Another Bro mounting question?

**cooltsi** · 10-11-2006, 07:26 AM

Mounting points have been covered quite a bit but I have a slight variation. Mine showed up yesterday, 188's stiff+a bit, and I'd like to keep them fairly versatile. Research shows mounting on the line is best for crud and everday and back 2cm for powder. I'd like both, which puts me in a quandry. Do I go for a solid mount (salomon 900 din 14 or P12) or go with something moveable like a Tyrolia FF17 on a plate or a Railflex? The Railflex would be the easiest to move and I could get another set of rails to swap some LD12's around(94mm brakes that would need a slight tweak).

So, the basic question is would the option of a moveable binding give enough versatility for you to mount a heavier binding? What would you mount on them for alpine?

**pechelman** · 10-11-2006, 08:11 AM

it sounds like you need to ask yourself a couple questions.

Do I want a lighter weight high performing all-around ski that slightly lacks in the pow?

Do I want a ligther weight high performing pow ski that slightly lacks all-around?

Do I want high performance in both pow and all-around and Im willing to sacrafice a bit of weight, system complexity, and\or possible malfunctions due to the added complexity?

simple enough no?

you could always split the 2cm diff and mount it -1?

**Hicks** · 10-11-2006, 09:49 AM

Not sure where you derive versatility with the line mount from.
I tried it before and it sucked IMVHO, to me it felt more like a park mount and the tails even hooked up more when occasionally encountering moguls. But if you like that feeling mount 'em there.
Busting crud, maching on hard and in soft snow and powder go way easier for me with the backward mount though.

**couloirman** · 10-11-2006, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by cooltsi

Mine showed up yesterday

Youre lucky, im drooling here over iskibcs trip report waiting for mine to arrive and take them out

**cooltsi** · 10-11-2006, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

Do I want a lighter weight high performing all-around ski that slightly lacks in the pow?

Do I want a ligther weight high performing pow ski that slightly lacks all-around?

Do I want high performance in both pow and all-around and Im willing to sacrafice a bit of weight, system complexity, and\or possible malfunctions due to the added complexity?

Right now I leaning toward option number #1 waivering towards #3 and looking for opinions aka what would you do? I've got a beat set of powder pluses in a 180 as my only other fatter ski. A set of 180 tankers and 183 Scott Santiago missions in the 90 range. I'm 175Ibs and 5'8" if it helps any.

**cooltsi** · 10-13-2006, 08:17 AM

Probably the best comment I've found.

from Splat http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...2A+mounting%22

As people that continue to ski the Bros with demo bindings are finding, the sweet spot on the Bros is very precise, allowing a max 4mm drift before you notice a big difference. Yet guys like DTM and karl Stall are loving them 1.5 cm's back. When you hit the center point we establsihed, you KNOW you have hit money.

**Toby** · 10-13-2006, 09:27 AM

FWIW I had my super-stiffs either at the line (1038mm) or 1040mm from tip just to round it off. I had no problem with tip dive in powder and they were fucking great on hardpack too. Someone else did have trouble with tip dive on the line IIRC. Maybe it's because all my powder was backcountry and I always had a decently heavy pack.

**splat** · 10-13-2006, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by cooltsi

Probably the best comment I've found.

from Splat http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...2A+mounting%22

I wrote that after our first year of production and it was true for me and many others. Last year's high camber made mounting back somewhat more feasible. But we have since found the cure for camber and will post our feeling s this year on how it affects the mount, but, again, preference is a big influence on where it will work best for you.