I would only ever have one ski at a time (no quivers). Been skiing it 3 years - 180. They were so good, I bought a second pair right away b/c afraid if I broke them or lost them I couldn't get another pair. Rips bumps, which most ski's don't. Very strong on everything else. I'm going to get a 3rd pair. I don't like hearing of changes though. That makes me nervous.
This reminds me of the Brahma's that I have from 2018. Super fun ski for firm condition and ripping groomers but versatile enough to do just about anything.
Quick question, I'm a bit confused on the sizing for these, I'm 5'7 and 150 or so pounds. I have a pair of Declivity 82ti's in 166, love them, but I find they don't grip as well on the ice conditions (really firm), they don't respond the same a fully cambered skis, as I like to forward pressure the tips at the start of the turn to get them to bite in the way I like. Are the Brahma 82's better at this? Or should I say, more ice grip than the Declivity's? I know they will be firmer in the tips, but am unsure if they will react the same because of the rocker. Last question, 166 or 173 for size? I do ski faster on the really hard days, but like to slow it down on the softer ones and mess around a bit, so will be using the Armada's on those days. Thanks.
With a denser wood core, an additional sheet of metal, and a flatter overall profile, the Brahma 82 has excellent edge grip and stability at this width--more than the Declivity in my experience. The build has more to do with the performance than the profile between these two skis. If you're 5/7 150, I would fear the 173 is on the long side.
Thanks for the great, in-depth review! I am 182 cm and around 75kg (165-170 pounds), and an advanced and aggressive skier. Ski mostly groomers, but like to take the occasional off-piste. What length would you advise 173 or 180? Thanks
I've been skiing this ski for 2 years and love it. I'm early intermediate and need to work to get this stiff ski to carve, but man when I do... hang on!
I'm 5'5"(165cm), 155 lbs w/clothing, advanced/expert, skiing in the Pacific Northwest. Looking for a high-performance ski on piste and also doing well on moguls and off-piste. Which length of Brahma 82 fits me better, 173 or 166? How does Brahma 82 compare with Rossignol Exp 82 Ti 168cm and Stockli Montero AX 168cm? Would you please help me decide?
You're in the right zone for sure. I'd say the Experience is the most well-rounded of this group with the Brahma and the AX as more of the pure carvers. For how versatile it is, the Experience 82 is also a very clean and crisp carver. you won't get race-like vibes from it like you will in the AX, but if you're looking for a mix of attributes, I do think the Rossignol has more to offer. I'd lean to the Experience in the 168.
How does this compare to the declivity 82ti, m-pro 85 and what looks to be discontinued black crows divus? Looking for a great mogul ski that can be super fun on high speed groomers.
Divus lives on! The Declivity and the Brahma are the most composed in an on-trail format at speed, while the Divus is a bit more comfortable in the mid-range. The Dynastar is awesome, and definitely has the most versatility out of this group. I'd say the Declivity checks the most boxes for both bumps and high-speed groomers. Have fun! SE
@@SkiEssentials Thank you, Just saw that the Divus wasn't on Black crows and didn't see it in your ski test so thought it was discontinued. You guys are so good to answer all these. I have been leaning towards the Divus but I agree the Declivity 82 hits all the boxes. Was just curious after this review because it seems like the brahma 82 might be similar to the declivity with a bit more rocker to help with the short radius turns. Really like your reviews not getting to ski many different skis and really wanting something unique. Bought the QST 98 based on a lot of your reviews for my soft snow ski and looking for having a 2 ski quiver for the first time. Thanks again, next question is length, I think the declivity has to be the 182 because the 174 is too short for me at 6' and 185lb. The divus has that 177 that might be good but mostly looking at that 180ish range. and then can I find some look pivots to go with it.
I’m debating between the 180 and 173 … I ski the 2021 Rustler 9 in the 180 length … but this ski likely skis true to length/ longer? Quite a bit less rocker? As for my height and weight, I am 182cm height and weigh 175 lbs. advanced skier mostly skiiing this in Quebec on firm snow/groomers. Thanks in advance!
The Brahma 82 does ski a bit longer than the Rustler. I think it's just fine to go to the 173 in this ski. It's very solid and stable so you don't have to size up in order to access performance. You also get the benefit of the shorter radius and crisper turn, which I think pairs well with PQ firm snow skiing.
@@curthayes4031since I have about similar stats as yours, was wondering what your experience is with the 173cm. Still debating whether to take 180cm. Keen to hear your view!
@@timdenhartog9817 hey there, unfortunately I haven’t bought the Brahma’s yet so I can’t comment on the length sizing. I would definitely be going with the 173 if I were to buy the skis. Why? Because they have 2 sheets of metal, lots of camber, they ski a bit longer than their length indicates, and at 173 they would be more agile for shorter turns. I hope that helps you decide. Btw they are discontinuing the Brahma so buy it soon!
Im an avanced skier, I ski mostly groomers and sometimes soft snow. I like a firm ski. I also love carving when opportunity presents itself. Would you recommend this ski?
Yup! The Brahma 82 is smooth, precise, and powerful. Since it's flat (non-system) there's some more versatility built in here as well making it a decent bump and tree ski for its width and build.
The main difference between the Brahma and the Deacon is the overall footprint. Since Brahma is a narrower version of their wider skis, it still has some of that off-piste influence but in a narrower shape. Deacons are sharper in nature, so that makes them a bit more crisp and precise in an on-trail format. The other big one is the system bindings of the Deacons--those are decidedly more front side in nature, even though they are on the low/minimalist side of the spectrum as far as system bindings go. Since the Brahma comes flat, you get to choose the binding, and most of them will be lower and with less of a flat spot underfoot, allowing for better tip to tail flex, again highlighting the slightly more versatile nature of the ski. And yes, I think the Brahma 82 would be a great pairing to the Rustler 9 when it comes to New England skiing.
this Brahma 82 looks amazing. I am 174cm height and weigh 145 lbs. I am advanced/expert skier skiiing in Swiss Engadin on firm snow/groomers, I like carving medium/high speed. Would you recommend 166 or 173 (this second I am more incline to)?
If you're leaning more to higher speeds and longer turns, then I would think the 173 is a better fit, especially if you're more in the advanced/expert realm.
Long time listener, first time caller. I currently ski the Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition in 172 length as my everyday ski, but I’m looking for a ski for hard packed conditions out here in the Pacific Northwest. Ideally a ski that can rip on an icy groomed run but won’t feel lost if we get a few inches of snowfall or hit some moguls. Should I get the 166 or 173 length? Strong intermediate who does ungroomed black runs, 5’9, 170.
Brahma 82 is sweet. It's a lot of sweet, too, so there's no real need to reach when it comes to length. The long camber and burly feel make the 166 a better option for what you're looking to do as well as your stats and application. Have fun, they're very stable skis!
I’m 5’11 3/4 and 180 lbs Advanced skier. Diamonds majority on the East Coast. Mostly on piste. I’ve had 177 Head LYT V6 skis in the past very good turning fast and a couple years ago I got Line Supernatural 86 to work on park skills. They just don’t turn great for me especially at speed. Do you recommend these in a 180cm for my size and style. I like to go fast and turning is key. But I might just keep my Line skis for the park terrain
Yes this is a great fit. it's a pretty strong ski and turns very well. IF you're looking for something slightly on the friendlier side, you can also check out the Armada Declivity 82 Ti and the Rossignol Experience 82 Ti.
Love the videos, you guys are the best. I'm 5'9 and 150 pounds. I currently ski kendo 88s and bent 100s, really love both skis. Looking for something more frontside w more grip. I am an east coast advanced/expert skier, I like to ski fast, carve and hit some jumps, no moguls. I'm torn between the declivity 82 to and the brahma 82? Which would be a better ski for me or do you recommend something else? Thanks!
I'd look to the Brahma 82, especially if you're not looking for mogul performance--that'd be more in line with the Declivity. You will get a lot of grip, power, and firm snow performance out of the Brahma 82.
Picked up last years brahma 82 on a discount since its unchanged. Debating on bindings. Considering either the griffon 13 or the xcomp 16 gw. What do you think
The only real differences are weight and mount zone. The XCOmp is a bit heavier, and the mounting zone is a bit longer, so you're creating more of a flat spot underfoot. In the Brahma 82, if you're looking to accentuate the front side performance, the XComp will allow the ski to do that a bit while if you're aiming to generate more off-trail versatility, the shorter and lighter Griffon should help in that regard.
Hey there! Looking for a ski that can handle steep, large bumps in hard snow conditions. I can handle all runs at my local resort, but my 172cm 96mm underfoot skis have a tough time in the steep bumps. I'm 170cm tall. Looking for a ski that can carve short turns, feels poppy, and will support me in the steeps. Thinking that Brahma 82 is a good would satisfy this requirement. I'm also having a hard time deciding on length range for this type of ski as I'm 170lb. Not too concerned with speed as my 96mm's can handle most other conditions. Any help is appreciated!!
I haven't skied this ski yet but I want to. Other skis to consider are the enforcer 88. It is great in hard chunky bad snow. I bought mine too long for all day bumping. I'm 178cm tall and bought the 186cm. I ended buying an armada declivity 82 ti for the bumps and firm bumps its light and damp and holds an edge really well. Another ski to try is the maverick 88 ti. It was really good in the bumps. Cheers!
I think this is a nice choice for what you're looking to do. If you want to go a bit lighter you should check out the Armada Declivity 82 Ti or the Rossignol Experience 82 Ti as well. For length, I'd say the mid to upper 160's is a good place to be for what you're looking to do.
![Chino Pacas - Modo Capone (with Drake & JOP) [Video Visualizador Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Zoc75M8Swhc/mqdefault.jpg)
I would only ever have one ski at a time (no quivers). Been skiing it 3 years - 180. They were so good, I bought a second pair right away b/c afraid if I broke them or lost them I couldn't get another pair. Rips bumps, which most ski's don't. Very strong on everything else. I'm going to get a 3rd pair. I don't like hearing of changes though. That makes me nervous.
This reminds me of the Brahma's that I have from 2018. Super fun ski for firm condition and ripping groomers but versatile enough to do just about anything.
Sounds about right!
Quick question, I'm a bit confused on the sizing for these, I'm 5'7 and 150 or so pounds.
I have a pair of Declivity 82ti's in 166, love them, but I find they don't grip as well on the ice conditions (really firm), they don't respond the same a fully cambered skis, as I like to forward pressure the tips at the start of the turn to get them to bite in the way I like.
Are the Brahma 82's better at this? Or should I say, more ice grip than the Declivity's? I know they will be firmer in the tips, but am unsure if they will react the same because of the rocker.
Last question, 166 or 173 for size? I do ski faster on the really hard days, but like to slow it down on the softer ones and mess around a bit, so will be using the Armada's on those days. Thanks.
With a denser wood core, an additional sheet of metal, and a flatter overall profile, the Brahma 82 has excellent edge grip and stability at this width--more than the Declivity in my experience. The build has more to do with the performance than the profile between these two skis. If you're 5/7 150, I would fear the 173 is on the long side.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks for the help
I've been skiing flat mounted, race construction 80-90mm midfats for ~20 years.
Thanks for the great, in-depth review! I am 182 cm and around 75kg (165-170 pounds), and an advanced and aggressive skier. Ski mostly groomers, but like to take the occasional off-piste. What length would you advise 173 or 180? Thanks
I'd go 173 in that ski--it's pretty sturdy so there's no real need to upsize to access the performance.
Expert level? Will this ski work for an intermediate skier on the cusp of advanced levels? Oh you kinda answered my question right at the end.
I've been skiing this ski for 2 years and love it. I'm early intermediate and need to work to get this stiff ski to carve, but man when I do... hang on!
I'm 5'5"(165cm), 155 lbs w/clothing, advanced/expert, skiing in the Pacific Northwest. Looking for a high-performance ski on piste and also doing well on moguls and off-piste. Which length of Brahma 82 fits me better, 173 or 166? How does Brahma 82 compare with Rossignol Exp 82 Ti 168cm and Stockli Montero AX 168cm? Would you please help me decide?
You're in the right zone for sure. I'd say the Experience is the most well-rounded of this group with the Brahma and the AX as more of the pure carvers. For how versatile it is, the Experience 82 is also a very clean and crisp carver. you won't get race-like vibes from it like you will in the AX, but if you're looking for a mix of attributes, I do think the Rossignol has more to offer. I'd lean to the Experience in the 168.
How does this compare to the declivity 82ti, m-pro 85 and what looks to be discontinued black crows divus? Looking for a great mogul ski that can be super fun on high speed groomers.
Divus lives on! The Declivity and the Brahma are the most composed in an on-trail format at speed, while the Divus is a bit more comfortable in the mid-range. The Dynastar is awesome, and definitely has the most versatility out of this group. I'd say the Declivity checks the most boxes for both bumps and high-speed groomers. Have fun!
SE
@@SkiEssentials Thank you, Just saw that the Divus wasn't on Black crows and didn't see it in your ski test so thought it was discontinued. You guys are so good to answer all these. I have been leaning towards the Divus but I agree the Declivity 82 hits all the boxes. Was just curious after this review because it seems like the brahma 82 might be similar to the declivity with a bit more rocker to help with the short radius turns. Really like your reviews not getting to ski many different skis and really wanting something unique. Bought the QST 98 based on a lot of your reviews for my soft snow ski and looking for having a 2 ski quiver for the first time.
Thanks again, next question is length, I think the declivity has to be the 182 because the 174 is too short for me at 6' and 185lb. The divus has that 177 that might be good but mostly looking at that 180ish range. and then can I find some look pivots to go with it.
I’m debating between the 180 and 173 … I ski the 2021 Rustler 9 in the 180 length … but this ski likely skis true to length/ longer? Quite a bit less rocker? As for my height and weight, I am 182cm height and weigh 175 lbs. advanced skier mostly skiiing this in Quebec on firm snow/groomers. Thanks in advance!
The Brahma 82 does ski a bit longer than the Rustler. I think it's just fine to go to the 173 in this ski. It's very solid and stable so you don't have to size up in order to access performance. You also get the benefit of the shorter radius and crisper turn, which I think pairs well with PQ firm snow skiing.
Appreciate you getting back to me! So helpful! Cheers@@SkiEssentials
@@curthayes4031since I have about similar stats as yours, was wondering what your experience is with the 173cm. Still debating whether to take 180cm. Keen to hear your view!
@@timdenhartog9817 hey there, unfortunately I haven’t bought the Brahma’s yet so I can’t comment on the length sizing. I would definitely be going with the 173 if I were to buy the skis. Why? Because they have 2 sheets of metal, lots of camber, they ski a bit longer than their length indicates, and at 173 they would be more agile for shorter turns. I hope that helps you decide. Btw they are discontinuing the Brahma so buy it soon!
Im an avanced skier, I ski mostly groomers and sometimes soft snow. I like a firm ski. I also love carving when opportunity presents itself. Would you recommend this ski?
Yup! The Brahma 82 is smooth, precise, and powerful. Since it's flat (non-system) there's some more versatility built in here as well making it a decent bump and tree ski for its width and build.
How do these compare to the Volkl Deacon 80 or Deacon 84? Would these pair well with the Rustler 9's as a 2 ski quiver for New England firmness?
The main difference between the Brahma and the Deacon is the overall footprint. Since Brahma is a narrower version of their wider skis, it still has some of that off-piste influence but in a narrower shape. Deacons are sharper in nature, so that makes them a bit more crisp and precise in an on-trail format. The other big one is the system bindings of the Deacons--those are decidedly more front side in nature, even though they are on the low/minimalist side of the spectrum as far as system bindings go. Since the Brahma comes flat, you get to choose the binding, and most of them will be lower and with less of a flat spot underfoot, allowing for better tip to tail flex, again highlighting the slightly more versatile nature of the ski. And yes, I think the Brahma 82 would be a great pairing to the Rustler 9 when it comes to New England skiing.
this Brahma 82 looks amazing. I am 174cm height and weigh 145 lbs. I am advanced/expert skier skiiing in Swiss Engadin on firm snow/groomers, I like carving medium/high speed. Would you recommend 166 or 173 (this second I am more incline to)?
If you're leaning more to higher speeds and longer turns, then I would think the 173 is a better fit, especially if you're more in the advanced/expert realm.
Long time listener, first time caller. I currently ski the Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition in 172 length as my everyday ski, but I’m looking for a ski for hard packed conditions out here in the Pacific Northwest. Ideally a ski that can rip on an icy groomed run but won’t feel lost if we get a few inches of snowfall or hit some moguls. Should I get the 166 or 173 length? Strong intermediate who does ungroomed black runs, 5’9, 170.
Brahma 82 is sweet. It's a lot of sweet, too, so there's no real need to reach when it comes to length. The long camber and burly feel make the 166 a better option for what you're looking to do as well as your stats and application. Have fun, they're very stable skis!
I’m 5’11 3/4 and 180 lbs Advanced skier. Diamonds majority on the East Coast. Mostly on piste. I’ve had 177 Head LYT V6 skis in the past very good turning fast and a couple years ago I got Line Supernatural 86 to work on park skills. They just don’t turn great for me especially at speed. Do you recommend these in a 180cm for my size and style. I like to go fast and turning is key. But I might just keep my Line skis for the park terrain
Yes this is a great fit. it's a pretty strong ski and turns very well. IF you're looking for something slightly on the friendlier side, you can also check out the Armada Declivity 82 Ti and the Rossignol Experience 82 Ti.
@@SkiEssentials thanks ! Made an order with you guys for some brahmas last night !
Hi, I am a very good skier, though, not an expert one. I am a woman, my height is 183 cm. Shall I go for the 180 or the smaller 173?
I'd go 173. The skis are very sturdy and to maximize the fun of the turn shape, the shorter length will likely work better for you.
Love the videos, you guys are the best. I'm 5'9 and 150 pounds. I currently ski kendo 88s and bent 100s, really love both skis. Looking for something more frontside w more grip. I am an east coast advanced/expert skier, I like to ski fast, carve and hit some jumps, no moguls. I'm torn between the declivity 82 to and the brahma 82? Which would be a better ski for me or do you recommend something else? Thanks!
I'd look to the Brahma 82, especially if you're not looking for mogul performance--that'd be more in line with the Declivity. You will get a lot of grip, power, and firm snow performance out of the Brahma 82.
@@SkiEssentials thank you and happy holidays to the crew over there.
Picked up last years brahma 82 on a discount since its unchanged. Debating on bindings. Considering either the griffon 13 or the xcomp 16 gw. What do you think
The only real differences are weight and mount zone. The XCOmp is a bit heavier, and the mounting zone is a bit longer, so you're creating more of a flat spot underfoot. In the Brahma 82, if you're looking to accentuate the front side performance, the XComp will allow the ski to do that a bit while if you're aiming to generate more off-trail versatility, the shorter and lighter Griffon should help in that regard.
Hey there! Looking for a ski that can handle steep, large bumps in hard snow conditions. I can handle all runs at my local resort, but my 172cm 96mm underfoot skis have a tough time in the steep bumps. I'm 170cm tall. Looking for a ski that can carve short turns, feels poppy, and will support me in the steeps. Thinking that Brahma 82 is a good would satisfy this requirement. I'm also having a hard time deciding on length range for this type of ski as I'm 170lb. Not too concerned with speed as my 96mm's can handle most other conditions. Any help is appreciated!!
I haven't skied this ski yet but I want to. Other skis to consider are the enforcer 88. It is great in hard chunky bad snow. I bought mine too long for all day bumping. I'm 178cm tall and bought the 186cm. I ended buying an armada declivity 82 ti for the bumps and firm bumps its light and damp and holds an edge really well. Another ski to try is the maverick 88 ti. It was really good in the bumps. Cheers!
I think this is a nice choice for what you're looking to do. If you want to go a bit lighter you should check out the Armada Declivity 82 Ti or the Rossignol Experience 82 Ti as well. For length, I'd say the mid to upper 160's is a good place to be for what you're looking to do.