Page 171 of 287 FirstFirst ... 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 ... LastLast
Results 4,251 to 4,275 of 7172
  1. #4251
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    468
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Those were great, both in uncut and heavy crud. Sold mine last year though. Probably skied them 50-60 days, including 10 10-15 inch days in Japan in 2014

    That being said, the newer Billygoats with RES float just as well, are more nimble, and far less cumbersome. Better in crusts as well.

    Regret selling the last of my two OG ON3Ps though....

    Edit: jeeeez, just realized that those are my old ones
    Jupp those are yours!
    I love them, they’re like a much less refined BG that goes super fast.
    They are absolutley terrifying to put on edge and try to carve on ice groomers though. I’ve been bucked quite a bit haha

  2. #4252
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Posts
    1,357
    Just leaving this here...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1152.jpg 
Views:	237 
Size:	1.06 MB 
ID:	234679

  3. #4253
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,221
    how tall are you homes? gonna stick 184?
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    Shout out to @N1CK.

    Let me take his custom 184 BGs out today. Ullr delivered and gave >13Ē of soft goodness!!

    Needless to say I am in love!! I found them very nimble and spun 3ís of pretty much any natural feature! I was hesitant to believe what people said about them ó with a nice neutral stance they pivot on a dime in tight trees! Driving the tips made them feel squirley which took a couple of runs to adjust to but holy shit!

    Stoke. Stoke. Stoke.

    My poor wallet.

    Attachment 234670


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  4. #4254
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    1,034
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    how tall are you homes? gonna stick 184?
    6ft - 200lb.

    Iím so torn... what will probably win this discussion is the spot the BGs will fill in the quiver. These will be my deep snow / tree ski. Based off what Nick said (skied the 189 vs 184) he felt similarly and for a ski dedicated for Goatin around in steep tight trees the 189 felt noticeably heavier and more cumbersome. Wish I could trial them vs K116 on a day like today. The K has a longer effective edge which makes me think it would not be as quick in trees.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #4255
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    383
    need to detune my Wren 98's. hooky as fuck. have to pay attention to exactly where my edges are at every moment, can't chill and cruise for even a second.

  6. #4256
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    3,041

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Something about those white customs w the black sidewalls.....

    Ode to the ogClick image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4154.JPG 
Views:	141 
Size:	1.35 MB 
ID:	234692
    Uno mas

  7. #4257
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremite View Post
    Something about those white customs w the black sidewalls.....

    Ode to the ogClick image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4154.JPG 
Views:	141 
Size:	1.35 MB 
ID:	234692
    Now those are OG...

    Sent from my SM-G955U using TGR Forums mobile app

  8. #4258
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    1,038
    Quote Originally Posted by CLQ View Post
    I weigh 135lbs, i'm thinking that the kartel 108s are going to be to stiff. Maybe I should go with a softer, custom layup or an entirely different ski. What do you guys think?
    A ski doesn't know how tall you are (unless we are talking extremes and at 5'11" you are not) but it does know how much you weigh.

    I don't know if the Kartel is getting the slightly stiffer treatment for '19 that the Wren is getting: you may wish to contact ON3P and ask (because if that were the case getting a slightly softer custom '19 might be very close to just picking up a '17 or '18).

    Also, as you are probably well aware, these measure true to length plus a bit more. So a 176 is going to measure about 176.5 straight pull and the 181: 181.5. Point is, buying the 176 would be like buying a big co's 180 and at your weight it may be right.
    Last edited by FlimFlamvanHam; 05-04-2018 at 12:09 PM. Reason: spelling

  9. #4259
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma & Truckee
    Posts
    11,289
    Quote Originally Posted by unpossible View Post
    Just leaving this here...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1152.jpg 
Views:	237 
Size:	1.06 MB 
ID:	234679
    Nice binding color match.

  10. #4260
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    196
    184 Steeple 108s continue to disappear in a cloud of fucking awesome under my feet after skiing them in a wide range of spring corn/schmoo/refreeze conditions the last couple weeks. I haven't dropped into anything that was steep and shiny, but I don't expect any ski would perform in such conditions. Anything at all edgeable has been fine. Variable 3d spring snow ranging from well-timed corn to over-cooked and then slightly refrozen corn has been easy and enjoyable. Two thumbs way up on these!

  11. #4261
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    8,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Reformed View Post
    184 Steeple 108s continue to disappear in a cloud of fucking awesome under my feet after skiing them in a wide range of spring corn/schmoo/refreeze conditions the last couple weeks. I haven't dropped into anything that was steep and shiny, but I don't expect any ski would perform in such conditions. Anything at all edgeable has been fine. Variable 3d spring snow ranging from well-timed corn to over-cooked and then slightly refrozen corn has been easy and enjoyable. Two thumbs way up on these!
    My fingers are crossed a pair of 179ís pop up somewhere. Iíve been amazed on how my 102ís pretty much ski anything on auto pilot. Funky or super deep is no problem. Surprising for a 102 waisted ski

  12. #4262
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Jackson
    Posts
    726

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    My fingers are crossed a pair of 179ís pop up somewhere. Iíve been amazed on how my 102ís pretty much ski anything on auto pilot. Funky or super deep is no problem. Surprising for a 102 waisted ski
    Do you mean something like these?
    https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/....php?p=5340432

  13. #4263
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    8,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Springskiin View Post
    I saw those. Thanks. The w98 is on a short list too. Iíve been eyeing up a new pair Iíve seen discounted . My post was for a 179 steeple 108 though

  14. #4264
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    8,728
    Anyone know what these are?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	58FC1735-CC11-48D8-9E42-359F6ADBEB30.png 
Views:	112 
Size:	959.0 KB 
ID:	235144

  15. #4265
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    A little to the left
    Posts
    1,586
    Tychoons.

  16. #4266
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,108
    I've been having a fkn blast on my Tychoons this spring. They rip!

    Been thinking that the new Wren 96 are looking kinda similar in dimensions, but with more tail rocker and probably a little stiffer. Both bi-radius, same waist.

    Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  17. #4267
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    8,728
    Quote Originally Posted by optics View Post
    Tychoons.
    Too funny.. they’re advertised as “touring, fat ski”. Thought something was off. Hoping maybe a vicik or wren112
    Thanks

    Edit; just saw norsemans post. Now I wish they were shorter,I could use them. $100 Canadian on Kijiji if anyone’s interested. They measured them in inches.sounds like 184,s

  18. #4268
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    A little to the left
    Posts
    1,586

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    I've been having a fkn blast on my Tychoons this spring. They rip!

    Been thinking that the new Wren 96 are looking kinda similar in dimensions, but with more tail rocker and probably a little stiffer. Both bi-radius, same waist.

    Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?
    I could be wrong (iggy?) but I feel like my tychoons have a more business minded tail. Flatter, beefier.

    Edit oh yeah. Thatís what you said.

  19. #4269
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    6,308
    Quote Originally Posted by optics View Post
    I could be wrong (iggy?) but I feel like my tychoons have a more business minded tail. Flatter, beefier.

    Edit oh yeah. That’s what you said.
    Yeah, pretty sure the Tychoons had the same tail rocker profile as the old Wren, which was much flatter.

    You can kinda think of the Tychoon/Vicik/Wren as the Wren 96/108/114.
    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!

  20. #4270
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Near Santa
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by unpossible View Post
    Just leaving this here...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1152.jpg 
Views:	237 
Size:	1.06 MB 
ID:	234679
    That outline looks surprisingly similar to the OG wren, same looking big squared tip, tapered tail and the proportions seem about right. A little more of a center mount on the Kartel there. Good looking ski

  21. #4271
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    3,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    I've been having a fkn blast on my Tychoons this spring. They rip!

    Been thinking that the new Wren 96 are looking kinda similar in dimensions, but with more tail rocker and probably a little stiffer. Both bi-radius, same waist.

    Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?
    I loved the tychoons. The tails were a little more locked in, but the rest of the ski was very easy to ski. From how the 189 W108 compares to 186 vicik, I suspect the 189 W96 to be a little looser than tychoons, but faster and more stable overall with the stiffer flex. Tychoons were fairly soft IIRC.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  22. #4272
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,108
    Yeah, they are a bit soft for the company's standard, probably. I got them thinking they'd be my "dad skis", and they have filled that spot very well with their ease, but they've surprised me at their speed and ability to absolutely rail turns. But I guess that's what Scott built them for.


    Hey, here's a question.

    For the bi-radius skis, why not state both radii? Too confusing for Joe Public? Is the listed radius the one in the tail?

    Is there a ratio between tip and tail radii that's somewhat constant between the model lines? Or does it vary based on intended use?
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  23. #4273
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    2,976
    Quote Originally Posted by theetruscan View Post
    Recommend me a ski. I think I want wren 108s, I'm not positive about touring core or veneer.

    Going to mount with Tectons/Switches(if I can find them). I'm leaning towards the Wren 108, but ...

    1. Does veneer save weight like with Praxis?

    2. How much am I going to give up on hard/refrozen/sketchy snow if I go touring core/etc?

    (6'2", 220)
    1) A touch, but mostly because we lighten the glass to account for the stiffness added by the veneer.

    2) Definitely top end speed, manageable in middle and low speeds. You are not small, so if you are going to see a lot of variable conditions, I would stick with stock layup. 19oz would offer a middle ground as far as weight.

    Quote Originally Posted by CLQ View Post
    I weigh 135lbs, i'm thinking that the kartel 108s are going to be to stiff. Maybe I should go with a softer, custom layup or an entirely different ski. What do you guys think?
    I would go with 19oz glass, stock carbon. That is a layup a lot of the team and a few factory guys is on and we're all a big fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Don't know about kartels, but ON3P told me that they mostly reccomended softer glass, not softer carbon.

    Softer glass would put the flex between stock and tour
    Yes and yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post

    Could the new skinny Wren be thought of as the next gen Tychoon? Or are the differences too great to bother with that "lineage" connection?
    Current Wren 96 is what the Tychoon should have been. Smaller radius than the Tychoon, a bit more power in the tips and tails, new rocker profile floats better. Just a better all around ski. Tychoon was fun when you had the space to let it run.

    Quote Originally Posted by adrenalated View Post
    You can kinda think of the Tychoon/Vicik/Wren as the Wren 96/108/114.


    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Hey, here's a question.

    For the bi-radius skis, why not state both radii? Too confusing for Joe Public? Is the listed radius the one in the tail?

    Is there a ratio between tip and tail radii that's somewhat constant between the model lines? Or does it vary based on intended use?
    If we did it, it would be something we have to list on all designs.

    Primarily, it is to avoid confusing people, prevent other brands from knowing the actual design or ratios of the sidecut, and to save us a million questions. People obsess over things already - some of value, some not - and I believe for most skiers the numbers we list convey performance more accurately than using two numbers - and that listing two numbers would increase the number of questions and misunderstanding about a ski's performance substantially. We often have to explain the difference between, say, a 21m radius Kartel 108 and 27m radius Wrenegade 108. Having to add in comparisons of the tip sidecuts, tail sidecuts, and sidecut ratios would just muddle the conversation.

    Same reason we no longer publicly list things like mount point on product pages - we had people mounting Billy Goats -9cm from recommended...aka -18cm from center. Also, I don't know why, but everyone gets skis and instantly decides they need to ask about mounting point, which should be recommended for the vast majority of people. So, we try to take that step out where possible and just say mounting on the line - that is where the ski is designed. Obviously we like to be somewhat transparent on design stuff, but we need to keep a modicum of design stuff internal and try to limit the questions we are asked that don't add value.

    Re other brands - not trying to make anyone else's job easier - they already try and buy our skis from time to time.

    We list a composite of the tip & tail radius (same on Elliptical Sidecut skis, which technically are even weirder since the tip and tail radius are, well, elliptical). And measuring RES is even funnier.

    I can confirm that designs work of ratios and scale proportionally and yes, those ratios change by model & use. Dialed ratios also make designing skis a lot easier, though.

    I've been sick for...awhile now, so been a bit MIA on here, but if I missed anything here quote it and I will get to it.

    First round of our custom sale going on for another week or so if anyone wants some custom skis soon here good chance to get customs at a discount ($50 over stock models w/ topsheet swap only) - and lots of 2019 models in stock and already shipping. There will likely be another SuperGoat run sometime in June so will have additional details on that soon.
    Last edited by iggyskier; 05-08-2018 at 03:33 PM.
    Seriously, this canít turn into yet another ON3P thread....

  24. #4274
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,108
    Thanks. Understood.
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  25. #4275
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    2,976
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Thanks. Understood.
    One other aspect to think about is that, generally, we don't get to have long drawn out conversations with other skiers like we do on here. We have a finite amount of time to convey product details before someone buys our skis, or buys another brand. So we just have to be mindful of how much information we load people up with, as we don't want to be overwhelming. As you can imagine, I can easily talk someone's ear off when it comes to ski design.

    That is where I find things like (5) dimensional skis sort of misleading, as technically, all skis could be listed that way, but no one has context of where the outer two dimensions sit and what those numbers really mean. Why not 7 dimensions? or 11? Technically, I can list as many dimensions as I want on the skis - all will be accurate - but I feel it only confuses people. I've had people ask me why we don't sell 5-dimensionally skis before - which is just the result of a lack of understanding of ski design and there being no standardization in how we discuss skis. This is the same reason we don't list rocker height/length (also other brands). Then the question is...are we talking rocker length? Or Tip length? Or are they the same? There is no central way brands talk about ski design right now, so confusion is inevitable - our goal is to avoid information that I feel adds to that confusion.

    Hopefully that explains so of the thinking that goes into stuff like this.
    Seriously, this canít turn into yet another ON3P thread....

Posting Permissions

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