Member of the Month

partyandBS
December, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Seth or BCs?

profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
I'm looking for a fatter twin than my AR6s, so I narrowed it down to last year's Seth and last year's Scratch BC WRS. They are both 98 underfoot. The Seth is a 169 and the BC is a 171. I can get em both with bindings for the same price. I'm kinda leaning towards the Scratches but I don't know why. Suggestions?
Aug 16 2007 12:21PM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Then get them both!!

haha, j/k

IMO, both are great skis, but I think the Seths have my vote on this one.  You can't go wrong with either though.

These are the '07's, rightt?
Aug 16 2007 12:23PM
0 0
profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
yeah they're both the 07s
Aug 16 2007 12:25PM
0 0
profile picture
=nick=
Posts: 10471 - Karma: 2,182
funny sig, considering youre buying 169/171 length skis
Aug 16 2007 12:29PM
0 0
profile picture
SkierJulie
Posts: 2495 - Karma: 101
Buy my Seths!
Aug 16 2007 12:47PM
0 0
profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
yeah i guess it is, but it's relative because i'm 5'5" and pushing 120 pounds
Aug 16 2007 12:49PM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Yes, buy her Seths! I think she's selling them $310 w/o bindings, used 40 days. They are 169's as well.
The threads here:
https://newschoolers.com/web/forums/readthread/thread_id/313649/

I'm not sure about this, but I believe K2 skis are a bit longer than they measure, so 169's would kinda be like 171's.
Aug 16 2007 12:58PM
0 0
profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
i plan to have these skis for years to come so i want them as new as possible. and i think 600 new with bindings is just as good as 310 without bindings and used 40 days. plus i think im going for the rossis. sorry
Aug 16 2007 1:09PM
0 0
profile picture
P.J.S.
Posts: 1782 - Karma: 11
I'd personally pick the Scratch BC's, that's what I ride. But you really can't go wrong with either of the two skis you picked. They are both great.
Aug 16 2007 1:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Rooddss
Posts: 1420 - Karma: 14
for get both of them, get some ANT's
Aug 16 2007 1:12PM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Waiittt.... 600 new? Are youtalking '08 seths here?
Aug 16 2007 1:17PM
0 0
profile picture
P.J.S.
Posts: 1782 - Karma: 11
Read it again...with bindings he said.
Aug 16 2007 1:19PM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Oh right, good deal then. I was offered $778 shipped, '07 Seths with 2 pairs of bindings
Aug 16 2007 1:22PM
0 0
profile picture
ski_DC
Posts: 1347 - Karma: 58
BC's are more versatile. and they would be better for a smaller person like you than the seths
Aug 16 2007 1:31PM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
Hearing that I'm kinda getting worried haha. Being a strong (if i may say) skier I'm getting some 180 pow skis in the hopes that i can ski them, and it may save me money in the future (saves me buying another pow ski) but my dimensions aren't far off him, 5'6, 125-ish. I typically ski 170's.

And yeah, if you choose the Rossis you'll be fine too. As I said before, they're both great skis, you can't go wrong with either
Aug 16 2007 1:34PM
0 0
profile picture
=nick=
Posts: 10471 - Karma: 2,182
im 5'6 120 like you on 178 bc's
Aug 16 2007 1:49PM
0 0
profile picture
Luc.
Posts: 7540 - Karma: 59
i am with npm. if u want them for years to come. step up son.
Aug 16 2007 5:01PM
0 0
profile picture
LookinBack
Posts: 242 - Karma: 21
aight...go with the seths...but 600$ man, thats a friggin rip! My skimarket down the street from me has some 07 seth's 179 in the shrink for 400$....hell i scored my 08's for 400$

So yea...do some research and go for the seth...but dayyymn you ski a short ski!
Aug 16 2007 5:58PM
0 0
profile picture
poofartpee
Posts: 7436 - Karma: 1,540
haha
Aug 16 2007 6:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
maybe i'll go for the 178. i'll probably grow a couple inches more so i guess its better to have them longer
Aug 17 2007 12:17AM
0 0
profile picture
fillup
Posts: 4904 - Karma: 568
get the VCT's
Aug 17 2007 12:20AM
0 0
profile picture
josh.
Posts: 3469 - Karma: 42
get the seth's cause there manlyer
Aug 17 2007 1:55AM
0 0
profile picture
tjski
Posts: 5859 - Karma: 44
the seth's are gunna be better for charging shit, the WRS is a foam core (i believe)
Aug 17 2007 1:56AM
0 0
profile picture
josh.
Posts: 3469 - Karma: 42
your wrong the bc is a wood core
Aug 17 2007 1:58AM
0 0
profile picture
edd1e
Posts: 679 - Karma: 16
you're both wrong. It has a thc core. Triple Hybrid Core. Which means it uses both wood and foam in the core as well as another synthetic material
Aug 17 2007 2:06AM
0 0
profile picture
dave44
Posts: 11052 - Karma: 113
haha, ownage!!
Aug 17 2007 2:26AM
0 0
profile picture
Me_Gusta_Esquiar
Posts: 216 - Karma: 10
definitely owned. i trust rossignol to make a burly ski when they are making a fat twin
Aug 17 2007 8:10PM
0 0
profile picture
titsLOL
Posts: 7485 - Karma: 396
werd, the thc cores sound cool. never skiied them but they are mad light.
Aug 17 2007 10:50PM
0 0
profile picture
BenJAMIN4aWhil3
Posts: 773 - Karma: 12
Alright heres the low down. I have Scratch BC... the year before the WRS but ive ridden the WRS too. And I also have last years Seths.

The Seths are a better all around ski. They are my every day ski. They go everywhere. do everything. I like them better for charging. and pow. I like them better on groomers.

The BC are better in the Park by a long shot. They are better in the bumps and they are a little better in the trees. They also better for riding switch.

They are both awesome skis. If you are looking for a one ski quiver your gunna go with the seths. if your looking for a fat park ski that still kills all mountain your gunna go with the BC.

PM me if you have any questions. I ride both these skis all the time. You cant really go wrong with either.
Aug 17 2007 11:17PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)