ON3P SKIS Discussion

[Banh Mi]

I've been having a fkn blast on my Tychoons this spring. They rip!

Been thinking that the new Wren 96 are looking kinda similar in dimensions, but with more tail rocker and probably a little stiffer. Both bi-radius, same waist.

Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?

I loved the tychoons. The tails were a little more locked in, but the rest of the ski was very easy to ski. From how the 189 W108 compares to 186 vicik, I suspect the 189 W96 to be a little looser than tychoons, but faster and more stable overall with the stiffer flex. Tychoons were fairly soft IIRC.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Norseman]

Yeah, they are a bit soft for the company's standard, probably. I got them thinking they'd be my "dad skis", and they have filled that spot very well with their ease, but they've surprised me at their speed and ability to absolutely rail turns. But I guess that's what Scott built them for.


Hey, here's a question.

For the bi-radius skis, why not state both radii? Too confusing for Joe Public? Is the listed radius the one in the tail?

Is there a ratio between tip and tail radii that's somewhat constant between the model lines? Or does it vary based on intended use?

[iggyskier]

Recommend me a ski. I think I want wren 108s, I'm not positive about touring core or veneer.

Going to mount with Tectons/Switches(if I can find them). I'm leaning towards the Wren 108, but ...

1. Does veneer save weight like with Praxis?

2. How much am I going to give up on hard/refrozen/sketchy snow if I go touring core/etc?

(6'2", 220)

1) A touch, but mostly because we lighten the glass to account for the stiffness added by the veneer.

2) Definitely top end speed, manageable in middle and low speeds. You are not small, so if you are going to see a lot of variable conditions, I would stick with stock layup. 19oz would offer a middle ground as far as weight.

I weigh 135lbs, i'm thinking that the kartel 108s are going to be to stiff. Maybe I should go with a softer, custom layup or an entirely different ski. What do you guys think?

I would go with 19oz glass, stock carbon. That is a layup a lot of the team and a few factory guys is on and we're all a big fan.

Don't know about kartels, but ON3P told me that they mostly reccomended softer glass, not softer carbon.

Softer glass would put the flex between stock and tour

Yes and yes.

Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?

Current Wren 96 is what the Tychoon should have been. Smaller radius than the Tychoon, a bit more power in the tips and tails, new rocker profile floats better. Just a better all around ski. Tychoon was fun when you had the space to let it run.

You can kinda think of the Tychoon/Vicik/Wren as the Wren 96/108/114.

Hey, here's a question.

For the bi-radius skis, why not state both radii? Too confusing for Joe Public? Is the listed radius the one in the tail?

Is there a ratio between tip and tail radii that's somewhat constant between the model lines? Or does it vary based on intended use?

If we did it, it would be something we have to list on all designs.

Primarily, it is to avoid confusing people, prevent other brands from knowing the actual design or ratios of the sidecut, and to save us a million questions. People obsess over things already - some of value, some not - and I believe for most skiers the numbers we list convey performance more accurately than using two numbers - and that listing two numbers would increase the number of questions and misunderstanding about a ski's performance substantially. We often have to explain the difference between, say, a 21m radius Kartel 108 and 27m radius Wrenegade 108. Having to add in comparisons of the tip sidecuts, tail sidecuts, and sidecut ratios would just muddle the conversation.

Same reason we no longer publicly list things like mount point on product pages - we had people mounting Billy Goats -9cm from recommended...aka -18cm from center. Also, I don't know why, but everyone gets skis and instantly decides they need to ask about mounting point, which should be recommended for the vast majority of people. So, we try to take that step out where possible and just say mounting on the line - that is where the ski is designed. Obviously we like to be somewhat transparent on design stuff, but we need to keep a modicum of design stuff internal and try to limit the questions we are asked that don't add value.

Re other brands - not trying to make anyone else's job easier - they already try and buy our skis from time to time.

We list a composite of the tip & tail radius (same on Elliptical Sidecut skis, which technically are even weirder since the tip and tail radius are, well, elliptical). And measuring RES is even funnier.

I can confirm that designs work of ratios and scale proportionally and yes, those ratios change by model & use. Dialed ratios also make designing skis a lot easier, though.

I've been sick for...awhile now, so been a bit MIA on here, but if I missed anything here quote it and I will get to it.

First round of our custom sale going on for another week or so if anyone wants some custom skis soon here good chance to get customs at a discount ($50 over stock models w/ topsheet swap only) - and lots of 2019 models in stock and already shipping. There will likely be another SuperGoat run sometime in June so will have additional details on that soon.

[Norseman]

Thanks. Understood.

[iggyskier]

Thanks. Understood.

One other aspect to think about is that, generally, we don't get to have long drawn out conversations with other skiers like we do on here. We have a finite amount of time to convey product details before someone buys our skis, or buys another brand. So we just have to be mindful of how much information we load people up with, as we don't want to be overwhelming. As you can imagine, I can easily talk someone's ear off when it comes to ski design.

That is where I find things like (5) dimensional skis sort of misleading, as technically, all skis could be listed that way, but no one has context of where the outer two dimensions sit and what those numbers really mean. Why not 7 dimensions? or 11? Technically, I can list as many dimensions as I want on the skis - all will be accurate - but I feel it only confuses people. I've had people ask me why we don't sell 5-dimensionally skis before - which is just the result of a lack of understanding of ski design and there being no standardization in how we discuss skis. This is the same reason we don't list rocker height/length (also other brands). Then the question is...are we talking rocker length? Or Tip length? Or are they the same? There is no central way brands talk about ski design right now, so confusion is inevitable - our goal is to avoid information that I feel adds to that confusion.

Hopefully that explains so of the thinking that goes into stuff like this.

[auvgeek]

Scott, your last few posts have been super insightful. Thanks for taking the time.

What do you think about how Praxis or Down skis conveys the technical specifications of their skis? I find it super useful, personally. But I understand your wanting to keep things simple and also not share too much with the competition.

we had people mounting Billy Goats -9cm from recommended...aka -18cm from center.

wow.

PS. Hope you feel better, mang.

[iggyskier]

Scott, your last few posts have been super insightful. Thanks for taking the time.

What do you think about how Praxis or Down skis conveys the technical specifications of their skis? I find it super useful, personally.

Honestly, not familiar enough to really comment. I will take a look and give me thoughts later. As someone familiar with ski designs, I am sure I would really appreciate it and see how customers would relate - but your knowledge set is also higher than the average bear.

I'll give them a look though.

[kid-kapow]

awesome

Great info - thanks for taking the time

And more importantly - hope to hear that you are on your way to better health soon! Easier said than done - but remember to slow down a bit to get better if you are a bit over worked (probably understatement of the week) or just feel unwell - slow is smooth and smooth is fast (and fast is efficient, meaning you get more stuff done in the time allotted -but remember - please refrain from incessantly increase the work load as you gain efficiencies (remember the law of Pareto - find your 20% and focus on it, not the other 80 % (yes, easier said than done, especially in a shop and brand your size))). You guys are doing awesome work, so hate to hear that you are unwell!

[TahoeJ]

Same reason we no longer publicly list things like mount point on product pages - we had people mounting Billy Goats -9cm from recommended...aka -18cm from center.

Any pics? That's fucking hilarious. I imagine they skied kinda long that way! lol...

[Norseman]

Ski nerdery is fun. On one shoulder I have an angel/enginrd wearing a plaid button up shirt, whispering questions about shear stress and vibration damping coefficients, sidecut radii, and what kind of quality bamboo flooring makes the best skis... and on the other shoulder, a handlebar-mustachioed dirtbag goggle tanned squinty-eyed devil, zig ablazin, asking why the fuck am I caring so much about that and why not just go ski on whatcha got... eh?

I feel kinda guilty about distracting our man here from his important gnomewhipping sched.

Maybe I can come up with some more thoughtful questions to carry into the spring.

[auvgeek]

Honestly, not familiar enough to really comment. I will take a look and give me thoughts later. As someone familiar with ski designs, I am sure I would really appreciate it and see how customers would relate - but your knowledge set is also higher than the average bear.

I'll give them a look though.

Yeah, I totally understand that many of the geeks here obsess over details that your average consumer could care less about and might even get confused about. (And it goes without saying that skiing ability is totally uncorrelated to ski geekery.)

Ski nerdery is fun. On one shoulder I have an angel/enginrd wearing a plaid button up shirt, whispering questions about shear stress and vibration damping coefficients, sidecut radii, and what kind of quality bamboo flooring makes the best skis... and on the other shoulder, a handlebar-mustachioed dirtbag goggle tanned squinty-eyed devil, zig ablazin, asking why the fuck am I caring so much about that and why not just go ski on whatcha got... eh?

Dude, 100%. And the more time I spend skiing, the less I care about a big quiver.

[RudyGarmisch]

Scott, feel free to correct me if I am wrong here:

Info posted on the website is for the general public. If you have read all 215 pages of this thread and still have questions - this is probably the best public forum to ask them in. As long as it isn’t proprietary super secretive design details, and as long as Scott or Jay or someone much less educated like myself has the time to type out the answer it deserves, we will do our best to continue to be as transparent and skier centric in answering any and all questions, as we have been from Day One.

Tough questions breed excellent discussion and learning, and the biggest takeaway I had from my small stint in this industry is how many people are misinformed or just don’t care to understand what’s on their feet. Keep asking, contributing and pushing the discussion.

[iggyskier]

Great info - thanks for taking the time

And more importantly - hope to hear that you are on your way to better health soon!

What do you think about how Praxis or Down skis conveys the technical specifications of their skis? I find it super useful, personally. But I understand your wanting to keep things simple and also not share too much with the competition.

wow.

PS. Hope you feel better, mang.

Getting there. Just a chest cold that is hanging around.

I wrote about it a bit below. I think it is cool they include it, but it does give a lot to the competition and I always wonder how much value they add to the customer. For example, I'm not sure, as a consumer, I need to know the ski's effective edge, front and aft of the mount mark, to the mm. How I take that information and apply it to my buying decision is my question here.

Any pics? That's fucking hilarious. I imagine they skied kinda long that way! lol...

Looked but cannot find it. It was pretty obvious.

What it comes down to me a bit on is that...mount points on the skis are intentional and factor in a lot of different elements. I think the vast majority of people should ski them where they are designed, and think it was a bit of a mistake for brands like K2 to have trained every single customer that the first thing you need to ask is - where do I mount these skis? - with mounting scales. If you have to ask where you should be mounting your skis, I think you should be a recommended. Just my opinion.

Ski nerdery is fun. On one shoulder I have an angel/enginrd wearing a plaid button up shirt, whispering questions about shear stress and vibration damping coefficients, sidecut radii, and what kind of quality bamboo flooring makes the best skis... and on the other shoulder, a handlebar-mustachioed dirtbag goggle tanned squinty-eyed devil, zig ablazin, asking why the fuck am I caring so much about that and why not just go ski on whatcha got... eh?

I feel kinda guilty about distracting our man here from his important gnomewhipping sched.

Maybe I can come up with some more thoughtful questions to carry into the spring.

I love ski-nerding. That is why I am doing this. There does become a point that on a macro scale, when we're getting a ton of emails per day, it can be really hard to dive deep into. That is one of the reasons forums are great, as we can make the conversation exponentially larger. But I would lying if I didn't say it is a strain on time when we end up in an email string that is a very detailed conversations over 30+ emails (you know who you are!). We try to give as much info as we can, and really be accurate in our info, but at times it is tough when we're being asked to compare to skis we haven't seen, haven't skied, or just don't know. Being asked to compare one of our skis to 10-15 other skis, in one email, happens enough that it isn't abnormal.

In my experience, the more info we gave, the most questions about that info we receive. And, for example, I don't think it is critical to know the exact taper length of a Kartel tip and tail. I don't think that most skiers would be able to make a buying decision based upon one ski with, say, 20cm of tip taper, compared to another ski with, say, 22cm of tip taper. What's the taper shape? Where is the end of the running length? What's the rocker profile? I can likely convince myself that 20cm is better than 22cm, but that decision isn't really made critically and based upon data, because I don't have enough info to really have a complete picture of the ski.

Honestly, I can pick a lot more out visually than I can just by reviewing numbers. I also think people have difficulty picking out the numbers of value when there are too many numbers - hence we give you just the key data I think you need.

Now - I think we need to do a much better job on our visuals, so we're far from where I want to be, but I can pick up more performance data about the skis from something like this, plus our normal data (dimensions, effective edge, turn radius), than from another data sheet that is just numbers.



It should be noted - this is just how my brain works, so what works for me might not work for everyone. But when I'm given, say, 4 data points : tip width, tip taper length, rocker length, tip height....those are just 4 points. What happens between all those points is infinite, so for all I know, I could be buying either of these skis below, which have the same tip width, tip taper length, rocker length, and tip height.



This is obviously exaggerated, and I'm glad that Praxis and Down take a different approach to this stuff than I do - variety is great - but to me, the numbers are just that. The ski image tells me a lot than the numbers do. The numbers in addition to the image is a nice touch, but I think unneeded and makes me concerned on what happens when someone loves the shape, but for some reason wants a 22cm tip tapered ski, when I'm offering 20cm?

One of the reasons we standardize our ski widths is to remove that exact decision. A 98mm and 102mm ski are extremely similar on performance - but we had people who would 1) be a directional skier 2) want a flat tail and 3) like to drive their tips who would be asking us if they should buy a Kartel 98 over a Wrenegade 102 because 102mm is far too wide, but 98mm is ideal, when obviously the correct ski for the customer is the Wrenegade 102.

As with any product, we're factoring in both functionality and practicality when we design them.

Now I will add a bit to that conversation and say...I did like a bit of detail on the Down image. There are a couple notes on there that I think add value as a feature, but not sure they need CAD details attached. I like their blending transitions, so I think there is value in sharing that detail. But I don't think I need to know that they are 70mm long. Telling me about their function seems more valuable to me than telling me their exactly length - aka sell me on the feature. Again, just my opinion - maybe they will hop in to comment, as their customer questions could very well differ from ours and if these tech sheets help save them time, I completely support them.

Scott, feel free to correct me if I am wrong here:

Info posted on the website is for the general public. If you have read all 215 pages of this thread and still have questions - this is probably the best public forum to ask them in. As long as it isn’t proprietary super secretive design details, and as long as Scott or Jay or someone much less educated like myself has the time to type out the answer it deserves, we will do our best to continue to be as transparent and skier centric in answering any and all questions, as we have been from Day One.

Tough questions breed excellent discussion and learning, and the biggest takeaway I had from my small stint in this industry is how many people are misinformed or just don’t care to understand what’s on their feet. Keep asking, contributing and pushing the discussion.

I think small stint is being modest, but yes, we really find that, as a whole, there is a lot of misinformation or misunderstanding about ski design, construction, and so on. We're obviously pretty passionate about the skis themselves, so it is a goal of ours to help educate people about what they have on their feet.

[N1CK.]

So begins the ON3P 2020 model rumors ....

[iggyskier]

So begins the ON3P 2020 model rumors ....

Haha this is tame compared to some of the designs Rowen thought up.

[Norseman]

[PowTron]

Haha this is tame compared to some of the designs Rowen thought up.

Oar 88/98/108/118/128?

[iggyskier]

Honestly, conceptually the Oar was really interesting, and remember, it made enough sense that we spent time/money on building them.

I think the one that stands out was one with the working name "The Dead Lung"....though so long ago hard to remember. Essentially a non-rockered, super super super damp, super super soft ski that would, in theory, just sort of flow over everything.

[Norseman]

Line EP Pro comes to mind...

[iggyskier]

Line EP Pro comes to mind...

Softer.

[Norseman]

Softer.

[auvgeek]

Really interesting thoughts, Scott.

Honestly, I can pick a lot more out visually than I can just by reviewing numbers.

100% agree with this. The problem with that is while I can usually tell in person looking at a ski if the sidecut and rocker profile is going to work for me, it's much, much harder to do online. Actual photos help, but there's nothing like eyeballing it in person. I like to think the numbers help online, but it's possible I'm deceiving myself.

I also think people have difficulty picking out the numbers of value when there are too many numbers - hence we give you just the key data I think you need.

Very fair point.

[markcjr]

I like what blister does to show actual rocker (tip and tail pics, laying flat on a table, squeezed together not squeezed together Etc) as opposed to just listing a line drawing with the numbers. It's easier for me to compute that way. Obviously the best way is to just fondle them but I can't always do that if I'm ordering online.

Sent from my VS987 using TGR Forums mobile app

[wwwllw]

What's the status of a short/women's Billy Goat?

[adrenalated]

I vote for a pointy tipped super Wren so that we can impale gapers that get in the way.