Moment Bibby Tour vs. Moment Bibby / Blister Pro

So … Which One?

This is the question that’s been on my mind since I first got on the Bibby Tour. It is so capable and powerful that I seriously wondered whether I’d like it better — even as an inbounds ski — than the Blister Pro. And the skis are similar enough and versatile enough that the answer comes with several layers of qualifications based on what you want to do with the ski.

As an Inbounds Ski…

As a purely inbounds ski, I’d personally choose the 184 cm Blister Pro every time. The only reason I could imagine putting alpine bindings on the Bibby Tour was for someone who wanted the length of the 184 (or 190) without the weight, and was going to use it as a dedicated pow-only ski. In pow, I don’t think you’ll notice nearly as much or at all the difference between skis as you do in variable conditions, and the combination of light weight and power the Bibby Tour presents is attractive, especially to lighter skiers who may be skiing tighter terrain.

As a 50 / 50 Ski

What if you’re not looking for an inbounds-only ski, but instead you want something that you can spin laps inbounds, do some slackcountry, and take on shorter tours?

Here I’d ask what bindings you’re planning on using. If you’re using frame bindings, touring adaptors, or even something like the CAST system, I’d stick with the Blister Pro. And that’s precisely why I put Salomon Guardian 13’s on the Blister Pro. It’s an incredible inbounds ski that really doesn’t weigh all that much, so you’re probably going to be held back more by the inefficiency of frame bindings than the extra 200 g a foot. And you get all of the inbounds awesomeness that Blister has raved about along with the ability to duck out the gates.

However, if your idea of a 50/50 ski skews a bit more toward backcountry use and involves tech bindings, then I’d opt for the Bibby Tour. You’ll give up some variable-snow performance, but the Bibby Tour is more suited to longer missions, and it is still a very capable touring ski. My hunch is that you’ll notice your binding’s effect on variable performance more than the difference in the weight of the skis.

Cy Whitling reviews the Moment Bibby Tour for Blister Gear Review.
Cy Whitling on the Moment Bibby Tour, Fox Creek, WY. (photo by: Julia Tellman)

Personally, if I could only have the Tour or Pro and wanted to use it as a 50/50 ski, I’d mount a pair of Blister Pros with inserts for alpine bindings and Kingpins. That would be one incredibly versatile setup. Sure, 2100 g per foot is a little heavier than I’d like for a touring ski, but it’s really not that bad, and it’s hard to imagine a setup that could handle more conditions more competently. I’d be pretty happy taking only that ski with the ability to swap bindings on just about any trip you can imagine.

As a Touring Ski

Before the Bibby Tour was introduced, there were more than a few people walking uphill on Blister Pros with tech bindings. And now that the Bibby Tour exists, I personally would never consider putting only tech bindings on the Blister Pro and treating it as a touring ski. This comes down to a couple of things, but is based mostly on this ski’s width and intentions. If I’m touring on anything wider than 110 mm, it’s because I’m expecting deep, fresh pow in interesting terrain, preferably with things to jump off of. Otherwise, I just don’t care to haul that much ski uphill; the payoff isn’t there. And in soft, fresh conditions the Bibby Tour is exceptional, and the Blister Pro’s better suspension and more damp ride aren’t needed, and so are less of a factor.

To be clear, I have no problem touring on heavier inbounds skis, and in fact, I often prefer it. But in this case (a wider pow ski) the tradeoff doesn’t make sense, especially given how versatile the Bibby Tour is compared to other touring skis.

Bottom Line

By creating a lighter backcountry version of the much-loved Bibby / Blister Pro, Moment has simultaneously increased the options for skiers looking for a light, playful-but-chargy pow ski, while also making that decision more complicated. The choice between the Blister Pro and Bibby Tour really comes down to what you personally want to get out of the ski, and whether you want to use it as a do-it-all ski or as part of a broader quiver. Both skis are great options, and we’ve been very impressed with both, so it’s worth taking a careful look at where your priorities lie.

24 comments on “Moment Bibby Tour vs. Moment Bibby / Blister Pro”

    • After a weekend where I skied the Tour in the Targhee backcountry all day Saturday and the Blister Pro inbounds at Jackson all day Sunday, I’m pretty sold on that concept.

  1. Thanks for the comparisons. Is the 2cm difference in measured length because of the tail notch cut into the tour? And therefore should have no discernible difference in the way each model skis, based purely on length. Thanks

    • I think that’s where most (maybe all) the length difference comes in. I sure couldn’t tell a difference in the length between the two skiing, and wouldn’t have noticed it if we hadn’t measured both!

  2. The reason the Bibby tour is a tad bit sketchy on groomers VS the Blister pro/Bibby, is the 1mm camber on it VS the 2.5mm on the Blister pro, if you have ever ridden a regular Bibby with 1mm camber it is a tad sketchy compared to the regular Bibby, just like the tour, its not the weight difference.

    • That could be part of it, sure, but I definitely notice the weight difference, especially in any kind of chopped up snow, even just on a bumpy groomer.

  3. Great write-up!

    As someone who’s been dragging my clapped out 190’s uphill on Beast 14’s for the last couple seasons, you guys are making it really hard to pick my replacement.

    On one hand, at 160lbs I probably don’t need the extra stability (and skin track weight) of the OG Bibby’s, but on the other hand they sure do shred chop inbounds.

    And on a third (more vain) hand, those tour graphics really do suck compared to the rest of their lineup..

    • I would definitely go Kingpin. This isn’t the sort of touring ski where the weight difference is going to be that glaring, and it’s such a fun ski to push hard, might as well get a binding that facilitates that!

      That said, a Bibby Tour with ION’s would still be an awesome setup, just wouldn’t be as inbounds / cliff huck and big line friendly….

  4. Hey Cy, what are your thoughts on the Blister pro for east coast skiing 75% of the time. Usually ski Aspen when i’m out west Back east i usually ski Magic, Stratton, Killington, Stowe, Loon, Cannon, Bretton. I’m on a pair of Atomic Automatics from 2015/2016 and all the reviews have me curious on how it would preform, i’m a fan of fat skis despite primarily an east skier and i got a pair of skis for boilerplate ice days here.

    • You’d probably be fine….but I really don’t think it would be ideal. It’s just a lot of ski for a daily driver anywhere that doesn’t get a fair amount of snow.

      I’d be more tempted to go with something like the Moment Deathwish, it’s just a little more versatile, and makes more sense as a daily driver for more people (even out here at Targhee). That said, you’d probably be just fine on the Bibby Pro, and could have a lot of fun on it, I just think you might be able to have more fun in more conditions on something a little narrower, given where you’re skiing.

  5. Hey Cy, sick review and I’m feeling the graphics on the top sheet massively. Noticed these are still in stock in 190 on moment’s website, have you got any pictures of the bases you can link me to before I take the plunge?

  6. I’m an aging guy in that time of life where I have a more in my quiver than I do in my tank. In recent years, my go-to kit for in-bounds powder half-days before work has been 193 Chetlers, Kryptons, and FKS. However, light seems right for the way I ski now, even when the uphill is free, so I’m looking for some new boards, to pair with my new favorite boot, Lupo Carbon, and probably some Griffons. Would the 190 Bibby Tour suit this function? Maybe Backland 117? Other suggestions? I’m 6’4”, 200#, lifetime Utah skier (with life starting to catch up). Thanks.

  7. Sweet comparison, Cy.

    What’s your take on using the 174 Bibby for a smaller guy as a 50/50 ski, as it’s only .25 kg heavier than the 184 tour?
    I’m 172cm, 69kg. I’m interested in running both tech and alpine with inserts. And would you still recommend the -6 mount point for 174? I noticed the recommended mount point is the same across sizes.

    • Just noticed that the 2018 Bibby Tour now comes in a 174, which adds another option for me. Still not sure what the ideal length is, for both tour and pro.

      • Hey!

        I haven’t gotten time on the 174 cm, and I don’t think anyone at Blister actually has, so it’s really hard to say. For 50/50 with inserts, I’d go regular Bibby though. As far as mount, again, none of us has been on that ski, but I think you’d be fine at -6 (but I think you’d probably also be fine at -4 or -5 too). I’d base that off what sort of mount points you’ve liked in the past.

  8. I am considering the Bibby Tour and the ON3P Steeple 108 as my quiver of one touring ski for use in a mix of resort uphilling and backcountry touring central Colorado and occasional SAR. I realize the first reaction might be that this is an apples to oranges comparison, but in the Venn diagram of burly touring ski that can perform at least adequately in any snow condition (weight is not a significant issue and these two are in the same range despite the difference in width), a wide-ish freeride shape (I am kind of down on both flat tails and fully rockered shapes and generally prefer fat skis) and made in the USA, there are not a whole lot of options. My main concern about the Bibby is the width as a work ski and challenge of maneuvering it in sketchy situations (IOW, I do not want to have to get it to full speed to turn it). My main concern about the Steeple is the reverse elliptical sidecut (fear of the unknown?). There are not many credible reviews of the Steeple out there. Any thoughts from the Blister folks or the general population would be welcome. Thanks!

  9. Hello. I am looking at some new Moments.
    Was wanting a more “quiver killer”, and coming off Faction 3.0’s, which I destroyed in one season. (Just over 1.2 million vertical)
    I have ALWAYS loved to shred the cut up powder. Really wanting the Bibby, but am tempted to go more all around with the Deathwish for more versatility.
    I love to play around, go fast by my self, go slow with the wife, drop big bowls wide open, trees, powder, and rip the groomers on last run to the village (Revelstoke). I am 215 ish, 6’4″ , and I guess my main want is stability.
    Would the Bibby be a better bet for my main ski in Revelstoke, or should I go more narrow in the Deathwish???
    Thank you.

    • Wow this is crazy but I am in almost the exact situation. Just destroyed my Faction 3.0’s after a season and looking at either the Deathwish or Bibby and have the same skiing profile except I’m 5’11 180. If you come to Tahoe apparently we should be friends.

Leave a Comment