Madd 170 or 158??

[Jim Callen]

Well, I ordered a Madd 170, but I'm still not sure I made the right decision. I'll be moving to Aspen, CO and I plan on doing a bit of racing while out there. I have a 178 Oxygen Proton that may or may not be rideable, so I was planning on getting the 170 as a backup GS board. My question is:

Which is better for racing, the Madd 170 for a GS race, or the 158 for slalom races? The 170 seems a bit short and has a small sidecut for a GS race. The 158 seems to be a nice, short board for slalom racing.

Second question: is the 170 really even practical for GS courses? It's got such a small sidecut.

I know this is like comparing apples and oranges, but any imput would be greatly appreciated.

[Matt D]

I have a slalom board that was used by a racer on the world cup and it has a 10m sidecut. If the 170 Madd has a 10.5 its pretty close to a slalom board. Thats what I would use it for anyway. I did ride both the 170 and 158 @ ECES this year. The 170 was my choice of the 2. Its not a GS board though.

[Pre School Rider]

Jim,in Colorado,you'll not be putting the 170 to work in it's element;IE Hard,Icy,New England Chalk type of snow.So, it's value as a 'race board' might not be realized in all that fluffy Western snow.However,it's still a very capable board,and is quite fast and stable despite the tightish sidecut.I've owned several boards that are plenty fast,and my old 170 was one of the fastest in absolute speed. Would I pick it over the Oxygen? Maybe... The Oxygen will work better on courses that invite you to boost off the tail for thrust. On courses that have big change-ups in turn size,the Madds would likely deal with those easier.You'll need to work this one out for yourself,stopwatch in hand.

[Jim Callen]

So would you recommend I get the 158 over the 170? I would like to try some slalom races, and I figure the 158 would be good for them. Albeit I don't know what else I'd use it for out in CO, seeing as the runs are plenty wide open. Argh, so confused...

[Chris Houghton]

Resistance is futile. You must acquire both. Then the challenge will be to choose which to ride.

BTW - I think you made the better choice. Although the 158 is really nice. Rides bigger than it is. Arrrgh.

[Jim Callen]

Ah, if only the money situation would allow it. What with moving and all, and I would like to get new boots for next season, I'll be hard pressed to get two new boards within a short time frame. And yes, that 158 rides so nicely, hence I'm so torn.

[Jack Michaud]

I don't know about racing, but in general the 170 is so versatile, it's a safe bet. If you don't <i>know</i> you want the 158, the 170 is the right choice. The 158 is a serious weapon of precision carving.

[Jim Callen]

I was planning on using my 178 Proton for racing GS. Would it work for PGS as well? What's the difference between GS and PGS courses?? Or SL and PSL?

It was the 158 I wanted for a SL board. I really enjoyed both boards at ECES. The 158 was so radically different from any other board I'd been on previously. I hadn't ridden anything in hard boots under a 170, and then I hopped on the 158, and it was quite a ride. It pulled me around turns with such force. It was such a rush...

[Matt D]

A buddy of mine who coaches and is an excellent course setter tells me that a PGS course has more horizontal offset between the gates, and a little less vertical offset. So it requires a rounder turn shape.

A friend of mine who formerly raced world cup used a board with 17m sidecut for GS, and Jasey Jay now uses a board with 16m sidecut for PGS.

My coiler was a world cup GS board built for a guy on the Canadian National Team with a 15.7m radius and he is now using something in the 14-15m range.

[skeez rule]

do they use the Microcell core(the best on the market!!) like rossignol
or do they use some neeto caps with titanium like the Atomics