Stiff 174 Bro mini review

[PowderPig]

Summary:
:yourock:

A little more details:
Me: 5'7", 135ish, decent skier (but nothing like some of the Loveland crew...)
Resort skis I own (and like!): 180 Wizard explosivs, 185 Blowers, Spatulas, Big daddies

My boot center was 2-3 mm in front of the boot center line on the Bros. When putting my Explosivs next to them, they pretty much had the same amount of tail as the Explosivs (mounted on the line); i.e. effectively slightly more mid-mounted than the Explosivs.

These skis are stiff; significantly stiffer than my 1st gen stiff 179 Bro (my everyday AT ski), but also stiffer than the stiff 179 Bro that Marshal had in the shop. They felt comparable to the Explosivs, but with a more even flex; my Explosivs have softer tips.

Why did I demo them? I'm looking for a ski that's a bit easier to handle than the Explosivs on those less than perfect days when I actually have to ski through some bumps in the search for the good stuff... I really like the Explosivs for most snow conditions otherwise.

I picked up the skis from Marshal this morning and headed to Loveland to try them out. The snow was mostly on the firmer side with the occasional wind loaded powder stash.

These skis felt very balanced and super stable! I skied them a bit hesitantly in the beginning as I didn't know what to expect from them, but I quickly found out that they didn't give me any surprises. I took them out in both open terrain and tighter trees and they adapted well to it all; I had no problems varying my turns after the terrain. They skied like on rails on anything out there today; super fun! Compared to the Explosivs, they felt as stable but more playful. They felt more forgiving in the bumps as well... Phew.

I had a great time on these skis today! I'm very impressed by the quality of them; it's a solid looking ski!

Marshal, thanks for putting me on these with short notice!

-pp

[telechuck]

Summary:
:yourock:

A little more details:
Me: 5'7", 135ish, decent skier (but nothing like some of the Loveland crew...)


The scary thing, he eats cheeseburgers and is still that small. Don't let the humble PowerPig fool anyone. He usually rips around Loveland on his Big Daddies, so if he says these can handle anything, including speed, they can.

That being said, I like my 179s :)

[hoarhey]

Indeed, PowderPig does rip.
Nice review.
PP, if you want to re-demo 174's at your favorite Utah resort, contact Skifishbum.
Glad to hear the 174's might fit the bill.

[axelkeitz]

Well thats it. I need a good al mountian ski!

[wandering, not lost]

to add, 5'7" and 125 poundsish

I skied skifishbum's pair of the 174 stiffs on Sunday all day at Solitude and I LOVE them. Squirrelmurphy has been pushing me onto bigger skis ever since we started dating and my current quiver consists of 170 auras and 173 sugar daddies for touring. When Skifishbum saw me on the sugar daddies, he told me he would mount the bros for me to try on Sunday.

Like powderpig said, they absolutely blast through any crud anywhere on the mountain. They flexed a little stiffer than the Sugar Daddy. They were incredibly stable compared to the auras, and I was missing the bros on Monday when I went back to the girl skis. If I was looking for a purely powder ski, I'd probably want to get a 174 (maybe 179?) soft, but I loved how powerful and confident I felt skiing on the stiffs.

in conclusion, the 174 stiff bros are bomber skis, skifishbum is the man, and Pat should make a ladies version with the 195 topsheet, but in hot pink instead of black.

[splat]

Pink. I love the pink.

[LocoDuk]

Anyone have any advise on where to mount my 174s? The “250” line on the top-sheet looks way back… but then again every sky I’ve mounted with FRs tends to end up looking that way with so much binding out back. Thanks

[PowderPig]

Anyone have any advise on where to mount my 174s? The “250” line on the top-sheet looks way back… but then again every sky I’ve mounted with FRs tends to end up looking that way with so much binding out back. Thanks

I'm guessing you mean the mid-boot mark on the ski? I think the number is just the serial number of the ski...
I demoed the stiffs at around +3 mm and loved them. My own stiffs are mounted around +5 mm and I can't really notice a difference - I still love them!

[LocoDuk]

I demoed the stiffs at around +3 mm and loved them. My own stiffs are mounted around +5 mm and I can't really notice a difference - I still love them!

Thanks, I guess I'll give it a shot around the +3-+5mm range. Will be sure to add a review on here when I get enough time to get familiar with them.

[wandering, not lost]

Thanks, I guess I'll give it a shot around the +3-+5mm range. Will be sure to add a review on here when I get enough time to get familiar with them.

Have fun, you'll love them!

Pat, you really do need to consider a pink version.

[ACHTUNG]

Pat, you really do need to consider a pink version.

Ahhh...I love pink interiors.

[splat]

I think tara and some of the slc girls said they wanted to ride the pink Ho Models.
I have trouble trying to figure out how many women would actually ride those...

[Wasatch_Expat]

Apparently I may be wrong, but I thought girls got annoyed when the "ladies version" was the exact same ski with a pink top sheet. What gives? Is powder blue not feminine enough?

PS, I loved the 174 stiff Bros and only wish I would have taken the time to try the 183 while I was there. SFB didn't have a 179 mounted. And I foolishly failed to take advantage of the chance to ski what I assume was a Brocker prototype that SFB was on.

[RootSkier]

hey pat, are there any plans for fatties shorter than 179 next year?

[splat]

prolly not at this time, root skier.

[crackboy]

how would the stiffs compare to something like the green BD crossbows?

[wandering, not lost]

Apparently I may be wrong, but I thought girls got annoyed when the "ladies version" was the exact same ski with a pink top sheet. What gives? Is powder blue not feminine enough?



I used to until I realized that the "ladies version" of most skis is too soft. Hot pink bros on the hill would be great marketing for pmgear.

[squirrelmurphy]

thats whats hot right now

http://tetongravity.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=37524&stc=1&d=1203046734

sorry for the quick shitty job. dooo it pat!

edit: actually, try this one on for size. the 80s are calling your name.
http://tetongravity.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=37537&stc=1&d=1203059221

[LocoDuk]

how would the stiffs compare to something like the green BD crossbows?

Funny, I've got both right here. I have 3 years on my X-bows, but they remain pretty much stiff as hell. I'd say the Bros are just as stiff, if not a touch more. Maybe softer in the tip and tail (a little hard for me to tell with the raised tail), but fresh out of the box this was my impression.

[~V~]

Thanks for the reviews! Demo'd the 164 and 174 at Mammoth this weekend in varying conditions and wondered how the differing lengths would add up. I typically ride at about the 170 length but def preferred the speed of the 174... and with the AMAZING DEAL (http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148845) going on I just couldn't pass up buying myself a pair :)

BTW - DEF prefer the current powder blue topsheet to hot pink, and would NOT want a softer flex. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing cause I've not once skiied a "woman's" ski. I think you'd be catering to a slightly less serious segment of the skiing population with those specs, and really, don't you want chicks who rip on your boards that are looking for the stiffer flex anyways?

[da sponge]

I just demo'd these at Kirkwood today - rockin skis. I was a bit concerned with the stiffs at my weight (130 as well), but I had no problems at speed. They don't let you get lazy with turn initiation, especially at low speed, but that's probably a good thing. I had tons of fun - they held great on the scraped off groomer steeps and were fun in the bumps.

Any recommendations for binders to go with these? I already placed my order (how could I resist with the kickass deal going on). I don't need a superhigh din with my weight - been thinking about the soly sth 14s, namely because they're lighter than the 12s.

[lhs]

just going to tag along with the bro - lovin on this thread.

i'm a small girl - 5'2", 120 or so lbs - and i recently bought a pair of 174s and put some dynafits on them. I have to say, I'm blown away by how much fun they are. in the past few weeks since it's actually been snowing here in cali, i've had them out a good range of conditions - long sloggy tours, steep scary shots, sunbaked crud, deep soft pow, and a couple pretty hard resort days.
now, i'm the girl who can't go anywhere without at least 2 pairs of skis in the car, and i've gotta say, i haven't wanted to ride anything but the bros since i've had them set up.
they are super light for touring, which is my usual mode of operation. they are floaty in the pow, and surprisingly powerful in chop and crud. i keep being amazed by the ease with which they moved back and forth between feeling like a soft pow ski and a stiffer charging ski.
I've got them mounted on the line, and can definitely get as forward as i want in the powder without feeling like i'm going to go over the handlebars. They turn easily, and go edge-to-edge quickly when stuff is firmer. Very stable at speed - haven't had them on any real iced-up ugliness yet, but so far no chatter or anything.
i also ski some 175 cm skis which can feel LONG when i'm a little tired (note my height before you heckle me), and I have not noticed anything like that on the bros - tails come around happy as you please in all conditions.
bottom line: if you want some LIGHT skis that are all kinds of fun in all kinds of conditions, and you're on the shorter side of the spectrum, it doesn't get much better than this.

[splat]

Hey, thanks, girl, for resurfacing this thread. We're starting to run out of 174s and only have stiffs left Same with the 164s. Not sure if we'll go below 179 in length next year, but at $399, the 174s are a steal.

[skew]

What is the profile on the 164/174? Is there some tip rocker? I'll trying to talk my daughter (12 yrs) into some Bros. I think she could handle a 160ish/stiff ski, but want to know if they ski short.

[splat]

They are 125-99-115, no tip rocker, semi-twin.
The Suit's 13 year old daughter loves hers.

[Ridgehippy]

Hey Pat,

Are there any 174's at the screaming deal still in the shop? Talked to a guy at in the Chair 2 lot at Mammoth the day I tweaked my knee back in Feb. He was riding them tele with HH's and seemed to be enjoying them.

The combination of an upcoming birthday and the youthful optimism that my leg will soon be all better have me thinking about doing my part to get the economy going. Some shiny new skis would be a good PT motivator don't you think?

Hope you and your's are finding some wonder in every day, maybe see ya at the Mini. B

[splat]

Screaming deal is still on. Low priced already and with the mag coupon code (pm100) for another $100 off. I'm thinking about using them for my rehab. I'm gonna give the Lhasas a shot but, if they're too much, I'll scale down to the 174s. Shit, this mini is gimp city, eh?

edit:
The Mammoth Mini, where broken maggots mingle.

[peterslovo]

Dug this thread up from last year, figured it was time to update for anyone interested in the 174 Bros. I know this isn't that popular a size with lots of folks here, but I like shorter skis.

Me: 5'8, 160 lbs. Decent skier who has a tendency to smear turns rather than let the skis carve. I like at least semi twintips in general.
Where: Maine mostly, 50% resort/50% short (day trip) NE backcountry
What: I typically like trees and gullies, but like to open it up at the resort or in wider spots.
Skis I like(d): 180 Karhu Jak/Jak BC, 177 Volkl Karma, BD Crossbow
Skis I didn't like: BD Havoc (ok, but a dead planky feel), Volkl Buddha Explosiv (I know I'll take shit for this; see below).
Boots: Rossi Bandit B2s and Scarpa Denalis (blue) with intuitions
Bindings: Marker Dukes mounted at +0.5cm boot center mark

I picked up a barely used pair of 174 Bros from ticketchecker. Got a great deal on Dukes as well (don't need 16 DIN, but couldn't pass up the deal, so whatever). I mounted the Dukes at +0.5 cm forward of the boot center mark. I kept the 1/2 tune Splat recommends, and detuned the tips for about 8".

Disclaimer: I was very hesitant to be on this stiff a ski. This stems from my prior experience with the Buddhas. I had mounted my Buddhas forward of the center line with Freerides, and HATED them no matter what conditions I skied them in. I was tailgunning and in the backseat no matter what I tried in terms of ramp angle or boot setup. I know, I'm a pussy and should man up.:rolleyes:

Subsequently, aside from my experience with the BD Crossbows, I have not been generally fond of stiffer skis, but wanted to give the Bros a shot, for better or worse.

After mounting, the bindings still looked way too far back, but hey, Splat has a suggested mounting point for a reason. In hand flexing the Bros, I was concerned. They were burly stiff, but did have a nice even flex.

Conditions: Warm, springlike weather at Saddleback, ME. Temps in the 70s, great corn to slush, with some harder stuff between bumps on some of the steeper stuff. Saddleback has a great variety of terrain, from classic tight bump runs, to good trees, to open groomers where you can really move.

In the open: My first run was hesitant, and honestly wasn't all that great. I started to wonder about my choice. But I decided to stay on them. The next run, I noticed they want to move, and move fast. In a subsequent run, I let them run a bit, and that was where they really started to shine. In fact, the more I let them run, the faster I went, the more fun they were and more stable they felt. At low speeds, they felt cumbersome on edge and chattered a bit on any harder stuff encountered, but as soon as I shifted to higher gear, they felt at home and more stable. Shorter turns were a bit more work, but they wanted to really be in medium to slightly longer turns. I found that smearing my shorter turns worked fine. But honestly, after maching on a groomer, I was left with a huge, shit-eating grin.

They were a bit more work than my typically liked skis, but it just took a little bit to note more of my technique in staying forward and really driving them from the tips. As soon as I got used to this, they were really, really fun.

In the bumps: Conditions were quite nice, with good soft bumps. I could skid the Bros through the turns nicely, and they blasted through mounds of slush like knife through butter. I was quite surprised with how well they handled in the bumps, but that is likely the snow conditions, as I am not fond of bumps generally.

In the air:Hit a couple smaller kickers and drops (<3 ft), and they stomped very nicely, stable and not backseat.

Didn't get a chance to go in the trees since it was mank.

Conclusion so far. Although I only have 1 day on the Bros in springlike conditions, I can comfortably say that I love these skis, and that they will help me become a better skier. I drove the skis with my Bandits, and have yet to try the Denalis. Maybe this weekend for a tour up Mtwashington. I look forward to trying these out with the AT boots on a tour, and next year in some pow. I'll update after I put a tour on them. So far, quite pleased.