EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Scratch BC vs. Gotama vs. 1080 Gun vs. Seth Vicious
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Scratch BC vs. Gotama vs. 1080 Gun vs. Seth Vicious

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Hey everyone,

I was hoping you could help me with a decision. I just moved to Telluride to work as a lift operator. I am 5'10 about 165-170 and ski agressively on all terrain. The weather is finally starting to cooperate, its snowing and it looks like it should continue through at least monday. I am currently skiing a Salomon Scream 10 Pilot but I would like to get something twin tipped and a bit fatter.

Has anyone skied a wider twin tip that they liked, i think I have narrowed it down to the volkl gotama, Rossignol scratch bc, Salomon 1080 gun and the K2 SEth Vicious. Does anyone know if Salomon has addressed in the 1080 the issue the pocket rockets had with being too soft and getting pushed around at speed and in the crud? I am drawn to the Scratch bc and gotama because of the stiffer wood core but am concerned their width underfoot might be excessive.

If you guys could share your thoughts or experiences I would appreciate it so I don't make a $700 mistake. I don't really want to demo as I will probably ebay the skis and don't want to spend $100+ on demoing.

Thanks
post #2 of 21
I've owned two - Gotama and Pocket Rocket (old version of Gun). Goat is backside wonder, weirdly stable at speed and still quick (but don't go over 183 unless you're a true expert). Can handle steeps, soft bumps, trees, air, hell itself if you're good. OK but not great on groomed. Gun/PR is quicker - actually prefers short radius turns to long - more forgiving, more versatile for pleasure skiing on groomed and moderate pow, but doesn't have enough stability for speed on groomed or pow, or in rough, deep snow. Gets twitchy on the steep. If you're really gonna ski there every week, all season, and see yourself more on the backside, go for the Gotama. I've heard good things about the Rossi, too, probably more of a 50/50 ski.
post #3 of 21
The Gotama is def. the best pow ski of the 4, but if u want a ski that's good on groomers aswell, then the S. BC is your ski. Don't just look at the waist and think that the ski is slow and can't turn, the BC is a good ski, and just for information, if you're buying the 178-version, you lose 2mm in the width, so it's only 96mm.

The thing is that you already have a pair of Scream's, and the question is if you are going to use them as normal skis, and use the new pair as pow-only. If that is the case, Gotama is your ski. If you wanna be able to ski groomers good with the new ones, you should go with the Scratch.

Final input: Just so you know, i've bought a pair of Scratch BC and the should arrive to me tomorrow or day after that, so my comments might be a bit colored and untrue... ;-)

Good Luck!
post #4 of 21
Addendum: Sorry I didn't answer all your question clearly. Far as I can tell from reading reviews, specs, etc., the "new" Gun is the old PR with new graphics. The Gun Lab has a different construction, more stiffness, but not the Gun...

Another thing to keep in mind is that three of your choices are known for their dampness, while the Volkl will feel more lively, less forgiving than the Scratch and Gun, for sure.
post #5 of 21
If money's an issue you can save a ton over the other skis you've mentioned by picking up a K2 Public Enemy. The 06 is 85mm underfoot and is a great all mountain twin tip. It's got enough beef to not get kicked around in chopped up stuff, has the width to well in soft snow, and performs well on hardpack as well.

Throw in the fact that it can be had for about $350, and I think it's a viable alternative.
post #6 of 21
another vote for gotama.

one thing of note: to retain a similar "feel" in the ski to what you are used to, the Rossi or Solamon is the way to go. the wood core and snap of the gotama will be a different feeling. the vicious will fall somewhere in between.

i'm not sure of the construction of the Rossi Scratch this year, but in years past, the THC construction of the Scrath series (only FS and BC models - note!) is much more of a "jumping/terrain park" construction than all mountain. of course, my buddy, who used to be J2 loves his 188 BCs for all around skiing in all terrain as an all mountain rippin ski. personally, i find that construction utterly useless in all mountain conditions. it's too soft and floppy (for me).
post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by UWASH
Hey everyone,
I am drawn to the Scratch bc and gotama because of the stiffer wood core but am concerned their width underfoot might be excessive.
That phrase tells me you really haven't spent enough (any?) time on fatty's. Please keep in my that you are asking for opinions and insight from folks who have and their experience is going to be a whole heck of a lot different from yours, if I'm right about your fat ski exposure.

Just curious, are you on the 70-mm waist version of the Pile-o-sh*t 10 or a different version like a Hot or Xtra Hot? Also what length do you currently ski? What do you like and not like about your current skis? And...get a little more specific about the terrain, conditions, and style you are after. Then folks can give you a more educated opinion.

I have either owned or do own all of those models but the newest Scratch BC. They are very different skis, with the exception of the BC and SV. Also length becomes an issue when you go super fat, so even though you want to save money by not demoing one or two, buying the right ski in the wrong length still makes it a $700 mistake.

Not trying to be a punk, but rather trying to help you get what you need.
post #8 of 21

Opinion on Gotamas

I just skied openeing day at Red Mountain in knee deep fluff on a brand new pair of 183 Volkl Gotamas. My usual skis are 190cm Salomon AK Rockets and 190cm Volkl Explosives. I found the Gotomas had great flotation, easy turn initiation .... and allowed generally effortless skiing. However at speed and when skiing aggressively (I'm 6'and 175lbs) they were too soft (not enough tip and tail pressure to maintain total control) and too easily deflected in the deep and variable. I felt the same about the 180cm Volkl Explosives. I'll try to trade them for a pair of 190s. I also had a chance to try the Fischer Wateas (They only come in 192cm) which is much closer to what I'm looking for, stable and smooth in all soft snow conditions and just as comfortable making tight turns in the trees as pointing it down (but not a twin tip, which doesn't matter to me).
post #9 of 21
Thread Starter 
Thanks everyone. In response to Bandit Man my current skis are the regular scream 10 pilots, 70 mm underfoot in a 180cm. Most of my skiing is done in Colorado off piste in both open terrain and trees. I am looking for a ski that I can ski all day everyday off piste but that will be decently capable on hard pack and groomers. I have generally liked my skis but would like something a bit wider and in a twin tip. I haven't spent any time on skis any fatter than my pilot. I am wary of the salomon 1080 guns as I hear they get tossed around in crud and chatter at speed. Do the rossi scratch bc and seth vicious have similar sidecut, and do they ski similarly? I am also interested in the karma and gotama but I think the gotama might be a lot of ski when there wasn't fresh powder around. Thanks in advance for any input.
post #10 of 21
I'm suprised no one's jumped on the Seth Visious. I haven't spent much time on the Gottama. Have skied the Pocket Rocket and have skied the Scratch BC quite a bit. Outof all these skis I prefer the Seth. I have a pair of last years b3's and the Seth is a much better overall ski. There's nothing it won't do for you if you're an accomplished skier. Go for a 176 or a 182.
post #11 of 21
UWash,

You really should demo several pairs as noted above. Several points:

1. You would be surprised how well many of the wider skis (80-100mm) will handle within the resort (bowls, black bumps, groomers, etc.). Four years ago I retired my 195 XScreams for the 191 10:EX and have never missed the 68-70 mm all-mountain boards of yesterday. Now my 10:Ex's are ready for retirement and I'll end up with something in the 90-95 mm range for my everyday ski.

2. Regardless of shape and width similarities, these skis can differ greatly in performance. Example, last year I demo'd 185 Pocket Rockets and hated them on anything but powder / cut-up powder. Sucked on groomers for example and mediocre on bumps. I would never buy it as an everyday ski. This year, I demo'd volkl Mantras which were much more versatile than the PR's. Would make a great everyday ski.

3. You'd be surprised how well many 80-85mm skis perform in 15-20" of new/cut powder. Both this year and last year, I demo'd a midfat (05 Legend 8000 last year and 06 B3 this year) after waking up to an unexpected powder day and found these skis to handle themselves very well in the bowls with new powder.

4. The more you demo, the more you will know about your own preferences for various ski characteristics that may vary greatly within a given size / shape category (power, finesse, quickness, float, carve).

Alot has changed since your Pilots were designed.
post #12 of 21
I continue to be fascinated that folks put down the Salomon Pocket Rocket, now called the TenEighty Gun. It is a popular ski, you won't see too many folks trying to get rid of them. Personally I think it is a lot of fun to ski. I am 5' 10", 195 lbs. and ski the 185 Pr's. To be honest I find the ski does nicely on the groomers and becomes deficient when on ice. But this ski is made for powder. The tips and tails are very flexible. This makes the tip ride to the top of the snow and I prefer to ride my skis on top of the powder. Some powder skiers prefer to ride down in the powder or feel that a really good skier can get his tips stay up.

It is worth a demo. I got a pair of Pr's for about $300 in the off season. This is a western ski, so right coasters aren't going to like it.

I am not a fast skier, just like to have fun, but I pretty much ski the speed limit on the groomers. Sometimes I wonder just where everyone is skiing their speed runs?

It fun to do a little switch stuff in front of the ski buddies and of course there is nothing like passing up a friend while throwing the rooster tail!

I wouldn't mind trying an 8800 or a scratch bc. Also, I would look at a K2 equivalent to the Phat Luv - that's a nice ski and I like it's lightness. The Phat Luv (a ladies ski) went from a 90 to a 95 waist this year.

I think something close to a 120 tip and a 90 waist is optimal for powder and also for playing on the groomers.
post #13 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruxpercnd
I continue to be fascinated that folks put down the Salomon Pocket Rocket, now called the TenEighty Gun. It is a popular ski, you won't see too many folks trying to get rid of them. Personally I think it is a lot of fun to ski.
Sorry, let me clarify.

Last year, I demo'd the Pocket Rockets for 2 days starting on the day after a big powder day at PC (poor planning kept me from having them on the powder day). Skied only in the bowls on first day and then all-around on 2nd day.

I loved the PR's in the bowls in the cut-up powder. Easy to turn and lively. Prompted me to seek out tighter lines in trees because I wanted to find the remaining soft stuff and because of elevated confidence due to PR's agility. Great.

Second day, I skied 40% bowls, 40% black bumps and 20% groomers. The bumps were still relatively soft but were well formed by that point. The PR's were OK but I liked the 8000's from earlier in the week. On the groomers, I thought the PR's felt like tongue depressors.

This year, same thing. Stupidity left me with 82-84mm skis on the initial powder day. Then I demo'd Mantras for the next 2 days and I skied a very similar pattern as described above for the PR's. I felt that the Mantras equaled the PR's in bowls but really performed at a much higher level on blacks and blues. Much better at carving - better grip and less vague on edge. Bump performance was a little better but could have been due to fact that I was on a shorter ski (177 Mantra vs. 185 PR - I wish I had been able to try 184 Mantra).

I just think the newer Mantras (and other skis) have been able to elevate the performance of the concept that was started by the PR.
post #14 of 21
A couple of years ago, on my old skis, I would dive into a short powder run, sitting way back trying to keep my tips up. As I slowed, the tips would dive and I would lose my skis under three feet of snow. So, I was delighted when I saw the soft PR tips ride to the top.

So, does the Mantra have soft tips that ride to the top or do you have to sit back a bit? Also, the PR tip action permits a centered binding mount. I would imagine that stiffer skis compensate by putting the bindings to the rear? I find that with the PR's I am in a more forward "attack" stance, even in powder.

Also I see that the Mantra comes in with dimensions of 130-94-113, wider than the PR 90 waist. Perhaps the 130 tip is what allows for more stiffness. I would think the Mantra's 94 waist would take away from groomer performance a little. Nevertheless, I love the wide skis.

I really wish that there was a measure of stiffness for skis. Obviously, manufacturers aren't interested in providing this information.

Thanks for the comments on the Mantra... I wasn't aware of this ski. It looks like it is new for this year. I see that it has excellent preliminary reviews. I always buy my skis in the summer, so it will be interesting to see how after-season prices go.
post #15 of 21
I honestly couldn't tell you what makes the Mantra carve / edge better than the PR.

I wouldn't characterize the Mantra as a stiff ski. It is still a playful, easy off-piste ski in the mode of the PR but does better on hard pack.
post #16 of 21
I bought a pair of Scratch BC after i wrote in this thread the last time, and i can just confirm what i said since i have skied with them more now...
These skis are nice, really nice! They are really good in pow, but still stiff so they perform really well on the groomers, and the softer and the more snow it is in the piste, the better will the skis handle! You can go really fast in big, big sweeping turns, which is a lovely feeling with these babies... The only thing that is bad is that they are a bit too big to handle well in the park, and a bit to heavy to spin with...
post #17 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by UWASH
Thanks everyone. In response to Bandit Man my current skis are the regular scream 10 pilots, 70 mm underfoot in a 180cm. Most of my skiing is done in Colorado off piste in both open terrain and trees. I am looking for a ski that I can ski all day everyday off piste but that will be decently capable on hard pack and groomers. I have generally liked my skis but would like something a bit wider and in a twin tip. I haven't spent any time on skis any fatter than my pilot. I am wary of the salomon 1080 guns as I hear they get tossed around in crud and chatter at speed. Do the rossi scratch bc and seth vicious have similar sidecut, and do they ski similarly? I am also interested in the karma and gotama but I think the gotama might be a lot of ski when there wasn't fresh powder around. Thanks in advance for any input.
You want the karma then. End of Story. Otherwise, k2 public enemy, head mojo90.
post #18 of 21
karma hands down
post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruxpercnd

I am not a fast skier, just like to have fun, but I pretty much ski the speed limit on the groomers. Sometimes I wonder just where everyone is skiing their speed runs?
Speed limit? I must have missed that trail sign...:
post #20 of 21
UWASH:

The way I read your comments, you're looking for the best one-quiver ski you can find, with maybe more emphasis on off-piste. Also, it appears backcountry is not a part of the equation--it's more off-piste resort skiing.

If that's correct, I just want to state that I don't think the Seth Vicious is the ski you're looking for. I just demoed it this weekend at Alpine, and I can't recommend it as a ski that transfers well between off-piste and groomers.

Conditions: I'm your height and weight, with a strong racing background. I alternated my demoing between the 179 SV's and some 181 Apache Recons, about three runs each before switching skis, all day long. The day was about 2-4" of newly windpacked (heavy) powder. It seemed a decent testbed to compare these skis, which are at opposite ends of my assumed one-quiver performance spectrum.

The Recons were far superior all day long in every situation, and I'm sorry to say that as I really wanted the Seth's to shine and convince me to buy them. I've been looking, as you have, for a nice fat ski that performs great in all the places I tend to ski, which is pretty much off-piste, California inbounds steeps and chutes--other than runouts. On this day, certainly, the Seth's were not that ski.

Their edgehold was lacking, for one, in those variable conditions. I expect in consistent, deeper powder, that wouldn't be an issue. But in this heavy and variable dusting, they frequently lost it when contacting the crust underneath. The Recon's had no problems in the same spots, making the same turns, head to head, with poise and aplomb.

Another issue I had with them was that the turn radius was too long on all the harder-packed stuff, off-piste and on. When the snow got more forgiving, it has to be said that the Seth's became very amenable as well, making sweet short turns between the trees, surprising in contrast to their sluggish behavior out in the windblown open bowls. If I had only skied them in the trees and in the softer chutes off of Scott chair, I would have been sold. But anytime hard snow made its presence known, the Seth's turned erratic, edgegrip-wise, and unresponsive, turn-wise. They got knocked around on off-piste crust like you wouldn't believe, and they sucked entirely on the groomers heading back to the lift. Not that I want to ski that stuff much, but the Recon's ripped it on/off the piste and never gave me a moment's concern that I couldn't make any turn shape I wanted, with great edgehold. I'm not sure how durable they are, though, as I compressed an edge pretty easily (don't tell the shop guys! ). The sandwich construction on the Seth's looked far more reliable, although I didn't force the issue as on the Recon's.

I was the first to demo the Seth's, by the way, and I inspected the tune and it was pretty superb, so I can't assign blame there. I really think it's just that the ski was intended for the softer end of the spectrum, that's where they shine, and that's fair enough. They just shouldn't be touted as a one-quiver winner, is all.

Now the Apache Outlaw, on the other hand, apparently does do it all. But it's only got a mini twin (like Dr. Evil, I guess). Don't know if that rules it out for you, but the buzz is pretty hot on that one doing everything the Recon does, but fatter. And since the Recon's were superb everywhere (I've demoed them on powder days, too), I'm thinking you might consider adding the Outlaw to your list...I know it's on mine...

My two cents. Hope it helps,
-Shawn
post #21 of 21

Great Recon review

Shawn-
Great review of the Recon and very timely. I do the same kind of skiing you do (at Squaw, Alpine, etc) adn I'm considering getting one to replace my apache crossfires, which just don't do it off-piste. When things get even deeper, I turn to my Pocket Rockets.
By the way, I've skiied the PR's everyday for the last few years and they are fantastic, from pow to crud to bumps. I don't really even need another ski, but I like having a more edgy carvy ski for harder snow days.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Scratch BC vs. Gotama vs. 1080 Gun vs. Seth Vicious