ON3P SKIS Discussion

[phatty]

The 187 woodsman 108 is similar in feel to the 190 moment wildcat 108.

I personally think the woodsman skis shorter than the BG and that the tail is not an issue. Unless you prefer a longer ski I think the 182 would compliment the 184 BG well. If you enjoy a 183 Qlab then for sure a 182 woodsman.

I regularly ski a 190 QLab and skied the 187 Woodsman 108 for 2 days. While I didn't think it skied particularly short, it definitely skied shorter than my QLab.

[123ski]

The 187 woodsman 108 is similar in feel to the 190 moment wildcat 108.

I personally think the woodsman skis shorter than the BG and that the tail is not an issue. Unless you prefer a longer ski I think the 182 would compliment the 184 BG well. If you enjoy a 183 Qlab then for sure a 182 woodsman.

Interesting, my woodsman 108 in a 187 feels Longer than my 190 Wildcat 116.

Could be a tune issue in the tail.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mtskibum16]

The 187 woodsman 108 is similar in feel to the 190 moment wildcat 108.

I personally think the woodsman skis shorter than the BG and that the tail is not an issue. Unless you prefer a longer ski I think the 182 would compliment the 184 BG well. If you enjoy a 183 Qlab then for sure a 182 woodsman.

A big part of my problem is lack of experience with different skis. I went from being a kid and college age skiing whatever I could get y hands on to a decade gear gap. Skied the OG 185 Cochise for a brief time before a delamination killed them. The QLab was a good deal CL pickup mid season to get me by. Needed a pow ski so went 184 Bibby Pro. That was too short for big days in the PNW and lead to the 184 BG. This is the first ski I really love and seems just right. The 183 QLab measures 180.6 and the rec line is -7.5 from center so the front end looks quite short. But it does have a strong flat tail. Funny enough it actually has the deepest rocker line of all my skis but not much splay. It's never really felt too short to me, but for sure not too long. The 182 Woodsman will be longer, but also mounted 1.5 closer to center plus more tail rocker and more splay in the tips. Add it all up and it's hard to know if that will make it ski longer or shorter than the QLab. If it was a one ski quiver that needed to ski powder I'd size up for sure, but I'll be on the BG anytime there's new snow.

I regularly ski a 190 QLab and skied the 187 Woodsman 108 for 2 days. While I didn't think it skied particularly short, it definitely skied shorter than my QLab.

Interesting. Based on Blister's review of the 190 that's not entirely surprising I guess. It sounds like it has quite the formidable tail which could really make it ski big I guess. So aside from that, did you feel undergunned on the Woodsman? Would you buy the 187 or size up?

[phatty]

Interesting. Based on Blister's review of the 190 that's not entirely surprising I guess. It sounds like it has quite the formidable tail which could really make it ski big I guess. So aside from that, did you feel undergunned on the Woodsman? Would you buy the 187 or size up?

Not undergunned really. It skied just fine. Nice and stable. High speed limit with a little playfulness. I would size up to the 192 for myself as I think the longer length would fit my skiing style better. Right now I'm weighing the Woodsman 108, waiting for the Dynastar MFree 108 next year or investing in something from Lithic. Looking to demo the MFree, but most places don't run a demo on the 192.

[kid-kapow]

Either call/chat/email ON3P and have a chat with them about it, or just get the 187s. It will be the same as a wildcat 190s, and should serve you well as you get used to them. Do not be terribly surprised if you at some point decide to go for 189 BGs as you grow accustomed to your 187 woods unless you only ski really dense woods.

And yes, wood108s and wood116s in 182 has noticeably more tail than BGs and C&Ds in 184 and Wren108s/Wren114s in 179. It is not good nor is it bad, it is just different. Woods do not pick up speed from the tails as effortlessly as Wrens, nor are they as loose as BG/C&Ds - but they sure bridge the gap well. Wood108s and Wood116s ski awesomely imho, and are arguably more versatile than either of the aforementioned skis as they rage well, can ski mellowly well and float well - especially the 116s (duh) - while being solid on piste. As long as you do not want a jib stick they should tick a lot of boxes for a lot of folks. There are probaly more lively skis out there, but for those of us who really like the ON3P feel (TM) woods are pretty golden for an all around ski that leans toward charging.

I would not be afraid of sizing up in snow rich locations to improve float, though that will make them a bit less nimble in tight spots. There's always some compromizes eh

[123ski]

Interesting observation. I always feel like skis with long tails (aka short tips) feel and ski short. But I guess if it's a strong tail I could see how it could run away/feel big especially if you get backseat. That might actually explain why my 183 QLabs ski bigger than they look on my feet. Big square flat tail that's pretty long with the strangely progressive mount of that ski.

But if you think the Woodsman feels like a 190 class ski (it really is) then maybe I really would be better off on the 182. What size are you for reference?

5’10” 185lbs


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Orthoski]

Haven't heard much about the Woodsman 96s as an East coast ski. Any thoughts, anyone? I love my OG Jeffrey 110s in anything remotely soft, thinking a narrower model with a bit more tail would be great for the less well-endowed conditions we face out East. Would still use my Jeffreys on softer days in the trees.

[davjr96]

Haven't heard much about the Woodsman 96s as an East coast ski. Any thoughts, anyone? I love my OG Jeffrey 110s in anything remotely soft, thinking a narrower model with a bit more tail would be great for the less well-endowed conditions we face out East. Would still use my Jeffreys on softer days in the trees.

I've got about 5 days on my woodsman 96s now in Tahoe, but I just moved here and spent my entire life out east skiing mainly whiteface and also racing in the southeast (Google Bryce Mountain lol) in college. I think with a proper tune for conditions the woodsman would be great out east. So far in Tahoe I've unfortunately had them on pretty firm groomer and spring conditions and they have been fantastic at laying down GS turns. If you are comfortable skiing a 96 waist ski in the terrain and conditions you ski out east then I think the woodsman are a good choice.

[phatty]

PSA - ON3P Kartel 116 192cm Mounted W/ Salomon STH 16 http://www.ksl.com/classifieds/listing/59170392

[Doremite]

Haven't heard much about the Woodsman 96s as an East coast ski. Any thoughts, anyone? I love my OG Jeffrey 110s in anything remotely soft, thinking a narrower model with a bit more tail would be great for the less well-endowed conditions we face out East. Would still use my Jeffreys on softer days in the trees.

I’ve thrown out a few tid bits in this thread. In the east and ski both Wren 96/98 and Woodsmans 96. My comments seem to align w most on the Woodsman including kid-kapows just a few posts back. Wider platform (non-pow specific) comments apply.

[PeachesNCream]

PSA - ON3P Kartel 116 192cm Mounted W/ Salomon STH 16 http://www.ksl.com/classifieds/listing/59170392

Damn, that's exactly what I've been hunting for, but the price seems a little steep. They're brand new on Evo for $600, free ship

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[phatty]

Damn, that's exactly what I've been hunting for, but the price seems a little steep. They're brand new on Evo for $600, free ship

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

My guess is you could talk it down. Unlikely they sell at the asking price.

[123ski]

PSA


ON3P Woodsman 108 189cm https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/59206290


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jackstraw]

PSA


ON3P Woodsman 108 189cm https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/59206290


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

189?

[eSock]

billy goats on sale = billy goats on their way to my address now. I understand why quiver pics end up having multiple ON3Ps, you can't have just one.

[phatty]

189?

Confirmed with seller they are 187. Pretty sweet deal with Pivot 18s.

[tdpdx]

Can anyone give me a rundown of the Billy Goats vs Woodsman 116?

[tdpdx]

And while we're at it, how about the performance of Wren 108 184s vs Woodsman 108 187s? Am a skiier in the PNW fwiw.

[kid-kapow]

Can anyone give me a rundown of the Billy Goats vs Woodsman 116?

That question has been debated at length in the last 20-30 pages of this thread. Including input from the head honcho at ON3P aka Iggy explaining the different target audiences of said skis. The same kinda goes for the wren vs woods question, especially if read together with Blister's excellent reviews of wren108s and wood108s.

On a side note, perhaps the introduction of the 2021 range is an opportune moment to restart the thread. At page 3xx it is possibly starting to get more than a bit overwhelming for people new to the thread, so much so that it is become contraproductive or overly repetitive.

I A/B-ed Rustler 11s and Wren108s the other day. The conditions were mainly tracked out soft snow at 5-15cm deep with intermittent open/untracked spots. At slower speeds Wren108s were noticably more work to turn and felt a bit cumbersome compared to R11s. Yet as the speed increased they somewhat transformed and became much looser, yet retained their stability. The Wren108s also made short work of variable, more so than R11s. Reminded me why I love wren108s. They are simply sensational at speed in any kind of soft snow. I still think R11s are a bit more versatile than wren108s, and they are def easier to ski across most conditions. I am really curious to know if wren 108 ti's kinda bridge the gap (by increasing wren's icy/hard snow performance) or increases the gap by making wrens even more chargy.

[Hood26]

Can anyone give me a rundown of the Billy Goats vs Woodsman 116?

On firmer snow the Woods are more manageable, so BG if you know you have all day driving conditions in soft snow, and the Woods if you have to time on the piste too. I choose the Woods and preferred a different tune than the factory. They have been everything I need on deep resort days, and I still get along with them when covering firm ground.

I am a shitty bump skier, so I have no reliable beta in bumps.

[mtskibum16]

And while we're at it, how about the performance of Wren 108 184s vs Woodsman 108 187s? Am a skiier in the PNW fwiw.

FWIW, iggy did say that most people who are wanting to go to a more playful/loose ski from a Wren would size down. So 184 Wren skier would be looking at a 182 Woodsman. That said, there's probably something to be said that by sizing up you may keep similar stability to the Wren in a still looser package.

[tdpdx]

That question has been debated at length in the last 20-30 pages of this thread. Including input from the head honcho at ON3P aka Iggy explaining the different target audiences of said skis. The same kinda goes for the wren vs woods question, especially if read together with Blister's excellent reviews of wren108s and wood108s.

On a side note, perhaps the introduction of the 2021 range is an opportune moment to restart the thread. At page 3xx it is possibly starting to get more than a bit overwhelming for people new to the thread, so much so that it is become contraproductive or overly repetitive.

I A/B-ed Rustler 11s and Wren108s the other day. The conditions were mainly tracked out soft snow at 5-15cm deep with intermittent open/untracked spots. At slower speeds Wren108s were noticably more work to turn and felt a bit cumbersome compared to R11s. Yet as the speed increased they somewhat transformed and became much looser, yet retained their stability. The Wren108s also made short work of variable, more so than R11s. Reminded me why I love wren108s. They are simply sensational at speed in any kind of soft snow. I still think R11s are a bit more versatile than wren108s, and they are def easier to ski across most conditions. I am really curious to know if wren 108 ti's kinda bridge the gap (by increasing wren's icy/hard snow performance) or increases the gap by making wrens even more chargy.

Thanks for the info. Will check out the blister reviews.

And yeah, the 300+ pages combined with this forums... lackluster search tech is a pretty difficult to deal with.

[Quandary]

New to the family. Bought some 184 BGs this year. Of course they are awesome soft snow boards. However as has been discussed at length they are not the most fun ski on hard snow. I mostly ski Breck and Vail. Consequently on many days there is a lot of hard snow skiing until the patrollers are done blasting and the top opens. Consequently it made perfect sense to me to buy a pair of Woodsman 116s for those days. Now the question, where to mount them? I have been skiing 50 years so of course developed as a directional skier, but..... Current quiver;

Hard snow - J Ski Masterblaster mounted on the line (-7.85cm)
Intermediate snow - K2 Mindbender 108Ti mounted on the line (-9.75cm)
Soft snow - On3p BG mounted on the line (-9ish ?)

Thinking maybe I should mount the Woodsman 1cm back of the line would fit better with a traditionally directional skier? Thoughts?

[adrenalated]

New to the family. Bought some 184 BGs this year. Of course they are awesome soft snow boards. However as has been discussed at length they are not the most fun ski on hard snow. I mostly ski Breck and Vail. Consequently on many days there is a lot of hard snow skiing until the patrollers are done blasting and the top opens. Consequently it made perfect sense to me to buy a pair of Woodsman 116s for those days. Now the question, where to mount them? I have been skiing 50 years so of course developed as a directional skier, but..... Current quiver;

Hard snow - J Ski Masterblaster mounted on the line (-6cm)
Intermediate snow - K2 Mindbender 108Ti mounted on the line (-9.75cm)
Soft snow - On3p BG mounted on the line (-9ish ?)

I like the mount point on the Masterblaster and have no problem skiing it with that mount point. Of course the tails of that ski are not as stiff as the Woodsman and the Woodsman are 3cm longer. Thinking maybe I should mount the Woodsman 1cm back of the line? Or on the line. Thoughts?

Unless you know exactly why you're mounting anywhere other than the line, then you should mount on the line.

[waxloaf]

Would note for the record that I think masterblaster mount point is closer to -7.5; check the blister review for details on the mount point.

Agree with prior post though — mount on the line unless you have a good reason not to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk