• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

2022 Blizzard Brahma 88

tomahawkins

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Posts
1,857
Location
Bellingham, WA
The Brahma 88 is one of the burliest all mountain 88s on the market. With the demise of the Head Monster 88, it has become the reference ski in this category. Yet neither SkiTalk nor Blister have a dedicated review.

Blister does mention that the Brahma 88 is now much more piste oriented. Like Mary Jane piste oriented?

 

ARL67

Invisible Airwaves Crackle With Life
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Posts
1,259
Location
Thornbury, ON, Canada
FYI: here are the Brahma 88 measurements on Soothski against a few other current 88's.

newplot (4).png
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,043
Location
Ontario, Canada
Find the new Brahma 88 pretty good in bumps but with it’s pretty traditional mount and decreased rocker compared to previous years there are even better options out there.
The Monster 83 or 88 were pretty good in bumps with their very uniform flex pattern tip to tail vs most skis that usually peak hugely underfoot.

Funny as it sounds, the 21 Faction CT 1.0 has a very similar, uniform flex pattern like the old Monster 88 had but with improved torsional rigidity underfoot with it’s 2 sheets of metal. Longer turning radius like the Monster so it’s more stable at speed than a Brahma 88. Long effective edge too even with it being a twin. CT 1.0 MUCH easy in the bumps with it’s mount point and twin tail.

The 178cm CT 1.0 isn’t on Soothski to compare to the similar lengths of the Monster 88 and Brahma 88 but they have the 172cm.

 

BMC

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Posts
787
FYI: here are the Brahma 88 measurements on Soothski against a few other current 88's.

View attachment 160177
So putting aside the Wingman, that chart seems to show that the Brahma is pretty much in the same ball park as a bunchy of other competitor skis when it comes to stiffness. Is that right?
 

ARL67

Invisible Airwaves Crackle With Life
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Posts
1,259
Location
Thornbury, ON, Canada
The shape of the ski also comes into play on how a ski may or may not have edge-grip.

Alex from Soothski did a very informative post a few days ago over at TGR forums, when discussing the differences between the Wingman CTi and Ti versions, and adding the Armada Tracer and Declivity into the mix. There is lots of good stuff to think about in this post below:

 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,043
Location
Ontario, Canada
The shape of the ski also comes into play on how a ski may or may not have edge-grip.

Alex from Soothski did a very informative post a few days ago over at TGR forums, when discussing the differences between the Wingman CTi and Ti versions, and adding the Armada Tracer and Declivity into the mix. There is lots of good stuff to think about in this post below:

If you look at the sidecut length, you can get a better idea of the shape along with taper specs if they are available. The Monster 88/Brahma 88/CT 1.0 all have long sidecut lengths and less tip/tail taper vs more tapered skis designed for softer snow like an Enforcer or Kore.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Yeah, i ain't no zipper bump guy, never was. And I ski the Jane a usual 30-40 times a season. But not much on the bigger bump fields.

I liked Mary Jane best, however, when it was powder glade skiing, when one would traverse over to hit it, and then traverse back at the end. (In other words, when it was an outside of the resort traverse through the woods, long ago - no lifts there.)

At one time, later, the U.S. bump team would be based there, and would train as a group on the Mary Jane bump runs. I'd sometimes tag along, watch them do their near super human thing from above, so amazing, then ski over to an easier run myself.

I tagged along because a friend and regular ski buddy was on the team. He ended up an alternate for their Olympic team twice, both times just one place away from going to the Olympics. But he never made it.

One evening over a beer I told him I had decided to get more serious about trying to do bumps on the zipper line, like he did. A New Year's resolution, maybe.

To my surprise, he advised me not to. He said he'd had five knee operations on each knee, and after his competitive days were done, he would probably have to give up skiing entirely, just to stay able to walk and run. He was thinking of opening a scuba shop in Florida instead, in a situation where weightless walking prevailed underwater.

He actually became a manager of a scuba shop in Key Largo, and has not skied in years.
 
Last edited:

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
On the Brahmas in particular, there is a good reason Blistergear is slow to review (again) the revised Brahma. According to them, it has not changed since last year, when it was changed, to them, drastically, for the worse. (They are not elite bump skiers, so their opinion would tend to fit my own, more than likely, more than the perhaps more dialed in opinion of elite bump folks.)

The bottom line, for Blister, is the older Brahma was number one, winner of their "best of" awards year after year. It could carve the groomers, and had a perfect balance of carve/slarve/edge release for the bumps, to them.

And the newer version? It no longer gets their awards. They reviewed it last year, at least in their magazine; and don't want to again until it changes, more than likely.

As for me, I demoed both versions, the 19/20 and 20/21 (unchanged for 21/22). And then before it vanished, I went out and got a used pair of 19/20 Brahma 88s. (They were fairly hard to find, I might add.) I am very satisfied with my purchase.
 
Last edited:

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
On the Brahmas in particular, there is a good reason Blistergear is slow to review (again) the revised Brahma. According to them, it has not changed since last year, when it was changed, to them, drastically, for the worse. (They are not elite bump skiers, so their opinion would tend to fit my own, more than likely, more than the perhaps more dialed in opinion of elite bump folks.)

The bottom line, for Blister, is the older Brahma was number one, winner of their "best of" awards year after year. It could carve the groomers, and had a perfect balance of carve/slarve/edge release for the bumps, to them.

And the newer version? It no longer gets their awards. They reviewed it last year, at least in their magazine; and don't want to again until it changes, more than likely.

As for me, I demoed both versions, the 19/20 and 20/21 (unchanged for 21/22). And then before it vanished, I went out and got a used pair of 19/20 Brahma 88s. (They were fairly hard to find, I might add.) I am very satisfied with my purchase.

I wish I had demoed a pair. i never got around to it. Always grabbed the bones first.
 
Thread Starter
TS
T

tomahawkins

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Posts
1,857
Location
Bellingham, WA
On the Brahmas in particular, there is a good reason Blistergear is slow to review (again) the revised Brahma. According to them, it has not changed since last year, when it was changed, to them, drastically, for the worse. (They are not elite bump skiers, so their opinion would tend to fit my own, more than likely, more than the perhaps more dialed in opinion of elite bump folks.)

The bottom line, for Blister, is the older Brahma was number one, winner of their "best of" awards year after year. It could carve the groomers, and had a perfect balance of carve/slarve/edge release for the bumps, to them.

And the newer version? It no longer gets their awards. They reviewed it last year, at least in their magazine; and don't want to again until it changes, more than likely.

As for me, I demoed both versions, the 19/20 and 20/21 (unchanged for 21/22). And then before it vanished, I went out and got a used pair of 19/20 Brahma 88s. (They were fairly hard to find, I might add.) I am very satisfied with my purchase.

I believe you, but I find this strange. I think this year's Bonafide is dynamite off piste, especially in firm, chewed up snow conditions. And by all accounts the Brahma 88 and Bonafide are pretty close siblings. I am fairly confident the Brahma would be great when in capable hands. For Blister to go from GOAT to something not even worth considering for off piste is odd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMC

Coolhand

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Posts
157
Blister are fat ski, rockered, "garage brand", centric, fan boys. The legacy, European, brands and skis under 100mm at the waist are for tourists and gapers, not for the Crested Butte/JHMR, Broh-Brah crowd. For a bigger guy, with adequate skills, the current iteration of the Brahma, is an excellent option. Unfortunately, this genre of skis has fallen out of favor in North America. Also, the model names that have been around for some time (like Mantra, Kendo, Bonafide, Brahma, Ranger, etc.) aren't considered "interesting" even if they have undergone substantial changes from the original.

RE: Soothski charts, cool I guess, but pretty big jump to translate that data to actual "on-snow" experience. Far too many other variables.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,043
Location
Ontario, Canada
Don’t know why you guys aren’t seeing the latest Brahma 88 in Blister as it was reviewed last yearFully describe the differences between the latest one and current one and why it’s not as forgiving off piste or in moguls.
The Kendo 88 is a more similar shape and long, flat flat rocker ski if someone wanted something like the previous Brahma.

64994FF4-BC8A-429A-AB3F-3AD39A474D07.png

Either Brahma still isn’t as fun off piste/in bumps or stable on groomers as a 21 CT 1.0. Faction really dropped the ball getting the 21 CT line into reviewers hands. The ones that did raved about them(21 CT 2.0 ski of the year on Curated) but definitely didn’t reach their target market for them.
 

tromano

Goin' the way they're pointed...
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Posts
2,475
Location
Layton, UT
Demo days have been canceled for two years here. Curious about this monster 88 vs. brahma comparison. Did they really change the new brahma to be more front side than the old one?

To me the m88 and old brahma were very different takes on an 88 width am ski. The m88 was much more front side oriented, carvy, planted and glued to the snow feel. The old brahma was much better in mixed conditions, more lively feel and more of an AM generalist, relaxed and bordering on narrow freeride ski.
Thanks.
 

FlimFlamvanHam

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Posts
79
Location
North Vancouver BC
I'd say yes, for sure, although I've not skied the new Brahma, but you can tell just by pressing them base to base it's totally different than the pre '21 Brahma. The rocker is so minimal whereas before it was long and low, both ends. A bit more camber but not much (old Brahma was close to flat). The M88 never had much camber, either, really.

Like for like (177cm) the new Brahma flexes softer than an M88, especially over the pre '18 ones and still softer than the '19 & '20's. And this is when stated radius' get kinda whack. A 177 Brahma is now 16m and an M88 is 17mm yet the M88 has 5mm more tip width and 4mm more tail width. Niether ski is tapered but the minimal amount the Brahma is over the Monster I find it hard to believe that gets you that extra 1m.

I do believe, without yet skiing the new Brahma that it would be much more open to being bent into dif turn shapes and at lower speeds than the Monster.

I love the M88. All years of them. If the Brahma has similar build quality I'd be very tempted by them and may end up on a pair as I believe the flex alone makes them more versatile than the Monsters. Rocker on your 88 is for wieners. The Brahma isn't made for wieners. You rip the ski off the groomers. If you need rocker for that, that's on you.

Of course the above is all junk since I've not skied the Brahma yet.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
One thing Blistergear is good at is making allowances for different skier preferences, based on their different styles, size, areas skied and terrain: their "skier profile." In their magazine especially, they are constantly basing their recommendations on the experience of each skier, rather than some absolute about the ski being good or bad.

Based solely on my size and weight, for instance, certain skis work better than others - different especially compared to someone of very different size and weight. To me, the Bonafide (but not the Brahma, from the start) was the prime example of this. Unlike most skis, for me, the original Bonafide was very skier weight sensitive: if you didn't have enough weight to flex it enough, the dang things skied like intermediate slarver/skidders, not carving skis. (And I say that with my favorite skis, and the ones I've cumulatively spent the most time on, being FIS GS skis - so I do know how to carve.)

To me, based on my own "skier profile," the Monster 88 was more of a versatile fat race ski, whereas the Brahma was a top all mountain ski that could also carve up the groomers. I think a bigger skier could flex the Monster more without trying, and thus move it more towards "all mountain" in the spectrum, when desired.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Don’t know why you guys aren’t seeing the latest Brahma 88 in Blister as it was reviewed last yearFully describe the differences between the latest one and current one and why it’s not as forgiving off piste or in moguls.
The Kendo 88 is a more similar shape and long, flat flat rocker ski if someone wanted something like the previous Brahma.

View attachment 160351
Either Brahma still isn’t as fun off piste/in bumps or stable on groomers as a 21 CT 1.0. Faction really dropped the ball getting the 21 CT line into reviewers hands. The ones that did raved about them(21 CT 2.0 ski of the year on Curated) but definitely didn’t reach their target market for them.
Funny you should suggest the Kendo 88 here, @GregK , in comparison to the old (and new) Brahma. This year I demoed this year's 3d Kendo and found it very different from Kendos past: it was for me a standout, going just by my experience. I was torn between getting a downsized pair of this year's Kendos or the previous version of the Brahma, which I'd skied on also in years past, and which is for me also a standout.

The deciding factor for me was the question of whether or not the new Kendo is damp enough, or if it still has the planky, not damp enough quality that's like a race ski, so that it can maximize its carve, I guess. I just don't know. I did not have a chance to demo the Kendo off piste or in bumps enough to trust it. So I went with the old Brahma downsized instead.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Don’t know why you guys aren’t seeing the latest Brahma 88 in Blister as it was reviewed last yearFully describe the differences between the latest one and current one and why it’s not as forgiving off piste or in moguls.
The Kendo 88 is a more similar shape and long, flat flat rocker ski if someone wanted something like the previous Brahma.

View attachment 160351
Either Brahma still isn’t as fun off piste/in bumps or stable on groomers as a 21 CT 1.0. Faction really dropped the ball getting the 21 CT line into reviewers hands. The ones that did raved about them(21 CT 2.0 ski of the year on Curated) but definitely didn’t reach their target market for them.
On those last things you write, @GregK, comparing the Brahma to the '21 CT 1.0, maybe after a year on the things, I'll see it this way too. But for now, I just experience those two skis as very different, both good, especially with me purposely getting a downsized 172 pair of the older Brahmas.
They bring out different technique and style in me, feel different - great variety. Like a quarter horse feels different than a thoroughbred, maybe: both just plain fun.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,043
Location
Ontario, Canada
Funny you should suggest the Kendo 88 here, @GregK , in comparison to the old (and new) Brahma. This year I demoed this year's 3d Kendo and found it very different from Kendos past: it was for me a standout, going just by my experience. I was torn between getting a downsized pair of this year's Kendos or the previous version of the Brahma, which I'd skied on also in years past, and which is for me also a standout.

The deciding factor for me was the question of whether or not the new Kendo is damp enough, or if it still has the planky, not damp enough quality that's like a race ski, so that it can maximize its carve, I guess. I just don't know. I did not have a chance to demo the Kendo off piste or in bumps enough to trust it. So I went with the old Brahma downsized instead.
Older Brahma is a bit heavier and more damp but similar, long flat rocker and minimal taper on both. Kendo 88 more lively and playful than the old kendo but the carbon tip is noisier than I like on hard snow.
The 3D radius gives the Kendo 88 the edge on high speed GS cruising. Similar mount points too.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,929
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Yeah, but I didn't get it for high speed GS cruising. (I have GS skis, 1.0 CTs, wider freeride and other skis for that!) No, I downsized it specifically to ski steeps and bumps, and as a quiver ski with a very different ride for off piste, for change of pace. ( I have to go by my own experience, and maybe later I'll find out the Kendo was damp enough.) :)
 
Last edited:

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,043
Location
Ontario, Canada
Out of curiosity I looked at the rocker and sidecut specs on the older Brahma and the Kendo 88 are they are within a cm or two when you compare similar lengths. Bit heavier on the Brahma but similar specs overall.

Also looked at the rocker and sidecut differences between the old and current Brahma 88 and the camber contact point in the current one is much longer as expected. Your 173cm would have a similar contact length to a 160ish cm current Brahma 88 if they made it. Put another way, a 177cm current Brahma would have a similar contact length to an old 190cm version.

The 183cm CT 1.0 would have a similar contact length to your old 173cm Brahma yet an effective edge when fully tipped very close to the current or older 183cm Brahma. So it would pivot like a much shorter ski when flat or on a partial edge, yet grip to a similar length ski when fully tipped over.

Same with the Bonafide 97 and CT 2.0. Similar when fully on edge but will ski like a much shorter B97 when flat or on a partial edge.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top