Moment Skis Deathwish - dual rocker meets triple camber

[skier666]

Why dont all have that topsheet...

No idea but I'll ask.

[mobygrape]

Anyone on the 13/14 version? Does it have the rough topsheet?

I've the 13/14 w/ a smooth topsheet. Have not skied them yet, been a bit dry out here as of late

What's hot about a rough topsheet? Snow doesn't stick?

[undertow2]

I've the 13/14 w/ a smooth topsheet. Have not skied them yet, been a bit dry out here as of late

What's hot about a rough topsheet? Snow doesn't stick?

That and they take a lot more abuse... I have a pair of Movement Thunders that I have ridden hard and have a rough top sheet and they still look "nice"... I love my Bibbys, but cannot say the same for them...

[Banh Mi]

In a bit of a moment conundrum here... Considering the 190 moment deathwish or the old 190 bibby pro. Own the pbj, governor, night train and donner party. Want one ski to do it all, will be thinning out my quiver. I figure the deathwish will be more like the night train mixed with the pbj, and the bibby is just a bigger pbj or my governor with tail rocker...

Anyone skied both and can give pros/cons for one ski quiver, 190 bibby or 190 deathwish?

[cooks]

Deathwish - Choose this if you ski with you ski with a more traditional stance (ie, not centered, "new school" form, this ski encourages really loading and carving the tail given the lack of stiffness imo), and all round fun not all out charging ability is most important.

Bibby - Slight soft snow bias, similar to billy goat in application, but much more of a locked in, carving feeling. Will charge and much more conducive to really railing and driving the tips compared to the deathwish imo. More of a chargy snowblade than easy traditional ski in how easy it can be and style of skiing it will work with, but retains 85% of the charging ability of a stiff, more traditionally shaped ski.

That being said, I feel the 190 deathwish may have the slight edge over the older versions of the 190 bibby with your current quiver. The govenor I feel can handle similar conditions to the bibby, just with a slightly different skiing style. Totally different ski from the bibby though.

As far as the best ski to do it all, I think that will entirely depend on what you are looking for the ski to excel in and your skiing style.

[Banh Mi]

Deathwish - Choose this if you ski with you ski with a more traditional stance (ie, not centered, "new school" form, this ski encourages really loading and carving the tail given the lack of stiffness imo), and all round fun not all out charging ability is most important.

Bibby - Slight soft snow bias, similar to billy goat in application, but much more of a locked in, carving feeling. Will charge and much more conducive to really railing and driving the tips compared to the deathwish imo. More of a chargy snowblade than easy traditional ski in how easy it can be and style of skiing it will work with, but retains 85% of the charging ability of a stiff, more traditionally shaped ski.

That being said, I feel the 190 deathwish may have the slight edge over the older versions of the 190 bibby with your current quiver. The govenor I feel can handle similar conditions to the bibby, just with a slightly different skiing style. Totally different ski from the bibby though.

As far as the best ski to do it all, I think that will entirely depend on what you are looking for the ski to excel in and your skiing style.

Thanks for the feedback.

[skier666]

I agree...the Deathwish has a special place in my heart. It's my one ski quiver (groomer to pow) for sure. I haven't even been on my exit worlds yet due to this shitty season in Tahoe but looks like that's about to change plus I'm headed to Telluride next week. I may need to bring both to play around on. I generally liked the original Bibby shape but was always a bit more drawn to the Ruby back in the day.

[Banh Mi]

I agree...the Deathwish has a special place in my heart. It's my one ski quiver (groomer to pow) for sure. I haven't even been on my exit worlds yet due to this shitty season in Tahoe but looks like that's about to change plus I'm headed to Telluride next week. I may need to bring both to play around on. I generally liked the original Bibby shape but was always a bit more drawn to the Ruby back in the day.

So you like the deathwish better than the old bibby? Maybe in consistent powder or groomers, but here in jackson id think that id need the bibby for crud and chop. Although the deathwish would be better in bumps. How does the deathwish handle the chunder teeth chatter chicken heads

[MakersTeleMark]

I have to chime in and wonder why there isn't more hype about this ski. It crushes everything, and has been the only ski from firm to pow that I've been on this year and I have a deeep quiver.

Sleeper keeper. It rails, plays, float, drives, and trenches. Moment really hit this one out of the park.

I will disagree with above in the fact that given the multiple camber points, it definitely wants a centered stance given the recommended mount (which is way more centered than I'm used to).

I'm in love with this ski. And 666, I was an early ruby adopter as well. But you have to admit, this is light year's away.

What a great ski. Can't squirt enough.

[pappag]

For those that like the Deathwish but want a skinny version for dicking around or mountaineering, definitely check out the new Underworld at 106mm underfoot. Yes, it's billed as a skinnier Exit World, but in my opinion, the Underworld skis closer to the DW than the EW.

[Lambert]

For those that like the Deathwish but want a skinny version for dicking around or mountaineering, definitely check out the new Underworld at 106mm underfoot. Yes, it's billed as a skinnier Exit World, but in my opinion, the Underworld skis closer to the DW than the EW.

Great stuff, I want.. Although I would have liked a tail like the Governor..

[hick]

For those that like the Deathwish but want a skinny version for dicking around or mountaineering, definitely check out the new Underworld at 106mm underfoot. Yes, it's billed as a skinnier Exit World, but in my opinion, the Underworld skis closer to the DW than the EW.

Do tell more... weight, lengths, turn radius. Salivating thinking about this.

[brown9]

Deathwish - Choose this if you ski with you ski with a more traditional stance (ie, not centered, "new school" form, this ski encourages really loading and carving the tail given the lack of stiffness imo), and all round fun not all out charging ability is most important.

Bibby - Slight soft snow bias, similar to billy goat in application, but much more of a locked in, carving feeling. Will charge and much more conducive to really railing and driving the tips compared to the deathwish imo. More of a chargy snowblade than easy traditional ski in how easy it can be and style of skiing it will work with, but retains 85% of the charging ability of a stiff, more traditionally shaped ski.

That being said, I feel the 190 deathwish may have the slight edge over the older versions of the 190 bibby with your current quiver. The govenor I feel can handle similar conditions to the bibby, just with a slightly different skiing style. Totally different ski from the bibby though.

As far as the best ski to do it all, I think that will entirely depend on what you are looking for the ski to excel in and your skiing style.

Wait, so the deathwish is for a more traditional stance but the bibby has better driving of the tips of the ski? These sound like the same thing to me. I find myself with a more traditional stance, driving the tips of the skis, carving turns. Didn't like the Nighttrain Ver.1. I don't need a rock solid ski, but enjoy something that can lean into an arc. Current skis are 182 atlases which I enjoy for the flat tail/solid underfoot railing of turns. Thinking the deathwish is the ticket for a deep day and replacement to my atlases, Can do everything from Whistler to Squaw, but mostly at home here in Washington. Care to elaborate on which has more drivability, without being FWT stiff/charger?

[Banh Mi]

Deathwish in chunder? Manageable or phenomenal ?

[Reformed]

I currently use the Bibby 190 mounted alpine @ -6 cm (recommended) as my daily driver and the Deathwish 190 @-6 (-1 from recommended) as my dedicated touring rig. I have more days on the Bibby and trying to compare skis driven with alpine boots and bindings to skis driven with touring boots and dynafits is challenging, but my $0.02 thus far mostly agree with what others have said:
Bibby feels more substantial and willing to rage in all conditions. This shouldn't be a big surprise, as the ski is stiffer, wider and heavier. Bibby is therefore more damp and solid feeling when pushed in chopped snow. Bibby 'might' be slightly more surfy and loose in pow. I say might due to the lack of pow I have had the DW in. The couple of times the snow hasn't been abused by wind/temp/rain the DW has felt really similar to the Bibby in terms of looseness with marginally less float, but a nice consistent pop and flex which allows for easy airs off of almost any feature and smooth, easy turns of any radius. The DW definitely feels lighter, poppier and more playful than the Bibby (surprise, surprise - it is). I don't trust the dynafits on hard surfaces at high speeds, so I can't really comment on the DW's ability to really rail, but my feeling is that they are quite stable and a little easier to bend into a smaller radius turn than the Bibbys. I had to remind myself numerous times to throttle them back for fear of a highspeed pre-release last time I had them at the hill. The DWs feel noticeably quicker edge to edge and are definitely easier to throw around in the bumps and tight spaces. I haven't had the DWs in firm chunder, but I've had them in lots of terrible snow conditions ranging from water saturated glop to unsupportive rain crust and they seem to handle it all at least as well as any other ski I've been on and better than most. The DW's overall performance has made me consider inserts or plates so that I can ski them at the hill when it hasn't snowed, as I think they would be more fun than the Bibbys on lots of days. This is saying something, as I like my Bibbys a lot.

[cooks]

Wait, so the deathwish is for a more traditional stance but the bibby has better driving of the tips of the ski? These sound like the same thing to me. I find myself with a more traditional stance, driving the tips of the skis, carving turns. Didn't like the Nighttrain Ver.1. I don't need a rock solid ski, but enjoy something that can lean into an arc. Current skis are 182 atlases which I enjoy for the flat tail/solid underfoot railing of turns. Thinking the deathwish is the ticket for a deep day and replacement to my atlases, Can do everything from Whistler to Squaw, but mostly at home here in Washington. Care to elaborate on which has more drivability, without being FWT stiff/charger?

Yeah, didn't really explain this the best. I feel the forebody of the deathwish is not stiff enough to lean into the tips and charge. The tail of the deathwish really wants to hook up (in a good way) and feels more engaged than the bibby, making it more fun at lower speeds when the bibby would rather be slid around. The supportive tail that wants to engage at slower speeds is why I described it as wanting to be skied with a traditional stance. I think the deathwish is going to be more fun than the bibby to most skiers who don't tailgun and whose priority isn't going mach looney.

The bibby on the other hand responds well enough to being slid around, but even better when leaning into the tips, charging hard. I think blister gear put it very well in describing it as a ski that is just so good at everything. To me, the deathwish is at home with moderate speeds (read, normal speeds), the bibby does a completely acceptable job at this pace. However, the bibby really shines and comes to life at speed, while the deathwish starts to become not as fun. The bibby definitely has more driveability/top end speed, while not being a complete chore at anything less than 40mph.

A quality that I really like about the bibby is to be able to lean the ski over into an arc and carve, at very high speeds and shitty snow. At slower speeds, this isn't as easy and the deathwish is much better at it. As for which ski would be better for you, I don't know. Depends on whether your priority is more fun in tight spaces/slower speeds or absolute top end speed. That being said, I think the deathwish is a step toward the playful side of things coming from the atlas.

Edit: If you were on a 182 atlas, a 190 deathwish could potentially be a good replacement. When I skied the 190 deathwish at my height and weight (5'9 170#) my thoughts were a shorter deathwish would just way too unsubstantial. But most my skis are in the 188-190 range, most of which have flat-ish tails.

[pappag]

Do tell more... weight, lengths, turn radius. Salivating thinking about this.

Pair the 181 (23m R) or the 187 (27m R) with Dynafits (I forget which size), and you're looking at a sub 10-pound setup with bindings.

[hick]

Pair the 181 (23m R) or the 187 (27m R) with Dynafits (I forget which size), and you're looking at a sub 10-pound setup with bindings.

You're the man PappaG, thanks! I know what will replace my pb and j as a spring tour rig. Sound $$

[himavan]

Picked up a pair of this year’s deathwishes from Moment’s spring sale.
Can anyone tell me if the mounting point is the little triangle on the sidewall (looks like -5 from true center)? Or is it the 2inch horizontal line on the top-sheet between “deathwish” and “184” (about -6 from center)?

Any more opinions on mount point? Looks like some folks (like Kc in this thread) prefer -1 from the line. I’m tempted to do that to drive the skis slightly more and because I won’t be skiing switch much. On the other hand, I won’t be skiing these in deep snow often (tip dive shouldn’t be a problem), I like to slash a bit, and worry that going back may not fit the camber profile (though I’m not sure if I’ll even notice any difference). I’m 5-10/160 and will be using these as a resort daily driver in the Canadian rockies.

Also, anyone know if the factory tune is a 1/2 or a 1/1?

[toast2266]

^^^ I prefer -1 on my Deathwishes in all situations, deep or not. Tried them on the line for a bit - they weren't horrible, but -1 is much better. Mine are the 12-13 model, but I don't think the line changed on the more recent ones.

[skier666]

I've had two pairs mounted on the line. No complaints at all. I'd use the sidewall marker.

[hick]

Skier 666- Did you get anymore time on those Exit Worlds? Kinda between those, the DW 190 or the '12/'13 190 Bibby for a quiver of 1 resort/slack co. ski.

Really intrigued by the 190 DW with all the positive I hear about it, but so hard to imagine liking a ski more than I did my 190 old Bibby's.

[skier666]

Yep. Skied them all last weekend. They don't really ski that much different than the original Bibby it's based off. Mine are mounted with Guardians on the line so weight wise I've felt no huge difference. They still rail morning steep groomers, float well in pow, plow chop, and sturdy enough for steep couloirs and icy chutes during spring touring sessions.

[hick]

Thanks! That is what I was hoping to hear. Figured a lighter Bibby couldn't be a bad thing.

[kc_7777]

Hey,

No longer own Deathwishes, miss 'em but Nordica Helldorados rule Baker snow.

I also owned old Bibbys, PBJs and DWs.

DW got skiied and was no need for PBJ and Bibby.

-1 felt way better than rec (triangle). Before I mounted mine I skiied a pair of demos, much better at -1. (Me 175lbs, 184 DW....maybe enough ski in front on a 190 DW at rec?)

Interestingly I am skiing my Helldorados at +2 (-4), so it would be interesting to ski the DWs again?

Kc