179 Stiff Bro mini-review

Splat sent my new 179 Stiffs in record time, I got them tuned and mounted the same day (last Tuesday), and was off for four days in Mammoth the next day, while all of you lucky bitches were partying it up in Whistler.

It was butt-ass cold (0 at 7am Friday morning) so the snow was cold and dry - about as Utah-esque as Mammoth gets. It snowed in the afternoon just about every day which meant at least a little pow every morning. Both Friday and Saturday mornings were bluebird with about 10"-14" of the cold and dry.

The 179 Stiffs feel a little softer than last years 188 Stiffs, which, for me, is a good thing. They are noticeably softer than my Tankers, and about a hundred pounds lighter. I can't believe how light the Bros are. They would make an absolutely unbeatable BC ski. I'd put the stiffness somewhere between the Seth Pistol and the Tanker - i.e. just about perfect for a ski that size.

They rail the groomed great. The turn radius is not small, and the width under foot took me a run or two to get used to (the Tankers are 93mm). I noticed myself making it down the groomers in less turns than on my Tankers.

The Bros tore up the pow. I had about a dozen runs in a couple of days that were nearly untouched most of the way, and the Bros felt super comfortable. I didn't ski my Tankers, so I can't say how they would've handled the same snow.

The only issue I ever had was if I was slamming through the cut up pow and hit a slightly deeper or thicker patch. I found that I had to be careful not to get tossed over tips in that situation. The cure might be to move the bindings back a couple of millimeters, but since I probably won't get any more pow days this year, I probably won't worry about it until next year. The mounting point seems spot on for everything else.

Final result: I'm totally impressed with the Bros. They're fat enough for the deep, their light enough to tour with, stiff enough for high-speed groomer runs, and soft enough to turn anywhere you want in any type of snow.

I've got to tip my hat to Splat for hooking me up in record time, and for once again coming through with a killer ski. Good on ya' mate.:fm: :fm: :fm:

Edit to add my stats:
5'7" 155lbs.
Good technique, fairly aggressive

Thanks alot for the review! Hopefully be getting a pair over the summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adam

Thanks alot for the review! Hopefully be getting a pair over the summer.

---

based on his review it sounds like they would be that killer everyday ski you were looking for. good choice.

thanks. i think i've pretty much decided to get a pair this summer and mount them up with freerides. i currently have cmh w/ explosivs with freerides that i love, but are heavy for touring. how does the soft/stiff 179 compare with a 180 explosiv?

oh and incase you're lurking, splat, any chance to get a blank topsheet 179?

ducktape man- just a question? where did you mount your bindings accoring to the line?

This jives with my limited experience in the 179 Stiff so far (1 day). I wasn't going to post until I had a chance to try them under some different conditions, but this thread is timely.

Splat also hooked me up last weekend and I had them mounted (dynafit), stone-ground (needed quite a bit) and waxed (needed a lot) in time for a Tahoe west shore pow day on Rubicon.

The 179 stiff is noticeably softer than either of the fat skis I have been riding (TeleDaddys and Explosivs) - and yes they are even lighter than the foam-core TeleDaddy.

BC conditions last Sunday were DEEP - so the the softer flex was perfect. I could feel the difference in the tip flex and the float over the TDaddy, which has almost the same exact sidecut dimensions. A much more springy ride and no problems with tip dive even in snow this deep.

I don't have any experience with how these will be as all-rounders given the softer flex - but right now I'm glad I didn't get the softs and I'll post a follow-up after I've had a few more days on them (hopefully it will be a while before I can report on the hardpack performance ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ulty_guy

oh and incase you're lurking, splat, any chance to get a blank topsheet 179?

---

No can do, ulty. Sorry.

wft- ducttape mounted to the line. I'm moving the line back 2 mm, based on having some time on them at Whistler in the same kind of snow ducttape felt like he might get tossed forward in. At 6 mm behind the line, I felt like I was carving off the tails, but 2 mm back should resolve the feeling ducttape describes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

No can do, ulty. Sorry.

wft- ducttape mounted to the line. I'm moving the line back 2 mm, based on having some time on them at Whistler in the same kind of snow ducttape felt like he might get tossed forward in. At 6 mm behind the line, I felt like I was carving off the tails, but 2 mm back should resolve the feeling ducttape describes.

---

Splat, you mean cm. correct?

No, I mean millimeters. 2 cm (20 millimeters) is a huge move on any ski.
If you have ever moved bindings a couple of mm, the difference in the way the skis perform is very noticeable.

edit: I have been amazed at some of the cm moves some guys have done on their Bros. I have found the performance on the line to be the max the ski will put out in every condition. The carve and snap the Bros have on the line is what we were looking for. Float is very important, too. I think individual style plays a big part in mount preference. My old softs got mounted 12 mm forward because the shop tech didn't listen to my instructions on measuring to the boot centerline, but I ski them in every condition. Damn snappy on the grooms, a bit forward for the pow.

FYI: 2mm = 1/2 the radius of a binding screw hole.

And when the sweet spot is small, 6 mm can take you right out of it.

edit: The Bro is an all-around ski. If someone lke Trackhead or APD is in some skinnyass coolie fall/die zone, they want the control that is maximized by being on the entire edge, not the tails. Hence, the attention to having the ski work best in all conditions. For powder specifics, a mount further back is fine - and it'll work on the grooms. But hitting the precise point for control in sketch sitches is very important.

if you want a pow ski, mount them -2cm.

if you want a fat everyday ski, mount them on the line.

done and done

ugh. the art critics! you want pretty skis? buy a bogner. them things are purty.

/curmudgeon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stebed

you should offer the bro's in a solid black or some other colour (dark blue? deep red?), no bigass logo, no graphics, nothing. keep the pmgear at the tails.. and then put a simple BRO right where the current BRO is written except in a better font and 1/5th the size. just big enough that it can be read clearly from six feet away. i bet you'd sell a lot more. no offense but the bro's are one of the tackiest looking freeride skis on the market and most (i didn't say all) people do care about appearances.. volkl nearly got it right this year with the mantra and gotama, such clean looking skis.. except for the nasty VOLKL on the gotama tails..

---

Uh... I think you're in the minority here. I happen to think the Bros look great- and I'm pretty sure everyone else does too.

Appearances do count, but I don't personally care what they look like as long as they ski well. Just had a pair shipped to Switzerland and the young freeriders that have seen them, 16-22, think they are really "cool". What floats one's boat with regard to color doesn't even get another guy's wet.

I like to rock the big blue skis. The are definatly a conversation piece.
I notice that AFTER people see you ski them they want to know!

BTW I also felt the pitch over feeling on the 179's. But I was blasting intom somthing the way I do the 188's. Need to turn them more. Exelent ski but there is a reason for 188's and 19Sumthin skis.

I really liked the even turny feel of the 179's in the Tight trees in the chutes @ Mt. Rose! In very technical situations they are just so fast and predictable.

Very few would be leaning on these hard enough to find a weakness, and I do not see it as a weakness it just perfroms a bit differnt than the 188.

Note, its seems like alot of good sized guys sking these. I have seen evidence that the 179 Bro is a big mountain Rippin ski for a Woman. Get your women on these thing (And bring your A game to the hill) or you will get owned by the little women.

So I was going to post my own thread reviewing my new 179 Stiff Bros, but since this thread's going I'll jump on the bandwagon.

About me: I'm 6'1", 175 lbs, (green eys, brown hair, likes sunsets yadda yadda yadda). This year I've been skiing 188 Volkl AX4s on piste, 190 Gotamas ('03) for deeper resort and sidecountry days, and a 178 Volkl G4 with freerides for skinning tours. I love the AX4 for cut up pow and railing groomers; it's a ski that forces me to ski well and aggresively over the tips. The Gotama is more forgiving, though i can get forward on it as well. The G4's have been great, but I'm replacing them with the bros so as to have a lighter, wider ski for backcountry pow.

Splat hooked me up with a pair of "blems," which arrived days before I expected them. First impression: I love these skis (and where is the blem??). Second impression: not as stiff as i expected. Not a bad thing (in fact, I had been leaning toward the softs on weigth, but decided I wanted edge hold more), but certainly no Volkl AX4 or explosive. Comparable to my old Gotamas. (As it turns out, this flex works well with the length...more later). I can't imaging wanting anything softer, however.

The setup:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/a...1&d=1142405231

Got them mounted with dynafits, on the line, over the weekend and my dynafit boots molded monday. Like doctapow's, mine needed a serious stone grinding and waxing to be skiable. Woke up at 6:15 this morning for a dawn patrol in the 8" of fresh reported, but got turned around in the parking lot on the pass by a sheriff: they would be bombing Glory.

So we went back into town, and I went straight to work. Put in an early hour and a half, and when my boss arrived at 9 told him I'd be taking a long lunch. By noon I'm back up on the pass, ready to begin testing.

First: These skis are LIGHT. I'm going to do a little weight testing later, but these skis must tip the scales at 1/2 of my Gots. I hardly noticed these on my pack, and from time to time on the bootpack up Glory I'd look up to make sure they were still there. This fact alone makes me very excited about these skis.

APH enjoying the light weight of his BROs.
http://www.alpinist.com/pics/mnts/brohiking.jpg

At the top, I ran into a non-maggot on 188 super stiffs (mounted tele). First pair of BROs I've seen in the Teton Backcountry, a nice coincidence. Clicked in (I've got to say, I find the dynafits to feel really secure stepping in, way more confidence inspiring than I expected) and poled off to do some research.

APH getting his 179's all figured out...
http://www.alpinist.com/pics/mnts/brotest.jpg

We skied second turn, which with the new snow and high winds had windbuffed drifts on its upper sections. On my AX4's of Gots, these conditions aren't much to worry about; on the 178 G4 I'll tend to have to fight going over the handlebars. As doctapow experienced, the BROs were more like the G4 in that an aggressive stance would tend to throw me in the heavier pockets. Mounted on the line, the ski demanded a more neutral stance in these conditions. Once I figured that out though, the ski was a ton of fun, very quick, easy to turn, with a great bounce to them.

...and loving it.
http://www.alpinist.com/pics/mnts/lovinit.jpg

For small radius turns, these were a blast. For railing turns in pow I would agree with Marshal that an aft mount would be neccessary (for someone my size). However, as I'm hoping to use these in steeper terrain, I'm thinking the mount will work out ok. I'm looking forward to trying these out at Jackson this weekend, and will report back with a few more impressions.

The labratory for Day 1 of testing:
http://www.alpinist.com/pics/mnts/2ndturn.jpg

Final word though: this seems to be, as I'd hoped, the backcountry ski to have for long tours. If purely a pow ski, get them mounted aft. Wish I'd had them for the Teton Traverse, now that I have them I want to go back and see how much easier it is...

APH,
A very profesional review. You always seem to raise the bar!
I am almost embarrased that I typed anything about a ski and put it in public.

Thanks for the words and the amazing pic's.

Wow, APH, that was fast from shipping to skiing!
Thanks for the report and glad you're diggin them.
Let me know more how they feel as you ski them more.
I'm dying to hear...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stebed

i doubt it, but then again this forum is bro central so who knows.. not knocking the skis, just saying that a nicer looking topsheet sure wouldn't hurt things (most people i know also find it ugly)..

---

A few strangers (i.e. people I've never met) at Mammoth felt differently. Two lift ops commented on them - one noted that he hadn't seen the green Bro's, but that he thought they looked better than the blue 188s (I happen to agree). A couple of race kids I rode a chair with commented that they liked them ("Dude, those are dope!" one of them said). It's all personal preference - personally, I have very little preference, but I actually dig the graphics on these.

One thing I should have noted (and forgot to mention to Splat when he called), is that those days were my first days on my new boots - Nordica Hot Rods. There's a big difference in forward lean between my old Rossi boots and the Hot Rods, and that definitely affected my stance, which probably affected the feeling of being too far forward. It took me about six or seven runs to get the feeling of both the boots and the skis. I'm sure part (but probably not all) of the over-the-front sensation is due to the forward lean of the Hot Rods.

aph, mtt

glad to hear some of the same early impressions I had. I forgot to mention that I also mounted right on bootcenter with my dynafits.

I'm looking forward to a week at Sorcerer Lodge to flesh it out, but I have a feeling that for backcountry use - these are going to be da shizz

stebed,

you sound like a fu*king woman. Who cares what they look like, that said personally I love them.

Walker, I second that notion.

And Stebed, before you go making suggestions, I think you should probably know more about PM Gear's setup and mission.... I think they're selling just about as many skis as they can handle making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lloyd Christmas

And Stebed, before you go making suggestions, I think you should probably know more about PM Gear's setup and mission.... I think they're selling just about as many skis as they can handle making.

---

truth
1234