2018-2019 Scott Superguide 105

Sam Shaheen reviews the Scott Superguide 105 for Blister
Scott Superguide 105

Ski: 2018-2019 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

[Note: Our review was conducted on the 17/18 Superguide 105, which was not changed for 18/19, apart from graphics.]


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

17 comments on “2018-2019 Scott Superguide 105”

  1. 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

  2. Sam,
    any input on the skis yet? Using some La Sportiva Nanos for powder touring, but they ski a bit to lightweight for my liking.
    How is slarving on the Superguides? Thanks!

  3. Hello,
    any news regarding this interesting ski? I’m wondering if it’s a bit too nervous for a light skier due to its low weight paired with such a stout flex.

  4. Hey guys, I own this ski (last years graphics) in a 175 cm. It’s a light ski for its width and powerful flex but it’s definitely not a nervous ski. On the contrary it’s on the damper side but still lively in how it pushes back as long as you’re on top of it. I find that the edge hold is tenacious but I haven’t skied the 105 on boiler plate. I have a 178 cm SG 88 also and it’s a better hard snow ski with its 88 mm waist width. I had the 105’s out at a ski area last week with 8” of cold new over groomed, so nice conditions. That day when I would really rail a carve they’d cut right through the pow and rip the buried corduroy but pop out easily to initiate the next turn. The 105 or really any of these Superguides are not what I’d call slarvy skis. The tails are turned up and you can slip them in tight terrain but there a big back seat on these babies and they can get you out of trouble if needed. I personally feel they ski almost any condition very well.

  5. Oh yeah, I’m a light skier at 145 lbs., they’re not nervous or an autopilot ski but will do what you want them to as ong as you’re in the drivers seat.

  6. I own both the 16/17 SG88 in a 178cm and the SG105 in a 175cm. Great skis very light, strong and good skis in most all conditions. The 88 is a little better hard snow ski and the 105 is a bit better in softer, deeper snow but they both cover a wide range.

  7. How do these sit when compared with the Black Crows Corvus or Navis freebirds? And what did Scott do to trim the weight from these, was it similar to the Corvus where they reduced the thickness of the base and edges? Thanks all

    • Hi Nick,

      I’ve not skied the Corvus or Navis freebirds, but the edges/base on the Superguide 105 are in line with most touring gear I’ve used — significantly thinner than most alpine gear. The Superguide 105 has a very traditional shape with almost no taper and very little rocker. It is also very stiff and light. This combination results in a ski that is not very forgiving of mistakes and rather unpredictable in variable snow. I have a hard time recommending this ski to anyone expect expert skiers looking for maximum edge hold on steep lines.


  8. i just bought these in a 175 to replace a beat set of dynafit manaslu’s and the recomended mount of 12.5 back seems awfully far back? Anybody play with the mount, not a huge fan of so much out front and grown to like the mounts of the rest of my quiver brahma, patron, and sickdays (all factory) don’t want to mess up the ski but like some tail!

    • Hey Harry,

      I wouldn’t worry about not having enough tail on this ski. It is very stiff and has almost zero tail rocker. I would stick to recommended. I haven’t played with the mount point, but my instinct says that moving the bindings up might be a bad idea.

      Hope that helps,

  9. Thanks for the reply sam. I went on the line and it ski’s well there for me. It works as my back/side country ski it’s ok in chop, ok float Not a particularly fun ski but it really wants to rip for such a light ski. Btw Scott says 1600ish a piece I think, mine were 1490, go fig

  10. skied on these for a week in Andermatt last winter, and loved them so much I bought a new pair from the rental shop (newer model). Have not been able to ski them this year yet but the week I Andermatt was revelatory…these guys ski everything…steep and icy, groomers, knee deep powder, spring slush, even bumps (slowly and carefully). I was smitten. If they turn out to live up to my expectations, they will replace both a new pair of Mantra M5s and a well used pair of G3 Findrs. Hard to find in the US. This may be evidence of how successful Scott has been in the EU market compared to here. In fact, the one I got is a discontinued model, and Scott are out to launch a new version called Freetour…similar specs, higher price. We’ll see if it is as popular here as their skis have been in Europe.

  11. These are one hell of a ski. You have to work for it as another comment says, you can’t just switch off (well I can’t anyway!) but they are so agile and confidence-building. Really, really happy with them

Leave a Comment