Bibby mount point advice.

**spotted dogs** · 03-31-2018, 06:07 PM

Long story short: picked up set up new/ old shape in 190, which were mounted ahead of recommended point by one “triangle” for 317 and Adrenalines. I am 310 which from my rough estimation brought me forward further another 7mm from recommended point. So instead of the -6 which universally seems to be be sweet spot I am almost -8 .
Skied them and they kicked my ass... they were hard work and wouldn’t pivot in boot deep snow which had me thinking I should move the mount to the recommended point. ( they didn’t have any of the characteristics that people seem to rave about)
Am I over thinking it and give them time to get used to or remount?

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**PlayItLeo** · 03-31-2018, 08:15 PM

I think the 7mm differential in bsl would lead to you only being 3.5mm ahead of the previous mount’s midsole line, but other than that, I have nothing to add re: remount.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Bandit Man** · 03-31-2018, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by spotted dogs

Skied them and they kicked my ass... they were hard work and wouldn’t pivot in boot deep snow which had me thinking I should move the mount to the recommended point. ( they didn’t have any of the characteristics that people seem to rave about)
Am I over thinking it and give them time to get used to or remount?

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I owned 190 Bibby Pro’s from the coveted years and I had a very similar experience. They were great on groomers but too much work everywhere else. I sold them and figured I just wasn’t as good a skier or not the style skier as people who rave about them. My buddies who skied them felt the same way. You aren’t the only one out there who had this experience.

**PNW_Skier206** · 03-31-2018, 10:04 PM

Worth thinking about. I’ve owned the ski in both 184 and 190 and love it at both lengths. I know a lot of people go +1 of recommended on the 190s.

What else do you ski?

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**spotted dogs** · 03-31-2018, 10:12 PM

Been on automatics, and skevik loken. Rode 191 billy goat a while back and they weren’t as much work!
I really want to like them, so thinking a tune the way I like and a moving them to recommended point and give them another shot.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**PNW_Skier206** · 03-31-2018, 10:21 PM

If 191 goats were fine I doubt it’s a length issue. They definitely like to run it open spaces.
Also not sure how many days you have on them but they took me a few days to adjust to.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**skizix** · 03-31-2018, 10:46 PM

Wow. My 190, ‘17/‘18’s are mounted on the line and are 100% living up to the hype. Agile and precise AF in tight trees yet can handle all kinds of funky junk at ludicrous speed. Magic combo of super-capable-yet-do-not-punish-mistakes. My most recent day on them was 4-6” of fresh on top of 3D frozen slush, and they blew my mind with how easily they slayed it.

I’m finding them a very energy-efficient ride (do not beat me up). Felt like I was used to them in like 1/2 a run but turns out I wasn’t - turns out it took a few days to figure out just how much faster i could easily go in less-than-ideal conditions. Yep...gush gush: one of the best skis I’ve been on.

Maybe check your tune?

**spotted dogs** · 03-31-2018, 10:50 PM

^^^^that is exactly what I was hoping for; something with more beef than the auto but still able to navigate the tight stuff .
Tune is first then possibly a remount . They were odd, as they just felt “off”. ( humbling as I thought myself pretty proficient.)

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**Lahar** · 03-31-2018, 11:34 PM

I've been on the 1st year 190 Bibby since they came out, and they have lost their camber, but I usually grab them in most conditions. I purchased a newer pair last year and they were basically unrideable, sketchy AF. After much detuning, I finally brought them to a shop and had a -1 base edge bevel put on them, pushing to -2 into the tip and tail. After re-edging they ski like a snappy cambered version of old trusty, but my old ones are like an old pair of jeans, really hard to give up.

Edit - I can check the mount point on the few pairs of 190s I have here, but the sweet spot if I remember correctly is recommended (-6 from cord center?) to -2 behind that. I think my old ones are mounted -1 from recommended.

**margotron** · 03-31-2018, 11:52 PM

I owned the 2017 in 190. I couldn't ski it at recommended. i loved the 184. maybe i just suck. ive gotten along with other 'loved' skis just fine. currently ski the kartel 116 and it skis just fine for me. Conclusion? I just suck.

**skizix** · 04-01-2018, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by Lahar

I've been on the 1st year 190 Bibby since they came out, and they have lost their camber, but I usually grab them in most conditions. I purchased a newer pair last year and they were basically unrideable, sketchy AF. After much detuning, I finally brought them to a shop and had a -1 base edge bevel put on them, pushing to -2 into the tip and tail. After re-edging they ski like a snappy cambered version of old trusty, but my old ones are like an old pair of jeans, really hard to give up.

Edit - I can check the mount point on the few pairs of 190s I have here, but the sweet spot if I remember correctly is recommended (-6 from cord center?) to -2 behind that. I think my old ones are mounted -1 from recommended.

What is “last year”? For 17-18 they returned to the most-loved, OG formula (and mine are actually Blister Pros, which were/are that, and same as 17/18 Bibbys - just more subdued graphics). For me at least they fkn rock (though I probs wouldn’t bring them out in anything less than the aforementioned 4-6” of fresh).

P.S. OP: what year are yours? They changed things a few times to poor reception, only to return to the Original Recipe (the whole thing is chronicled on Blister Gear, if distributed-ly)

P.S. Despite the KFC reference, KFC will never pass my lips. That shit is fucking disgusting

**skizix** · 04-01-2018, 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by margotron

I owned the 2017 in 190. I couldn't ski it at recommended. i loved the 184. maybe i just suck. ive gotten along with other 'loved' skis just fine. currently ski the kartel 116 and it skis just fine for me. Conclusion? I just suck.

Maybe you’re just a smaller person...? At 5’ 10”, 190# I can flex/move the 190’s around at will.

**spotted dogs** · 04-01-2018, 12:43 AM

They are the 17/18 model

Click image for larger version.

Name: Image1522564936.472204.jpg
Views: 90
Size: 250.4 KB
ID: 230682

I usually run 1 base and 2 edge angles and detuned tips and tales , so that is first.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**spotted dogs** · 04-01-2018, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by Lahar

I've been on the 1st year 190 Bibby since they came out, and they have lost their camber, but I usually grab them in most conditions. I purchased a newer pair last year and they were basically unrideable, sketchy AF. After much detuning, I finally brought them to a shop and had a -1 base edge bevel put on them, pushing to -2 into the tip and tail. After re-edging they ski like a snappy cambered version of old trusty, but my old ones are like an old pair of jeans, really hard to give up.

Edit - I can check the mount point on the few pairs of 190s I have here, but the sweet spot if I remember correctly is recommended (-6 from cord center?) to -2 behind that. I think my old ones are mounted -1 from recommended.

I believe these are further forward than recommended.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**Lahar** · 04-01-2018, 12:47 AM

2013 or whatever year they went to the 192. Then they went funky double camber>Blister>back to og.

Originally Posted by skizix

What is “last year”?

**Lahar** · 04-01-2018, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by skizix

Maybe you’re just a smaller person...? At 5’ 10”, 190# I can flex/move the 190’s around at will.

This^. I'm 190+/- and 6'1"

**waxoff** · 04-01-2018, 12:59 AM

Originally Posted by spotted dogs

which were mounted ahead of recommended point by one “triangle” for 317 and Adrenalines. I am 310 which from my rough estimation brought me forward further another 7mm from recommended point. So instead of the -6 which universally seems to be be sweet spot I am almost -8 .

Maybe it's just me but I don't understand how you can end up at -8 if mounted ahead of recommended mark plus shorter bsl. -8 in my book is 2 cm behind -6.

Besides that, I find 190 Bibbys on the line with a centered stance to be very well balanced in most if not all conditions! Skiing cut up powder on these make the skis feel like an extension of my feet, so intuitive.

Checking the tune would be a good idea, but also make sure (measure) where your boot center is in reference to the skis true center. If more than a cm from -6 maybe consider a remount?

**Lahar** · 04-01-2018, 01:00 AM

Originally Posted by spotted dogs

I believe these are further forward than recommended.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I would not want to go forward of the line. The line is a forward center-mount already compared to other skis. Rec or slightly back.

**spotted dogs** · 04-01-2018, 08:58 AM

^^^^ confusion is probably my description with mount. Would have been easier to say I am over 2 cm forward of the suggested mount. My boot mark is lining up with the small triangles forward of the big one ( recommended).

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**waxoff** · 04-01-2018, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by spotted dogs

^^^^ confusion is probably my description with mount. Would have been easier to say I am over 2 cm forward of the suggested mount. My boot mark is lining up with the small triangles forward of the big one ( recommended).

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Ok, that makes more sense. Which would put your midsole even in front of -4. Guess it's time to get the drill out and remount those!

Still, just to be sure of the location of the triangles, I would first measure and mark the skis true center, then measure 6 cm rearward from there and put boot center there if you remount. If all is good, recommended would be in the same spot.

**Lahar** · 04-01-2018, 12:07 PM

Mine are mounted here, which look about about -1.5 from what might be an old rec of -5? They are about 101cm straight pull from tip.

Click image for larger version.

Name: IMG_20180401_110415.jpg
Views: 95
Size: 83.1 KB
ID: 230757

Both pairs I have here are within .5mm of the same spot, 101cm from tip.

**skizix** · 04-01-2018, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Lahar

Mine are mounted here, which look about about -1.5 from what might be an old rec of -5? They are about 101cm straight pull from tip.

Both pairs I have here are within .5mm of the same spot, 101cm from tip.

...which puts you pretty much on the (new) rec-line, as they switched it from -5 to -6

**spotted dogs** · 04-01-2018, 03:05 PM

Terrific, thanks! Gonna get them on the bench and do some
Measuring and snap a pic or two.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**skuff** · 04-01-2018, 03:39 PM

My 190cm 12/13, 143-118-134 OG style, have the triangle/boot center at ~100cm from the tip with a straight tape, leaving ~87.5cm of tail. Currently have bindings on there now which make a precise measurement difficult.

From skiing Explosivs and Legend Pros, it took a bit of time for me to get used to a more centered mount.

**Banh Mi** · 04-01-2018, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

I owned 190 Bibby Pro’s from the coveted years and I had a very similar experience. They were great on groomers but too much work everywhere else. I sold them and figured I just wasn’t as good a skier or not the style skier as people who rave about them. My buddies who skied them felt the same way. You aren’t the only one out there who had this experience.

I kind of liked the 190 Bibbys, however I also thought they were a lot of work.. They felt like freestyle powder comp skis, designed for a large person to throw huge tricks off big cliffs at high speeds in perfect powder. That’s not me lol.. Perfect for Josh Bibby, but a bit too beefy for mere mortals to get a little “playful” with. They demanded more input in difficult conditions and in tight spots, when compared to similar skis. I had the same experience with 192 Bentchetlers (the 2015 BC, when are 2650g/ski). I prefer On3p Kartel 116 and K2 Shreditor/Pettitor for slashing around and popping off small-medium inbounds hits, as well as difficult 3D conditions. I also prefer 193 Patrons/Gunsmokes for all mtn charging, in difficult firm conditions.

I think it just takes a certain style to get along with 190 Bibbys. For me, 190s felt like they couldnt decide whether to be chargers or playful skis. In the end, I decided they were mediocre at being playful, when compared to a softer ski. As well as mediocre at charging, when compared to a beefier ski like Patron/Gunsmoke ( or especially compared to a more directional ski)

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums