Bigger Bro Model

[Tippster]

I agree with you completely Z.

It's very unlikely that the next ski we make will be less than 110 underfoot.

And trust me people...Z E R O camber on this one (or if so, very very very little)

DO IT! VITE!

ooooo... page top.....

[mc_roon]

200cm, flat tail, long nose rocker(6-9cm lift), around 140-120-130 sidecut with fairly stiff flex. i'll buy one pair

this could be a winner.

[leroy jenkins]

This ski sounds sick. I was planning on getting Legend XXLs next fall as my big day/gun ski, with possibly some like a Lotus 138 later in the year for days too deep to be maching. There is a strong chance this ski could replace the XXLs.

I think that two sizes would be a good choice, but screw anything sub 190, I would like to see maybe a 198 and a 205, both with a slightly turned up tail (not a twin tip) and a bit of tip rocker so the true length would be maybe 3-4cm shorter. After the tip rocker, maybe just a tiny hint of camber in the rest of the ski, with a shape like upper130's in the tip 115ish underfoot and low120s in the tail.

Also, call me a pussy, but I think making this thing stiffer than the squads would be a mistake. If you really want to make it 30% stiffer than the big squads, then I would imagine like 100 people or less would buy these, and half would already be spancered anyways.

Offer it in a stiff/super stiff combo, with the stiff about as stiff as the LPs and the super maybe a bit stiffer than the Squads. I guess, since you probably won't be pressing too many of these skis, you could just make the shorter ones softer and the longer ones stiffer.

[Shredgar]

Go for the Bro Model spatula.

And call it the Splatula.

[Idris]

Round 2. Wider waist and Flat / Straight tail



What I am trying to do his is come up with a ski for the larger folk to go mach stupid down a big mountain.

This in not realy a ski for me at 5'10" 165lbs a super stiff 188 bro is plenty of ski for me for anything under 60mph (didn't realy get much chance to ski faster than this for any sustained period, so they probably work fine at higher speed). The 188 is plenty of platform for me. But I can understand why some feel the need for more.

I am not trying to come up with a versatile big selling do all ski. Just one large nasty plank for those who feel the need. - Production and market realities are being ignored on this one.

[hemas]

Round 2. Wider waist and Flat / Straight tail

What I am trying to do his is come up with a ski for the larger folk to go mach stupid down a big mountain.

This in not realy a ski for me at 5'10" 165lbs a super stiff 188 bro is plenty of ski for me for anything under 60mph (didn't realy get much chance to ski faster than this for any sustained period, so they probably work fine at higher speed). The 188 is plenty of platform for me. But I can understand why some feel the need for more.

I am not trying to come up with a versatile big selling do all ski. Just one large nasty plank for those who feel the need. - Production and market realities are being ignored on this one.

I'm pretty sure that would be $$$ for big charing fellows. Sadly, if the stiffness is going to be around what was discussed be4, I wont be getting such a ski. I'm sure though that there would be some interest for a tuned down version (~195cm and softer flex), or offer atleast a few different stiffnesses for the beast (soft, stiff and the über stiff).

Just my 0.02 €

[EstoBum]

I like your cad program. Fancy

Would the production of a ski like this cut into production of existing bro models?

[FREESKIER_FIVE-0]

Im 6 foot and weigh 185 pounds, id like nothing more than to see a straight ski for charging. i wouldn't make this my deep powder ski, but it would definetly be my charging ski in my quiver. i was thinking of getting some squads but if something wider AND stiffer came out i would definitly be a buyer. It doesnt need to be to much stiffer, of course this ski could be to much for me, but i really think that you might have hit a home run with this second round 1.1 ive been looking for something like this.

[fez]

Round 2. Wider waist and Flat / Straight tail



What I am trying to do his is come up with a ski for the larger folk to go mach stupid down a big mountain.

This in not realy a ski for me at 5'10" 165lbs a super stiff 188 bro is plenty of ski for me for anything under 60mph (didn't realy get much chance to ski faster than this for any sustained period, so they probably work fine at higher speed). The 188 is plenty of platform for me. But I can understand why some feel the need for more.

I am not trying to come up with a versatile big selling do all ski. Just one large nasty plank for those who feel the need. - Production and market realities are being ignored on this one.

Looks Great!
I think you might be surprised by the interest these things generate. there are plenty of big boys skiing hard out there.

[Dromond]

...Like the 4FRNT EHP model - Good concept but too short at 193.

Like, seriouslyl; how big are you people? Like 250lbs? I really am not rockstar. On a given day I tend to want something longer than 95% of people on the hill, (granted I am on the east coast,) but 205 is an effing huge length to think of actually skiing every day, no matter where you are

[Meathelmet]

i wouldn't make this my deep powder ski, but it would definetly be my charging ski in my quiver.

On what fucking planet do you live on,where 205cm long,115mm waisted ski isnt enough for you to ski deep powder??

Here on earth we usually get by with more,um,less.




Oh,and let me know where the place is.
I have to go to the nearby hill´s with my towell,activate my intersellar transponder and wait for a lift.

[jfk]

Will it be seen as an alpine only setup, or will people want to tele and AT on those monsters?

i'd like to tele on them. i'm not that big (6'1'', 180lbs), but i do like to go fast (and like to have skis that can take high speeds if needed/wanted), and i really like stiff skis (my current favorites are titan pros).

shape wise i'd like to see 105-110 underfoot, 125-130 at the tip, little to no camber, stiff underfoot and in the tail, slightly softer tip (as someone mentioned before), 200-205 length, rounded off flat tail (ok if it's turned up slightly).
but i'm no engineer so i don't know if a ski like that really would perform well. i'd like to find out though.

[slim]

These skis will be perfect as my bump ski. The rest of you pussies talking about using it as a big mountain gun are total pussies.

[mc_roon]

1.1 looks money. I would suggest that in order to sell more then 50, you should have at least 2 sizes and stiffness levels. 205 and more then squad stiffness is too much for me, but i would probably get it anyway. 195 with little less then squad i would put deposit in today

[Endlessseason]

6' 0" and 220 pounds, wearing the Big Daddios less than two weeks ago on closing day.
After about ten days on 'em, I'm barely getting used to these 193cm, 105mm waist, 9.5 pound (each) skis. I can tell you right now this is the biggest surface area ski I'll ever ride.

BobMc--Thanks again for the photos!

[train07]

Well, I'll join in here, not that it's going to make a bit of frkn difference but of the choices so far round one does it for me. Actually was hoping for a 197, 198, ....but I'd try round one. Meaning I'd have to travel more. Sooo get on this quickly cause I thought I was going to pull the trigger on on your "little" 188 bros.....and now you go and do this.

[warthog]

Theres a reason 200+ skis got dropped, and its not because people are to much of pussies to ski them. Its because there no fun to ski. Seriously, make a 185-188, and then a 195-198.

Fuck that noise.

I was skiing 210 Pre's in bumps before you were even a zygote. Trust me, it was more fun than you have ever had.

[edg]

bumpbump

[Atrain505]

Let me chime in.
Waist 110-115.
Higher tip.
Little to no camber.
Keep the rounded tail and turned up tail...it helps so much in so many situations. There's no reason not to have it.
Any stiffer than the current bro aspen super stiffs would be pointless. They have no speed limit.
Legnth 193-195. Bigger than that I don't really see the point. That legnth is plenty for stability and power. Any bigger and your just adding weight and making the skis slightly less manuervable.

I can't tell you how many times I have dreamed about this ski.

[Endlessseason]

Yea! Endless - Big Guys Want Big Bros. You must have the 1st Gen BD at that weight?

Yep. It's the first-year model that a bunch of us bought in a group buy early this season. Heavy suckers, but they rip and they are as stable as riding on rails.

[FigureEleven]

I want a Nordica W9.1FF/W105 +3mm all around in a 200cm to 205cm length at the same stiffness.

[Jumper Bones]

185 or 187 please. You he-men can have youselves a 197 if you want.

and you're a pussy 12-year-old or whatever. Let me clue you in, in a couple years, not so far away, you'll feel the same as we do.

I recommend you stop being such a faggot. This is a rager, destroyer ski. NOT FOR PUSSIES. If you want something average, go buy a B4 or Squads or something.

[splat]

I got a question - Do you guys perceive any noticable correlation between the same or similar sidecut on skis of different width dimensions? Should the sidecut of a fatter Bro be modified in any way to enhance the skis girth? And how should that sidecut engage in relation to the flex? What do you see as the advantages/drawbacks of a pintail, meaning a narrower tail, irrespective of whether it is turned up or flat? Rocker the tip and not the tail?

Ok. That was a long question.

[Dromond]

6'1" 250lbs is how big I am. 205 is a bit long in a traditional ski, but if it has a rocker tip, the effective length is shorter.

Fair enough! Way to answer that question.

How many skis are currently being produced that have no camber/tip rocker only? i.e. not full reverse camber and/or sidecut. The 193 EHP next year, one of the Fischer fat skis I think? I'm sure I'm forgetting some. It sounds like a great way to combine fluffy-floatyness with hi speed stability, better traversing capabilites, speed on the flats, etc.

disclaimer: this is all pure and utter conjecture.

[soul_skier]

I got a question - Do you guys perceive any noticable correlation between the same or similar sidecut on skis of different width dimensions? Should the sidecut of a fatter Bro be modified in any way to enhance the skis girth? And how should that sidecut engage in relation to the flex? What do you see as the advantages/drawbacks of a pintail, meaning a narrower tail, irrespective of whether it is turned up or flat? Rocker the tip and not the tail?

Ok. That was a long question.

if you are going to modify the sidecut, modify it so the turning radius gets bigger, not smaller. As for flex, well, i have no idea what you are asking. Pintails are nice for the obvious reason as they sink the tail and float the tip, but too much of it will be bad. Instead of rocker tip or tail, just go completly flat camber, rocker the tip a bit if you must. All of this the rantings of someone who has no idea what he is talking about, well, mabye some but not much...