Bro 179 Soft vs K2 Apache Chief

[harpo-the-skier]

I am trying to decided between a Bro 179 Soft and a K2 Apache Chief. It will be mounted with Freerides and used in/out of bounds on powder days. I can get the K2's for about $150 less than the Bro's.

Both skis don't have too much side cut, though the Chief has a bit more. Similar in the waist. Both are on the softer side of longitudinal flex. The K2 weighs 2lbs more but I have other Bros w/Dynafits for long tours so that is not a concern.

I am 5'11", 180, ski most of Kirkwood's terrain except that I don't catch big air, and make more short turns than long.

Rumor has it that with the right tecnique, you don't need much sidecut to make short turns in off-piste conditions, as long as you aren't committed to carve your turns. This was true for me on my Trab Freerando on corn. I would like to find out if this is also true for fatter skis in pow.

[upallnight]

I am trying to decided between a Bro 179 Soft and a K2 Apache Chief. It will be mounted with Freerides and used in/out of bounds on powder days. I can get the K2's for about $150 less than the Bro's.

I'd go with the Bro, simply because the weight is a noticeable difference if you're going to be touring (and it sounds like you will do some). I know you say you have other Bros+Dynafit for pure touring...but I think weight is the key. If it's meaningful, go with the Bro; if weight doesn't matter, go with the cheaper pair.

For reference, this season I am going to be comparing a pair of 179 Bros w/ some 179 SVs that I've taken on steeper tours.

A big factor is the weight difference.

Both skis don't have too much side cut, though the Chief has a bit more. Similar in the waist. Both are on the softer side of longitudinal flex. The K2 weighs 2lbs more but I have other Bros w/Dynafits for long tours so that is not a concern.

I am 5'11", 180, ski most of Kirkwood's terrain except that I don't catch big air, and make more short turns than long.

Rumor has it that with the right tecnique, you don't need much sidecut to make short turns in off-piste conditions, as long as you aren't committed to carve your turns. This was true for me on my Trab Freerando on corn. I would like to find out if this is also true for fatter skis in pow.

the chief has a solid profile, and i think it's an ideal BC ski but for the weight. if you're riding lifts/sidecountry, it doesn't matter too much. $150 is not chump change.

you can make turns of any radius on any ski just fine, but it may not be natural, and it won't be a carve--but why does that matter? the straighter sidecut of the Bro should be more conducive to a smear, too, for shortening up those turns.

[Cirquerider]

Sounds like you want a ski that will serve more inbounds duty to complement your Bros with Dynafits. I am surprised you aren't looking for a dedicated alpine outfit for KW crud and using the Bros to hike out to West Shore. Since you have the Bros already, you can save some money with the Chiefs. If you are really touring, the extra 2 lbs is a bunch; get the Bros. If its mostly resort and an occasional hike, save some money.

[MTT]

The K2's for sure!!

Everyone is getting Bro's go with a mass produced Made in China ski (So hot this year)

[harpo-the-skier]

I am surprised you aren't looking for a dedicated alpine outfit for KW crud and using the Bros to hike out to West Shore.

I have used Freerides for most of my inbounds skiing on both R:ex's and 97mm Jaks. I having carving skis for icy groomers, but for everything else I use of of the two Freeride set ups. That is why I am thinkig of putting Freerides on the Bro's or the Chiefs (and selling the Jaks). Would putting alpine binders on the Bros/Chiefs make much of a difference as long as I wasn't on ice and also because I don't fall often? I have never had trouble with the Freerides for coming out when I shouldn't or staying in when I should have. I would be using them with alpine boots most of the time. I have been following the posts on alpine binders vs. AT binder on both TTips and here.

Still up in the air regarding Chiefs/Bros, tending toward Chiefs.

[upallnight]

I have used Freerides for most of my inbounds skiing on both R:ex's and 97mm Jaks. I having carving skis for icy groomers, but for everything else I use of of the two Freeride set ups. That is why I am thinkig of putting Freerides on the Bro's or the Chiefs (and selling the Jaks). Would putting alpine binders on the Bros/Chiefs make much of a difference as long as I wasn't on ice and also because I don't fall often? I have never had trouble with the Freerides for coming out when I shouldn't or staying in when I should have. I would be using them with alpine boots most of the time. I have been following the posts on alpine binders vs. AT binder on both TTips and here.

Still up in the air regarding Chiefs/Bros, tending toward Chiefs.

i have a theory (documented in other threads) that the stiffest alpine boots put additional stress on the Fritschi bindings in that the boots absorb less of the force exerted by the skier and transmit those stresses to the binding. I believe that this leads to more incidents with "problem" Fritschis.

hard inbounds skiing + Fritschis + alpine boots is, in my opinion, more detrimental to the binding over time than hard inbounds skiing + Fritschis + AT boots.

just something to consider.

that said, i've never personally had any problem in 10 years of skiing inbounds and out with Fritschis and AT boots.

it's the only way i can explain how so many folks seem to have troubles and hate on the Fritschis.

if you're going to ski these mostly in area and not skin w/ them, why not go with alpine boots + alpine bindings. you could use your AT boots for those occasional hikes.

if you're going to spend more time touring, go Frtischis, but be sensitive to the amount of time you spend in them with your alpine boots...or spend none at all. there's no reason you can't totally tear up any terrain in AT boots with either setup.

presumably, you already know and like the bros for their performance. it comes down to weight and $$.

touring much? save the weight and pay the cash.

not touring much? pocket the $150.

[team ftb]

I'd love to see someone who's skiied both to compare/contrast the two boards.

Harpo the Chiefs bang out short turns no problem. To me they actually are better in short radius turns than in higher speed GS turns.

As a Chief owner I would like to see them handle set up sierra crud a bit better. The Bros and Chiefs are close in dimensions, I think the soft bro is a bit stiffer though(my only experiencing was flexing a pair in a gonola line). Which may help it bash through set up conditions better.

[The Dark Side]

i have a theory (documented in other threads) that the stiffest alpine boots put additional stress on the Fritschi bindings in that the boots absorb less of the force exerted by the skier and transmit those stresses to the binding. I believe that this leads to more incidents with "problem" Fritschis.

hard inbounds skiing + Fritschis + alpine boots is, in my opinion, more detrimental to the binding over time than hard inbounds skiing + Fritschis + AT boots.

This is the first I've heard this mentioned but I tend to believe it. I skied on Lasers and FR's for a year and then Langes and FRs and after the half year with the Langes and FR's there was considerable play in them. I then switched to Looks for inbounds and the difference was very noticeable (on hardpack anyway). This makes me distrust Lou's binding stiffness study (on wildsnow.com), where he claimed that the FR's were just a stiff as alpine bindings (but he tested markers so I guess that explains it )