Gear Review - 2004 Rossignol Scratch

Vano · Nov 21, 2005, 9:10 AM

Rossignol Scratch (not FS)
Date Purchased: October, 2005
Retail Outlet: Paramus NJ Ski Barn
Purchase Price (optional):$150
MSRP: ~$450
Overall Rating: 3
Would I recommend: Yes if you want an inexpensive, versatile ski and are primarly concerned with skiing softer snow, bumps or doing some tricks.

Description of item and your experiences:
I finally got the test the skis out in Belleayre this weekend. Blue trail with 100% man made snow - a bit choppy, but decent snow conditions.

PROS:
Responsive - easy to initiate a turn, skid around, hop around in the small bumps
Light - they were easy to swing and felt considrably lighter than my K2 Public Enemy twin tips

Cons:
Edge hold - the edge hold wasn't all that great (partly due to pretty choppy snow). I had to really get forward and push the tip into the snow to get the skis to hold its edge. This experience surprised me as the ski is already very forward mounted, again compared to my K2 twintips.

Stability at Speed - these tips would really start wondering all over the place at speed in choppy snow. Again, had to force the tip into the snow by going forward a bit more than i normally would.

Overall:
I think its a fine ski for the money. Nothing special, but a good choice for someone trying to get comfortable with bumps, with being in the air and riding switch. I am pretty confident that the skis will be pretty good in soft snow as they are light, happy to skid and are pretty maneuverable.

**bvibert** · Nov 21, 2005, 9:21 AM

Thanks for the review!

Vano · Jan 11, 2006, 7:47 PM

Having skied on these skis some more and in various snow conditions I can expand my review a bit more.

In short - these skis are NOT versatile. I have been once again able to confirm that the skis are too soft and you need to apply lots of forward pressure to get them to carve. They don't like high speeds and get chattery.

But worst of all they are very bad in soft snow. I skied in Killington after about 10 inches of snow and the whole experience was a struggle. When the snow was fresh (first person on the gondola baby!!) the tips kept wanting to dive. They don't have a big enough profile, are too narrow and the mounting point is too forward to give anyone above 150lbs much floatation to stay on top. It was back seat riding the whole way down. Once the snow got choppy (conditions where i like to go fast rather than avoid every rut) they were simply too noodly to take the hits. In short, if it snows more than a few inches, these skis are hopeless.

At the end of the day:

PROS: Good for tricks, quick turns and bumps. Ok for carving at slow and medium speeds.

CONS: Too soft for high speeds, too soft for crud, too soft period. Pathetic in powder.

RossiSkier · Jan 12, 2006, 6:27 AM

Hey Vano, thanks for the review of your demo. I have never tried a pair of those Scratch's, but I always wanted to. There are six varieties of Scratch and since you said MSRP of $450, I'm assuming your rode on the Scratch Pro at 110/80/103; 14.6@148, with 158 being the longest model. I think it's an important distinction to note that you were on the Scratch Pro's and that they are much different than the other Scratch models. Scratch Pro is the low end of the Scratch Series. I doubt you would have the same issue on a pair of Scratch BC at 128/88/113 20.8@178. Would be night and day.

Thank you for taking the time to write up your demo. Hope to hear more about the different brands of skis your try out. Rossi

----------ROSSI SCRATCH MODELS----------
MODEL | TIP/WAIST/TAIL | RADIUS | LENGTHS | MSRP
Scratch BC 128/98/121; 20,8 @ 178 171, 178, 185 $800
Scratch FS 116/84/109; 19,7 @ 174 19,7 @ 174 167, 174, 181 167, 174, 181 $700
Scratch Sprayer BC 120/88/113; 20,1 @ 176 20,1 @ 176 170, 176, 182 170, 176, 182 $600
Scratch Sprayer FS 110/80/103; 21,2 @ 174 21,2 @ 174 168, 174, 180 168, 174, 180 $550
Scratch Pro 110/80/103; 14,6 @ 148 14,6 @ 148 138, 148, 158 138, 148, 158 $450
Scratch Mogul 104/65/85; 24,4@181 24,4@181 167, 175, 181 167, 175, 181 $800

awf170 · Jan 12, 2006, 2:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RossiSkier

Hey Vano, thanks for the review of your demo. I have never tried a pair of those Scratch's, but I always wanted to. There are six varieties of Scratch and since you said MSRP of $450, I'm assuming your rode on the Scratch Pro at 110/80/103; 14.6@148, with 158 being the longest model. I think it's an important distinction to note that you were on the Scratch Pro's and that they are much different than the other Scratch models. Scratch Pro is the low end of the Scratch Series. I doubt you would have the same issue on a pair of Scratch BC at 128/88/113 20.8@178. Would be night and day.

Thank you for taking the time to write up your demo. Hope to hear more about the different brands of skis your try out. Rossi

----------ROSSI SCRATCH MODELS----------
MODEL | TIP/WAIST/TAIL | RADIUS | LENGTHS | MSRP
Scratch BC 128/98/121; 20,8 @ 178 171, 178, 185 $800
Scratch FS 116/84/109; 19,7 @ 174 19,7 @ 174 167, 174, 181 167, 174, 181 $700
Scratch Sprayer BC 120/88/113; 20,1 @ 176 20,1 @ 176 170, 176, 182 170, 176, 182 $600
Scratch Sprayer FS 110/80/103; 21,2 @ 174 21,2 @ 174 168, 174, 180 168, 174, 180 $550
Scratch Pro 110/80/103; 14,6 @ 148 14,6 @ 148 138, 148, 158 138, 148, 158 $450
Scratch Mogul 104/65/85; 24,4@181 24,4@181 167, 175, 181 167, 175, 181 $800

Im pretty sure he was on last years model...

Vano · Jan 12, 2006, 2:33 PM

Its a Scratch, not Pro, nothing. Its a blue and white topsheet that onlines a naked woman. It is the one that is 80mm under foot but because of narrowish, low profile tips and forward mounting it felt no better at floating in the deep than a 65mm under foot ski would. I am also over 200lbs - which didn't help.

RossiSkier · Jan 12, 2006, 5:33 PM

We the point was that it was a low end Scratch and there are many better versions. Was it a 158? You gave a review without mentioning how long it was.

Vano · Jan 12, 2006, 5:35 PM

180 - longest available size.

yes, there are better versions of this ski, like the Scratch FS. The Scratch FS is a stiffer skis (i believe) which would make it even more useless in powder. If a soft version of a ski can't float, usually a stiffer one is SOL.

I didnt expect these skis to be that great... only bought then cause they were dirt cheap and would be useful in low snow cover (rocks) and in bumps, which they actually handle pretty well for a park ski.

Nov 21, 2005, 9:10 AM	#1 (permalink)
Vano Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 102	Gear Review - 2004 Rossignol Scratch Rossignol Scratch (not FS) Date Purchased: October, 2005 Retail Outlet: Paramus NJ Ski Barn Purchase Price (optional):$150 MSRP: ~$450 Overall Rating: 3 Would I recommend: Yes if you want an inexpensive, versatile ski and are primarly concerned with skiing softer snow, bumps or doing some tricks. Description of item and your experiences: I finally got the test the skis out in Belleayre this weekend. Blue trail with 100% man made snow - a bit choppy, but decent snow conditions. PROS: Responsive - easy to initiate a turn, skid around, hop around in the small bumps Light - they were easy to swing and felt considrably lighter than my K2 Public Enemy twin tips Cons: Edge hold - the edge hold wasn't all that great (partly due to pretty choppy snow). I had to really get forward and push the tip into the snow to get the skis to hold its edge. This experience surprised me as the ski is already very forward mounted, again compared to my K2 twintips. Stability at Speed - these tips would really start wondering all over the place at speed in choppy snow. Again, had to force the tip into the snow by going forward a bit more than i normally would. Overall: I think its a fine ski for the money. Nothing special, but a good choice for someone trying to get comfortable with bumps, with being in the air and riding switch. I am pretty confident that the skis will be pretty good in soft snow as they are light, happy to skid and are pretty maneuverable.

Nov 21, 2005, 9:21 AM	#2 (permalink)
bvibert Surfing AZ while waiting for snow Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Torrington, CT Posts: 12,495	Thanks for the review! __________________ Brian SAC Tracker - Tramdock Tracker - Chainlove Tracker - WhiskeyMilitia Tracker 2008/09 Demo Days

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Rossignol Ski Owners	RossiSkier	Northeast Skiing and Snowboarding Forum	72	Sep 11, 2007 10:04 PM
GEAR REVIEW: Volkl 5 Star, Volkl AC3, K2 Apache Recon, Rossignol Z9	Catul	Gear and Equipment Forum	0	Jan 28, 2006 7:09 PM
GEAR REVIEW (mini) - Jansport Goshawk 40 internal frame daypack	smitty77	Gear and Equipment Forum	7	Jun 27, 2005 10:07 AM

Jan 11, 2006, 7:47 PM	#3 (permalink)
Vano Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 102	Having skied on these skis some more and in various snow conditions I can expand my review a bit more. In short - these skis are NOT versatile. I have been once again able to confirm that the skis are too soft and you need to apply lots of forward pressure to get them to carve. They don't like high speeds and get chattery. But worst of all they are very bad in soft snow. I skied in Killington after about 10 inches of snow and the whole experience was a struggle. When the snow was fresh (first person on the gondola baby!!) the tips kept wanting to dive. They don't have a big enough profile, are too narrow and the mounting point is too forward to give anyone above 150lbs much floatation to stay on top. It was back seat riding the whole way down. Once the snow got choppy (conditions where i like to go fast rather than avoid every rut) they were simply too noodly to take the hits. In short, if it snows more than a few inches, these skis are hopeless. At the end of the day: PROS: Good for tricks, quick turns and bumps. Ok for carving at slow and medium speeds. CONS: Too soft for high speeds, too soft for crud, too soft period. Pathetic in powder.

Jan 12, 2006, 6:27 AM	#4 (permalink)
RossiSkier Banned Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: N. Troy, NY Posts: 599	Hey Vano, thanks for the review of your demo. I have never tried a pair of those Scratch's, but I always wanted to. There are six varieties of Scratch and since you said MSRP of $450, I'm assuming your rode on the Scratch Pro at 110/80/103; 14.6@148, with 158 being the longest model. I think it's an important distinction to note that you were on the Scratch Pro's and that they are much different than the other Scratch models. Scratch Pro is the low end of the Scratch Series. I doubt you would have the same issue on a pair of Scratch BC at 128/88/113 20.8@178. Would be night and day. Thank you for taking the time to write up your demo. Hope to hear more about the different brands of skis your try out. Rossi ----------ROSSI SCRATCH MODELS---------- MODEL \| TIP/WAIST/TAIL \| RADIUS \| LENGTHS \| MSRP Scratch BC 128/98/121; 20,8 @ 178 171, 178, 185 $800 Scratch FS 116/84/109; 19,7 @ 174 19,7 @ 174 167, 174, 181 167, 174, 181 $700 Scratch Sprayer BC 120/88/113; 20,1 @ 176 20,1 @ 176 170, 176, 182 170, 176, 182 $600 Scratch Sprayer FS 110/80/103; 21,2 @ 174 21,2 @ 174 168, 174, 180 168, 174, 180 $550 Scratch Pro 110/80/103; 14,6 @ 148 14,6 @ 148 138, 148, 158 138, 148, 158 $450 Scratch Mogul 104/65/85; 24,4@181 24,4@181 167, 175, 181 167, 175, 181 $800

Jan 12, 2006, 2:33 PM	#6 (permalink)
Vano Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 102	Its a Scratch, not Pro, nothing. Its a blue and white topsheet that onlines a naked woman. It is the one that is 80mm under foot but because of narrowish, low profile tips and forward mounting it felt no better at floating in the deep than a 65mm under foot ski would. I am also over 200lbs - which didn't help.

Jan 12, 2006, 5:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
RossiSkier Banned Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: N. Troy, NY Posts: 599	We the point was that it was a low end Scratch and there are many better versions. Was it a 158? You gave a review without mentioning how long it was.

Jan 12, 2006, 5:35 PM	#8 (permalink)
Vano Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 102	180 - longest available size. yes, there are better versions of this ski, like the Scratch FS. The Scratch FS is a stiffer skis (i believe) which would make it even more useless in powder. If a soft version of a ski can't float, usually a stiffer one is SOL. I didnt expect these skis to be that great... only bought then cause they were dirt cheap and would be useful in low snow cover (rocks) and in bumps, which they actually handle pretty well for a park ski.