ON3P SKIS Discussion

[Sessiøn]

Ok so all gripes aside, if my new Jeff 110s are acting hooky on the hard pack. What should I be tuning/detuning to? I know there was some comments 20 pages ago. So I’ll ask the collective. I’ve got change for a nickel, what’s your 2 cents.

I have always aggressively detuned the rocker sections. My take is that the hookiness on a ski such as this is a result of rockered tips deflecting and making random contact with the snow.

I know people on here want to keep hammering on the tune issues that ON3P experienced for a time, but that should simply no longer being the case unless it was a ski built during that time.

[carlh]

Anyone put a 2* sidewall on a narrower ON3P? I want a bit more bite from my woodsman 102s on hard pack. Will start with a basic sharpen but thinking more could be better here.

[kid-kapow]

Any Jeff 118 love out there?

Just took mine for their first a rip today in the heavy sierra pow we just received and they preformed beautifully. Mounted on the line, don’t really need to do anything but keep it neutral and the skis literally do all the work. Blasting off cat tracks into untouched and chop they just blasted straight through without any deflection.

Didn’t notice a tune issue on groomers getting back to the lift. Just felt the looseness of the ski and the ease at which they ski. Attachment 440860

I hate it when people quote a post and include the picture in the quote - but hot damn, jeff118s look sooooo good. I would love to try that ski.

Hmmm, now I see there is a 50/50 layup for custom builds. I wonder if that will do the trick over the stock layup (especially with the Gen2 flex and mount point tweaks), or if I should stay the course and go with a Tour. I'm not very hard on my gear these days either so I'm not sure if the thinner base and edges of the Tour layup will be penalizing to me on my rare trips to Bachelor where contact with lava rocks at high speeds is a lot more likely than at my local podunk hills ...

I would chat with ON3P on the topic. Current gen wood108's tails is a fair bit softer than the OG, so it might be the ticket. A tour layup second year wood108 would be a bit softer yes, but also a lot lighter.

I've skied the first w108, w108tour, current w110 and current w110 50/50, all 182s. They all ski well imho. The first gen is a fair bit stronger than the current, especially in the tails. There is not a massive difference in flex when comparing the stock and 50/50 layups - the difference is more in swing weight / mass.

[jdadour]

Putting up for sale my 21/22 BG118 192s in the next day or so. If any of you guys are interested hit me up. Garnet custom top sheets, 4 days skied great condition, one mount for pivots at 317bsl. Sticking with my Bibbys.

[adrenalated]

Anyone put a 2* sidewall on a narrower ON3P? I want a bit more bite from my woodsman 102s on hard pack. Will start with a basic sharpen but thinking more could be better here.

I put a 2* side bevel on my Wrens (wider ones, the 113s, but I skied them mostly on firmer snow).

I liked them though it didn't make a massive difference. I don't see a downside to doing it if you want a bit more max grip. As long as you still detune appropriately to keep them from getting hooky.

[PeachesNCream]

If you can get a killer deal on a 116 then jump on it. It's a good ski.

You seem to have spent quite a bit of time on the jefferys. What's your height/weight and what size are you on?

2 pairs of 186s for cheap around me, but at 6'3, 195, I'm thinking I should hold out for some 191s

[EWG]

Just a bi-weekly note that if anyone have 102/187 woods to sell I'm interested.

[jacob_dbu]

I hate it when people quote a post and include the picture in the quote - but hot damn, jeff118s look sooooo good. I would love to try that ski.



I would chat with ON3P on the topic. Current gen wood108's tails is a fair bit softer than the OG, so it might be the ticket. A tour layup second year wood108 would be a bit softer yes, but also a lot lighter.

I've skied the first w108, w108tour, current w110 and current w110 50/50, all 182s. They all ski well imho. The first gen is a fair bit stronger than the current, especially in the tails. There is not a massive difference in flex when comparing the stock and 50/50 layups - the difference is more in swing weight / mass.

What do you lose by going for the 50/50? Put another way...what do you notice about it skis differently.

[Sessiøn]

You seem to have spent quite a bit of time on the jefferys. What's your height/weight and what size are you on?

2 pairs of 186s for cheap around me, but at 6'3, 195, I'm thinking I should hold out for some 191s

I'm 5'9, 215. I'm on 186's. I have been on 191's in the past but they were just overkill. I have honestly had good time on 181's as well.

[TeleBeaver]

Anyone put a 2* sidewall on a narrower ON3P? I want a bit more bite from my woodsman 102s on hard pack. Will start with a basic sharpen but thinking more could be better here.

Put a 2* on my wren 96s. Hardly made a difference. They still leave a lot to be desired on firm snow. They never bite or hook up. You can put them on edge and ride it on groomers, but they are some of the worst carving skis I have ever skied in this width range. My Deathwishes are better on hard snow. That being said, the looseness makes them super predictable and stable in bumps, funky snow, chalk etc. I try to avoid groomers anyway so it isn't a huge deal, but I would love to try a ti version of the same shape to see if it helps at all. Over 100 days on them by now with 3 or 4 base grinds so I am sure they are flat, I think they just lack torsional stiffness.

[PeachesNCream]

Just a bi-weekly note that if anyone have 102/187 woods to sell I'm interested.

There's some with an edge blem on the on3p website for $550, tour layup tho

[on3pbg]

I'm 5'9, 215. I'm on 186's. I have been on 191's in the past but they were just overkill. I have honestly had good time on 181's as well.

I second this one. I’m 6’2 and 195. I’m on the 186s and love them. I had the 191s and they were sweet but I wanted something distinctly more playful then my 189 BGs and downsizing to 186 was a great move.

Haven’t noticed any float issues…..it’s also roughly the same length as my MFree 108s in 191.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Ed el Loco]

You seem to have spent quite a bit of time on the jefferys. What's your height/weight and what size are you on?

2 pairs of 186s for cheap around me, but at 6'3, 195, I'm thinking I should hold out for some 191s

Like others have said, I’m 6’1 and well over 200lbs. The 186 Jeff 114’s are my favorite non hard pack skis. I have fatter skis for deep days but the Jeffery’s for every thing in between.

[EWG]

There's some with an edge blem on the on3p website for $550, tour layup tho

Thanks for the heads up, but no tour layup for me. Thanks for the note though.

[MoeSnow]

Like others have said, I’m 6’1 and well over 200lbs. The 186 Jeff 114’s are my favorite non hard pack skis. I have fatter skis for deep days but the Jeffery’s for every thing in between.

I have a pair of Jeff 118s and can't imagine needing a wider ski. I do ski thick PNW snow though, not cold blower.

[SchralphMacchio]

I would chat with ON3P on the topic. Current gen wood108's tails is a fair bit softer than the OG, so it might be the ticket. A tour layup second year wood108 would be a bit softer yes, but also a lot lighter.

I've skied the first w108, w108tour, current w110 and current w110 50/50, all 182s. They all ski well imho. The first gen is a fair bit stronger than the current, especially in the tails. There is not a massive difference in flex when comparing the stock and 50/50 layups - the difference is more in swing weight / mass.

Thanks, that is all helpful.

I don't think it's the tails honestly. I think it's just the overall flex of that gen1 WD108, especially with how quickly the skis ramp up in stiffness as you get further along the rocker line behind the tips. Works great when the snow is soft and variable and loses to the ski, but if it's wet and just getting packed out or starting to refreeze it ends up being a lot to manage and just not forgiving enough (for me) - has the net effect of getting me onto the tails and tentative, either from getting bucked back off firm impacts, or being afraid of getting bucked from firm impacts and skiing like a Jerry. Probably amplified by both my boots being a touch too stiff for my weight and skill in cold weather, and poor form/fitness. I think the more forward mount point forcing the boot and legs to absorb more of the impact than the ski also is part of it, so I wonder if the new mount point will also add to enhanced forgiveness in crap snow and not having to feel like I need to charge with perfect form.

So anyways, since this is for a daily driver ski at Hoodoo/Willamette where I will want mass and damping (I have Pivot 15s on this pair of Woods), it sounds like neither the 50/50 or the Tour are the right answer ...
the right answer seems to be wait on an early summer custom sale (I presume they do these?) and get a new pair with stock layup but Soft Flex! But I will run this assumption by ON3P for further feedback.

In comparison, my junk snow ski is the OG dual-layer titanal Enforcer 98, something like a -13 cm mount point, flat tails, not all too incredibly stiff either, but it settles super well in junk snow. They only feel too much for me if I get into the backseat and stay there, but are just soft enough to buy me time to recover. And I really like them in junk, but not a very versatile ski once it starts getting 3D.

[MHSP1497]

Thanks, that is all helpful.

So anyways, since this is for a daily driver ski at Hoodoo/Willamette where I will want mass and damping (I have Pivot 15s on this pair of Woods), it sounds like neither the 50/50 or the Tour are the right answer ...
the right answer seems to be wait on an early summer custom sale (I presume they do these?) and get a new pair with stock layup but Soft Flex! But I will run this assumption by ON3P for further feedback.

I’ve been in your position before, I went stiff on a pair of Kartel 98’s and loved them, most of the time. After getting my Cease & Desist’s with the “old” tour layup and “rounder” flex, I found it to be more suited to my style and needs. This was further confirmed when I scored a pair of Caylor’s which also have the “rounder” flex profile. When I ordered my last pair of custom Jeffrey 108’s, I went with the “softer” flex option and it’s exactly what I wanted. Has the backbone I need of it on Mt. Hood, and can lay tracks when asked. They also have the looseness and playfulness I was after too, while not being noodles either. They don’t have the top-speed of the stiffer Kartel’s, but they make up for that in every other aspect, including moguls (my J108’s are superior in tight moguls).

My stock Billy Goat 108 Tours, however, are just like my old stock Billy Goats (116mm, pre-asym) in stiffness and ride quality; they slay and I wouldn’t change a thing about their flex.

[Sessiøn]

Thanks, that is all helpful.

I don't think it's the tails honestly. I think it's just the overall flex of that gen1 WD108, especially with how quickly the skis ramp up in stiffness as you get further along the rocker line behind the tips. Works great when the snow is soft and variable and loses to the ski, but if it's wet and just getting packed out or starting to refreeze it ends up being a lot to manage and just not forgiving enough (for me) - has the net effect of getting me onto the tails and tentative, either from getting bucked back off firm impacts, or being afraid of getting bucked from firm impacts and skiing like a Jerry. Probably amplified by both my boots being a touch too stiff for my weight and skill in cold weather, and poor form/fitness. I think the more forward mount point forcing the boot and legs to absorb more of the impact than the ski also is part of it, so I wonder if the new mount point will also add to enhanced forgiveness in crap snow and not having to feel like I need to charge with perfect form.

So anyways, since this is for a daily driver ski at Hoodoo/Willamette where I will want mass and damping (I have Pivot 15s on this pair of Woods), it sounds like neither the 50/50 or the Tour are the right answer ...
the right answer seems to be wait on an early summer custom sale (I presume they do these?) and get a new pair with stock layup but Soft Flex! But I will run this assumption by ON3P for further feedback.

In comparison, my junk snow ski is the OG dual-layer titanal Enforcer 98, something like a -13 cm mount point, flat tails, not all too incredibly stiff either, but it settles super well in junk snow. They only feel too much for me if I get into the backseat and stay there, but are just soft enough to buy me time to recover. And I really like them in junk, but not a very versatile ski once it starts getting 3D.

The snow you have described (Oregon 11 AM snow) is what has been behind my campaign for a lower tip rocker height as I believe it would be ideal, especially in skinier waists. Also just better on harder snow days where I would like to be skiing ON3P's, but I have to pull my Rossi Experience.

[Ed el Loco]

I have a pair of Jeff 118s and can't imagine needing a wider ski. I do ski thick PNW snow though, not cold blower.

My fatter skis are 118 billy goats. But I’m passively looking for 118 Jeff’s just for that “party” flex.

[lrn2swim]

. I try to avoid groomers anyway so it isn't a huge deal, but I would love to try a ti version of the same shape to see if it helps at all.

FWIW, my 189 102tis grip hard pack great. No clue on the bevel or anything so not much help on that.


Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk

[SchralphMacchio]

I’ve been in your position before, I went stiff on a pair of Kartel 98’s and loved them, most of the time. After getting my Cease & Desist’s with the “old” tour layup and “rounder” flex, I found it to be more suited to my style and needs. This was further confirmed when I scored a pair of Caylor’s which also have the “rounder” flex profile. When I ordered my last pair of custom Jeffrey 108’s, I went with the “softer” flex option and it’s exactly what I wanted. Has the backbone I need of it on Mt. Hood, and can lay tracks when asked. They also have the looseness and playfulness I was after too, while not being noodles either. They don’t have the top-speed of the stiffer Kartel’s, but they make up for that in every other aspect, including moguls (my J108’s are superior in tight moguls).

My stock Billy Goat 108 Tours, however, are just like my old stock Billy Goats (116mm, pre-asym) in stiffness and ride quality; they slay and I wouldn’t change a thing about their flex.

Thanks. Sounds like round flex is what I need. At my height and weight it can be tricky, because 180 cm feels spot for my height on but stock flexes for some freeride / charger models of indie built skis are often too much (Praxis, ON3P, etc). Funny enough I do not have this problem with Nordica / Blizzard stock ski flexes …
(That’s not a knock or complaint about ON3P, just a snide remark about big brands having to cater to middle of the market)

[kid-kapow]

Thanks, that is all helpful.

I honestly think that the current gen's stock flex is round enough for your needs. They have made them a fair bit more approachable imho - the new flex profile out back is very noticable compared to the first generation.

I am approx 70kg and on 182s, no expert and I would not want them to be any softer - I would want them stiffer. Then again I like stiff skis, so there's that.

And again, give ON3P a ring - their advice is usually spot on.

What do you lose by going for the 50/50? Put another way...what do you notice about it skis differently.

I have not skied either ski a ton or back to back for various reasons, but the 50/50 layup is for those who want a Bent110 type ski wrt mass, the stock layup for those who want the regular ride feel and variable performance of ON3Ps imho. The denser bamboo core can also take more abuse, though the 50/50 layup is plenty sturdy.

I would personally only buy 50/50 as a heavy touring ski for added sturdiness. The only reason I bought them was getting a bit carried away bby creating a travel ski quiver due to my desire to try the new layup.

In other news, I tried my brand new 16/17 BGs today in killer conditions. Oh my freaking jeebus - one word: sensational. Like, just sooooo good. Slarvy, instant direction changes, mob variable, make you want to just smash through stuff or jump off stuff. Thoroughly impressed.

I bought them to try them back to back with asyms (to get a feel / understanding for how much the asym affects ride feel / performance), but these might just make their way into my quiver on a permanent basis.

I will try them b2b with asyms tomorrow in what will be perfect BG conditions.



And if anybody has been wondering if the latest C&D tiny violin graphic matches well with Harlauts...

Mighty fine I would have to say.

[Sessiøn]

And if anybody has been wondering if the latest C&D tiny violin graphic matches well with Harlauts...

Mighty fine I would have to say.

Needs a huge Slayer sticker.

[kid-kapow]

Needs a huge Slayer sticker.

Snicker - far be it for me to copy such awesomeness.

And, while Angel of Death is awesome, I might be more inclined to get a Meshuggah sticker at that

[tuco]

You're from Norway dude, use an Enslaved sticker!