snowcoach Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Tested the next generation Madds with Titanal this weekend and came away very impressed. I must admit to being a bit apprehensive about going metal, particularly with the 158. Not that I don't like the characteristics that metal brings to many boards, I am definitely a fan. But, I am also a huge fan of the traditional Madds and was leery about losing some of the magic. I ran everything hard under varied snow conditions from rock hard man-made to inconsistent natural snow to see what the new construction brought to the table. They nailed it! The tenacious edge hold that made them famous actually got better. Most noticeably under steeper, chatter conditions, both the 158 and the 170 are more damp and want to stay in contact, even with mid-turn adjustments they kept tracking confidently. I took it as a challenge and did all the wrong things over the skiied-off sections, diving abrupt engagements, drastic mid-turn changes, no problem. Better than the traditional construction? Maybe, maybe not, totally depends on what you want from it. If you wanted more help on icy or race course conditions the titanal is a great way to go while not sacrificing much of the playful nature. The trad with the carbon butterfly is still amazing edge hold and is a bit more lively. I am choosing to have both and add the metal boards to my quiver as well. What can I say -Mark Harris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonerider Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Tested the next generation Madds with Titanal this weekend and came away very impressed. I must admit to being a bit apprehensive about going metal, particularly with the 158. Not that I don't like the characteristics that metal brings to many boards, I am definitely a fan. But, I am also a huge fan of the traditional Madds and was leery about losing some of the magic.I ran everything hard under varied snow conditions from rock hard man-made to inconsistent natural snow to see what the new construction brought to the table. They nailed it! The tenacious edge hold that made them famous actually got better. Most noticeably under steeper, chatter conditions, both the 158 and the 170 are more damp and want to stay in contact, even with mid-turn adjustments they kept tracking confidently. I took it as a challenge and did all the wrong things over the skiied-off sections, diving abrupt engagements, drastic mid-turn changes, no problem. Better than the traditional construction? Maybe, maybe not, totally depends on what you want from it. If you wanted more help on icy or race course conditions the titanal is a great way to go while not sacrificing much of the playful nature. The trad with the carbon butterfly is still amazing edge hold and is a bit more lively. I am choosing to have both and add the metal boards to my quiver as well. What can I say -Mark Harris Thanks for the info! Have you ridden any other Titanal boards (Prior, Coiler, Kessler)? I think a lot of people would be interested in a compare/contrast type of review as most are sold on Titanal... just wondering which one to get! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Jesus, a metal Madd 158 I want! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik J Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 I don't know if "want" fully describes what I'm feeling right now.Oh that sweet 158!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekdut Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 I'm thinking the 180 might be the best bet for a full carbon plus metal Madd. Its already an awesome damp yet snappy board, so that combo might be even more damp and more snappier! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 keeping up with the times! now Just about making a wider option in the whole line 19.5 waists would be the shizzle on the 158, **** even if only the stiff flexed ones came in the wide width I'd think most of the people that want the stiff flex have bigger feet anyway so it would be a winning combo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekdut Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Mark, thanks for an excellent review by the way. Let us know your thoughts on how the metal Madd compares to the other metal competition out there. Bob, I think the 170 FC-T Wide F3 would fit the bill perfectly for larger riders looking for a killer freecarve board. You should get one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonerider Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 Jesus, a metal Madd 158I want! Lol... and this is the secret reason why you can never afford a nicer boot setup With "tremendous discipline," I forced myself to only have ONE metal board (I'm holding off on a Metal Coiler AM for at least a season) and with that money I will soon have a pair of Head Stratos Pros, Comformable Foam Liners, Surefoot Custom Footbeds, BTS (will mod the Heads), and Intec Heels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 haha, yeah I just need the $600 liners I could use new shells too footbeds I have bts too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 wide 170, yeah, it would, the thing is that the big hole in my quiver is the SL twitchy ride catagory I have a pile of coilers and that can pull freecarver duty and even hold their own doing SL sized turns but the madd 158 kinda owns it when it comes to twitchy rides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonerider Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 haha, yeah I just need the $600 liners I could use new shells too footbeds I have bts too The foam liners are actually only $300... still pretty pricey... but after several sets of boots, thermoflex liners, and years of boot fitting... I still haven't gotten boot that hasn't been comfortable to wear (they hurt as much my rock climbing shoes after a few hours).I hope foam liners are the answer - and I figured if I'm going to get foam liners... I mights as well get a nice shell to go along with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.