Page 311 of 351 FirstFirst ... 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 ... LastLast
Results 7,751 to 7,775 of 8752
  1. #7751
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleBeaver View Post
    Hmm this C&D talk has me thinking. I've been dreaming about a custom pair for next season, but you guys have me considering the billygoat. I'll be living at Alta, so there is a high probability I will be skiing a lot of pow. I currently ski 184 wren 96s when it doesn't snow, and 190 Deathwishes when it does, with a pair of blue megawatts filling the "3 days a year" slot. With the 3 day a year slot maybe changing to 10-15 days a year with the move from Crested Butte back to Utah, I was justifying the upgrade and was naturally thinking about a ski with similar girth. Is the C&D so much ski that I will be hurting when things get tracked at 10:30 like they do in lcc, or is it worth it for the extra untracked performance? I was also considering the 184 since they are trad mounted and have so much surface area to begin with. If you can't justify owning a pair of C&D in Utah, where can you??
    I think you can easily justify them, for me I wanted to see if there was room in the quiver for both a goat and the C&D.

    After a banner last 2 weeks here in the INW Iíve decided YES, but the days on the C&D will be less than I had wanted... but that is really only due to the goat being so damn amazing and absolutely a quiver of one.

    Ha


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #7752
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    I actually have both the goats and C&Ds. Inserts for shift which is MNC and will work with your boots. Send me a PM and we can get you on them.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Super generous. I'll PM you when the time gets closer and if the trip actually happens. Think about what whiskey/etc you like

  3. #7753
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by paalrune View Post
    12/13, 13/14, 14/15
    Not first BG, but the breakthrough design.

    15/16
    Same as above, but -2cm tail rocker (191cm to 189 etcÖ)

    16/17
    Same as above, but with an added straight section underfoot before RES.

    17/18, 18/19, 19/20
    Asym tips and update to straight section underfoot

    20/21
    New tweak that makes me get that cat camo
    Thanks. Is there somewhere where its discussed how they ski differently? I remember seeing it somewhere but I can't find it for the life of me.

  4. #7754
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    6,623
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Quick comparison to your Wrens? Lengths and vintage etc? Guess both are stock? How are the Woods in tighter terrain?
    2014/2015 186cm Wren 112 (so back when the tail was flatter and stiffer), stock
    2019/2020 182cm Woods 108, custom topsheet but stock construction

    My old Wrens require staying on the front of your boots and going at least 30mph at all times. They also have no speed limit and will absorb any and all small children in their path. I can ski them in tight terrain but need to have my shit together.

    The Woods allow me to stand in the middle of the ski and be lazy and just kind of pivot them around. They still have a pretty generous speed limit but I do need to pay a bit more attention to what's coming up than the Wrens, as the Woods won't just automatically absorb everything when I decide turning is overrated. That said I can still ski them really hard, they still have great edgehold (like my hand needs to be dragging on the snow before I find their limit), and they're still very stable. The big difference is that I don't have to be 100% on my game at all times like I do with the Wrens. I honestly haven't had a chance to ski much tight terrain/trees on the Woods yet but based on how they've felt on chalky mogul steeps, they should excel there.

    I don't particularly like either ski in pow, but that's why I have Billy Goats. Wrens and Woods are fine in pow, but the BG is better.

    I should also add a couple things. First, most people should size a Woodsman the same as a Wren. I went shorter because I specifically wanted a significantly more easygoing ski. Second, I'm on the smaller side of things at 5'9" 145lbs and generally ski longer skis than most people my size would. Third, my Wrens are pretty significantly different in design than the current Wren, with a much flatter, stiffer, more powerful tail. By all accounts, the current Wren is a lot more forgiving than mine and it sounds like the primary difference between the current Wren and the Woods is the mount point and how you stand on the ski.
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    All ye punterz! Leave thine stupid heavy skis in the past, or at least in the resort category, for the age of lightweight pussy sticks is upon us! Behold! Keep up with the randocommandos on their carbon blades of shortness! Break thine tibias into spiral splinters with pintech extravagance!

  5. #7755
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    I think you can easily justify them, for me I wanted to see if there was room in the quiver for both a goat and the C&D.

    After a banner last 2 weeks here in the INW Iíve decided YES, but the days on the C&D will be less than I had wanted... but that is really only due to the goat being so damn amazing and absolutely a quiver of one.

    Ha


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Yeah I think I'm going to go big or go home on this ski. I love the megawatts at 125mm but they are straight noodles once things get tracked. Good intro to pow specific skis but I want to upgrade. Also considering the Chipotle banana if anyone has any comparisons between those (or fat meridians) and the billygoat/C&D.

    Also just wanted to point out that way back in this thread, Scott mentioned that the average weight for the C&D single skis were 2330 in 184cm and 2410 in 189cm. Basically identical to the Billygoats. So weight is less of a factor in maneuverability than just the sheer width I think.

  6. #7756
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by brundo View Post
    Thanks. Is there somewhere where its discussed how they ski differently? I remember seeing it somewhere but I can't find it for the life of me.
    Here:

    https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...tional-Changes

    And some here:

    https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...BillyGoat-am-I

    Sent from my Pixel XL using TGR Forums mobile app

  7. #7757
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    2014/2015 186cm Wren 112 (so back when the tail was flatter and stiffer), stock
    2019/2020 182cm Woods 108, custom topsheet but stock construction

    My old Wrens require staying on the front of your boots and going at least 30mph at all times. They also have no speed limit and will absorb any and all small children in their path. I can ski them in tight terrain but need to have my shit together.

    The Woods allow me to stand in the middle of the ski and be lazy and just kind of pivot them around. They still have a pretty generous speed limit but I do need to pay a bit more attention to what's coming up than the Wrens, as the Woods won't just automatically absorb everything when I decide turning is overrated. That said I can still ski them really hard, they still have great edgehold (like my hand needs to be dragging on the snow before I find their limit), and they're still very stable. The big difference is that I don't have to be 100% on my game at all times like I do with the Wrens. I honestly haven't had a chance to ski much tight terrain/trees on the Woods yet but based on how they've felt on chalky mogul steeps, they should excel there.

    I don't particularly like either ski in pow, but that's why I have Billy Goats. Wrens and Woods are fine in pow, but the BG is better.

    I should also add a couple things. First, most people should size a Woodsman the same as a Wren. I went shorter because I specifically wanted a significantly more easygoing ski. Second, I'm on the smaller side of things at 5'9" 145lbs and generally ski longer skis than most people my size would. Third, my Wrens are pretty significantly different in design than the current Wren, with a much flatter, stiffer, more powerful tail. By all accounts, the current Wren is a lot more forgiving than mine and it sounds like the primary difference between the current Wren and the Woods is the mount point and how you stand on the ski.
    Thanks.
    Yeah, I get the older wren / woods pairing. I have 189 new Wrens, so for me it's more of picking one. The wren is nice, just a tiny bit more than I need for most days.

  8. #7758
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,507
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Thanks.
    Yeah, I get the older wren / woods pairing. I have 189 new Wrens, so for me it's more of picking one. The wren is nice, just a tiny bit more than I need for most days.
    I ski 189 W108's most days. I think of it as a forgiving charger, at least that's the slot it fills in my quiver.

    I demoed the woodsman last season. It was less demanding than the wren and does well with slower speeds/shorter turns (naturally.) One thing I didn't like on the woodsman 116 is that the short sidecut/wide tail does get catchy/bogged down in deep crud/heavy pow. If you're looking for a low-tide playful directional ski from on3p, I think the woodsman 96 metal would be the choice for me.

    I'll stick to the wrens.

    RIP W114

  9. #7759
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,693
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleBeaver View Post
    Hmm this C&D talk has me thinking. I've been dreaming about a custom pair for next season, but you guys have me considering the billygoat. I'll be living at Alta, so there is a high probability I will be skiing a lot of pow. I currently ski 184 wren 96s when it doesn't snow, and 190 Deathwishes when it does, with a pair of blue megawatts filling the "3 days a year" slot. With the 3 day a year slot maybe changing to 10-15 days a year with the move from Crested Butte back to Utah, I was justifying the upgrade and was naturally thinking about a ski with similar girth. Is the C&D so much ski that I will be hurting when things get tracked at 10:30 like they do in lcc, or is it worth it for the extra untracked performance? I was also considering the 184 since they are trad mounted and have so much surface area to begin with. If you can't justify owning a pair of C&D in Utah, where can you??
    Similar position as skilyft. Own 191 BG, 189 BG and 189 CD.

    The current iteration of the CD is not difficult to ski. In tracked or untracked. Itís an incredible offering.
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  10. #7760
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    3,437

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by robnow View Post
    Yes, where are the Woodsman reviews at, especially from those coming from Wrens. I assume most sized up?
    I posted a short one a ways back. Greatly aligns w what others are saying.

    I wouldnít say size up. I have 179 Wren 108s and 96s and went 182 Woodsman 96. I believe they both have 144cm of EE.

    Woodsman just a bit softer and turnier Wren so takes some ease off the demand of the driver. I assume that is what a Wren owner moving to Woodsman is looking for - a bit of ease - so not sure youíd want longer.
    Last edited by Doremite; 01-17-2020 at 09:05 PM.
    Uno mas

  11. #7761
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    I finally got to take my woodsman116s out in decent snow yesterday. I started the day on BMT122s and 4FRNT Hojis (both mounted w/Tectons) while the snow was fresh, then took out the Woodsies when things started getting tracked out.

    First impression: winner. They had a fair bit of umph, took kindly to being driven/ridden with a centered stance and released nicely. In spite of my legs being somewhat spent, the heavier woods+castified pivots combo was pretty easy to ski (if not as mindnumbling easy/intuitive as Hoji/Tectons that might be the easiest to ski pow ski I have yet to try). I think woods116s will be a riot as I grow used to them.

    The plan today was to try woods116s back to back with BGs, but alas - we had a change of weather turning pow to wet, moist, dense shait of the sort that wrecks knees. That is, the top was ok - the bottom half pure shait/survival skiing -> not worth it, so groomers ftw. Oh well, at least I got to try woods108s a bit more. I am also quite pleased with them thus far.

    Have anyone experimented with the mount point on woodsman108/116s? Say at a cm or a cm and a half back?
    Are you rocking the 192? Just got mine today and Iím pretty stoked on the feel in hand. Theyíre big but my daily is a 193 OG Cochise so Iím hopeful for a mix of stability and forgiveness with these. Shouldnít be as stout as my 196 Bodes Iíve skied in the past.

    Seems as though the rocker up front and the nice flex on these should make a great Squaw/alpine soft snow charger.

    Iím very much old school directional in my style and on the line seems like a good spot to drill with Pivots. It compares very closely when side by side with Cochise which I consider very directional.

    More to come.....pretty stoked to get out on these.....

    Love to hear bout mount points as well in the next cpl days if there are any opinions out there. Line seems pretty money tho. Assuming there has been a shit load of research by ON3P regarding that.

  12. #7762
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoepa View Post
    Love to hear bout mount points as well in the next cpl days if there are any opinions out there. Line seems pretty money tho. Assuming there has been a shit load of research by ON3P regarding that.
    i'll say this, waffled on mount point on the kartels for a while and got good feedback from on3p and folks here. ended up on the line last season, then switched to -2cm. skis are great at rec but charge just that extra lil bit where im at now. love em at -2

    can't speak for the woodsies but based on what i hear about design its a wrenish shape with a kartel/jeff heart, rec is somewhere around -7cm from true center. wrens are about -10 with kartel/jeff being -5ish

    fwiw, im a directional skier and if i owned a woods i'd probably mount at least -1cm from rec, others here who have had my experience with the kartels like being aft of rec as well...ymmv

  13. #7763
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by detuned View Post
    i'll say this, waffled on mount point on the kartels for a while and got good feedback from on3p and folks here. ended up on the line last season, then switched to -2cm. skis are great at rec but charge just that extra lil bit where im at now. love em at -2

    can't speak for the woodsies but based on what i hear about design its a wrenish shape with a kartel/jeff heart, rec is somewhere around -7cm from true center. wrens are about -10 with kartel/jeff being -5ish

    fwiw, im a directional skier and if i owned a woods i'd probably mount at least -1cm from rec, others here who have had my experience with the kartels like being aft of rec as well...ymmv
    Was just thinking the same......-1 may give me the directional feel Iím wanting out of these.

    Call me crazy but I never bonded with Bibby pros which seemed more center in feel. I know the Woods are a totally different ski but I love the directional feel of my Blizz skis and am hoping for a blend on these so going a little deeper may be the call.

    The 192ís are guns tho......such a rad feel in hand......canít wait to let em run.

  14. #7764
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    461
    Billy Goat Tour from factory finds. Mounted on the line.
    Haven't flexed standard Billy Goat, but according to Iggy these have softer and rounder flex.

    Can't wait to take them for a ride tomorrow.

    Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  15. #7765
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    334
    I know this is heresy...

    I am not really finding any versatility with my C&Ds. Wondering if I'm completely alone in this experience/can't ski/whatever, or if I'm just too fat for tour core. I'm 6'2", 230#, strong. Decent skier, not amazing. Ski at a decent clip, don't really charge. ride somewhere between centered and forward. I've put 3 resort days, 3 cat days on the C&Ds. When powder is deep, light, and uncut, they're great. Really, really great. Better than praxis protests by a little bit. When conditions are heavier, cut up, or variable, I find the skis getting pushed around more than I would hope or expect. The reason this stresses me out is that I find variable snow

    I have ... IDK, 200+ days on a pair of 2011/2012 billygoats. The C&Ds are floatier, more manueverable, and just better in fresh, deep snow, and weirdly better on groomers. The Billy Goats are confidence inspiring in every kind of fucked up variable weird cut up whatever snow I've ever skied, and the C&Ds really don't inspire that confidence for me. I probably have 10ish days on a pair of Wren 108 veneers, and while they're not quite the bulldozers of the old BGs, I don't have this feeling on them.

    Is it me? Do I need to just go faster and hold it together? Do I need to ride the C&Ds differently than my old BGs? Should I just be on goats (189/193/whatever)?

  16. #7766
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Western MT
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by detuned View Post
    i'll say this, waffled on mount point on the kartels for a while and got good feedback from on3p and folks here. ended up on the line last season, then switched to -2cm. skis are great at rec but charge just that extra lil bit where im at now. love em at -2
    I can vouch for detuned ripping on his Kartels.

    What he left out is how good they are at serving double duty as an axe!

  17. #7767
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,276
    Quote Originally Posted by scmartin69 View Post
    Barn Find OG 191 BG
    Skied twice, mounted once...


    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
    Best soft snow oriented BG vintage IMO. Super pivoty but can still charge. Tail seems just a tad more forgiving and loose than the current vintage. That is a heck of a find. One of the best graphics, too.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  18. #7768
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,276
    Quote Originally Posted by brundo View Post
    This is going to come off as a jong in this thread but can someone go over the differences between the current gen and the last gen of the BG? I'm remembering that one difference is the last gen is little softer felx so maybe a little more soft snow oriented?

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
    I would say that is pretty accurate.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  19. #7769
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,276
    Quote Originally Posted by SupreChicken View Post
    Similar position as skilyft. Own 191 BG, 189 BG and 189 CD.

    The current iteration of the CD is not difficult to ski. In tracked or untracked. Itís an incredible offering.
    Yeah...heís telling the truth. I think the current C&D is stupid easy to ski. Very similar to the feeling of my 186 2014 BG.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  20. #7770
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by theetruscan View Post

    I am not really finding any versatility with my C&Ds.
    Itís difficult to understand what youíre not liking about them based on that post. They are not a difficult ski to ski by any means ó the wider platform just works ya a bit more as the day gets chopped up. On groomers they rip (for a ski of that width) @iggy really nailed that. Skiing them faster does really help them come alive ó but they are not Goats and will not ever be that versatile IMHO.

    Something I noticed, the ski needs to be skied a bit differently vs the goats. I canít quite nail it down as I havenít skied them on the same day back to back against goats. But Iíll keep playing with it and report back if I can articulate what I mean here.



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  21. #7771
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    334
    i think itís the difference thatís not clicking. iím getting worked even when deep snow has been chopped up but still feels goood on bgs or protests


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  22. #7772
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    348
    If you are ever wanting to move them... i think you would find a buyer pretty quickly. Sometimes skis just donít click for people.

    I would be tempted, so feel free to drop a Pm if you decide to go to something else.

    Quote Originally Posted by theetruscan View Post
    i think itís the difference thatís not clicking. iím getting worked even when deep snow has been chopped up but still feels goood on bgs or protests


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  23. #7773
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Your couch?
    Posts
    211
    Got a pair of 108 187 woodsman mounted for cast pivots 325mm on the line. Located summit county. Any offers?

  24. #7774
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    95

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by phallic-menace View Post
    Got a pair of 108 187 woodsman mounted for cast pivots 325mm on the line. Located summit county. Any offers?
    Why are you moving on from them?

  25. #7775
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    50 miles E of Paradise
    Posts
    9,278
    Quote Originally Posted by phallic-menace View Post
    Got a pair of 108 187 woodsman mounted for cast pivots 325mm on the line. Located summit county. Any offers?
    What kind of mounting hole issues will I have if I want to mount regular alpine pivots on the line @ 325? Searched Cast's site but ran out of patience
    Check Out Ullr's Mobile Avalanche Safety Tools for iOS and Android
    www.ullrlabs.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •