Thread: Rossignol scratch steeze

Hey gang.

Can anyone tell me what the lengths the 2008 models come in? I see the std size is around 185 cms but I'm looking for something in and around the 175 cm range.

These look like an awesome ski for the backcountry and maybe some double diamonds in the resort.

Any thoughts or info muchly appreciated.

Powdermag Buyer's guide says 174 and 185.

That 174 seems like it would be awful short with the twin.

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

Powdermag Buyer's guide says 174 and 185.

That 174 seems like it would be awful short with the twin.

Thx Bandit - The 185's would be a bit long for me seeing I'm 5'9" and 160 lbs. I have been using the Madian AK 179 with Naxo's in the backcountry and find them a bit long and don't get the control in tight trees and deep powder that I need.

I'm thinking the 174 Steeze with the new Duke Marker binding might be the way to go.

Trying to get the right combination is a task in itself.

Anyone else have any imput

Originally Posted by WhiteWolf

Thx Bandit - The 185's would be a bit long for me seeing I'm 5'9" and 160 lbs. I have been using the Madian AK 179 with Naxo's in the backcountry and find them a bit long and don't get the control in tight trees and deep powder that I need.

I'm thinking the 174 Steeze with the new Duke Marker binding might be the way to go.

Trying to get the right combination is a task in itself.

Anyone else have any imput

I hear you. I haven't skied the Steeze yet, but I spent last year on the BC's, which are supposed to be the same lay-up. The 185 was silly-easy to ski, which I why I think that the 185 will be the way to go, even with the added girth in the waist. The spread from 174 to 185 seems a bit wide and will make it tough for a lot of folks to make the same decision you are faced with.

the 185 does ski pretty short with a 8cm tip and tail... go for the longer ski!

My Rossi alpine catalog sez that the recommended weight for the 174 is 140-170# but they seemed pretty soft when I flexed them as compared to the 185...

fat is fun, so enjoy!

Ira

Originally Posted by WhiteWolf

Thx Bandit - The 185's would be a bit long for me seeing I'm 5'9" and 160 lbs. I have been using the Madian AK 179 with Naxo's in the backcountry and find them a bit long and don't get the control in tight trees and deep powder that I need.

I'm thinking the 174 Steeze with the new Duke Marker binding might be the way to go.

Trying to get the right combination is a task in itself.

Anyone else have any imput

You could easily ski a 185. The extra length makes a nice difference in control and float, especially at your weight. Don't sell yourself short, pun intended.

I am 5'11 170 lbs and I am going for the 185

Oh wow, I just weighed myselft at 158...I am getting skinny.

174 seems way too short. I'm 5'5" and 150 lbs and tour all the time. I would totally be getting the 185 if I was in your shoes. That fat a ski would be super squirrel so short. That fat a ski will be easy to smear, and throw sideways to scrub speed in trees. Definately go longer!

I just posted this on another thread, but if you cannot get over the graphic, look at the Raven from the Tele/AT lineup. same construction/mold/sizing, but better graphic...

Ira

Originally Posted by Ira

I just posted this on another thread, but if you cannot get over the graphic, look at the Raven from the Tele/AT lineup. same construction/mold/sizing, but better graphic...

Ira

Anyone know when the Ravens will be available and what the cost will be? Sometimes the Tele sticks run a tad cheaper, so curious...

Those look sick, love the steezes but the topsheets just freak me out. All the newschoolers are gonna be jumping on those flying-pink-heart graphics though, so I think we can expect to see the raven's on SAC within a month

Originally Posted by WhiteWolf

Thx Bandit - The 185's would be a bit long for me seeing I'm 5'9" and 160 lbs. I have been using the Madian AK 179 with Naxo's in the backcountry and find them a bit long and don't get the control in tight trees and deep powder that I need.

I'm thinking the 174 Steeze with the new Duke Marker binding might be the way to go.

Trying to get the right combination is a task in itself.

Anyone else have any imput

For more control in tight BC trees you need more width over less length bro. The wider your ski the less it will sink and the quicker you can turn it in powder.

Case in point, my 185 KW Megafats (146mm waist) ski better in the trees than any ski I have ever ridden. I ski in tighter trees than ever on them, and am only limited by spaces that are too narrow for them to physically move through ie trees closer together than the width of the tips.

Just got back from being out of town.

I picked up a set of the Scratch Steezes in the larger size.

I have been looking at the Katana and it looks like a wicked ski for the quiver. I'm wondering if the Katana would be a good addition or am I just over lapping for the same usage.

Also I was going to pick up the Mantras for a more all around ski but saw these Katanas so now I'm confused again..

Just like a kid in the candy store, I want everything but can only have a couple pieces.

Originally Posted by Ira

I just posted this on another thread, but if you cannot get over the graphic, look at the Raven from the Tele/AT lineup. same construction/mold/sizing, but better graphic...

Ira

Good call.

Hi everyone, I have been a snowboarder for the past 13 years. I am looking to get back into skiing. I have skied for 8 years previous top my snowboarding affair.

I am looking for recommendations in a one ski quiver. I am 5'9" 170lbs athletic. Is the steeze too wide and sketchy to ski groomers. I love to hit pow but sometimes, the groomers is all you get. I want to go fast and huck of cliffs.

I have heard great things about the steeze except for the graphics. I am open to any suggestions.

from everything i have heard, the steeze is a awesome one ski quiver. my buddies talked to sage last year in utah, he was skiing groomers on them and loving it. on backcountry he said it "rails groomers". if you can get over the puking care bear graphics, then go for it. i just got mine in today.

oh, and welcome.

Thanks, what size should I try? 174 or 185. 5'9" 170lbs.

im 5'7 150. and i got the 185's. they ski short.

They measure short, they ski short. Unless you are shorter than 5'6" or less than 150lbs, there is no reason you shouldn't be on the 185. They really should have made 3 sizes. 174, 181, 188 would have been much better.

Sweet, thanks everyone for your input. Now I just need to plan a few trips out west this winter and spring.

Originally Posted by wren

. 174, 181, 188 would have been much better.

Well, I had the same dilemna. I am 5'7" et 160 lbs and went for the 174 but NOT AS A POWDER SKI. I intend it to be a jib ski that is fun to throw around and land in pow or crud on a typical Chips-jumparound-run.

I would have chosen a 180 if available. I chose it to replace a 178 BC and they have about the same contact area. I did not dare take it out though with the shit snowpack so I don't know yet if it was a stupid idea or not.

My dog is 3'2" 75lbs and rides the 185cm. Height and weight should not be an issue when selecting skis. Unless you are a JONG!

What about PMgear Bros instead of the Steeze? Seems to be a popular ski on this board.

well welcome voiron, JONGGGGGGGG