Page 505 of 594 FirstFirst ... 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 ... LastLast
Results 12,601 to 12,625 of 14839
  1. #12601
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    BG108tours are freaking great - if you can score a pair, go for them.

    The Mango pre-release hype train is still going at full speed ahead prior to their 20.4 release. This looks like another instant classic base design.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mango.jpg 
Views:	143 
Size:	267.4 KB 
ID:	413193

  2. #12602
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Portlandia
    Posts
    2,723
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    BG108tours are freaking great - if you can score a pair, go for them.

    The Mango pre-release hype train is still going at full speed ahead prior to their 20.4 release. This looks like another instant classic base design.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mango.jpg 
Views:	143 
Size:	267.4 KB 
ID:	413193
    Pretty sure these aren't Mango's.
    Training for Alpental

  3. #12603
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    311
    Kinda looks like a cooler version of the Armada Tracer topsheet.

    Name:  957150_926w_640h.jpeg
Views: 827
Size:  19.2 KB

    re: goats on runouts/firm - goats have to be "carved" from right under your foot, not from the RES. Wide or skinny goat, doesn't matter, same thing. Look at where the sidecut is, it'll make sense.

  4. #12604
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by Sessiøn View Post
    Pretty sure these aren't Mango's.
    yeah, I have no idea - the pic was posted with a reference to something being dropped at the same time as the new mango100s, so made the leap. I am not privy to the new designs.

  5. #12605
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    1,888
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    BG108tours are freaking great - if you can score a pair, go for them.
    Admittedly, and I know I'm in the minority, I find the Tour versions too light, even though they are medium to heavy for touring sticks. Lighter skis still feel weird to me and I would say most people I ski with are on a regular weight resort ski paired with light pin bindings (FR14, MTN). Coming off the BG116Tours, I think I'm going to switch out for BG110 50/50s.

  6. #12606
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by robnow View Post
    Admittedly, and I know I'm in the minority, I find the Tour versions too light, even though they are medium to heavy for touring sticks. Lighter skis still feel weird to me and I would say most people I ski with are on a regular weight resort ski paired with light pin bindings (FR14, MTN). Coming off the BG116Tours, I think I'm going to switch out for BG110 50/50s.
    I agree in that they while they ski great, a heavier ski of the same ilk will ski even better. That is the reason I ordered standard layup BG110s and sold my BG108tours. I was blown away by how much fun I had on the 108tours though before I sold them, they skied great in spring snow.

  7. #12607
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Taterville
    Posts
    950
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    I agree in that they while they ski great, a heavier ski of the same ilk will ski even better. That is the reason I ordered standard layup BG110s and sold my BG108tours. I was blown away by how much fun I had on the 108tours though before I sold them, they skied great in spring snow.
    I went with standard layup on my BG 108s. I like a ski with a little backbone. Something that crushes anything I decide to blast. I want the ski to react on demand with no delay while the ski bends and recovers.
    The 108s slash and float almost as well as my 116 asyms. The rocker in the shovels and the RES in the narrower width seems to give the ride a very aggressive feel. The 108s definitely like to charge. The 116s feel a bit more tame or mellow.
    I put about 40 days on the 108s this season.

  8. #12608
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    58
    Were some of the changes from the BG108 to BG110 similar to those for 116 to 118: slightly more camber and lower tail splay?
    What else changed in the 110 (except the lengths) ?

    BG108t from a few days ago:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	BG108t.jpg 
Views:	129 
Size:	1.88 MB 
ID:	413383

  9. #12609
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    311
    RIP
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20220416_192911795.jpg 
Views:	119 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	413401

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20220416_192906811.jpg 
Views:	112 
Size:	1.08 MB 
ID:	413402

    Anyone selling 184 asyms?

  10. #12610
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Location
    Lost in the PNWet
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward_Banana View Post
    RIP
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20220416_192911795.jpg 
Views:	119 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	413401

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20220416_192906811.jpg 
Views:	112 
Size:	1.08 MB 
ID:	413402

    Anyone selling 184 asyms?
    Not my listing but I saw this the other day.

    ON3P Billy Goat 184 with Atomic STH 13 bindings
    https://seattle.craigslist.org/est/s...468445719.html

  11. #12611
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Maple Falls, WA
    Posts
    622
    Ouch. What happened?

    I can facilitate/ship that Seattle pair if you need someone to help.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  12. #12612
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    47
    BG118 vs BG110…?

    I own a ‘20 184 116 ASYM and ‘22 182 110 stock layup. Love the 184 in heavier snow but it is more work to ski than the 110, which I expect is partly due to weight, partly due to shape & width. The 110 I have is crazy nimble, very much feels like cheating, but is not as stable. It’s hyper compared the the 116…but does seem to float pretty well. Most days I prefer the non-Asym tail too, releasing easily but not as prone to over rotate. I’m 55… ski pretty old school at moderate speeds. NOT a Charger!

    My pow days (so far) have all been interior BC and the deepest cat days around 18”. Terrain varies a lot, but every trip includes more tight, protected terrain than big open faces.

    Been wondering if the 110 in a 187 might just be the goldilocks… enough ski but not overkill, a little calmer and more stable than the 182. Also considering that maybe the new 118 at 182cm would achieve the same. Thoughts?

    #seasonisoverbutI’mstilldreamingaboutskiing!

  13. #12613
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    I re-mounted my Woods116 182s with STH2 on the line (compared to Pivots at -1), and man - they feel like a completely different ski. So the ski feeling overly stiff out back was 100% not caused by the ski being too stiff, but a binding delta issue. They are not remotely difficult to ski with Pivots and are smooth and predictable, so sorry - my bad Iggy!

    Quote Originally Posted by Marko888 View Post
    BG118 vs BG110…?

    I own a ‘20 184 116 ASYM and ‘22 182 110 stock layup. Love the 184 in heavier snow but it is more work to ski than the 110, which I expect is partly due to weight, partly due to shape & width. The 110 I have is crazy nimble, very much feels like cheating, but is not as stable. ... ski pretty old school at moderate speeds. NOT a Charger!

    Been wondering if the 110 in a 187 might just be the goldilocks… enough ski but not overkill, a little calmer and more stable than the 182. Also considering that maybe the new 118 at 182cm would achieve the same. Thoughts
    The difference in feel between 184 asyms and 182 BG110 is mainly down to flex pattern and effective edge, width playing a third fiddle. Simply put, BGasyms 184s are just much more ski - stiffer and longer contact area - than BG110.

    If you want them to be quick edge to edge just more stable at speed, then BG110 187s is the way to go. These will probably be closer to asyms than 182s wrt charginess.

    If you "just" more of the same (aka sligtly slower edge to edge, and more calm than BG110s) while improving float and having a ski that is less work and needs less speed to come alive compared to BGasyms, then BG118 182s is the way to go. Sure, 182 BG118s give up a bit of ability to ahtefuck the mountain that makes the asyms so great, but they are still very nimble, more balanced during slarves in drier snow than asyms and generally a lot of fun. I prefer 184 asyms to BG118 182s, but then again I want a ski that is stiffer and rages more. BG118 182s def feel like more ski than BG110 182s, as in they def calm things down a bit without being particularly demanding.

  14. #12614
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    621
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    I re-mounted my Woods116 182s with STH2 on the line (compared to Pivots at -1), and man - they feel like a completely different ski. So the ski feeling overly stiff out back was 100% not caused by the ski being too stiff, but a binding delta issue. They are not remotely difficult to ski with Pivots and are smooth and predictable, so sorry - my bad Iggy!
    Wait so is the new mount at -1 with pivots or on the line with Sth? Sorry, confused by the wording



    Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

  15. #12615
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by lrn2swim View Post
    Wait so is the new mount at -1 with pivots or on the line with Sth? Sorry, confused by the wording
    The original mount was pivots at +6mm or so (messed up the mounting, was meant to be on the line). Second mount: Shift on the line. Third mount: Pivots at -1, and fourth mount: STH2 on the line. (So yes, a bit swiss cheesed, but no problem - they are pretty stout underfoot and the holes are spaced out, and mostly plugged with epoxy and bamboo skewers.)

    Pivots have a 1mm delta and way shorter heel binding footprint, whereas STH2/Shifts have 6mm delta and pretty substantial footprint unnderfoot/aft of where the boot heel is on the binding.

    So in sum the ski's ability to flex more under/aft of the heel and a flatter mount makes for a different ride feel, or at least for me and my not so flexible legs. And no, there is nothing right or wrong here, just an observation

  16. #12616
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    621
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    The original mount was pivots at +6mm or so (messed up the mounting, was meant to be on the line). Second mount: Shift on the line. Third mount: Pivots at -1, and fourth mount: STH2 on the line. (So yes, a bit swiss cheesed, but no problem - they are pretty stout underfoot and the holes are spaced out, and mostly plugged with epoxy and bamboo skewers.)

    Pivots have a 1mm delta and way shorter heel binding footprint, whereas STH2/Shifts have 6mm delta and pretty substantial footprint unnderfoot/aft of where the boot heel is on the binding.

    So in sum the ski's ability to flex more under/aft of the heel and a flatter mount makes for a different ride feel, or at least for me and my not so flexible legs. And no, there is nothing right or wrong here, just an observation
    Thanks for the explanation.

    So do you like them better now on the line with Sth or -1 with pivots? Why the newest remount?

    Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

  17. #12617
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by lrn2swim View Post
    So do you like them better now on the line with Sth or -1 with pivots?
    They were great at -1 with pivots. Smooth, easy to ski, poppy out of turns in pow, easy to shut down, great at speed - just a great ski. Not quite as loose as Dynastar MF118s in soft snow (more tapered), but livelier than them on piste. I suspect WD116s would be equally great on the line with pivots.

    I never got along with them with Shifts, so I am guessing it would be the same with STH2s (same delta).

    I remounted to sell them - no value swiss cheesed without bindings. I prefer the looser feel of MF118s in dry soft snow to how WD116s ski in the same snow. MF118s can be skied similarly in dry/light snow to how BGasyms skis maritime/denser fresh, so they compliment each other really well imho

  18. #12618
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by Brasso View Post
    Ouch. What happened?

    I can facilitate/ship that Seattle pair if you need someone to help.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    Thanks, I might just take you up on that.

    Kinda unclear what happened, I landed on a tree the day before this happened, it was a bit painful, but the skis seemed fine. I noticed this after skiing a full day of soft chop, can't say that anything in particular happened on the day it actually broke. Kinda strange.

  19. #12619
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Maple Falls, WA
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward_Banana View Post
    Thanks, I might just take you up on that.

    Kinda unclear what happened, I landed on a tree the day before this happened, it was a bit painful, but the skis seemed fine. I noticed this after skiing a full day of soft chop, can't say that anything in particular happened on the day it actually broke. Kinda strange.
    Sorry to hear that, that is kinda strange. I'm guessing that tree landing created a fracture of some sort and it just got worse from there. Is only one ski broken? It might be worth looking for a single. Reach out to ON3P and post around.

    Let me know if you do go the Craigslist pair route.

  20. #12620
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    4,715
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward_Banana View Post
    Thanks, I might just take you up on that.

    Kinda unclear what happened, I landed on a tree the day before this happened, it was a bit painful, but the skis seemed fine. I noticed this after skiing a full day of soft chop, can't say that anything in particular happened on the day it actually broke. Kinda strange.
    It’s almost like the core damage may have been done on the most forward mount and just didn’t show itself until now.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  21. #12621
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    311
    Yeah, I snagged 'em used from a guy who had them center mounted, didn't know about the double mount there. I'm sure it didn't help, and I'm sure its just one of those unlucky things. No big deal.

    Where'd we land on the new 118s? I've never really wanted more top end of the goat, so the thought of more camber + more tail + more traditional mount sounds like a move in the wrong direction for my snow/terrain (Oregon wind-blown dense shit). Did I miss anything?

  22. #12622
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    39
    My QST 106 is dead; cracked core, delam on both skis, compressed edges, etc. Great skis but fragile, I think I got a little less than 100 days out of them. So I'm looking to ON3P but I've never found any to demo and need some help deciding.

    I love to ski ungroomed terrain, trees, steeps, going fast, occasionally catching some air. Performance on hard-pack isn't very important to me, if the edges don't hold just straight-line it. I'm used to driving a ski and a supportive tail is nice; so I don't know if the Jeffrey is really for me but I've never tried them. The Wrenegade seems a bit far in the opposite direction, maybe a bit more damp and stiff than I'd like for tight terrain. But again, never tried them. The QSTs handled like 2x4s in really tight trees which was fine but occasionally an annoyance. The nearly flat tails didn't help. This leaves the Woodsman? I'm leaning towards the 110 in a 187 length. I'll give up performance on hard-pack if it means I can enjoy a deeper day even more.

    I understand this is a gamble for me and nothing beats skiing a pair, I just wanted to see if anyone has some advice.

  23. #12623
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by JuiceboxHero View Post
    My QST 106 is dead; cracked core, delam on both skis, compressed edges, etc. Great skis but fragile, I think I got a little less than 100 days out of them. So I'm looking to ON3P but I've never found any to demo and need some help deciding.

    I love to ski ungroomed terrain, trees, steeps, going fast, occasionally catching some air. Performance on hard-pack isn't very important to me, if the edges don't hold just straight-line it. I'm used to driving a ski and a supportive tail is nice; so I don't know if the Jeffrey is really for me but I've never tried them. The Wrenegade seems a bit far in the opposite direction, maybe a bit more damp and stiff than I'd like for tight terrain. But again, never tried them. The QSTs handled like 2x4s in really tight trees which was fine but occasionally an annoyance. The nearly flat tails didn't help. This leaves the Woodsman? I'm leaning towards the 110 in a 187 length. I'll give up performance on hard-pack if it means I can enjoy a deeper day even more.

    I understand this is a gamble for me and nothing beats skiing a pair, I just wanted to see if anyone has some advice.
    Sounds like you need yourself some goats or some woodsmans

  24. #12624
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by Backward_Banana View Post
    Where'd we land on the new 118s? I've never really wanted more top end of the goat, so the thought of more camber + more tail + more traditional mount sounds like a move in the wrong direction for my snow/terrain (Oregon wind-blown dense shit). Did I miss anything?
    The reviews have been a bit of mixed bag.

    Some mags prefer the slightly more present tail for more balance in drier snow, some prefer the previous profile.

    I've only skied 182 BG118 and they are noticably less skis than 184 asyms (which makes sense given that they are a 179 that have grown sligthly). I prefer the asyms thus far, but if the sligthly more balanced slarviness (aka ability to stay in a long slarve in drier snow when doing big turns in steep terrain instead of washing out / wanting to return to the fall line like asyms want to) of the 182s is present in 187s - just with a more potent flex pattern - then I can see them being sweet skis. Asyms are freaking magical in dense fresh though.

    Quote Originally Posted by JuiceboxHero View Post
    My QST 106 is dead .... I'm leaning towards the 110 in a 187 length. I'll give up performance on hard-pack if it means I can enjoy a deeper day even more.
    You sound like a wren-guy to me. I've always thought of QST106s and Wren108s being somewhat similar, just with Wren108s having a larger top end and more float at the cost of hardpack ability.

    That being said, the current Wood110 is pretty close to being a more versatile wren - so it could be just the ticket. They are meant to shine in soft snow, off groomers, and they def do. The current version's tails are more forgiving than the originals.

    BG110s could be a good contender too if you want something that pivots even easier. Woodsman-tails give a bit more float / balance in the ski and is better in harder snow, but if soft snow nimbleness while still being able to rally and cut through variable like standard BGs are the main goals then BG110 187s will be hard to match. They happen to be on sale now too, so yay.

    Wren110pros will be less loose than Wood110s, but have a higher top speed than the other two.

    Give ON3P a call and have them provide their take if you are unsure. They are very good at getting you on the rigth ski.

  25. #12625
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    You sound like a wren-guy to me. I've always thought of QST106s and Wren108s being somewhat similar, just with Wren108s having a larger top end and more float at the cost of hardpack ability.

    That being said, the current Wood110 is pretty close to being a more versatile wren - so it could be just the ticket. They are meant to shine in soft snow, off groomers, and they def do. The current version's tails are more forgiving than the originals.

    BG110s could be a good contender too if you want something that pivots even easier. Woodsman-tails give a bit more float / balance in the ski and is better in harder snow, but if soft snow nimbleness while still being able to rally and cut through variable like standard BGs are the main goals then BG110 187s will be hard to match. They happen to be on sale now too, so yay.

    Wren110pros will be less loose than Wood110s, but have a higher top speed than the other two.

    Give ON3P a call and have them provide their take if you are unsure. They are very good at getting you on the rigth ski.

    Thank you for the in-depth advice, I appreciate it! I tried to get ON3P on the phone but haven't heard back yet, I'll try again tomorrow.

    The Wren 110 Pro looks pretty sick with that black and red top sheet but I'm worried about it being too stiff in tight spaces, especially with ON3P saying it's "the burliest comp ski in the game". I think I'm a pretty good skier (haha, that's a funny thought) but it's a bit intimidating. I rarely top 50mph and tend to pick my way through hard lines instead of charge them. And if I'm realistic, I don't see as much fresh snow as I dream of so the Woodsman may be the better choice over he BG for me.

    In the mean time, any idea on how to size the length on the Wood 110? I'm about 190lbs and 6'1", the QST 106 in a 188 length seemed perfect. Should I go for the Wood 110 in 187 or 192?

Posting Permissions

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