ON3P SKIS Discussion

[adrenalated]

RES on Billy Goats is very sensitive to mount position. They will probably not ski well mounted at -1. Wouldn't recommend doing that.

[Name Redacted]

I think you and I may be having the same feeling on the BGs. I've been struggling for a few days on them, and I also think it's just how centered they are compared to other skis I'm more comfortable on. If I just skied a little more centered and less "driven", they did exactly what they were designed to do, but anything more than that and they felt ponderous and hooky.

You might want to try a detune at the contact points if the BG's are feeling hooky, because they are anything but hooky. I feel like they lend to a more loose style of skiing that some people might not really work well with. For me, being the shitty skier that I am who likes to get into steep, tight, ugly terrain and see if I can figure it out, they are perfect. I was on the Wrens and they were hooky AF for me, and required a lot more work and skill that I don't have in order to ski them well.

[Ted Striker]

ponderous and hooky.

I chuckled at bit at that.

IMO, they're just not your and comish's cup of tea. One guess would be that (again IMO) they aren't meant to go straight - hence the name. They are however fantastic at steam-rollering pnw cement "pow", but you have to keep them at least a little on edge or the res can engage in unintended directions.

[Kopi_Red]

Yep.

I agree with other posters that it's likely the mount position of the BG's. Hence why I'm toying with going a bit further back. Like -1cm from the line? It is so close to what I want, but at the end of the day I don't ski centered, so like skis with a rear mount. I can definitely feel differences of 1cm for those doubting that it would make a difference. Not everyday on every run, but can definitely feel it.

Other thing I sometimes wonder about is my boots are a 295mm boot sole length, so small. Does that make me more sensitive to mount position? Thanks for the ideas everyone.

BGs require a more centered two footed style. If you over pressure the tips the tails wash out and the skis act a little wonky. I doubt remounting them will help but a change in approach (more centered and 2 footed) will make the skis come alive.

[sf]

Soli bindings, Doberman WC 130 boots, 5'9" 160.

Atlases have old Marker Duke's interestingly enough.

Ok. Shouldn't matter much. Both are pretty flat.
I just wanted to check if you skied them with Kingpins, Ions or any other binding with a bit of ramp.

I like my BGs best when I stay forward, but I must avoid leaning forward. Over the balls of my feet, slightly more dynamic/laterally smooth/two-footed than when I ski more traditional skis

[Ted Striker]

RES on Billy Goats is very sensitive to mount position. They will probably not ski well mounted at -1. Wouldn't recommend doing that.

I would never recommend mounting BGs off the line, but I do own a pair of this year's 184 asyms that were already drilled for a different bsl, so rather than put more holes in them I decided to try them out at the resulting minus 5mm and they skied just fine. Even on hardpack. But I'm sure there's a tipping point somewhere behind that.

[Joey311]

I had previously posted that I had bought 184cm BG's and am mounted 4mm in front of the line as I'm reusing holes. I felt I couldn't drive the tips like I wanted, but they are super quick in the pow, pivoty, and fun. Enjoyed them on deep days in Mammoth, even if I could sink the tips when pressuring the tips.

Took them to AK last week. Skied them 1 day and they sat in the RV the rest of the week as I reached for my old skool Atomic Atlas. On big AK faces, with Ak snow (think super light facets on the top 3" with denser pow lower down) the sidecut and quick nature of the BG's were not super confidence inspiring. They felt a like the sidecut wanted to turn too quick and I still can't completely commit to driving the tips and when one is skiing 3k of vert super fast, at least this old fart, wants to be driving the tips and charging. Ended up liking the much longer turn radius of the 182cm mini Atlas which made the ski more predictable, the flat tail for hauling ass in front of sluff, and the significant tip rocker let me charge the front of that ski without fear of stuffing the tip coming in hot through sluff or chunder. I was an AK virgin and we nailed it scoring 6 days of clear epic condition, but was definitely a bit bummed that the BG wasn't the right ski for me in those conditions, on those ginormous faces at those speeds.

That said, still wondering about mounting my BG's back a bit or maybe trying a pair of 114 Wren's? Thoughts?

I had pretty much the same exact experience last week in Alaska (Black-Ops Heli Skiing Valdez) (Highly recommended).

I’m 5'6" 140lb. I’ve been skiing the BG 174cm for the past three seasons and I absolutely love that ski (keep in mind I'm 10cm shorter than someone 5'10"). Occasionally in open alpine terrain when I can really let the ski run I feel I could use something a little longer. So when the opportunity came up recently (on this thread) for a BG tour layup 179cm I jumped all over it.

On low angle terrain they were fine, but on the steep terrain in Alaska I found it very difficult to control the tips; the skis wanted to wander and aggressively turn uphill. I did OK, but had to work very hard. After a few runs I was completely exhausted. For the next two days I used their rental skis (BD megawatt), and crushed it.

Not sure if there something I could’ve done as far as tuning. Maybe there are some adjustments I could make with my technique, but I’ve skied quite a bit of steep alpine terrain and never had this issue in the past; also had no problem with different skis on the following days.

[Bandit Man]

The notion that a BG is NOT a great AK ski is intriguing. I guess I should finally book a trip to test the hypothesis first hand...I mean many of us have been training for Alaska for several years now, so it makes sense.

[mr_pretzel]

Rex shepard seems to be doing fine. I think it comes down to preference.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bq79B9Gh..._web_copy_link

[Skeeze]

Comish, what have you thought of your Wren 108s that are mounted on the line? I know the mount point is similar to the Billy Goats, but while the BGs are my favorite skis ever, I’m finding that I may prefer other everyday skis with boot centers more in the -5 to -6 range (I prefer the 187 Meridian 107 to the 184 Wren 108).


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[PowTron]

Can't wait for people to start getting on the new ti wrens and providing feedback. PowTron seems to have gotten along with his pretty well

I’d probably mutilate - or at least break the bones - of anyone who tried to take my Metal Wren 108’s away from me...

Biggest reason I have to get through knee rehab and be back stronger than ever = METAL 108

[nickwm21]

I’d probably mutilate - or at least break the bones - of anyone who tried to take my Metal Wren 108’s away from me...

Biggest reason I have to get through knee rehab and be back stronger than ever = METAL 108

Can you give a comparo to a Cochise, LP105, or similar metal charger?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[comish]

The notion that a BG is NOT a great AK ski is intriguing. I guess I should finally book a trip to test the hypothesis first hand...I mean many of us have been training for Alaska for several years now, so it makes sense.

I gotta say, it's a difference beast than anything I have experienced before, whether living in JH, skiing Mammoth, or Yurp.

The scale and sustained steep pitch is insane. That leads to super high speeds if you wanna let it hang out in front of the sluff.

The snow quality is unique. The week we were there wasn't deep, but call it boot topish and the consistency changes as you go down into the pack. Top is super light, bottom isn't which is why it sticks to these ridiculous faces. Then add in old avi debris, sluff debris which is constant and everywhere, constant sluff management, and the occasional piece of hard pack where the wind stripped the snow and its a cocktail of interesting snow to make sure you can handle while going mach schnell.

So for this guy, I wanted to ensure I was forward and charging or your going to get bucked off, but to do that you had to have faith the tip wouldn't get hung up on sluff, chunder, or that thicker layer down low in the pack. This was problem A, as the tips of the BG's will go down with too much of a drivey technique. Nothing to do with tails washing out btw.

2nd problem was that they felt a bit twitchy or wanted to turn with that really interesting combo of light and dense snow consistency. This was felt when riding the edge and the edge would go into the denser snow, you could feel it want to turn more than I was looking for. This wasn't riding flat as someone speculated as you don't ride shit flat there or your going Mach schnell. Too steep, at least for this guy. Always on edge.

I get the 2 footed skiing, and have felt how fun the skis are at Mammoth. I was pretty sold, even though I knew I couldn't fully drive the tips. They are a really fun combination of pivoty while being reasonably stable on Mammoth scale runs. Think 1500 sustained vert that is steep, but not puckering steep. Then throw in steeper, longer terrain, that has sluff cascading and you are going way faster and it gets "interesting" . I see why the PNW crew has a hardon for them. They are sweet in the techy steep short lines in the thick snow through woods that I have experienced there.

I could get over the slightly pivoty / twitchy wanna turn feeling if I could stand on that tip and know it wasn't diving. As the guide said, 3 rules here: No avalanches, no tomahawking, and ski pow. Can't go over the bars and tomahawk as the consequences are pretty big. One dude dislocated his shoulder tomahawking while I was there and led to another, a former PSIA examiner demo team member, tomahawking 1500 feet with his skis going >3000ft.

So I want a bit more tip to drive, for me, as I agree it is preference. My ideal AK style, in my dreams of course, is Nobis, versus a more centered pivot style, so that likely has something to do with it.

BTW, Leo Slemmet is the mang!. He, Connery Lundin, and Jackie Passo were there during our week and Leo just slayed it. We are hanging out in the PZ and our guide looks up and goes "holy chit!" and we see Leo drop a double and come out absolutely hauling ass! Super impressive. Really humble nice dude as well. Interesting to hear the radio chatter as even the pro's had a hard time picking their lines from the top. As Jackie wrote, I think on Instagram, it's way harder / more difficult to scope your line in a few seconds from a heli than she is used to. When it rolls over in AK, you have no idea what's on the other side unless you were able to scope it out which is harder there because of the scale, lack of trees, and other features to see from the top as markers.

Yes, BM, you need to go! It blew my mind and was the dream trip I had waited 25 years for.

[Ted Striker]

The on edge comment wasn't really directed at you or anyone specifically, it's just that I've found that they will engage with random snow irregularities when you straight line run outs.

[detuned]

at the end of the day I don't ski centered

if this is true it's possible the BG isn't the ski for you, or any on3p ski for that matter. it took a bit for me to get out of the directional shin-on-cuff hard drive ski style to get all my on3p skis to open up for me. when i got more centered/balanced and played with my heel/ball of foot - holy cow was i amazed.

my K108's require me to do this crazy ball of foot "dance" thing in tracked up terrain to get the tails to cooperate and i think for me that was what made my BG experience better. that and spending a lot of time in the trees with the BG, getting that centered feel down which also requires some strong quads for the long haul open bowl big mountain line skiing that i love. my (older gen) BG's are by far my favorite ski, i want to ski them every day but it doesn't dump pow every day right?

as others have stated, do NOT stray far from the line on any RES ski, they get wonky. personal recommendation is remount on the line, that'll get it out of your head and let you ski the ski, and detune til you think its good then detune a little more, good luck

[jackattack]

Can you give a comparo to a Cochise, LP105, or similar metal charger?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Have you skied a wren 108? It skis like that, but more high frequency damping.

It’s more loose and less demanding than the traditional metal charger. It will still hook up when put on edge and driven with the shin in the boot, but it’s still more centered than the LP105.

If you’re looking for that locked in tail and traditional GS feel this is probably not the ski you’re looking for IMO.

[MiddleOfNight]

supergoats like to eat corn too

as others have stated, do NOT stray far from the line on any RES ski, they get wonky. personal recommendation is remount on the line, that'll get it out of your head and let you ski the ski, and detune til you think its good then detune a little more, good luck

+1 on all this. Amazing what a difference a detune made on the SG's. So responsive now.

[Cladragon04]

The 2020 line is now out on their website!!!

[terpskier]

I know a couple centimeters here and there may not make a difference when evaluating the whole ski, but I’d be interested to learn why a 186 Jeffrey and a 187 woodsman have the same effective edge, implying the woodsman has a very similar amount of rocker. I would’ve thought the woodsman’s rocker profile and thus effective edge would’ve fallen in between Jeffrey and Wrenegade. Unless of course the data on the site is wrong


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[RudyGarmisch]

FWIW I took Wren 108’s to Tailgate AK this spring. Conditions were not optimal. Wrens were.

Someone needs to talk me out of having a Wren 108 for daily driver touring and Wren 108Ti for resort.

[Cdubmpdx]

FWIW I took Wren 108’s to Tailgate AK this spring. Conditions were not optimal. Wrens were.

Someone needs to talk me out of having a Wren 108 for daily driver touring and Wren 108Ti for resort.

I think iggy said the Ti comes in lighter, so maybe two Ti's, not really talking you out of anything, just saying.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Doremite]

I know a couple centimeters here and there may not make a difference when evaluating the whole ski, but I’d be interested to learn why a 186 Jeffrey and a 187 woodsman have the same effective edge, implying the woodsman has a very similar amount of rocker. I would’ve thought the woodsman’s rocker profile and thus effective edge would’ve fallen in between Jeffrey and Wrenegade. Unless of course the data on the site is wrong


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I doubt the site is wrong. EE just a piece of the puzzle. It alone doesn’t speak to tip/tail rocker profiles, taper, radius, mount point, flex etc....

Two skis of same length and same EE could be entirely different beasts.

[iggyskier]

*Preface. This is how we use the terms. Others might us other definitions. But alas...this is how we use the terms.

Effective Edge = Sidecut Length. It is wholly independent of rocker.

Running Length is likely what you are thinking of, which = uncambered base to base length.

Regardless of how the ski is flexed/rockered/cambered, the flat length between widest tip/widest tail is fixed. That is EE.

A couple other things just to stew on with EE.

1) Tip/Tail taper length. What is the ratio of tip to tail taper? The Woodsman, for example, has more tip taper, less tail taper than the Jeffrey. So while the listed EE might be similar, the end product on the ski is different.
2) How is the EE dispersed over the ski? Aka, how does mount & tip/tail taper affect the dispersion of EE over the ski's sidecut? In a -4 and -10 mounted ski, that dispersion is very different.

Same questions can be applied to running length. 150cm of running length applied to different parts of two skis can create two very different skis.

Trying to convey this info - without 1) giving too much info away and 2) causing all your eyes to roll back in your heads is something we are working on, but it is really easy to get in the weeds. Right now, we're more interesting in trying to get people to understand Ski Platforms, as opposed to 1-2cm differences in EE, running length, etc.

This goes to something I posted awhile back on why I felt 5 dimensions skis are dumb. These specs sheets give a base level info, but it is really easy to pass on info that is unpractical in its use as a consumer. There is no standard on what "5" dimensions mean, and literally every ski in existence can be 5, or 7, or 20 dimension skis if we want. So, there are two listed points on the 5-dim specs that practically mean nothing, only that it is the point between 0 and the widest point on the ski that the designer decided to plant a flag.

Understanding the ski's platform - and how that changes the fundamental aspects of the ski's design - is a concept we're trying to roll out this year because it is how you understand how two skis, with the same EE, same running length, same width, and even same radius if we wanted....can be dramatically different with a few tweaks.

I know specs are fun to analyze, but I just like to remind people they are a base level info for a reason.

Not sure that helps shed too much light on things, but hopefully gives you a bit of insight into why we don't go crazy posting specs. To us, the extra specs don't accurately convey much more information, and to do so in a fully complete fashion would more or less require giving up the full ski designs - something we're not interested in doing.

[PowTron]

FWIW I took Wren 108’s to Tailgate AK this spring. Conditions were not optimal. Wrens were.

Someone needs to talk me out of having a Wren 108 for daily driver touring and Wren 108Ti for resort.

Do it, pansy ass.

[terpskier]

*Preface. This is how we use the terms. Others might us other definitions. But alas...this is how we use the terms.

Effective Edge = Sidecut Length. It is wholly independent of rocker.

Running Length is likely what you are thinking of, which = uncambered base to base length.

Regardless of how the ski is flexed/rockered/cambered, the flat length between widest tip/widest tail is fixed. That is EE.

That makes sense. You’re right, I was thinking of the uncambered distance between contact points at tip and tail.

Now that I think about it though, your definition of the term makes way more sense to me for modern skis considering that when the ski is tipped over on edge, the maximum amount of edge you could have contacting the snow is the length you guys describe and not the length I was thinking of.

I appreciate what you guys are trying to do in terms of bringing some transparency to ski design and how different designs/tweaks do different things. Though it honestly almost makes my decision harder as I’m set on picking up a pair of skis from you guys to use as a one-ski quiver next year and probably for the next few years, but I now have a harder time deciding what aspects of skiing I wanna sacrifice by getting a specific pair of skis when I do go skiing (fun vs stable vs switch riding vs edge grip vs etc). Either way, thanks to you and the entire ON3P team for all you guys do


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums