Comparison review: 179 BRO "soft" vs. BRO "stiff"

**splat** · 02-23-2007, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Deep Days

Not sure why the variance between my stiffs and other stiffs of the same generation. Thoughts, splat?

Whose stiff 179s from this year did you flex them next to?

**Deep Days** · 02-24-2007, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by splat

Whose stiff 179s from this year did you flex them next to?

The other pair at the shop in Bobo's was the only pair I handflexed. I am going off input in threads on here that say the stiff is "pretty burly" and you "need to stay on top of them."

Anyway, marshal is right, and this shit is splitting hairs. I feel horrible to disappoint you by being such a dumb ass, Marshal, with everything you've done to help me out and all the effort you've put into pointing me in the other direction.

I'll quit bitching and just go ski (if I can stay healthy). Overall, they're great skis. Extremely versatile, and I'm definitely satisfied.

**Rontele** · 02-24-2007, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Deep Days

Anyway, marshal is right, and this shit is splitting hairs. I feel horrible to disappoint you by being such a dumb ass, Marshal, with everything you've done to help me out and all the effort you've put into pointing me in the other direction.

Dear Max,

I am willing to guess that Marsha doesn't fucking care. Quit being a bitch and always apologizing. It makes you look like an even bigger sissy.

**Deep Days** · 02-20-2008, 07:41 PM

Nice email, D. Guess you really love digging into the Gosey annals, don't you? (

)

Real stiff BROs are too light for inbounds skiing. They hold an edge on hardpack astremely well, but they're too light. If I had to choose between a 183 iM103 and a stiff BRO for pounding variable snow, I'd choose the iM103 for heavy dampness and thus stability... I love the shit out of those skis (with boots that fit).

The quiver has been thinned... Lotuses for pow, park skis for park, and iM103 for every other possible condition.