ON3P SKIS Discussion

[phatty]

Just snagged the 186 mango goats in factory finds. Very stoked!

Those were the ones I was looking at! Thanks for buying them and saving me.

[tuco]

Glad they’re getting the love!!! They are damned fun! My Jeffrey 118’s are just the replacement I was hoping for…

Haven't even mounted those yet brother!
All my plans for the season shit the bed when I broke my hand.

[Going Coastal]

My wife and wallet are very glad the Mangoats are sold.

[forumskier]

Site still showing the 186 Mango Goats for me. XavierD’s response to them actually got me thinking about 186s over 191s, as tree skis.

I've been telling myself I need to fill out the 94-104mm part of my quiver before I buy any more wide skis, but wide skis are more fun!

[SchralphMacchio]

In my opinion, a single 88-94 waisted ski for truly awful snow and then you can go straight to 108 and bigger … at least out west!
I’m planning that Enforcer 94, Woodsman 110, and BG118 will cover 100% of my resort needs next year.

[forumskier]

My 100mm pair is full rocker with long radius and surprisingly not THAT much worse in Sierra cement than BGs lol. 85% as good by my seat of the pants quantifier.

I have nothing thinner. I need some actual thin skis that aren’t so greasy in super firm.

[Gate11]

Hey folks. I haven't seen this question before, but sincere apologies if this is retreading old ground:

Regarding the Woodsman (looking at 100, but this question could easily apply to all waist widths): My quiver includes 176s, 177s, 180s and 182s, and I feel most at ease at 179-180. Given that the Woodsman come in 176 and 181, which way would you recommend I go? go longer or shorter?

Me: I ski Praxis Quixote 182, Praxis BC 180, and Enforcer 110 177. I'd note that the Quixotes ski a bit long, so even though they are 182, they feel a bit longer. I'm looking to retire the 177 Enforcers and replace with (a) lighter/less-chargy, (b) more groomer-friendly, (c) versatile. A more boring alternative to the Woodsman would be Elan Ripstick 96 Blacks.

Thanks all.

[MoeSnow]

Hey folks. I haven't seen this question before, but sincere apologies if this is retreading old ground:

Regarding the Woodsman (looking at 100, but this question could easily apply to all waist widths): My quiver includes 176s, 177s, 180s and 182s, and I feel most at ease at 179-180. Given that the Woodsman come in 177 and 181, which way would you recommend I go? go longer or shorter?

Me: I ski Praxis Quixotes, Praxis BCs, and Enforcer 110s. I'm looking to retire the Enforcers and replace with (a) lighter/less-chargy, (b) more groomer-friendly, (c) versatile. A more boring alternative to the Woodsman would be Elan Ripstick 96 Blacks.

Thanks all.

181

[tschoppe9@gmail.com]

$499 for wd100 181 protos in the factory finds now. Weird to see all white bases

[SchralphMacchio]

Hey folks. I haven't seen this question before, but sincere apologies if this is retreading old ground:

Regarding the Woodsman (looking at 100, but this question could easily apply to all waist widths): My quiver includes 176s, 177s, 180s and 182s, and I feel most at ease at 179-180. Given that the Woodsman come in 176 and 181, which way would you recommend I go? go longer or shorter?

Me: I ski Praxis Quixote 182, Praxis BC 180, and Enforcer 110 177. I'd note that the Quixotes ski a bit long, so even though they are 182, they feel a bit longer. I'm looking to retire the 177 Enforcers and replace with (a) lighter/less-chargy, (b) more groomer-friendly, (c) versatile. A more boring alternative to the Woodsman would be Elan Ripstick 96 Blacks.

Thanks all.

So I own the 182 Woodsman 110 and used to own the 177 Woodsman 108 (first gen, not current). I also own 180 Praxis BC, 177 Gen 1 Enforcers, 179 current gen Enforcers, and used to have 182 GPOs, so we have the same taste in skis and sizes lol!

I would also say go 181, as my understanding is that it’s mostly the same profile as the 182 but with the tail shortened by 1 cm.

Oddly enough I found the original 177 Woodsman to be more chargey and punishing than the 182, because the 177 had a softer tip, stiffer tail, and more forward mount; the 182 had a much more relaxed tail that did not punish backseat mistakes and also had better suspension up front in how it ramped up in stiffness. The 182 Woodsman 110 was also much more smooth on really firm snow.

[Gate11]

So I own the 182 Woodsman 110 and used to own the 177 Woodsman 108 (first gen, not current). I also own 180 Praxis BC, 177 Gen 1 Enforcers, 179 current gen Enforcers, and used to have 182 GPOs, so we have the same taste in skis and sizes lol!

I would also say go 181, as my understanding is that it’s mostly the same profile as the 182 but with the tail shortened by 1 cm.

Oddly enough I found the original 177 Woodsman to be more chargey and punishing than the 182, because the 177 had a softer tip, stiffer tail, and more forward mount; the 182 had a much more relaxed tail that did not punish backseat mistakes and also had better suspension up front in how it ramped up in stiffness. The 182 Woodsman 110 was also much more smooth on really firm snow.

Wow that is a very similar quiver history to me LOL. Good advice and Thank You.....As a replacement for heavy, charging 177s, I was gravitating towards the 176 Woodsman, but consensus is to size up a little. 5cms can't make too much change to my mojo...And the 181 Woodsman is still ~90g lighter than my Enforcer 177s.

[MoeSnow]

181 might seem like a lot on paper, but the depth of the rocker lines makes ON3Ps ski shorter.

[beeeom]

2013 186 BG vs 2024 186 BG.

Less camber. Damn near identical tips. Less tail splay. They hand flex a bit stiffer, but the old dogs are so bagged out that it's not an apples to apples comparison. I'm optimistic that the 2024's will suitably replace the 2013's

[FloridaSnow]

Blades

https://www.ebay.com/itm/33539464824...mis&media=COPY

[phatty]

2013 186 BG vs 2024 186 BG.

Less camber. Damn near identical tips. Less tail splay. They hand flex a bit stiffer, but the old dogs are so bagged out that it's not an apples to apples comparison. I'm optimistic that the 2024's will suitably replace the 2013's

Thanks! I just wish the new 191 was that close to the original 191, but sounds like that isn't the case. Will be looking forward to more reviews next year.

[phatty]

Just got my new J118s from my sister's place. They look pretty sweet. Now figuring what Pivot to put on them. May wait for next year's colors. Sender version would look pretty sweet.

[skuff]

Not sure if this was mentioned already, but Jeffrey 124 option available on custom order

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

Ripper rocker on there too!

[MHSP1497]

Not sure if this was mentioned already, but Jeffrey 124 option available on custom order

Feck………….. Want……….

[Sessiøn]

Feck………….. Want……….

I know, I was talking with Scott last night about some OG throwbacks (bear paw BG, OG C&D) they threw on the custom configurator, and saw that. I really do not need.

[kid-kapow]

Ripper rocker on there too!

well, dammit - it was not like the struggle to not order some ON3Ps was not real, now made even worse. Good thing I am broke... Or, not really.

[MoeSnow]

Wow, that’s an impressive catalogue. No need for skis now but I am definitely interested in either a 92/100 waist width with the new rocker option when my Wrens die.

Listed weight of the J124s on the customs page made me laugh

[Joey311]

Woodsman 92 with ripper rocker
Man!....I really thought I was done buying skis for a while.

[mr_pretzel]

Jeff 124 tour hmmm

[ASmileyFace]

Bear claw top sheet is back!