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

2017-2018 Scott Superguide 105

Sam Shaheen reviews the Scott Superguide 105 for Blister

Scott Superguide 105

Ski: 2017-2018 Scott Superguide 105, 183 cm

Available Lengths: 175, 183 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 181.1 cm

Stated Approximate Weight per Ski: 1640 grams

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 1562 & 1566 grams

Stated Dimensions: 135-105-124 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 134.7-104.4-122.8 cm

Stated Sidecut Radius: 23 meters

Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 65 mm / 21 mm

Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~3 mm

Core: Paulownia + Aramid Stringers + Carbon Fiber & Fiberglass Laminate

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -12.15 cm from center; 78.4 cm from tail

Intro

The first thing we noticed about the Superguide 105 is that it’s light. But the second thing we noticed is how solid and strong the construction feels. For a ski weighing in at ~1560 g, that’s a good sign.

Here’s what Scott has to say about the Superguide 105:

“Presenting the award winning backcountry ski that has helped bag numerous first descents in the Alps. The SCOTT Superguide 105’s innovative Elliptic carbon core has opened the door to skiing extremely steep terrain on a wider platform, thanks to its incredible power to weight ratio. SCOTT’s team of guides and steep-skiing athletes rely on the versatility and performance of the Superguide 105’s to achieve what most think is impossible on a pair of skis. We are proud to get into the elite club of “steep line catchers.”

A lightweight, stiff ski mountaineering stick with a wider platform? We’re listening.

Flex Pattern

Tips: 6.5-7
Shovels: 8-9
In front of Toe Piece: 10
Underfoot: 10
Behind Heel piece: 10
Tails: 9-9.5

The tips really are the only part of the ski that is soft. By the time you get ¼ way down the ski, you’re in the 9/10 range. The flex ramps up progressively, so there are no noticeable hinge points.

The tails actually feel very similar to the Scott Scrapper 115 — but just remember, the Scrapper 115 is about 350 g heavier (and, of course, 10 mm wider and 6 cm longer).

Shape / Rocker Profile

There are a few things I look for in a ski that I’ll use on the steepest lines of my season: (1) a stiff platform with plenty of effective edge for biting on terrible snow, (2) a low swing weight for jump-turning down long lines, and (3) a long sidecut radius to keep the tips pointed where I need them in steep and variable terrain.

With a 23 m radius, a very stout flex (especially underfoot and in the tail), ~3 mm of underfoot camber, very little tip and tail taper, and modest tip and tail splay, the Superguide 105 ticks all of these boxes.

The sidecut also uses Scott’s 3Dimension Sidecut tech that combines a straighter sidecut underfoot and a tighter radius near the tips and tails. This should make the underfoot platform of the Superguide 105 even more stable than the 23 m radius alone would suggest.

We’re very excited to see what this ski can do.

Actual Weight vs Stated Weight

In our First Look on the Scott Scrapper 115, Jonathan Ellsworth noted that those skis are a fair bit heavier than their stated weight (over 100 g heavier).

However, the Superguide 105’s are coming in about 75 g lighter than their stated weight from Scott.

Is this a good thing? That’s hard to say. There is a chance, at least, that this ski could be too stiff for its low weight in anything but perfect snow — that’s something we’ve found in the past with skis like the old DPS Wailer 112 RPC.

But with the softer tips of the Superguide 105, I have a feeling this ski will respond well to a hard driving stance in softer variable snow.

At ~1560 g and with a good amount of effective edge, there’s no question that it will be a fine uphill performer.

Some Comparisons / Questions

The Superguide 105 replaces the old Scott Rock’Air that I’ve put about 80 days on over the past few years, and the two skis certainly have some similarities.

In the next few weeks, I’ll get to put the Rock’Air and Superguide 105 side by side to do a more thorough comparison (and hopefully A/B them on snow). For now, I’ll just say that the Superguide 105 seems a bit stiffer and lighter overall.

If I had a qualm with the old Rock’Air, it was that it was sometimes a bit too easy. They were super versatile and could accept both a neutral and a more forward stance equally well, but that ease meant that they didn’t quite have the power for steep lines with truly bad snow (e.g., chunked-up ice; punchy, softer snow; etc.). They were passable in those situations, but they didn’t excel there. Hopefully the Superguide 105 will improve in steep, awful snow, while still being able to handle a variety of conditions.

Those Holes in the Tips and Tails…

Yes, there are holes in the tips and tails. The holes seem to serve a dual purpose: decrease weight, and offer attachments for the custom skins that Coltex makes for the Superguide series (hopefully we’ll have a set of these skins soon).

I’m not sure yet how I feel about those holes. But I’lll spend a lot of time staring at those tips over the next few months, and I’m sure I’ll form an opinion.

Some Questions / Food for Thought

We said above that a primary question of ours is whether or not this ski feels too stiff for its low weight. It’s easy to make a light, stiff ski, but will the Superguide 105 exhibit the nervous, chattery nature of some of its carbon competitors? Will it be able to track confidently at high speeds? Again, we’ll see. And if it does manage to punch above its weight class in terms of its suspension and downhill performance, this will become an extremely compelling backcountry and mountaineering ski.

Bottom Line (For Now)

The Scott Superguide 105 looks like a very intriguing ski for everyday touring as well as ski mountaineering. With an impressively low weight and a surprisingly stout flex, we’re excited to get this ski out once we get more snow here in Colorado.

Please leave any questions you might have below, and we’ll do our best to address them in our full review.

NEXT: Rocker Profile Pictures

1 Comment

  1. James December 28, 2017 Reply

    Definitely interested to hear how this ski compared to the Rock’air. Currently looking for a mid-fat dedicated touring ski and both of these are available for about the same sort of price in the UK right now

Leave a reply

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

*