ON3P SKIS Discussion

[MHSP1497]

As they do.

Indeed. They’re so much fun, so confidence boosting that I’m taking lines I would normally not consider.

[margotron]

I'm sure it's buried in here, but what's the comparison to the last year of non-asym BG vs. asym BG? I love my 189s non-asym


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mfa81]

I can’t really say I noticed much difference in powder or tracked soft crud so far!

[robnow]

In theory Asym vs Sym, the Asym will have a slightly longer inside edge for slightly better grip while the tip/tails will be slightly less 'hooky' in variable soft conditions. In reality, not enough of a difference to switch IMO. Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong.

[margotron]

In theory Asym vs Sym, the Asym will have a slightly longer inside edge for slightly better grip while the tip/tails will be slightly less 'hooky' in variable soft conditions. In reality, not enough of a difference to switch IMO. Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah. That's what I'm curious about. Theory makes sense but like???

[PowTron]

Asym is most noticeable in long traverses or in windblown, catchy snow...when you toss the skis sideways at speed in that type of snow the uphill ski’s tip and tail doesn’t get batted back and forth or “hung up” as much (less physical material to get snagged).

It’s more than marketing and I’ve noticed it quite a bit at places like Alta, Big Sky, Jackson, Loveland (high-alpine, windswept, long bumpy traverses with choppy uphill snow, etc areas) quite a bit vs the older version.

Also helps when slicing into cutup pow on that uphill ski when really driving into the tips when initiating a turn. If you ski more vertically or more neutral you may not notice it as much there. Not a good or bad thing, just depends on your style.

[auvgeek]

if you want to try asym, just get the C&D

[margotron]

Asym is most noticeable in long traverses or in windblown, catchy snow...when you toss the skis sideways at speed in that type of snow the uphill ski’s tip and tail doesn’t get batted back and forth or “hung up” as much (less physical material to get snagged).

It’s more than marketing and I’ve noticed it quite a bit at places like Alta, Big Sky, Jackson, Loveland (high-alpine, windswept, long bumpy traverses with choppy uphill snow, etc areas) quite a bit vs the older version.

Also helps when slicing into cutup pow on that uphill ski when really driving into the tips when initiating a turn. If you ski more vertically or more neutral you may not notice it as much there. Not a good or bad thing, just depends on your style.

Interesting indeed. I do drive my BGs. And everyone is aware of that uphill ski trying to wander at times when turning in chop.

[iggyskier]

I've missed a couple pages. Is the Wrentel real?

We'll just let the cat out of the bag and put the name out there, so "tweener" and Wrentel can die in this thread. Called the Woodsman.

Yeah. That's what I'm curious about. Theory makes sense but like???

Asymmetry primary goal is to create negative space in areas that lower the threshold to maneuver. I think people tend to focus on the shape of the ski, as that is what you actually see, but it's really about removing ski where you don't need it. In a pintail ski like the BG, especially one with an untraditional shape, enhancing the ski's ability to pivot is a primary driver of performance. Is it needed? No. Do we think the BG/CD ski better with it? Most certainly. /endmarketingspeak

[klauss]

We'll just let the cat out of the bag and put the name out there, so "tweener" and Wrentel can die in this thread. Called the Woodsman.

Looking forward to this ski. Hearing each pair comes with a custom ON3P cruet of beard oil

[optics]

Iggy, can you size the now unbagged cat waists for those of us who might be making 2020 purchase decisions soon?

[iggyskier]

Iggy, can you size the now unbagged cat waists for those of us who might be making 2020 purchase decisions soon?

I want people to be making decisions by ski platform (mount/balance/radius), with ski widths determined by snow performance set. That is why we are and will continue to run platforms with the optimal waist width we think skiers should be on for various snow sets (96, 108, 116) - at least as things stand now.

I am of the opinion that it is a detriment to skiers to make them pick between waist widths that have the same performance for 95% of skiers (ie: 96 vs 98, 106 vs 108, etc.). Aka...why add a 106 vs 108 waist debate to a Kartel vs Wren debate. That debate is solved by mount/balance + radius, as 106 and 108 are basically the same ski.

I am pretty hesitant to talk about much else as, frankly...it's only Feb, lots of skis to still sell, and I still think it is fucking insane next years products are announced with two more months of prime sales season left. I will give out one last detail right now, which is that the Woodsman will come in a 192cm. That is is for now, though.

[optics]

Perfect.

Thanks!

[detuned]

the Woodsman will come in a 192cm.

this is good news...

[snowaddict91]

this is good news...

Agreed. Sounds like my next ski! Can't wait for more details.

[mr_pretzel]

Scott, 192! You are the man!

[SupreChicken]

Where are we with a 186 length and a park detune?

The answer to that is probably “buy a Kartel 108”

[auvgeek]

Where are we with a 186 length and a park detune?

The answer to that is probably “buy a Kartel 108”

Yes, you want a K108 instead of this tweener ski if primary or even secondary use is park.

[adrenalated]

Yes, you want a K108 instead of this tweener ski if primary or even secondary use is park.

Recall that this is the guy that once started a whole discussion about the park performance of the Billy Goat.

C&D with park detune for the win!

[robnow]

Profile shot of the Woodsman?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cstefanic]

^definitely getting an Enforcer vibe from that.

[Gnar_Shralp406]

We'll just let the cat out of the bag and put the name out there, so "tweener" and Wrentel can die in this thread. Called the Woodsman.



Asymmetry primary goal is to create negative space in areas that lower the threshold to maneuver. I think people tend to focus on the shape of the ski, as that is what you actually see, but it's really about removing ski where you don't need it. In a pintail ski like the BG, especially one with an untraditional shape, enhancing the ski's ability to pivot is a primary driver of performance. Is it needed? No. Do we think the BG/CD ski better with it? Most certainly. /endmarketingspeak

So the Woodsman will be a Wren with metal? Dope! Are you planning on releasing that in a couple widths, or just in 108/114 (only ones I care about)?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[terpskier]

So the Woodsman will be a Wren with metal? Dope! Are you planning on releasing that in a couple widths, or just in 108/114 (only ones I care about)?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Not at all what he said... the Woodsman is the ski that will occupy the spot between the Wren and the Kartel in terms of mount point, radius, etc.

Wren with metal will still be called a wren, you’ll just have the option eventually (after they finish dialing in the layup) of getting it with metal or without it, though idk how getting it with metal will effect the standard price.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[terpskier]

Profile shot of the Woodsman?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Saw this earlier. He looked like he’s riding them center mounted. Tough to tell how big of a twin tail there is.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[DerekPersson]

I am pretty hesitant to talk about much else as, frankly...it's only Feb, lots of skis to still sell, and I still think it is fucking insane next years products are announced with two more months of prime sales season left. I will give out one last detail right now, which is that the Woodsman will come in a 192cm. That is is for now, though.

Agreed...but def. stoked on massive levels thinking about an ON3P over 190 with metal. Yum.