Thread: 190 Bibby Pro. Should I pull the trigger last minute?

Let me start by saying there is no real point to this thread. I just want someone to talk me into buying Bibby Pros after wanting them for years.

I am heading to Whistler in a few days and shit is going on sale so . . .

Right now I am planning on bring 186 Prophet 115s and 186 Viciks. But, I really want to ditch the Prophets for the Bibbys.

I really have no beef with the Prophets, but the tips are a little big and clanky. They work surprisely well in tight places and are excellent on groomers in all but ice. They also straightline pretty well too. They are a little heavy though, and mine are a bit beat on the top sheet, sidewalls.

I come from an EC race type background and want a charger. But I also want something manuverable. I haven't gotten into tail rocker before, and I am worry I bit that I won't like it. After a few runs, allbeit on icy conditions, I was not feeling the Blizzard Bonafide for example. But, the conditions were all wrong.

With all the rave reviews it sounds like the Bibby is still super versatile. I would only use them a few times a year, realistically, and I wonder if in a year or so everyone will move on to the next best ski? Maybe the Squad 7? Who knows . . .

Should I warm up my credit card or wait it out until next year?

Yes. They rule. I couldn't be happier, and I'm on the east coast. My other skis are 186 prophet 100s and 190 explosivs, and unless I'm skiing only groomers, I'm on the bibbys. My prophets are on their way out as well. Hope this helps.

If you want a charger and don't think you'll like a rockered tail, the Bibby Special would be the ticket (stiffer and features a larger shovel, flat tail, and 7mm of taper from waist to tail). And you lose no maneuverability: http://vimeo.com/35660993 (the tele skier in front of me near the end is on the 190 Bibby). Otherwise, I think you'll have a hard time hating yourself on the Bibby Pro: http://vimeo.com/4056083. I spent the better part of 2+ seasons on these as my everyday ski here in CO. Tried a variety of skinnier, more directional skis in between (Garbones, Belafonte), but ended up ditching them all in favor of the Bibby.

Since you're going to Whistler, stop by Snosciety. They should have demos available.

Biff - Just what I was looking for. It sounds like we have similar taste in skis. Prophet 100s, despite some obvious flaws, haven't found there way out of my quiver for 4 years now. Those and the 190 explosivs are at the top of my all time list.

G - Good to know they can be had for demo at Snosociety, that is obviously the rational way to go. Just hoping if I go that route and love them, some can still be had on sale when I return.

Originally Posted by Smails

Biff - Just what I was looking for. It sounds like we have similar taste in skis. Prophet 100s, despite some obvious flaws, haven't found there way out of my quiver for 4 years now. Those and the 190 explosivs are at the top of my all time list.

Mine too, but the bibbys are quickly climbing the ladder. PappaG has much more experience with them than I, as well as having a broader perspective on the entire moment line (I'd like to try the special/governor and the deathwish), but for what it's worth, I can attest after double digit days on them in every condition on the east and in CO, other than ideal, they kill it.

I've been on the bibby pro for two years. Fantastic all around ski, you won't regret the purchase.

I don't understand the gigantic shovel on the bibby special. Just give me the exact bibby pro dimensions, with a flattish tail. In 186. That would rule, and I'd buy it.

Originally Posted by bobsdesk

I don't understand the gigantic shovel on the bibby special. Just give me the exact bibby pro dimensions, with a flattish tail. In 186. That would rule, and I'd buy it.

You raise a good point... but after much time on both, I'd say the Special's long sharknose outperforms the short blunt tip of the Bibby Pro. It slices through crud and chopped-up pow much easier. Could you get the same effect if it was 140-145mm instead of 150? Perhaps, but has the gigantic tip been problematic on-piste? Nope.

I just don't see how the special fits into the lineup. I'd buy the Jag shark over the special (basically a flat tailed bibby). My impression of the jag shark is that it's too soft for me, so that's off the table as well.

That's all off topic - bibby pro. Awesome ski. Get it.

Originally Posted by bobsdesk

My impression of the jag shark is that it's too soft for me, so that's off the table as well.

I didn't know this until recently but for the current season, the 182 is considerably softer than the 192. For 2012/2013, the 182 will be much stiffer - effectively, all sizes get the 192 core. If I had to venture I guess, I'd say next year's 82 is a solid 20% stiffer than this year's. And then there's the addition of the 187cm length which should please some people that were torn between sizes.

Nice. I have a friend who is going to be very interested to hear about the stiffer 12/13 Jag shark. Can you compare the new Jaq shark stiffness to a 10/11 belafonte in 182? That (and a 190 bibby), is what we've got to compare...

Originally Posted by bobsdesk

Can you compare the new Jaq shark stiffness to a 10/11 belafonte in 182? That (and a 190 bibby), is what we've got to compare...

Here are the relative flex numbers taken from next year's catalog:

Bibby Special/Governor - 10
Belafonte - 9
Bibby Pro - 8
Jag Shark - 7
Deathwish - 7

Unfortunately, I have not had a chance to ski the new Jag Shark layup. But if we digest the flex numbers for a second, the Jag Shark places low on the list due to it's softer tip when compared to the Special/Bibby Pro/Belafonte. They plane far quicker at slower speeds. However, the tail for next year is much stiffer than the one I'm on now and I imagine the new Jag Shark will ski similar to the Belafonte/190 Bibby on firm snow underfoot towards the rear of the ski.

get em! i haven't personally skied them, but almost bought them last year, didn't really find anyone say anything bad about them.

Don't the viciks kind of fill the stiff, not fully rockered place in your quiver? What are you not liking about the Vicik?

Originally Posted by klikboom

Don't the viciks kind of fill the stiff, not fully rockered place in your quiver? What are you not liking about the Vicik?

Loving the responses, thanks boys.

As for the above question, the Viciks are an interesting animal. They kill it on soft groomers and don't have much of a speed limit at all on ice chucks, variable snow, etc. On this year's EC conditions, you can haul some serious ass, but you better know that they aren't going to hold an edge on ice if you need to make a quick turn. Not a lot of skis will on the current conditions.

As for powder, to me they are just too stiff and the tips don't stay up like the 115 or a lot of other skis. Cut up stuff isn't bad, mash potatoes (not surprisely what you get in the PNW where they were designed) are AWESOME. Spring corn is excellent, etc.

Basically, the Viciks are great (in my view) for the in between stuff. But, when it comes to powder or anything too deep and cut up they dive a bit for me.

I don't think they are really comparable in any way to the Bibby. More like a Belafonte type ski.

Smails - how you describe the Viciks in powder is exactly my thoughts on the Belafonte (very similar skis). I loved them on firm, but get them in anything over 6-8" and the tips submerge. After about 8 days on them, I ended up selling the Bfonts and went back to the Bibby as a daily driver since it was more than adequate on the firm as the Bfonts but did far far better in deeper snow.

Originally Posted by Smails

you better know that they aren't going to hold an edge on ice if you need to make a quick turn. Not a lot of skis will on the current conditions.

It's probably the fresh edges, but I found the hold to be relatively good on EC ice when I did encounter it. Nice solid platform when the surface was edgeable.

Originally Posted by PappaG

Smails - how you describe the Viciks in powder is exactly my thoughts on the Belafonte (very similar skis). I loved them on firm, but get them in anything over 6-8" and the tips submerge. After about 8 days on them, I ended up selling the Bfonts and went back to the Bibby as a daily driver since it was more than adequate on the firm as the Bfonts but did far far better in deeper snow.

Not surprising at all. I shopped the Bela hard before buying the Vicik because they were so similar. Actually, I think I PMed you a few times on that topic. I ended up with the Vicik essentially because the 186 length worked for me better then 182 or 192.

In a way I feel like that design of this type of ski is flawed because for the size, the lack of powder applicable is a little mind boggling. But, with that said, I can use the Vicik more or less as an everyday east coast ski and they haul some serious ass. In comprison, I took one EC run on the 115s and that was enough for me, and I assume I would feel the same about the bibby.

You can't ask a ski to do everything I guess. But I am always tempted!

Originally Posted by Smails

G - Good to know they can be had for demo at Snosociety, that is obviously the rational way to go. Just hoping if I go that route and love them, some can still be had on sale when I return.

FYI - I had inquired with them about demos and they have the 184s but I don't think they have 190s to try. No 186s either.

Originally Posted by biff chalupa

It's probably the fresh edges, but I found the hold to be relatively good on EC ice when I did encounter it. Nice solid platform when the surface was edgeable.

Don't get me wrong, Viciks can very definitely hold an edge. Just not on this year's conditions which are extraordinarily bulletproof. Even then they still work, it is just a little dangerous going mach loney and then expecting to crank out a carve. . . And that is certainly not the ski's fault.

Originally Posted by Smails

Not surprising at all. I shopped the Bela hard before buying the Vicik because they were so similar.

In a way I feel like that design of this type of ski is flawed because for the size, the lack of powder applicable is a little mind boggling. But, with that said, I can use the Vicik more or less as an everyday east coast ski and they haul some serious ass. In comprison, I took one EC run on the 115s and that was enough for me, and I assume I would feel the same about the bibby.

Both skis are built too stiff for powder and are more geared towards firmer snow... something heightened by more people owning a dedicated pow ski and a dedicated frontside ski (then again, that segment of the population is likely 10% or less of all skiers... but probably x3-4 that of sales for ON3P and Moment). Take the Belafonte, make the tip softer, widen it a bit, and you have last year's Jag Shark. Regarding the 115 comparison, I truly don't believe you'll get the same firm snow feeling on the Bibby considering the flex is rated just a notch below the Belafonte.

Originally Posted by PappaG

Take the Belafonte, make the tip softer, widen it a bit, and you have last year's Jag Shark.

Is it off base to say that if you have a tip rocker profile and width like the jag shark, you don't need it to be soft? That ski is going to float regardless of tip flex, why not have it be stiffer? Doesn't make sense to me at all to have a soft tip on the jag shark. That ski should be stiffer than the belafonte and less stiff than the 10/11 Garbone. That's a ski I'd purchase in 187 or 192.

Originally Posted by D(C)

FYI - I had inquired with them about demos and they have the 184s but I don't think they have 190s to try. No 186s either.

Ohh, major bummer. I can't believe they dont' stock the 190. Oh well, that always seems to be the deal with demos .. .

you buy now! you crush everything! you love!

Originally Posted by bobsdesk

Is it off base to say that if you have a tip rocker profile and width like the jag shark, you don't need it to be soft? That ski is going to float regardless of tip flex, why not have it be stiffer? Doesn't make sense to me at all to have a soft tip on the jag shark. That ski should be stiffer than the belafonte and less stiff than the 10/11 Garbone. That's a ski I'd purchase in 187 or 192.

In my past experience, stiff tips only functioned well when carrying a lot of speed, and softer tips do much better at planing in deeper snow at far slower speeds. Perhaps my technique was a lot different when I was on the 190 Bibby (and perhaps I was pressing the tips too hard and not allowing the ski to work for me which was likely the case), but I felt like it needed a fair amount of speed to achieve adequate float. On the other hand, the Jag Shark got instant float right out of the gate. Now that I'm on the Special which is much stiffer than the Jag Shark, I agree with your thoughts about not needing soft tips, even in deep snow. But I do believe there's a learning curve in trusting the ski to get the job done and using self control in not wanting to drive the ski too hard.

And again, everything I'm discussing is about this year's 82 Jag Shark which has a softer flex all throughout when compared to next year's. Unfortunately, I haven't been on the 12/13s but it's likely the tips are much stiffer.