumps and tight trees at Vail and Keystone, and also spend time at A basin.
    Would you go Scott Punisher 189, Cochise 185 or 193, or MOMENT Belafonte, 187cm or the new Sir Francis Bacon in 190. I am an expert skier and love to ski Pallavicini at A Basin but at 43 I now ski it with less reckless abandonment that I did in years past.
    Look forward to your thoughts and suggestion.

  11. Steve November 1, 2013 Reply

    Im also interested in the response to Jason’s post! Im a tick off his height and weight (6’3″/205#) .

  12. Jason November 5, 2013 Reply

    I have narrowed it down to either getting the 190 Sir Francis Bacon or the 189 Punisher. Your thoughts? I am 6’4″ and 240. I ski bumps and tight trees at Vail and Keystone, and also spend time at A basin.
    I am an expert skier and love to ski Pallavicini at A Basin but at 43 I now ski it with less reckless abandonment that I did in years past. Look forward to your thoughts and suggestion.

  13. Jason November 7, 2013 Reply

    Well boys I ordered some 189 Scott Punishers today! I will give you my two cents on how they perform once I get some time on them. Thank you for your help.

  14. sTEVE November 7, 2013 Reply

    I ORDERED SOME 189’S TOO!!

  15. Jake January 13, 2014 Reply

    189 Punisher
    Age 40 6’4″ 250 pounds
    Expert skier, Days on skied on Punisher 4, average days skied each year 40 to 50
    Skied Punisher at Keystone and Breckenridge. So far very happy with the ski
    Skied on groomers that were soft to hard packed and the ski did not chatter and I could really rip downhill with confidence. Skied some midsized moguls that were rock hard with 3 inches of fresh on top. Ski performed well and did not have any issues with the wide shovel of the ski. The skis are light and I felt they performed as well in the bumps as you could expect a ski of this size. Epic day at Breckenridge 8 inches of new snow to start the day and dumping hard all day with plenty of wind. Skied Peaks 7 and 8 which means you get everything from very hard windblown snow, light chop to 16 inches of pow because of the wind. Ski performed well and provided plenty of float. I skied some very tight trees at both Keystone and Breck and could make tight turns without a problem. The only thing I have not skied is heavy chop but after being on the ski I think it will handle this without a problem. I think the ski is plenty big for skiing Summit County and Vail as we rarely get more than a foot of snow at a time. I may get a smaller pair skis 90 mm range for when the snow is not great and I have to keep up with my smaller friends and kids in the bumps all day. Over all I really like the ski and they were significantly better than my old skis for the one big snow day at Breckenridge.
    Old skis 2004 Gotomas 184 with 103 underfoot This model was twin tip and no rocker great all mountain ski. Background raced growing up until high school. Ex D1 football player. Side note I skied old skinny skis just fine until a buddy gave me the Gotamas in 2009 and I saw the light of new equipment also I have not skied on any other skies to compare to the punisher. I originally wanted to buy the Sir Francis Bacons but felt after reading reviews and talking to some folks that I was just too heavy for the Bacon.

  16. Jake February 7, 2014 Reply

    Follow up.
    Days on skies now 10 +. Skied the epic storm we had in Colorado last week with 29 inches of new heavy powder.
    Skies performed well I did sink a bit but at 250 pounds and 29 inches of snow this is to be expected. Skied well in the tight trees and open bowls. The ski is very stable. Once the powder was cut into crud this ski really shined. The ski has no speed limit in crud or chopped up snow. The ski also performs very well on groomed runs for making GS style turns and has no speed limit on groomers or I did not find it.
    If you are a bigger guy and want a stable ski that can handle a variety of things I think this is a good choice.

  17. TM February 8, 2014 Reply

    How do you guys compare them to armada JJ’s and the new soul 7 type skis?

  18. Eric Edelstein February 8, 2014 Reply

    Just rode the 14-15 Scott Punisher for a couple runs in foot-deep, cut-up pow at NEWSR/ESWRA demo days n Vermont after a foot of fresh over hardpack….It was probably the best ski for those cut up conditions I tried at the show. Great balance of mass, response, stability, agility, grip and power with a really useful feedback underfoot. Huge performance envelope..and darn good at either end of the envelope…not just “OK”..but really, really good. Good job Scott. I have not tried the newest JJs or the soul 7s yet, but skied behind a guy on new Soul 7s….and he was tip-flapping in places the Punisher did not, and I think I had better grip in transitions from pow-to-scraped-off sections than he did…but it could be the tune of the Rossi, or the skier…who knows. The consistent message from reviewers all over the place saying the Punisher is a great mixed-surface ski is correct. I simply though this ski was great and a potential one-ski-quiver for many ski areas.

    • Blister Member
      Ross April 19, 2014 Reply

      Does anybody know if there are any changes other than graphics to the 14-15 Scott Punisher from the 12-13 and 13-14 versions?

      • bungyfish April 19, 2014 Reply

        14-15 are the same other than the graphics – as told to me by the demo guy at Loon in late March. I got mine this time last year and got the previous year for a steal. Happy shopping.
        I am still loving my Punishers – 25-ish days on them this season. Zero regrets on getting this ski.

  19. Blister Member
    Ross April 21, 2014 Reply

    Thanks bungyfish. I just picked up a pair of lightly used 12-13 Punishers with demo bindings for cheap. I’m looking forward to using them the rest of the season at Snowbird. They sound like they might be better than my Soul 7’s in variable Spring conditions.

  20. Patrick October 10, 2014 Reply

    Hey Garrett,

    Have you had a chance to ride the new 2014 or 2015 RMU Apostle? How does it compare to the Punisher and the Bacon now that they stiffened the ski up a bit?

    Thanks a bunch for the solid review!

    • Author
      Garrett October 10, 2014 Reply

      Patrick,

      The Apostle I’ve ridden (see my review) is starkly different than the Punisher since it features a 5-point design with the widest point at the front of the ski occurring much further down from the tip than the Punisher. I personally prefer the widest portion of a ski occurring at the tip, like the Punisher features, so that floatation is more quickly enabled in powder and crud, while a longer effective edge is available on groomers. I haven’t ridden the ’14-’15 Apostle or Bacon but will hopefully get on them this winter.

  21. Patrick October 14, 2014 Reply

    Thanks a bunch Garrett for the heads up.

    I just pulled the trigger on a pair of 183’s. Im excited to tear the shit out of Alta this winter and putt these things through the ringer. From all the reviews I have read, I havent heard a single bad thing about these. They seam like a perfect daily driver for charging on everything from hardpack to crud and pow. We shall see.

    -P

  22. Blister Member
    Andrew November 18, 2014 Reply

    Hey guys –

    Any chance of a 190cm Scott Scrapper review during the 14/15 season?

  23. Patrick November 18, 2014 Reply

    Does anyone have any thought on the recomended mounting position of the 183cm version and if so, why?

    I just picked up a pair and am super stoked to taker for a spin this weekend!

    • bungyfish November 18, 2014 Reply

      I mounted mine at +1.
      I measured them out and I don’t recall the exacts but boot center was approx -6 from ski center so I decided to go +1 off boot center. Compared to the demo’s mounted standard I skied – can’t say I notice a big difference but I wanted them a pinch quicker overall.
      Guy who mounted them (who knows my style a bit) recommended +2 or +2.5 but I was a chicken and couldn’t go that far.
      I ski all mtn – rarely go in the park – sometimes spin off a natural jump.
      Enjoy the new skis – I’m sure you’ll love them.

      • Patrick November 18, 2014 Reply

        Hey thanks a bunch bungyfish!

        Yeah that was my next question, I was wondering how far away the Recommended was from True Center. I mean, some skis are designed to be mounted close to True center, such as the Bacon, but -6, then another -1……
        I was slightly confused when reading the 2nd Review of this Ski and seeing a recommendation of -1 on the 183.
        I also like to play a bit and spin, but dont want a ski that doesn’t feel balanced and fairly neutral just because it was mounted a bit further back. From Scotts description on their website, I’m kinda surprised that the recommended line isn’t further forward.

        For how good of reviews this ski has gotten from everyone that has taken it for a spin, their isn’t much of anything in the way of info on recommended mounting position. Thanks for the response!!

        • bungyfish November 18, 2014 Reply

          Sorry if that made no sense – I’m blaming the beers.
          Just to be clear – I am mounted at +1 – which is closer to center. I also have the 183’s.
          I’m not 100% that true vs boot was an exact difference of 6 – it may have been more actually. I know these are designed for an off center mount. I met one guy who had his mounted true center and he ended up moving them to recommended boot center because he “didn’t like the feel” of true center. Although he couldn’t tell me exactly what he didn’t like. But his statement was part of the reason I was a chicken and only went +1. Not knowing what or how you ski – I can’t really recommend but if I had to do it again I’d stay in the +1 to +2 range. (closer to center from rec boot).
          Good luck man – let us all know where you land and how much you love them.

  24. Luke November 21, 2014 Reply

    Hi Garret,
    thanks for the great review… just like all on blistergearreview!

    I was very tempted by the Punishers after reading this (and founding them at a good price), but worried they might be too stiff / charger?

    I’m 39, 141 pounds / 5’9″ intermediate (which is pretty vague) skiing Salomon Lords 177.
    I guess I’m used to that Salomon flex: can you compare the flex of the Punishers to, say, the Lords or Q-105?
    I was after a relatively easy going ski…

    Cheers,
    Luke

    • Garrett November 23, 2014 Reply

      Luke,
      Despite it’s charging capabilities, the Punisher would be good for you if you’re looking to advance your skill level a bit. It has a predictable feel that, while probably being slightly heavier than the Lord (cap vs. laminate construction), is still fairly straightforward in maneuvering and will likely hold an edge more easily. The Punisher will be good at teaching you to carve more advanced GS turns on groomers, yet be capable of smaller turns at moderate skill level.

      If you’re content with intermediate skills, then stay with the Lord since it’s probably a bit easier to swing around and smear. But if you want to enjoy the feel of a good carve and be more proficient at skiing chop off piste, do yourself a favor and mount up a pair at 1cm forward and enjoy the ride.

      • Hey, Luke – Garrett’s got more time on the Punisher than I do, but I don’t disagree with anything he says. The only thing I’ll add, and that makes me a little nervous, is that you say that you’re looking for a “relatively easy going ski.” Granted, we only have time on the 189cm Punishers and haven’t skied the shorter lengths, but when I think of “relatively easy going skis,” I think the Quest 105 fits that description perfectly. But again, I think Garrett’s descriptions are on point, I just don’t want you to end up with more ski than you’re looking for.

      • Luke December 3, 2014 Reply

        Garrett and Jonathan,
        thank you both for your prompt replies! Sorry couldn’t respond earlier.
        All valid points, and I tend to agree with all. I’m intermediate and I want to progress (if only my skills would match my enthusiasm… ) but although I’m in pretty good shape, I know I don’t have legs of steel, hence my comment about the “easy going ski”.

        I think both Punisher (183) and Q105 (181) could work TBH, with the Salomon being the safer option. Jonathan I read your review on the 105 and was also intrigued by that.

        I ski on eastern Alps/Dolomites, so not always guaranteed powder as in PNW – so the choice was also influenced by offers/prices, as this might not be my daily driver (but hoping for snowfalls like last year.
        So at the moment was looking at 2015 Punisher, 2014 Q 105 and 2014 Shreditor 102, but won’t have the chance to demo. Planning to mount them with a pair of Barons, as I’d really like to start get into some short touring / hink’n’ride.

        I’ll make sure to post back some comments if I end up getting any of these…

        Cheers,
        Luke

  25. Tim January 9, 2015 Reply

    Hi, I have been following this thread awhile. I have a set of Scott Reverse that are awesome on groomed on groomed and soft but am looking for a second ski for spring heavy snow on top of groomed. Late February and early March i ski Big White 6-8 days and there is often 4-6 inches of fresh snow on top of softt groomed, if its warmer it can be heavy and also choppy in the the afternoon. I am deciding between Scott Punisher and Rossi Soul 7. My specs are 51 years old, 5 ft 10 inches, 160 lbs, advanced skier and looking for a second ski for heavy snow to perform as easy and comfidently as my Scott Reverse performs on groomed with 2 inches of light snow. Any thoughts appreciated.. Cheers, Tim

    • bungyfish January 9, 2015 Reply

      Tim,
      First off – I still love my Punishers.
      I demo’d the Rossi line of Sin/Soul/Super a few weeks ago and they all ski the same for the most part. The only differences structurally is the widths (as far as I know) They have a real low swing weight and overall – for me – they are just OK. Predictable and easy to ski but a little too lightweight/chattery for me.
      If you are looking for a ski for fresh/choppy conditions I’d definitely go with the Punishers – but I am partial to them. Even more so now after skiing many other skis. But again – that could be my style and preference. Not sure what it is about the Punishers that is scaring you but some comparable skis that I’ve clicked into that I would put in that “chop” category would be the Volkl Gotama, Armada TST, Line Supernatural (92 or 100) and the Line Bacon’s.
      Good luck and let us know what you pick.

  26. Jake January 9, 2015 Reply

    Tim, I have not skied the Soul 7 but from friends and other reviews it is a soft snow ski. I love the Scott Punisher. I ski the 189 and I am 6′ 4″ and 250. You should have plenty of float on the punisher as it does well in all conditions from groomed, crud, to powder. For me personally I have some Megawatts for deep days but I am 90 pounds heavier than you and I am sure you will enjoy the punisher. I would consider the Punisher similar to the Line Bacon but a little burlier. I think you can have as much fun on the Punisher as the Soul 7 with a more versatile ski. I now ski three skis but for two years just skied the Punisher and Megawatt. I now ski the Moment Tahoe for groomed and no new snow bumps, Punisher on everything, and Megawatt on deep days. Good luck

  27. Jake January 9, 2015 Reply

    Also Tim, the 183 Punisher will be plenty of ski for you unless you are skiing giant open lines and break neck speed.

  28. Tim January 9, 2015 Reply

    Thanks for the input Jake and Bungyfish. I am leaning more towards the Punishers. I have been trying to think about what I would like to add to my Scott Reverse, and really it comes down to more capability in spring heavy snow and the afternoon choppy powder/groomed skied up piles that result. I was most interested in trying the Soul 7 from reviews stating that it is an excellent fun ski and while the Soul 7 sounds like an excellent choice for soft and fluffy the Scott Reverse that I have performs excellent on fresh light snow with a groomed base. Most all reviews identify the Punisher as excellent for mixed and choppy conditions, Any feedback on whether it responds quickly and easily (nimble?) or whether you have to work at it? Not an easy thing to define, but for example I skied a Head 88 for about 5 years, and with the bindings at center I had to put a lot of effort into it, with the bindings 1 inch forward I could snap it around the mountain with ease. Cheers, Tim

  29. Maz March 3, 2015 Reply

    Some mount point advice, please.
    I just received my 183s, which I predict will go like hell (in a good way) at the NZ clubfields. Measured them up, and they’re 182cm straight pull, with recommended boot centre at 101cm, i.e. 10cm behind true centre – and that’s a lot in 2015, although they have very long, gradual tip rocker.
    I saw Garrett mention +1cm. Any other feedback on this? Very curious :-)

    • bungyfish March 3, 2015 Reply

      My 183’s are mounted +1.
      The guy who mounted them and knows my style recommended +2 or 3 but I couldn’t do it. I’ve been real happy with ski overall and my mount point.
      Met one guy who had mounted at true center and ended up moving them back to +4. Said they were to “twitchy” at center.
      Good luck.
      I’m going to demo next years Punishers in a few weeks. Not sure if there are any changes yet but looking forward to it.

  30. Aaron January 10, 2016 Reply

    Thanks for a great review! Big fan of the Pun.

    Have a question re a Scott ski on the opposite end of the spectrum. Do you or your team have any experience w the Superguide 95? I’m looking at a touring setup and this ski has piqued my interest, but I can’t seem to find much on it.

    • Author
      Garrett January 15, 2016 Reply

      Aaron,

      I’ve been putting time on the Punisher 95, Scrapper, and The Ski but have yet to try the Superguide 95. I’m heading to Europe for the next several weeks and have a few folks I’ll who have been putting significant time on the Superguide the past couple years. I’ll see what feedback I can attain for you and reply here if I hear anything. -G

      • Tyler October 29, 2016 Reply

        Hey garret,

        Curious about your thoughts on the scrapper? Looking at the 115, seems to have less tail rocker than the punisher. Seems like a solid directional charger?

        • Garrett November 14, 2016 Reply

          T,
          I’ve yet to put time on the 115, though I’ve ridden the Scrapper 124 extensively the past couple seasons. The Scrapper does have more directional charging capabilities than the Punisher in softer conditions, particularly due to a more reinforced tail section and a bit less rocker. I suspect the 115 will have even more so with narrower width and reduced surface area to float. The Scrapper 115 is at the top of my list for the upcoming season and I’m anxious to see how this ski performs.

  31. Christian February 6, 2016 Reply

    Hej Garret

    I am currently riding the Norwalk but looking for something similar between the width of the Norwalk and tst – 110 falls straight in between.

    I like that I’m able to point the skis and step on it, 21m turn radius, float. how would you say the punisher would compare?

    Thanks!

    • Author
      Garrett February 9, 2016 Reply

      Christian,
      This Punisher loves to be pointed, stepped on, and charged. No problem with 21m turns. It will excel at these. Unlike the Norwalk and TST, which carry a tip profile that is not continually in contact with the snow [in firm conditions], the Punisher may feel like a lot more ski since the widest point of the ski is at the tip and will be making contact with snow most of the time. I prefer this for carving, and all around skiing, for that matter. The TST is more nimble for quick turns but I found it irritating to carry around 20+ cm of tip profile that only engaged in deeper snow.

      • Christian February 9, 2016 Reply

        Thanks Garrett!

        Sounds like a really interesting ski. Is it a lot stiffer than the Norwalk/TST?

        As the punisher has a lot of tail rocker while the TST has none, which is easier to ski in tight terrain?

        Really appreciate your input. I agree with your thoughts on the tiprocker, even though it didn’t bother me on the TST the Norwalk gets a lot of flap.

        Thanks again
        C

  32. lothar October 2, 2016 Reply

    hi garrett,
    i am planning to buy the scott punisher, but i am not sure yet about the length – i am 1,84cm(6’)/72kg (160lbs), pretty good skier in all conditions, just not so much into park/tricks. so i wonder what size you would recommend?
    thanks a lot!!
    lothar

  33. lothar October 2, 2016 Reply

    ah sorry, 1,84cm=6’3”

  34. lothar October 2, 2016 Reply

    no wrong again, sorry, total confusion!;) 1,84cm=6’0,3”

    • Garrett October 4, 2016 Reply

      I’d go with the 189cm if you’re just over 6′ tall [184cm]. The remaining question I’d ask is how fast do you like to ski? If you enjoy cruising fast and staying forward in all types of snow, then go long. If you find yourself in the moderate speed range, on groomers more than off piste, and in the back seat from time to time, go with the 183cm and learn to master it for a couple years before going long.

  35. lothar October 5, 2016 Reply

    thanks a lot for the quick answer! ok, sounds like i should go for the 1,89 then.
    usually i like to go fast and ski forward especially off-piste and in deeper snow. plus, sometimes i weigh 1-2kg more, and airbag and avalanche gear adds around 5kg.
    for the hardpack groomers i also have a race-carver and i still have the old punisher in 1,83 which might be still ok sometimes to play with on days with less snow… thanks for the great review and good advice!

  36. Jake October 5, 2016 Reply

    It depend where you ski. When I ski Breckenridge, A Basin, or Vail I love my 189CM Scott Punishers 110. While at a place like Keystone it is a little to much ski at times and for Mary Jane it can be a little to much ski at times. That being said last year I bought some 186cm Blizzard Peacemakers just for Keystone and Jane and while I am sure I mounted them wrong I was never that confident on them. I like the Scott Ski so much I am planning on getting the Punisher 95 to complement my Punisher 110 in a 189CM and getting rid of my Moment Tahoe and Peacemakers this year. If you ski a place like Mary Jane or Keystone all the time I would get the Punisher 110 in the 183 CM and if you ski a place like Breckenridge or Squaw Valley I would get the Punisher 110 in a 189 CM. I am 6’4″ 250 Pounds and while I don’t huck cliffs like I used too but I still push it pretty dang hard and never feel like the Punisher will let me down.

  37. lothar October 5, 2016 Reply

    hey, thanks a lot for the comments! unfortunately i don’t know these resorts, as i am usually skiing in europe (austria)! could you tell me the characteristics, so i can apply them to austrian resorts? also, it sounds like the combination with the old punisher could work well then, because it has more or less the same size as the new punisher95.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*