Page 564 of 576 FirstFirst ... 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 ... LastLast
Results 14,076 to 14,100 of 14379
  1. #14076
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    4,964
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    Yeah, that's a sweet top sheet. I'll be curious to hear if the tweaks fixed the issues with the older 192s without messing up what people loved about the 187.
    Just bring back the 2014-2016 BG and all will be forgiven.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  2. #14077
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Just bring back the 2014-2016 BG and all will be forgiven.
    New tip shape does look more like the old one, I might give them a shot if this season has good snow.

    Interested to see how people like the new woodsman, the turning radius is getting low for me. Edit: -8.5 mount for the 186? Damn thats a huge bummer.

  3. #14078
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Just bring back the 2014-2016 BG and all will be forgiven.
    We can dare to dream. In the meantime, I'll enjoy the two I have in my garage.

    Let's just say I'm not going to be the Guinea pig for the new BG this time around after last time. Looking forward to reviews on the new skis and hopefully we get an iggy appearance to discuss the changes.

  4. #14079
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    9,670
    The 187 BG was/is DIALED. Weird they changed it. If the new 191 has the same stiffened shovel as the 187 with the same stiffer flex, flatter tail, maybe closer to the SG, that sounds like a great ski.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #14080
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Bodenseekreis
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    the turning radius is getting low for me. Edit: -8.5 mount for the 186? Damn thats a huge bummer.
    Welcome to the twenty-twenties...

    or visit http://heritagelabskis.com/products/fl105

  6. #14081
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Maple Falls, WA
    Posts
    568
    Is that mount too far back or too far forward in your opinions? It sounds great to me.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  7. #14082
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,765
    Quote Originally Posted by Brasso View Post
    Is that mount too far back or too far forward in your opinions? It sounds great to me.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    Too far back, this was supposed to slide in between the wren and jeffrey, now it’s just a wren mounted +1 with a baby radius

  8. #14083
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,096
    the new BG 118 looks like a slightly more aggressive version of the old Caylor to me. I am pretty excited about it and will probably pick up a pair (as my 2011 Caylors are getting pretty tired).

  9. #14084
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    1,965

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    I have an old 184 Billy Goat with RES from the late 20-teens.

    Would like to size up, but now Iím confused about how On3p measures their skis.

    Does the current measurement system still add 3-4 cms relative to conventional brands?

    Should I go 186 or 191 on the new model?

  10. #14085
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,172
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Too far back, this was supposed to slide in between the wren and jeffrey, now itís just a wren mounted +1 with a baby radius
    Meh. The Jeff skis great at -6cm. The wren is more or less gone. The outgoing Woods is way more of a playful all mountain ski than the Wren.

    This is just the consolidation of this ski into one for the masses built on bamboo. Although I felt the outgoing one is pretty damn dialed, will remain to be seen how the tighter radius skis.

  11. #14086
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by SUPERIOR View Post
    Does the current measurement system still add 3-4 cms relative to conventional brands?
    All measurements are post-press. 186cm is 186cm.

  12. #14087
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by jacob_dbu View Post
    Meh. The Jeff skis great at -6cm. The wren is more or less gone. The outgoing Woods is way more of a playful all mountain ski than the Wren.

    This is just the consolidation of this ski into one for the masses built on bamboo. Although I felt the outgoing one is pretty damn dialed, will remain to be seen how the tighter radius skis.
    Can you drive Jeffs through the shovels a bit when mounted at -6cm? I did not get along with them on the line. I would like to try them again at some point. Woodsman are mounted too far back for me and I like the shape of the Jeffs more.

  13. #14088
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,189
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Too far back, this was supposed to slide in between the wren and jeffrey, now it’s just a wren mounted +1 with a baby radius
    Looks to me like this now replaces both the Wren and the old Woodsman. I bet it would ski fine at +1 from recommended.
    I'd be fine with the new mount point but I'm with you that the radius is getting too small for my tastes.

    Quote Originally Posted by skiracer88_00 View Post
    the new BG 118 looks like a slightly more aggressive version of the old Caylor to me. I am pretty excited about it and will probably pick up a pair (as my 2011 Caylors are getting pretty tired).
    BG is still WAY more pintailed than the Caylor was, that alone is going to make it ski pretty differently IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by SUPERIOR View Post
    I have an old 184 Billy Goat with RES from the late 20-teens.

    Would like to size up, but now I’m confused about how On3p measures their skis.

    Does the current measurement system still add 3-4 cms relative to conventional brands?

    Should I go 186 or 191 on the new model?
    "Conventional brand" ski measurements are all over the fucking map. Not at all consistent. ON3Ps are simple: if you put a tape measure on an ON3P ski, it will measure the length that ON3P claims it is. Really that easy.
    I would expect the 186cm would feel very similar in length to your 184cm so if you want to size up significantly you probably want the 191.

  14. #14089
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Vinyl Valley
    Posts
    1,743
    Quote Originally Posted by jacob_dbu View Post
    Meh. The Jeff skis great at -6cm.

    What size Jeffrey have you skied @ -6? Is that ~-2 from recommended?

    I have a 186 Jeffrey 108 mounted @ -2 from recommended that I'm not feeling so much. Thinking it's the tune.

    I also have a 191 Jeffrey 108 that feels perfect mounted on the line

  15. #14090
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    4,964
    Quote Originally Posted by SUPERIOR View Post
    I have an old 184 Billy Goat with RES from the late 20-teens.

    Would like to size up, but now Iím confused about how On3p measures their skis.

    Does the current measurement system still add 3-4 cms relative to conventional brands?

    Should I go 186 or 191 on the new model?
    Who knows? No demos. No reviews. Just cool topsheets and the ďON3P rocks!Ē drivel. Getting hard to shell out those premium dollars for skis with a lot of unknowns.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  16. #14091
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    577
    While we wait, could anyone compare the 187 of recent release to the previous 189 asym, aside from the dropped tail?

    Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

  17. #14092
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    246
    "New line review next week" according to their socials. Drop your questions... nice to see a little promo vid too.

  18. #14093
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,172
    Quote Originally Posted by skuff View Post
    What size Jeffrey have you skied @ -6? Is that ~-2 from recommended?

    I have a 186 Jeffrey 108 mounted @ -2 from recommended that I'm not feeling so much. Thinking it's the tune.

    I also have a 191 Jeffrey 108 that feels perfect mounted on the line
    I have the 181 Jeff 110. I had to get mine retuned immediately.

    Also Iím running warden demos and to me, I think next time Pivots or Griffon demos would be the move. For me on more progressive skis I really feel the need to have less binding ramp.

    I love the woodsman so -4 was too far forward for me personally. Very happy at -6 but would like a binding with less ramp.

    Iím really thinking about a Jeff 118 tour with castsÖÖ.

  19. #14094
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Vinyl Valley
    Posts
    1,743
    Quote Originally Posted by jacob_dbu View Post
    I have the 181 Jeff 110. I had to get mine retuned immediately.

    Also Iím running warden demos and to me, I think next time Pivots or Griffon demos would be the move. For me on more progressive skis I really feel the need to have less binding ramp.

    I love the woodsman so -4 was too far forward for me personally. Very happy at -6 but would like a binding with less ramp.

    Iím really thinking about a Jeff 118 tour with castsÖÖ.

    Gotcha, thanks for the reply

    Had the 186s retuned already, but I took the skis to a shop that may (probably) not know what they're doing. Think it's time to take the 186s elsewhere for a retune

    Pivots on both 191 and 186

  20. #14095
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,140
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Too far back, this was supposed to slide in between the wren and jeffrey, now it’s just a wren mounted +1 with a baby radius
    Quote Originally Posted by jacob_dbu View Post
    This is just the consolidation of this ski into one for the masses built on bamboo. Although I felt the outgoing one is pretty damn dialed, will remain to be seen how the tighter radius skis.

    the new skis seems pretty bang on wrt where marked is - not too dissimilar with Moment's Countach.

    It seems like the ski a lot of mags have asked for - slightly less soft snow biased, but still very much true to the spirit of the OG Woods. Most of the changes are in the rockered section, the ee is identical to the OG108, but their all mountain chops should have increased a fair bbit. On paper, the new version fixes all of the things I felt could be improved with the outgoing 110. And if -8 is too far back, just mount a tad forward. This ski should sell like hot cakes.

    And don't even get me started on its potential as a touring ski. Seems pretty damn close to perfect, on paper at least.

    now, if it was partial ti as well...

    and partial ti jeffs while we are at it

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Who knows? No demos. No reviews. Just cool topsheets and the “ON3P rocks!” drivel. Getting hard to shell out those premium dollars for skis with a lot of unknowns.
    yikes. Kinda harsh based on tune-gate and BG118 192 not fitting with some mags, but if that is how you feel then sure thing. Kinda odd comment to make regarding the BG though, as the changes seem pretty damn aimed at fixing the feedback provided in this thread, where some people liked the former model and some did not. There is no pleasing everybody.

    To be fair, some of my recent purchases from ON3P have not been slam dunks as well, but no reviews or other people's take would've made much of a difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by SUPERIOR View Post
    I have an old 184 Billy Goat with RES from the late 20-teens.

    Would like to size up, but now I’m confused about how On3p measures their skis.

    Does the current measurement system still add 3-4 cms relative to conventional brands?

    Should I go 186 or 191 on the new model?
    my general advice on BGs, size up, they are usually very easy to ski. The 186 is basically the current iteration of the 184 with a longer rocker section up front, so if you want more ski in the sense of effective edge size up for more support/float/brawn, or if 2cm more out front is enough, go with 186s.

  21. #14096
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    4,964
    Quote Originally Posted by bry View Post
    While we wait, could anyone compare the 187 of recent release to the previous 189 asym, aside from the dropped tail?

    Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
    I only have a few days on my 187ís after I fixed the messed up tune. I feel like the 187ís float a tad better than my 189 Asym but otherwise, they feel quite similar. Iíve had quite a few more days on the 189 Asyms and they feel like an extension of me. Still not there on the new 187ís. Hope to get them dialed this winter.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  22. #14097
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    382
    I should be the guinea pig for the new 191BG.
    Last edited by Velomayniac; 09-22-2023 at 09:29 PM.

  23. #14098
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,140
    I really liked BG118 182s, but for the fact that they are clearly 179s made longer. I would expect the new 186s to be more akin with 184 asyms, but then again - the difference between lenghts isn't night and day.

    The best BG that I've tried is the 2017 version aka these 184s.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	217_1068719148.jpg 
Views:	114 
Size:	422.8 KB 
ID:	470483
    Theey strike the best balance of loose but still supportive.

    I think the asyms are great too, but the tails are kinda too loose for how I ski. Still 184s
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	124_641695027.jpg 
Views:	117 
Size:	443.9 KB 
ID:	470484
    On a side not - it admittedly pained me to sell the white eagle ski, but their new home is worthy squared so I guess I've come to terms with it Then again I think the 2017 fits me better. I did not care for 179 BGasyms compared to the 184s, I could bend them too much = too much bounce

  24. #14099
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    382
    Kid Kapow I also really like the 2017 BGs, I skied the 189s. They are equally as good as the 2015 191s I had, but different. I'd have a hard time picking which model I'd vote for On3p to bring back, if ever was given the option. Both are some of my favorite skis of all time.

    The 2015 191 for me was more loose and playful like a 4FRNT Hoji/K2 Obsethed 118, and the core felt more poppy(in a good way). The ski overall was still extremely supportive in 191, much more than a 187 Hoji or 189 K2, but it felt like it had a little more freestyle dna in my opinion, easier to jib around and more maneuverable at slow to medium speeds. It begged me to launch off anything in sight, every side hit, and was super stompy. It was still obviously more of a directional freeride powder charger than anything else.

    The 2017 189 was more stable for me. Everyone was complaining for a year when On3p chopped 191 to 189, but people like XavierD were telling us not to worry, and he was right all along. Not only a stiffer ski, the 189 sidecut felt more precise, and a bit better on edge. Still not a carver obviously but it was slightly more predictable out of deep snow, more like a what a big mountain ski is made to encounter off piste anywhere anytime. I never found the 2015s unpredictable, just looser.

    The 2017 felt so reassuring, like it had a little more Blizzard Bodacious edge to it, minus any real carving ability. I found the 189 length better in funky powder moguls and the stiffer flex a bit more predictable charging off piste than the 191. The 2015 191 might have had a better suspension though, in terms of translating less vibration to my body, but overall I felt faster on the 189 from 2017.

  25. #14100
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,140
    the thing tha I love with 2017s over asyms is the feel that I can just poke the tails into anything to control the speed. So i dab down the hills, making the tails make my skiing shine - to the degree it can. Asyms kinda wash out for my shit technique.

    182 118s feel much the same to the 2017s (so very, very good), just more meh, softer. As in I ordered the wrong size. Awesome scooping out of the wrong but still right ice cream flavor.

    asyms haul. It is just such a good shape if you want to keep it fall line. 2017s are just a tad more slarvy - as in easieer to keep in the slarve - for me.

    I would love to love to try the new 186, but I just see no reason to replace the 2017s (though I would love a textured top sheet BG). A non-asym C&D would have me tempted, in spite of my history with my current pair of 184s. I stood minutes and minutes on end down range on them after all, wishing I was skiing - not beiing in the sand castle.

Posting Permissions

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