2015-2016 Moment Bibby Pro

Ski: 2015-2016 Moment Bibby Pro

Stated Dimensions (mm): 143-118-134


The Bibby is back.

Ok, well, the Bibby never went away, it just got a makeover.

But then the previous Bibby came back in the form of the Blister Pro.

And for next season, the Bibby Pro is back in the form of the Blister Pro—or rather, the Bibby is back to being the Bibby.


It’s been an interesting year.


Anyway, we don’t care what it’s called or what it looks like, we’re just glad this particular ski is sticking around. There are a few updates to the ski (including use of a new base material and a nice looking semi-cap construction), and it looks like this:


SIA Tradeshow 2015, Blister Gear Review
Moment Bibby Pro



SIA Tradeshow 2015, Blister Gear Review
Moment Bibby Pro



SIA Tradeshow 2015, Blister Gear Review
Moment Bibby Pro – Tip Profile



SIA Tradeshow 2015, Blister Gear Review
Moment Bibby Pro – Tail Profile



SIA Tradeshow 2015, Blister Gear Review
Moment Bibby Pro – Bases

42 comments on “2015-2016 Moment Bibby Pro”

  1. Nice work getting this ski back into regular production and kudos to Moment for taking into consideration input from the community. It’s good to know that should I ever wear out my Blister Pros it won’t be a mad scramble on the internet to find an old pair. I will miss the subtle graphics of the Blisters, but when they’re covered in snow it doesn’t matter. Now, can you guys stroll over to the fine folks at Volkl while at SIA and kindly request that they restart production on the metal Katana? (I heard a rumor Nordica is bringing back the Enforcer so they figured out lighter isn’t always better) Try finding a pair of 13/14 191 Katanas on the ol’ interwebs right now – based on your reviews they’re all gone! That’s market demand talking to you Volkl…

  2. Blister knows best! What are your team’s thoughts on the semi-cap construction? Should the fans of the stability of this ski be concerned it are those fears misplaced?

    • Hey, Andrew – to be clear, these are not a cap wall or ‘full cap’ construction – there is a vertical sidewall that runs the full length of the ski, it’s just that the tops of the sidewalls have been capped, which ought to make the top sheets more durable / less prone to chipping. We’ll see of course, but we aren’t worried at all about the construction.

  3. Best graphics on a Bibby yet, to bad they are going back to the old one, I thought the 2013-2014 where the best ones since the very first year in 09, oh well I guess I will have to stock up on few pairs at the end of the season.

  4. Very exciting! Any other big changes (a reversion to the classic Belafonte shape, for example) worthy of note in next year’s Moment line-up?

  5. I have a pair of ’12 Bibby’s. Love them and they are still in good shape. I would never sell them. But gonna buy the new ones based on the graphics alone. Don’t judge. Keep on rockin’ Moment crew!

  6. Really digging this topsheet! Cool graphics… you guys should put the Bibby to test agains teh Jeffrey 114 and 122! I’d be curious to see how that goes…

  7. Best skis I’ve ever owned in 47 years of skiing. Absolutely crushes everything and is spectacularly fun doing it. I’m grabbing a set of the new ones and keeping my 12/13s for rock skis.

  8. OMG I’m so confused…hellish flashbacks to Coke, New Coke and Coke Classic…ok…so one of our local shops has the Bibby (are they all Pros?) with the demon and guy with the axe graffic…which Bibby is that? Is that a Bibby Pro? Which review should I read?

  9. I am looking to replace my atomic automatic with either the 2016 190 biddy pro or 2015 186 blizzard bodacious. I am leaning toward the bodacious and have gotten some input from Paul Forward however he has never actually ridden the Biddy. I am 200 lb and an advanced skier. I live in the PNW and I am looking for a ski that can handle crud and chop well but also handle pow well enough for cat trips. How much stability does the Biddy give up to the Bodacious and how much better would the Biddy be in pure Pow?

  10. I have red all reviews on Bibby Pro. Next year’s grafics is cool! Good to know pros and cons to Icelantic Keeper as I have never find any reviews on them. I am skiing “big” only in EU Alps and since this year I am keen on sidecountry, which we have enjoyed in Vorarlberg area of Austria (Lech/St. Anton/Sonnenkopf). Being 178cm/77kg own Nordica Enforcer Ti (2013) for Alps and Fischer RC4 Worldcup SC Pro for our local hils in Central Russia.
    I have tested Nordica Patron – fun but “kicky” in tracked powder. Now I’m looking to Bibby’s 2013; Keeper’s and DPS Wailer 112RP2 Hybrid for skiing powder/mixed/slopes in Alps.

  11. First of all, thanks – I never knew I could spend 15 hours reading ski reviews, but with your help, I’ve done it, and it’s been awesome.

    Second, I figure you’ve got better things to do then respond to me, but in the event you’re feeling generous, I’d really appreciate if you’d let me know if you think I’m too light for these (the Blister Pro / old Bibby Pro)? I’m 5’8″ and 145lbs +/- 5 lbs, currently ski on 2010-2011 Volkl Mantras (170 length, 96 underfoot, still tons of fun even as they approach their 100th day), and I’m looking for a 2nd ski to take to BC next year. I’m worried after reading your, Will B.’s, Jason H.’s reviews that a guy who ways 25 lbs less than you, and 15 lbs less than Will & Jason, won’t have as much fun on these (Jason mentioned his weight being a bit of an issue in his 2nd look at the 2014-2015 Bibby). If it matters, at this point I’m deciding between these, the Blizzard Gunsmoke (thanks your second take on that one, and also for the comment on the review the Bodacious comparing the two), and the Head Cyclic 115.

    • Never mind, I answered my own question reading your reviews/comment of the Blister Pro (which I feel dumb for missing) – sounds like I ski a lot like Noah and am the same weight. Now I’ve just got decide between Blister Pros and Head Cyclics, and that’s on me. Thanks again for have such a fricking fantastic site.

  12. Great fricking site, love all the reviews – feeding the fever! Wanted to get your collective opinion: 6’00”, 165 lbs, long time Tahoe skier (squaw and alpine), directional advanced skier. Favorite skis are Enforcer (first year, now retired) 177, Cochise (first year, daily driver) 185 cm. On JE’s review, bought the Volkl One’s in 186 cm last year, mounted at 0. Great float and lots of fun, but the substantial tail rocker makes the ski want to wheelie out on any landing or high speed turn if I get in the back seat at all. From all you’ve written about the Bibby Pro, sounds like the perfect powder / soft snow ski to match with the Cochise. So thinking to 1) buy the new bibby pro (thanks for bringing them back), 184 cm or 190 cm? and sell the One’s or 2) remount the One’s forward to increase the support from the tail?

  13. I am finally going to get the Bibby! I am torn between sizes tho. I am 5’11” 180-185lb depending on good ive been:) I am a fairly strong skier. I have the deathwish in 184 and love that ski. What do you professionals think? 184 or 190? Oh…I live in Denver and ski everywhere in CO…Thanks!

  14. Obsessively went back and read all your awesomely detailed reviews and comments on the Bibby Pro. Pretty much decided I’m gonna go for it and sell the One’s. Thinking the 190 cm length is it (have read through all the discussions on length), but wanted to get your thoughts on whether mounting the 190 length at +1 with look pivots would strike a balance in maneuverability between it and the 184 cm length. Thanks in advance

    • Hey, Perkin – since you’ve read everything, I”ll keep this short: I’ve got zero reservations about going +1 on the 190s – they ski great at +1. If you were going to be tricking these or primarily skiing a bunch of firm moguls, then I think the 184s would be worth considering. Otherwise, given the skis you have, I think +1 on the 190s will work well for you.

      • Hi Perkin. i’m in exactly the same situation. Cochise been my daily driver for the past 7 seasons (fist year and 2015 models) and i love the to death.
        Been trough a few powder skies in a last few years and looks like Bibby pro 190 are winning the battle. Also ski in Tahoe, mostly Squaw and Alpine.
        Question for you about mounting Bibby. I’m also thinking about mounting +1, somebody even suggested +2. However, moment guys at the factory saying it should be at the line…
        I’m 6’2″, 200lb, directional skier at moderate speeds but i love to make medium to long size turns. Based on your experience, where would you recommend to mount those skies?

  15. Going to gamble on El Nino and pray for some deeper snow in SW Idaho. May even try for a trip to Alta or Targhee too.

    Currently just have the SFB in 172. Im 5’2″ and around 130 lbs. Not sure I would call myself an “expert” skier but more of an advanced inter. Can ski most runs in good conditions but do struggle in deeper snow, especially when its heavy and tracked out/cut-up.

    I like the bacon but in heavy powder or tracked up powder and crud it does get pushed around a bit. Would like something wider for deeper days and this ski is top of my short list. Like the flex profile of the Bacon, even though its not what I would call super stiff it seems right for what it is.

    I am told it can charge harder than the SFB but still be a bit play full in the tress and what not. I do at times seem to get some chatter from the SFB on groomers and would like some more confidence at speed.

    Will be considering a 3 ski quiver with the Brahma/Sick day etc as my no snow for ages, thaw-rain-freeze, groomer ski. So will have the hard groomers covered.

    Obviously I would go for the 174. Vey happy with the SFB in 172. One other ski I was considering is the Opus (local shop has a couple pair left at a killer deal), but at 178 that may be pushing it a bit.

    Any advice is much appreciated.


    • Hey, Scott – given what you’re looking for, I think the Bibby fits the bill. The Opus is a great ski, but it was definitely not built for “heavy and tracked out / cut-up snow.” Very balanced skiers can make the Opus work in that stuff, but that is not the same as saying the ski is good there. On the other hand, the Bibby is one of the best skis we’ve been on in that stuff. I think this is an easy decision, and I think you’re going to really like the Bibby.

  16. Jonathan, maybe not the best place for this question but here goes. As I said above I am also looking for a no snow in a while ski. Think groomers (hard and soft), wind blown hard pack, refrozen spring snow/crud. Basically a crap conditions ski. FYI, I usually stay away from the bumps, especially if they are hard or bigger. The SFB was no good in that really. The Bibby seems too wide for that too. Looking in the under 100mm range and directional with some rocker in front with little to no rocker in rear but a twinned tip. Something that doesnt hold me locked into a turn shape like flat tails can do so I can wah out the tails if I need to. Something if I want to ski it hard I can but when I get tired after lunch (few beers) I can take it easier if I want to. Skis I am thinking of are Tahoe, Brahma/Bonifide, Kendo/Mantra etc.

    Thanks once again!

  17. Looking at the Bibbys as a 2 ski quiver with the 182cm Rossi E100s that just came in the mail. 6’1″, ~220lb advanced/expert skier. 190cm in the Bibby?

  18. I’m having an internal debate between the 174cm and 184cm Bibbys. I’m 5’6 and ~185lb, and have been skiing the Rossignol Soul 7 180cm – I’m a bit worried the 184cm may be to much ski for me?

  19. Mark, Ill let the experts weigh in but for what its worth…
    Im 5’2 and about 130 lbs in ski gear. Advanced to expert level. I ski the 174. I know nothing about the Soul 7 as far as mount point etc. It “looks” more directional than the Bibby. Bibby is mounted I think -6 from center so not “very” directional.

    I also have the 172 SFB and its mounted at -2. I find the 174 and -6 mounting suit me better than the SFB (skis quite short). I am not much shorter, but quite a bit lighter. I find the Bibby a great Stiff, but not unforgiving ski (also have the Moment Belafonte and its noticeably stiffer) and possibly the perfect length for a playful powder ski. I have not had it in deep powder (6″-8″) and about 6″ of heavy chop/crud. It killed it. And on the way back to the lift on a long steep roughed up groomer it held its own. I was shocked how well it held and edge at a respectable speed. I get the playful charger term now!!!

    If you are a strong skier at your weight I would certainly go for the 184. But as I said the experts here are closer to your weight and they may be better help.

  20. Just picked up a pair of the 2015-2016 Bibby’s. I am 5’7 180 Advanced / Expert Skiier, and will b using all over the mountain + BC. Do you go w/ Moment’s recommended mount point?

  21. I picked up a pair of the 2015-16 Bibby’s at the end of the 2015 season in a 190cm length based on reviews on this site. Thus far, I’ve got a season and change on these skis leading into 2017 and experience on them in a wide range of conditions from perfect to perfectly shitty.

    A whole lot of superlatives have been attached to the Bibby Pros in multiple threads on this site and elsewhere, so I thought I’d chime in with a small dose of contrarian levity. First and foremost, allow me to state that my opinions are just that, my opinions. And my opinions in no way take away from the enjoyment other people have found with this ski. We all have our likes and dislikes, after all.

    The Bibby Pros simply aren’t for me. They are not my “best ski ever” … That ski is still the 2010 Volkl Mantra. Nothing before or since has ever come close to the versatility of the original Mantra.

    My stats go something like this: 5’ 11”, 175 lbs, expert skier, former ski instructor, former racer, with 43 years on snow. I charge as hard as anyone and still enjoy getting air off piste and in the park. Carving is poetry and my favorite tool for all-mountain versatility and lacerating a mountainside with a Joker-esque smile is still a dedicated slalom ski.

    Much has been made of the Bibby Pro’s versatility. It’s great in powder, bumps, crud, soft pack, hard pack, blah blah blah. And it “rails” on groomers.

    No. It isn’t. And no, it doesn’t.

    There isn’t a 110cm or wider “powder” ski in production that “rails” on groomers. Yes, you can get the Bibby’s on edge and hold that edge on groomed terrain because it is a comparatively stiff ski for a powder plank. But it’s not as simple as rolling your 90 cm all-mountain ski on edge and blammo! you’re carving. Wide skis take a huge amount of effort and energy to carve simply because the fulcrum gets pushed well outside of your ankle. With the fulcrum so far outside of your ankle, an enormous amount of lateral skeletal pressure is exerted directly on your ankles and lower legs in order to keep the ski on edge (and it doesn’t matter how tight your boots are). Throw in minor variations in terrain on hard or soft pack and this constant buffeting does not make for a pleasant day on the mountain on an average day. In deep snow, that pressure is largely non-existent. Perhaps, we simply need a different word to describe “carving” in powder.

    I digress.

    The Bibby’s will, in fact, hold an edge on hard pack, I’m not disputing this. But the effort required to initiate and maintain that position does not translate to what I consider a “daily-driver”. And it’s my opinion that comments claiming “I could ski these every day, all day” are just silly. I’m a strong, highly proficient, technically sound skier and I find the Bibby’s to be punishing in hard and soft conditions. At best, I would describe their performance on-piste on seasonal average conditions to be “lumbering”.

    In fact, I didn’t enjoy skiing these boards in anything less than 10” of untracked fresh. And if you don’t live within first-tracks radius of a mountain, those days are exceedingly rare. I find them to simply be too much work even on days when a 1” or 2” blanket is covering the slopes.

    Are these fun in powder? You bet. Do they charge? You bet. Are they stable? Yep. They are also really really friggin’ heavy. And this is where my primary issue lies.

    Here are some random and randomly contradictory oddities about my experience with these skis:

    • In untracked powder*, these skis performed beautifully in the sense that they definitely keep you afloat. BUT I would not call them the “best ride” either. The Bibby’s aren’t surfy in powder but I wasn’t blown away by their nimbleness from edge to edge when trying to make linked turns of any shape. I was never able to duplicate that amazing feeling of momentary weightlessness you get after the rebound in deep snow. What you gain in float, you sacrifice in nimbleness. And I love to mix up my turn radii in powder.

    I’ve had just as much fun on my 184cm Salomon X-Drive 8.8’s in deep snow and that is probably the most apt comparison I have for why the Bibby’s don’t thrill me. The X-Drives are not an optimal powder ski by any metric, yet I chose them on three of the six deep days I was lucky enough to enjoy.

    • In heavy, tracked-up Jackson Hoback powder, the Bibby’s wide, rockered tips were constantly deflecting off chunky snow instead of plowing through.
    • … But in those same conditions, I had a blast blasting through untracked powder in and around obstacles at speed.
    • Oddly, I found them to be quite playful and quick in smaller bumps with 6-8 inches of fresh snow despite the fact their sheer volume doesn’t make for a nimble swing weight. Larger soft bumps were not fun.
    • Not-so-oddly, I found them to be far too heavy and far too wide for hard bumps of any size. The tip rocker will prevent you from augering but their width and weight will prevent you from airing gaps or ripping a zipper line.
    • In wet or slushy conditions, the Bibby’s weight was compounded by the weight of the snow which made for a sluggish and hooky ride.
    • In day old, congealed Cascade Concrete, the Bibby’s were pure torture.
    • Trying to spin these things is like trying to spin a pair of railroad ties.

    *It’s, perhaps, worth nothing that I have yet to experience a blower powder day on the Bibby’s.

    Here’s the deal. I have no idea if sizing down to the 184cm length would solve any or all of these observations. I just know that I’ve had a lot more fun in the same conditions on a wide assortment of skis I tested at the demo tent. I definitely have a preference for narrower waists.

    I would say that if “turning” your skis isn’t a priority, the Bibby’s will suite your skiing style.

    Bottom line is that I want to able to enjoy the dance on a powder day and the 190cm Bibby’s aren’t my ideal dance partner. I’m still searching.

  22. Jonathan,

    I’m so tempted to get this ski…finally, but am a little gun shy because I didn’t like the Belafonte as much as I had hoped. I ski the 13/14 Cochise in a 185 as one of my daily drivers in the resort when not skiing on race skis. I’m a very traditional skier still on racing skis 50% of the time, and I’m 6′ 160 lbs. The cochise is one of my favorite skis of all time, but I’ve struggled to find a ski that I like for the deeper days. I’ve tried and sold Automatics, Bent Chetlers and Super 7s. I hated having to ski all of them in such a balanced/neutral stance and I always overpower the tips on them. Back to the the Belafonte – I loved it in certain conditions but in the 186 it felt like too much work and effort for me in a lot of places…home resort is Winter Park, lots of trees and bumps. I know it’s a totally different rocker, camber, rocker, camber profile than the Bibby, but based on my experience there I’m hesitant going back to a Moment ski. If I absolutely love the Cochise, it really seems like the bibby is like a bigger brother there and I’ll love it just as much…I’m thinking the Bibby Pro in 184 at my weight just due to lots of trees and bumps at the home resort. Love to get your thoughts and keep up the awesome work on the site!

  23. Hi Jonathan,

    Currently searching for a new ski and leaning towards the 190 Bibby’s right now but I still have a few reservations.

    About me:
    -6’2″ and 210lb

    I recently moved from the East Coast to Northern California and will be skiing primarily in the Lake Tahoe area plus probably 1 destination trip per year. On the east coast I was primarily skiing a pair of Cadide 2.0’s in 184 which were fun for pretty much everything that I skied ( lots of tight trees, groomers, limited park). I did some work for Ramp and ended up with a pair of the Kapow’s and the Groundhogs. The Kapow’s worked well for me on the rare super deep days and the Groundhogs were a fun ski but both deteriorated rapidly (less than 1 full season). Also would break out the old race boards for boilerplate days

    I took the Candide’s on a trip to Revelstoke last year and got tossed around pretty hard when I opened it up at all. So I’m looking for a stable ski that can charge through pow and chop . I will be keeping the Candide’s around as a groomer/park ski. I’ve been eyeing the Bibby 190 and Governor 186. I’m leaning towards the Bibby now as I like the idea of the ski still having some playfullness to it but I really want it to be able to perform in chopped up Sierra cement.

    What are you thoughts?

    • I cannot speak about the Bibby but I have been skiing either CA and OR for 10+ years and I would recommend looking at the Blizzard Bodacious with metal (not the current version with carbon fiber). You can still find the old version floating around online and Blizzard is bringing back the old version for the 2017/2018 season. The Bodacious can be a little work in tight spots but it does great job is heavier maritime snow pack. It is very highly regarded ski here on blister.

    • Hi, Richard – well, the 190 Bibby’s are still one of our very favorite skis for chopped-up cement. But as PDX has noted, the 186 Bodacious (without the heavily-tapered tip), is pretty high on the list, too, though I personally can’t speak to its availability.

      But at your size, I think the 190 Bibby will suit you very well – plus it has a more progressive mount point than the Bodacious, which you might appreciate since your coming from the CT 2.0.

      (I’d also rather ski the 190 Bibby on a deep pow day than the 186 Bodacious, but not sure how much that matters. Honestly, I feel like I could pretty happily ski either ski in cement. Both have really nice suspension.)

      And re: the Governor, you can read my comments on it in my review of it. It’s a really nice ski, but for tracked-up cement, I personally would opt for a less tapered tip than the Governor’s (i.e., the Bibby tip), and I’d also take the Bibby’s tail rocker rather than the Governor’s flatter tail – just a bit easier to break free in weird, tracked-up snow.

      Let me know if you need me to clarify any of this.

      • Thanks for all of the great information on this site. Just discovered it in my search for a new set of skis on the big end of my quiver. My current skis that I’m on almost every day are 2010/2011 Volkl Katana 190s. I love how they float in deep snow, but are rock solid at high speeds, and plow through the heavy chop we see often here in the WA Cascades. My only complaint with them is the weight when billy goating around or maneuvering through tight trees. I’m hoping to find something that is stable like the Katanas, but a little more nimble in tight spots. I had been leaning toward the Rossi Super 7 HD, but am a little worried they aren’t as damp as I’m used to and I’d be disappointed in their stability at high speed.

        It sounds like the Bibby might be exactly what I need, but the stiffness and turning radius look a lot like my Katanas. That’s not a bad thing, but I definitely would prefer something more nimble than the Katanas. Should I expect the Bibbys to be noticeably more maneuverable in trees and tight spots than the Katanas, or should I expect them to ski very close to what I’m used to?

        About me: 6’4″, 185 lbs. Mostly ski in WA & ID. Current quiver: 2010/2011 Volkl Katana 190 (almost all conditions), 2006 Volkl Mantra 184 (firm conditions, long overdue to be replaced and will be in 17/18), 2015 Rossi Soul 7 180 (touring).

    • One other thing to note is if you are skiing Tahoe you should be able to find a place to demo the Bibby pretty easily since they are made in Reno.

  24. Jonathan-
    Does anyone at Blister have time on the 189 ON3P Billy Goat? I love my 184 Blister Pro’s but yesterday, at Alta’s Demo Day, I got a chance to test drive the BG189 which felt like a charging crud buster that could stomp. What I’m wondering is…was it the extra length of the BG that I was diggin or something else (the tail)? It definitely felt like more ski than the 184 Bibby. Next season I’m looking at switching up the quiver and replacing the 181 Meridian’s with the 186 Kartel 108 for a playful everyday ski and then going a little longer for my pow ski and replacing the 184 Blister Pro with either the 190 or maybe the 189 BG for inbounds Utah pow and chop. Thoughts?

  25. Scott-

    At -6cm mount point on 174cm bibby did you feel that you had enough ski in front of you? Did the tails feel long? I’m debating on the 174cm at -1cm so tecinacally -7cm back from true center. Also do you feel that there is too much tail rocker?

Leave a Comment