New Madd 158

[Jack Michaud]

I dont like short boards.

But I love the new Madd 158. This is a completely different snowboard than the 158 I demo'd two years ago at the 2004 ECES. The 2004 board reaffirmed what I had felt about all short carving boards - they're nervous, unstable, demanding, and have to be ridden in their tiny sweet-spots at all times. Right? Wrong.

Madd Mike approached me in the base lodge at Sugarloaf at the ECES and said he had been working to duplicate the famous original Madd 158 of the mid 90's, and that he was pretty sure he'd nailed it. He wanted me to try it, so I hesitantly agreed with skepticism.

I've never ridden an original Madd 158. But I can't imagine any 158 riding any better than this. If the original was better, then any remaining examples should be immediately purchased for a hefty ransom by the Smithsonian.

The Madds are now being made in varying stiffnesses. I demo'd the medium a.k.a. "f2" 158, and found it to be perfect for my 175 pounds. The nose of the board has been stiffened up considerably, and this is readily apparant on snow. Feedback from the nose is excellent - you know exactly what the edge is doing at all times, and exactly how much purchase it has in the hardpack.

The stiffer nose radically improves the board's stability and versatility. The board will now carve larger and faster turns with total confidence that should be impossible for this length and sidecut. I could not believe I was having so much fun on a 158, and going as fast as I was with no sense of the board giving up. Gone is the precarious feeling of having to be perfectly poised over the board's sweet spot. This board lets you think about what you want to do, not what it wants to do.

To call this board lively is an understatement. That's a good thing. Cranking out some short-GS turns, I was effortlessly launching off the ground in between each perfect C-shaped carve. Upon returning to earth, the board would instantly slice into the next carve as if it had never lost contact. At one point I had to stop on the slope and ask ErikJ if I looked as good riding this board as I felt. He said something about "dude, if you were a woman, we'd be off in the trees right now..." Umm, not that there's anything wrong with that. Hey Erik, you know how I know you're... never mind.

Edge grip was flawless. No complaints, total confidence. Hip dragging on both sides.

Only changes I would make would be to center the insert pattern on the sidecut. I like a centered stance. With the existing setback, I had to use the forward most inserts and the forward binding holes to get to what I thought was a centered stance from my quick measurements in the demo tent. Also the jury is still out on Madd's return to brass inserts. The softer metal is less forgiving about thread engagement, and will require careful mounting.

The board just felt perfect. This is totally useless feedback for Madd, but what can I say, I have to have one. Mike, whatever you did to this board, for the love of god man, write it down. Dammit. This quiver thing is becoming a problem.

[kjl]

Jack, I agree with everything you said. I also never rode the legendary Madds in the 90s but had the pleasure at the SES of demoing probably that exact board (the #2 flex 158) and had been promised by Mike that it would "ride like a long board" and that it would blow me away.

The edge hold was incredible and the stability was amazing considering its tiny size. With such a shortcut I was making 10 turns for everybody else's one turn, so I was just absolutely wrecked at the end of the day, but what an amazing narrow, steep carving machine it is. Definitely one of those infinite-confidence boards.

If I had more room in my quiver (and/or had to ride narrower, more crowded slopes than I do right now), I would get one in an instant. What a sweet ride, and it really did feel like a much longer board than it was, except I could muscle it around if I wanted to.

[Mike T]

I too let Madd Mike talk me into demoing some Madds, at SES. First I tried out the 170 "Flex3" which I liked better than the previous year's 170, but I still prefer my Donek FC 175 Olympic.

Then I got on the 158 and was completely blown away. Now I'm a rider of every-improving-but-still-modest abilities. This board likes to be worked but it does not absolutely require a top-notch rider, such as certain ex-members would have you believe, in order to thoroughly enjoy it.

Just when I had decided that my FC 175 was my shortest board... I MUST have one of these as well.

[Neil Gendzwill]

So was this a one-off, or is this the same as the boards currently for sale?

[nekdut]

Alright, perhaps its time to talk about the picture below, as I've gotten many questions about the two.

First off, the phyiscal differences. The two boards have the exact same shape and geometry. The new Madd has more camber is feels stiffer with a hand flex. The old Madd has a different base, which seems thicker and harder than the Ptex 4000 on the new 158. The CF butterfly on the old Madd is shaped only slighty different, but is noticibly thicker, requiring longer mounting screws. The inserts themselves are recessed a bit and are brass (vs the steel inserts on the 05 158 red sidewall). Also, there are only 3 sets of inserts fore and aft on the old Madd. I had to use the most outward sets of holes, with the bindings mounted to their widest point to achieve the same stance (19.7" stance) that I had on the new 158.

Now on the snow. I rode these boards, back to back, with the same bindings (TD2, standards in front, SI in the rear, yellow elastomers), on the same day, on the same runs, with the same boots, even the same wax, so this should be as fair a comparison as possible. The first thing I noticed about the old Madd was that the base is WAY fast. This board kept speed on the flats and gliding to the lifts more than any other board I've ridden.

Both boards have incredibly edge hold, as everyone here is saying. Edge to edge is lighting fast, and getting air between carves is almost a given. Now, the old Madd was noticibly damper and quieter than the new 158. The new 158 required more of my attention and demanded to be ridden harder than the old Madd. Putting the TD2 suspension kit on the new 158 gave some of the dampness that the old Madd has, but takes away some of its springiness.

I honestly can't say which Madd I like better, but they are certainly both great boards. One thing that does stand out, is that due to its dampness, I can do as many tight crazy turns on the old Madd, but not tired as much as when I'm on thew new Madd.

People have said, and made fun of, the difference in "feel" between the two. There certainly is a difference, and its hard to quantify it in words.

[Erik J]

Another Madd lover here. I brought my Madd 170 with me to ECES - now I must have the 158. I'm just going to repeat everything that Jack said but whatever, this board just rocks.

I rode the same board that Jack did and had more fun riding the Madd 158 "f2" than any other board. The other boards I tried were the Madd 180, Prior Titanal 187 and another "first batch" Madd 170. I got a glimpse of what the fuss is over titanal but that Madd 158 is just plain fun.

The day I rode the 158 I was hung over and without my prescription eyeglasses (lost) but I had more fun that day on that board than anything else. Having ridden an original 158 at the last ECES, this board grabbed my cojones every bit as much as the original. Tons of Edge hold, rides longer than it should, turns on a dime. Just plain fun. I'm looking for things to sell so I can get one for next season. It would be nice to see stronger inserts.

[Jack Michaud]

Nekdut, I am pretty confident the Madd I demo'd is newer than the blue boy with red sidewalls you've got there. Someone had a board that looked like yours, and the nose on the new board is noticibly thicker and stiffer. I should double check with Mike, I dont know if it was an '07 proto or an '06 production model. It had the golden-clear topsheet with the boy on it, and flourescent green sidewalls. Very pretty. QC has come a loooong way from '04.

[sfleck]

you're right Jack. The newest Madds have a thicker rubber in the nose, and are stiffer through the nose as well, making them ride more like the old ones.

[nekdut]

Originally Posted by Jack Michaud

Nekdut, I am pretty confident the Madd I demo'd is newer than the blue boy with red sidewalls you've got there. Someone had a board that looked like yours, and the nose on the new board is noticibly thicker and stiffer. I should double check with Mike, I dont know if it was an '07 proto or an '06 production model. It had the golden-clear topsheet with the boy on it, and flourescent green sidewalls. Very pretty. QC has come a loooong way from '04.

Hmm interesting. I did not know there were significant changes between this years run and the run from 05. Well hopefully Mike and Shaggy come through with demos for the SNES, and I'll redo back to back Madd 158 comparisons with the new revision.

[Helmut Karvlow]

Madd 180
Prior titanal
Different ride, Madd springs to life holds on tight.
Prior, damp,light,and holds through all it hits!!!

[Mike T]

Originally Posted by Jack Michaud

I should double check with Mike, I dont know if it was an '07 proto or an '06 production model. It had the golden-clear topsheet with the boy on it, and flourescent green sidewalls. Very pretty. QC has come a loooong way from '04.

I wonder if I rode the same stick at SES - description matches. IIRC, those were the '06's. I would heartily agree that QC has come a huge distance since the '04 - '05 models. Regardless, I will be asking Mike/Shaggy for "one of what I rode @ SES".

Argh - I better get a good bonus in July. I want a 180 / 14m Donek Olympic just as bad! (That's a 182 / 15m Olympic I'm on in my current avatar...)

[NateW]

What's the sidecut on the Madd 158 and 170? I've seen a bunch of different numbers on that, does anyone really know?

[Jack Michaud]

Originally Posted by NateW

What's the sidecut on the Madd 158 and 170? I've seen a bunch of different numbers on that, does anyone really know?

Madd's website says 11, 12, 16m for the 158, 170, 180. These are estimates. It's hard to say for sure because the curve is elliptical (I believe). You can't measure it using the usual 3-point method. I tried that on my 180 measuring at the ends and middle of the sidecut and came up with like 14m. I know that's wrong, the board turns longer than the 15m board I used to have. 16m sounds about right. Maybe even 17. If you measure it using 3 different points, you get a different number. Use another 3 points and you get yet another number.

The new 158 I tried felt much longer than the 8.8m previously rumored, so 11m sounds reasonable.

[Scott]

I FINALLY got my Madd 158 this year and have to say it is my favorite board. I have the F3 and it does have more camber than the board I demoed at Okemo. I don't find that I have to be as much "on the nose" of this board as on last year's model. Seems more forgiving.
One thing I am still not impressed with it the overall quality of the board. I have one spinning T-nut and even though I chased the threads with a bottoming tap (VERY necessary) one screw engagement seems iffy. There are voids between the edge and board especially at the bottom. Top sheet- factory second. I am skeptical on the holding power of the brass inserts with my weight and forces on this board.
Still, I love the ride, since it took me 2+ years to get it, I'll ride it till it dies.
Maybe Mike will have a real product by then, or Coiler could find this recipe

[Chubz]

I picked up The Irritator 158 from Shred earlier this season and completely concur with everything Jack has shared. That thing rides like a small and bigger board, holds like a mother and spits me out from on turn to the next. I have been on my MADD 170 camo recently, but looks like I need to bring out the 158 again before the season ends.

Hearing you guys talk about all the different small different characteristics of of different boards is not helping me with my BBA sessions (Board Buyers Anonymous). Keep trying to shake that monkey, but the little pest keeps chirping in my ear ......"Buy....buy....buy....."

When my wife divorces me, I'm blaming you guys who make me more interested in buying and trying different boards. Maybe that would be a good sales pitch to attend the SES and ECES next year to deom boards, rather than buying them.

[Mike T]

Originally Posted by Jack Michaud

The new 158 I tried felt much longer than the 8.8m previously rumored, so 11m sounds reasonable.

Interesting. I was thinking it felt "about like my Donek Wide 161 - 9 meters". This is based on the fact that I could do complete turns in a very small space. I was also thinking the 170, both '05 and '06, felt like "about like my Axis 172 - just over 10".

I have the Donek FC 175 which is 11.75m and both the Madd 158 and 170 feel more turny to me that said Donek. Interesting, the 158 actually felt more stable in a stretched-out turn than the 170 - back-to-back runs - and I had the f2 158 and the f3 170. Strange. All I know is I got *really tired* riding the 158 because I was making so many turns. It was a cardio workout! Yeah, it liked making bigger turns as well, but I can do that on any board. The small turns were what was making me giggle.

[Dave Pushee]

I demoed the Madd 158 and 170 at ECES. Both were the softer F1 variety.

I'm shorter (5'6"), lighter (158), and older (by almost 27 years) than Jack.
I'm not any kind of expert, but I was very impressed by the 2 Madds.

The 170, even in the F1 flex was just a bit much for me. On the right trail and a bit more practice it could probably work well for me. The 158 really made me feel immediately at home.

I switched off between the Madds and my Axis 162. I think part of the reason I felt a home on the 158 is that it was giving me turns that felt a lot like my Axis (but with more confidence).

By early afternoon on Thursday, the wind had really scoured some of the trails down to boilerplate. I became more and more confident as I came to realize that the Madd's (both of them) just did not care about the difference between snow and hardpan. In fact, with the 158, I started looking for the shinier trail sections to test out the edge hold. I never did find the limit.

[bobdea]

Originally Posted by Scott

I FINALLY got my Madd 158 this year and have to say it is my favorite board. I have the F3 and it does have more camber than the board I demoed at Okemo. I don't find that I have to be as much "on the nose" of this board as on last year's model. Seems more forgiving.
One thing I am still not impressed with it the overall quality of the board. I have one spinning T-nut and even though I chased the threads with a bottoming tap (VERY necessary) one screw engagement seems iffy. There are voids between the edge and board especially at the bottom. Top sheet- factory second. I am skeptical on the holding power of the brass inserts with my weight and forces on this board.
Still, I love the ride, since it took me 2+ years to get it, I'll ride it till it dies.
Maybe Mike will have a real product by then, or Coiler could find this recipe

and there is no brass in the new boards
I suspect that you are a troll because with all the issue you have mentioned just about anyone would waranty your board
FYI if Bruce got the Madd recipe most people here would never get one, pretty long waiting list for a Coiler
if you do truely have issues I am sure Madd will take care of you

[Scorpio]

Bob, if you take a look at maddmike's site, there is an option to get brass inserts on the alpine decks.

[lonerider]

Originally Posted by bobdea

and there is no brass in the new boards
I suspect that you are a troll

If he were a troll I don't think he would describe the 158 as "my favorite board." Also, I guess you didn't bother to read the entire post that started this thread...

Originally Posted by Jack Michaud

Also the jury is still out on Madd's return to brass inserts. The softer metal is less forgiving about thread engagement, and will require careful mounting.

[bobdea]

I based my brass statement on my board which did have steel inserts
I for one would not touch a board with brass inserts
either way, a spinning insert is another issue as is delam "There are voids between the edge and board especially at the bottom"
both I am sure would be covered

[gdboytyler]

I demo'd the Madd 158 (F1 flex) at the SNES at June Mountain. I'm 5'7", 132 lb, 24mondo boots.

I rode the board early in the morning to specifically test it out in boilerplate conditions. The board had great edge hold, it even made riding on boilerplate fun. It's definitely the best board I've ridden under 160cm.

I normally ride boards with waist widths ranging from 19.5cm to 21.5cm. So I thought I might have a problem riding the skinnier Madd. But my transition to the Madd was almost seamless. I rode with angles of approximately 63f and 57b. I was doing hip to hip carves by my third run. It felt like an easy board to ride. The only problem I had was having my back knee occasionally hitting the snow. Because I was carving the board so quickly from edge to edge on laid-out carves, I didn’t have time to extend my legs through the turn like I normally would. I had to consciously think about tucking my back knee behind my front knee to get it out of the way.

Now about the high-speed stability of the Madd. Maybe I expected too much because of what I heard and read about. I expected it to be as stable as my boards with 13m sidecut radius. It didn’t feel that way to me. I could ride the board faster than my stock Donek FC2, with a 10m sidecut, but I couldn’t approach the speeds that I ride on my custom Donek or my Oxygen Proton 164 (both 13m sidecuts). At higher speeds it started feeling “squirly”. Yes, that’s a scientific term.

A few of the Madd boards in the SNES demo fleet did have jacked-up inserts. I’m pretty sure they were brass inserts. None of the Doneks in the demo fleet had bad inserts.

The Madd website does say you have a choice of brass or stainless steel inserts for new boards. I would recommend going with stainless. Anybody know of any reasons for going with brass inserts?

[Jack Michaud]

Of course, every board has a speed/carve size limit. Perhaps you would have liked the f2 better, or rather, found the f2 to be more stable at speed. I didn't try the f1 (I'm 175lbs), but I would think that the f1 would have given you the same ride as the f2 gave me. Maybe not.

Anyway, Madd claims improved vibration dampening characteristics with the brass inserts. They also have a larger diameter flange on the bottom, and have a stepped profile. According to Madd, if you get your screws at least 3.5 turns in, the board will rip apart before the inserts strip.

[skipuppy]

I've been talking to various people about my next board and was told that a Madd might be too stiff for me because I'm lightweight (120-) and I've got mondo 23 boots and I'll be riding on the east coast. Sooo... if you guys all tried a 158 is there anything smaller than that?? Would it still be too stiff? I'm not that good but I am good at getting good.

[kjl]

I'm only 140 lbs and the Madd 158 flex #2 was perfect for me. I forget which way the flex patterns are numbered, but if #2 really is too stiff for you the #1 or #3 should be perfect.

[lonerider]

Originally Posted by skipuppy

I've been talking to various people about my next board and was told that a Madd might be too stiff for me because I'm lightweight (120-) and I've got mondo 23 boots and I'll be riding on the east coast. Sooo... if you guys all tried a 158 is there anything smaller than that?? Would it still be too stiff? I'm not that good but I am good at getting good.

I think the F1 would be fine for you. However, since you are in Madd's backyard I'm pretty sure you can cop a demo before buying (they have a 2-week return policy too). Mostly you just need to be patient for next season!

[sfleck]

the F1 would be a good match for you. I'm in Worcester, so get in touch with me early next season and I will set you up with a demo.

Steve Fleck
sfleck05@hotmail.com

[Mike T]

Originally Posted by kjl

I'm only 140 lbs and the Madd 158 flex #2 was perfect for me. I forget which way the flex patterns are numbered, but if #2 really is too stiff for you the #1 or #3 should be perfect.

I rode the f2 at SES - possible the same deck kjl rode - and it worked very well for me at 195. I found it more stable feeling than the 170 f3 at moderate speeds, same runs, an hour apart.

[TrenchDigger]

I have always been a fan of short boards. They do require a little more control and concentration but it is worth it when you can lay down carves that leave thick ruts and pretend like your head is the point on a compass and let your whole body just turn around that (your head is the spike and your board the pencil). A long time ago I borrowed a board from this girl, it was a Sims Asym 153cm. Handsdown the most fun board I have ever riden. I compare it to this 183cm board that I used to ride, wait, you can't really compare them at all it is like day and night riding a long board and a short board. Nowdays I like to split the difference leaning more towards the smaller side, like 162. I own and ride regularly a Burton 158cm LOVE IT! Can't wait to try out the Madd.


TrenchDigger

[John Gilmour]

Back in the 1990's we had the sidecut of the 158 pegged at 8.8 meters and the 170 at 10.5 (we called them 880 and 1050 then in cm)

The 158 can do extraordinary tight turns if pushed..far beyond what a 8.8 would suggest and also if you broaden your weight distribution and stay low without bending the board aggressively (nearly - outboard canting)you can make a 158 do something close to a 11M turn at speed. The 170 can be made to do slalom like turns but still is not as quick side to side as the 158 (it gets up on edge but doesn't do much of a lateral move). You can stretch the 170cm 10.5M out in a similar fashion to make it feel like a 12-13 meter board but no further- however you can front load punch it to make it do a pop turn like a 9.5m deck. The times I feel the need for the 170 are in crud and on steeps and at speeds over 50- or on very wide open terrain. In crowds or on ice... I'll pick the 158 every time. For Ice (real ice... not what they call ice in Colorado) the 158 despite its smaller effective edge- has a stiffer profile that cuts into it better and allows for better speed control...making it one of the few boards I feel completely safe on even when an "edge catch" to "skull hit" on real ice would make your head explode like a watermelon- helmeted or not.



BTW..we called the 170 a 170... but it really measured out to be closer to 168. We just didn't want guys to feel too "short".