Page 276 of 289 FirstFirst ... 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 ... LastLast
Results 6,876 to 6,900 of 7208
  1. #6876
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleBeaver View Post
    Whats the weight for the cease and desist in 184 or 189? Anyone have their pair on a scale? I figured it would be listed on the 2020 page but its still not on there.

    My apologies if someone already asked this, but I've scoured this thread and can't find it anywhere.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cd_weight.jpg 
Views:	163 
Size:	155.6 KB 
ID:	280750

    184. I regularly tour on mine, so I was pretty happy to score a lighter weight pair.

  2. #6877
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by iggyskier View Post
    2019 production run came in averaging at 2330 for 184 and 2410 for 189.
    Very enticing. Thanks for the help guys.

  3. #6878
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    152
    Would appreciate any thoughts Iggy
    Looking for a new touring ski, thinking either Jeffrey 96 or Woodsman 96. Leaning this way as my only inbounds ski is a 181 Kartel 116, favorite ski I've ever ridden no question asked. I'm 5'8" 120lbs and have been skiing since I could walk. This is gonna be a ski for days when we haven't seen any fresh snow in the Wasatch for a few days. Mostly steeper skiing and tighter lines, not as much a focus on open alpine where I can redline it. Kinda more like hippy pow technique. Never gonna be skiing switch, I don't often inbounds, but love how releasable the tail is on the Kartels.

    I spend most of my time touring on a Moment Meridian in a 181, I really like it but on harder variable snow it gets tossed around and doesn't have that damp feeling I love with the Kartels. Best I can put it is the Moments feel like a Corvette, super responsive and precise. The Kartels are like a Tacoma with a 6" lift kit, plows over anything it looks at.
    What would you reccomend and what length? With the Jeffrey I'm on the fence between 181 and 176 but uncertain. Woodsman I'm thinking 177 but curious if you think the 172 would work well. Thanks! Also stoked to see new custom options, planning on a veneer top and want to get a graphic overlayed on it.

  4. #6879
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    10
    Scott I just want to say thank you for making the Blister podcast it means a lot man.

  5. #6880
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Lizzie123 View Post
    Scott I just want to say thank you for making the Blister podcast it means a lot man.
    Agreed


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  6. #6881
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    471
    Thirded!

    Can’t wait to get on a metal wren and a woodsman.

  7. #6882
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    167
    just finished the latest blister podcast interview with scott and heard a lot of what i guessed i would regarding the new line up. all good stuff of course.

    the best part for me is scott's semi-soliloquy regarding radius, ee, sidecut, etc and what they all mean to the end user. i too in his words love to "nerd out" over the numbers but relaying to the customer what those numbers mean and why they are important without giving up proprietary information is difficult. a very in depth explanation nonetheless

    i did follow (mostly) what he says regarding the technical info and why some very different skis share the same ee/radius/whatever and i think this forum and this thread specifically allows us, the end user and questioner of the product to share a lot of specific experiences and information that helps folks who may or may not have any clue about what that info means and why its important. i guess it's one of the reasons i keep reading this thread

    in all another good podcast from blister about a fantastic product, and oh yeah, i'm one of those guys who rattled your cage about mount point. sorry scott!

  8. #6883
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    6,190
    Yeah, I enjoyed that. Gestalt matters.

  9. #6884
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Los Angeles/Mammoth
    Posts
    716
    Has there been any report of the weight of the Woodsman 108 in the 187 or 192?
    Unofficial Fact: Skiing was 69% more rad in the 1980's.

  10. #6885
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    471
    Quote Originally Posted by jdadour View Post
    Has there been any report of the weight of the Woodsman 108 in the 187 or 192?
    Scott said it would be similar to the Kartels. So 2250-2400g

  11. #6886
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    600
    #wopsy
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	wrens.jpg 
Views:	159 
Size:	1.54 MB 
ID:	281440
    Well, at least I have done my part to thank Iggy for bringing the w114s into life. I decided on a whim that both my quivers needed to contain a pair

    I might still move on from the w96s prior to using em, as I am thinking that a Woodsman96 might be better fit with what I want that slot of the quiver to do - especially a titanal-infused pair

    So, my whole k108/166 + C&D + wren96 conundrum is still a bit unresolved. Luckily I have all summer long to ponder on how my 2020 quivers will turn out, or get reworked. The only thing that is certain is that they will shrink a bit - they are a bit excessive right now... That being said, my W114/108/88s are going absolutely nowhere though

  12. #6887
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    That being said, my W114/108/88s are going absolutely nowhere though
    How much overlap is there between the 108 and 114?

  13. #6888
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    600
    67.322%?

    In all honesty though, I do not know.

    My (very limited) experience with wren114s suggests that they will thrive in a narrower set of conditions than wren108s. Wren108s can easily be daily drivers for people who like to go fast all the time and ride fresh snow rich resorts. For big days on big lines in the right snow w114s should be perfection in the form of skis. For lazy groomer days, not so much.

    I also think it is kinda interesting how similar wren114s are to Rustler11s (a ski I consider to be pretty much a perfect daily driver) in a lot of ways. That kinda makes me wonder if a slightly less demanding and more turny/energetic wren114 could be a much bigger seller. Alas, that is not to be. I am very thankfull for Iggy's decision to make the wren114s the ski they are instead of neutered down version. I cannot wait to get more time on mine, and bring them to some proper terrain on big days.

    And btw, I was hardly able to ski this past winter though due to other commitments. That kinda explains the somewhat excessive quiver building focus over the last months, lining everything up for next year.
    Last edited by kid-kapow; 05-07-2019 at 02:26 AM.

  14. #6889
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    3,095

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    I am a self proclaimed fairly strong skier that craves speed. I will just add that I found the 108s to be plenty of ski for even the deepest ec pow days I got this year. When the snow is soft I am in the woods and would not want a wider Wren in tight space. I read the 114 as likely different beasts and would only be interested if I had more open terrain to bomb in soft snow. Even as things quickly get tracked out it doesnít take long for me to reach for the 98s > 108s.

    I think the 114 should be instead compared to the BG and either/or dictated by preferred skiing style. .....Says one who hasnít skied the 114 or a more modern BG.
    Last edited by Doremite; 05-07-2019 at 08:56 AM.
    Uno mas

  15. #6890
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    67.322%?

    In all honesty though, I do not know.

    My (very limited) experience with wren114s suggests that they will thrive in a narrower set of conditions than wren108s. Wren108s can easily be daily drivers for people who like to go fast all the time and ride fresh snow rich resorts. For big days on big lines in the right snow w114s should be perfection in the form of skis. For lazy groomer days, not so much.

    I also think it is kinda interesting how similar wren114s are to Rustler11s (a ski I consider to be pretty much a perfect daily driver) in a lot of ways. That kinda makes me wonder if a slightly less demanding and more turny/energetic wren114 could be a much bigger seller. Alas, that is not to be. I am very thankfull for Iggy's decision to make the wren114s the ski they are instead of neutered down version. I cannot wait to get more time on mine, and bring them to some proper terrain on big days.

    And btw, I was hardly able to ski this past winter though due to other commitments. That kinda explains the somewhat excessive quiver building focus over the last months, lining everything up for next year.
    Thanks for the feedback. I have a pair of 114's and have been debating about picking up some 108's for more of a daily driver and tighter terrain.

  16. #6891
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    600
    I say go for it - I think wren108s are absolutely awesome. I have just about 0% hesitation to recommend them to directional skiers who want an easy to ski charger with better fresh snow capability than the width suggest. They are not zippy groomer killers or the funnest ski to do lazy laps on, but are a lot of fun at mach looney no matter the condition of the snow. I clicked instantly with my wren108s, not so with BGs. Titanal wrens do seem like a killer idea as well, if perhaps not for the use you lay out.

    So far Wren114s are more of a really good idea for me rather than something I can say skis this or that way, whilst wren108s are freaking great and ensured a spot in the quiver based on experience. I am quite sure that I will enjoy wren114s too though, hence getting two pairs while I still can. For sure, the wren108s are more nimble than wren114s due to narrower width and slightly shorter sidecut. The flex is pretty comparable imo, but where the narrower ski is easier to bend imo.

    It could be that Woodsman108 is an even better fit for what you are trying to achieve though, with it being sligthly more playful and probably catering to more varied turn shapes, though I have yet to try them myself. The new Woodsman-series really tick a lot of boxes imho - I will be very, very surprised if ON3P are able to keep them in stock this coming winter.

  17. #6892
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by jdadour View Post
    Has there been any report of the weight of the Woodsman 108 in the 187 or 192?
    I just got my Woodsman 108 protos in a 182 and they weigh ~2380 with the demo binding plate things (for Attack 13s). The protos are supposed to have a bit less taper so they might be a slight bit heavier than production, but Iíd bet itís close.

  18. #6893
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    LaLa Land
    Posts
    3,174
    i will weigh in on the Wren 108 v 114 banter and confirm the above statement of you very likely won't need the 114 in the East. I was fine on the 108 in the west this year until Jackson got 24 overnight. Then I wanted more. I found the 108 did pretty well till >12".

    I am picking up a 114 as I didn't like the BG in AK and we do get some rather large dumps in Mammoth that warrant a 114. It will be interesting to see how I like them compared to the BG.

    I will sell 1 of them (114 or BG) and likely my 108's as I actually prefer my Qlab's for <6" of pow through packed powder. Think the 108 has too much tip rocker unless it gets quite deep and I wish it had metal for that slot in the quiver. The 108 does way better in pow that 108 underfoot should, but then why not go fat! I'm solving for a 3 ski quiver here. Monster 98 for groomed/firm, Qlab for soft/day after storms, and either the 114/BG/Atlas (my old standby) for pow. For the fatter, 114 slot I don't think it needs metal and the wren likely has the perfect rocker.
    He who has the most fun wins!

  19. #6894
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    471
    More than no overlap, less than full overlap.

    It skis exactly like you would imagine a wider 108 would ski.
    So if you’re skiing deeper snow and want more width that is exactly what the 114 will provide, but at the same time it is a bit more combursom on hard snow.

    It’s a sweet ski.

  20. #6895
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    3,095
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    More than no overlap, less than full overlap.

    It skis exactly like you would imagine a wider 108 would ski.
    So if youíre skiing deeper snow and want more width that is exactly what the 114 will provide, but at the same time it is a bit more combursom on hard snow.

    Itís a sweet ski.
    This validates my imagination.
    Uno mas

  21. #6896
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma & Truckee
    Posts
    11,058
    Mammoth is the perfect place for the Wren series in general. 114 makes a lot of sense.

  22. #6897
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    ahead
    Posts
    36
    I bought the Billy Goats this year to fill the slot as my inbounds pow ski (1 foot+ new snow) and figured I'd give my two cents after getting so much good advice from fellow mags.

    Quick bit about me: 30 year old weekend warrior, 6'4" 185lbs, strong skier, mainly Utah, bought the BG 189.
    Only other 115+ skis I've ever owned are the old 196 Bodacious, but I also spent 5 days on the 190 Bibby this year in an effort to test the other side of the spectrum (relatively speaking) before buying a new pow ski. My everyday ski is the BMX 105HP, which is a pretty solid pow-performer in its own right.

    First things first: I LOVE the bodacious. Absolutely trucks through variable snow, super damp, reliable ski. An absolute dream in untracked, steep snow. However, now that most of my inbounds skiing is in Alta/Snowbird in steep and narrow terrain and choppy snow, the Bodacious are a bit too much work in tight places and require me to be "always on" in a way that isn't realistic.

    Before buying the BG's I spent 5 days on the 190 Bibby's. Having very little experience on heavily tapered or rockered skis, these were a pretty radical change for me. Gotta give credit where credit is due though, they turned on a dime, ultra maneuverable in tight places, great float, and you could still stand on them and charge hard through junk snow. I now understand why so many people love them.
    The reasons I didn't ultimately buy a pair were:
    1) the mount-point was too far forward for me. I didn't like having so little tip in front of me, and occasionally I would get hung up when skiing fast through choppy snow. I'm sure this could have been solved by skiing with a more neutral stance, but that simply isn't my style (or perhaps even capability?). When skiing fast through chopped up snow in steep terrain, I'm most comfortable when staying forward in a drive the tips kind of style, which also makes it much easier to release the tails when needed, in my experience.
    2) Kinda related to #1, I found the skis were too floaty in the tails. As a result, the back half of the ski was not "in the snow" enough for me. I know that points 1 and 2 could literally be interpreted as "pros" rather than "cons" to skiers with different preferences, and even though they allowed the ski to be super manueverable, super easy to break the tails free, etc., it just didn't fully work for how I ski.

    In comes the Billy Goat:
    Essentially, the BG solved a few of my gripes with the Bibby and restored some of the things I loved about the Bodacious, and that's why I bought them.
    1. Pintail. The tail sinks in the snow a bit more than the fat front half of the ski. Rather than being completely locked-in like the Bodacious, there's a good amount of taper in that tail too, so they remain pretty easy to break free in tight places.
    2. Mount point. A bit further back, -9 from center I think. Bibby was -6 and Bodacious was -11 I think. As a result, I felt like I could drive the tips pretty much as hard I wanted without risking tip dive or hangups.
    3. Volume: for a 116-wide ski with a narrow tail, there is a LOT of volume in front of your bindings. These things float very well.
    4. RES tips. Don't really understand the technology here and I'm not going to try explaining it. All I can say is that there's a good amount of taper and they allow the ski to change direction very easily. Also, zero hookiness.

    The only downside for me personally is that despite these significant benefits in deep snow, all that taper in the tips has required me to change my skiing style pretty significantly whenever I'm NOT deep snow. Keep in mind, I only intend to use the BG on days when it's snowed 1+ feet, so this isn't an issue for my particular use case, but for anyone thinking of using the BG more as a daily driver, I personally think there are plenty of 115+ wide skis that will have much broader versatility.

    When put on edge, the heavily tapered tips of the BG do not respond the same way as a more traditional shape. I'll use a an analogy because it's the only way I know how to explain it: The tip of the Bodacious (about as traditional as they come) engages with the snow pretty immediately given its very limited (zero?) taper in the tips. But its long shallow rocker line and extremely limited sidecut (32m radius) allow it to engage without being at all hooky, ie: you have the contact and you know you can use it fully if you apply more pressure. The BG, on the other hand, is kind of deliberately "letting go" of the snow up front as part of its design, both in terms of rocker and sidecut, which pushes the turn engagement further back on the ski and lends itself more to a pivoty style. For your typical inbounds powder skiing and tighter places, I think the trade is absolutely worth making. However, in less-deep snow or on the rare occasions I find myself with room to really run, when you really want to be on edge driving the ski, I think a traditional shape remains king.

    In other words, this BG is very well designed to be a quiver ski: a stiff chargey pow-ski, but I do not find it particularly inspiring outside of the pow-day environment. And again, that's completely ok. So to sum it all up: the BG is a heavy, damp, stable ski that floats very well, can truck through crud, and most importantly for me, it's a charger with good manueverability in tight places. All in all, it's one of the best inbounds pow (chop) day skis I've ever been on.
    Last edited by VON; 05-11-2019 at 11:34 AM.

  23. #6898
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    82
    ^^
    I agree with a lot of this as another new cult member this year.

    In terms of hard pack performance - this thread had a couple of comments, a few from Iggy, explaining that the BG is designed for a more neutral style on hard pack.

    I personally found that if I kept that in mind they werenít scary or anything and were great in bumps and trees with even a dusting of soft. Would definitely agree that plenty of wide skis are more rewarding carvers though.

  24. #6899
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    600
    Great review VON. I do mirror the sentiment that some skis can be too floaty in the rear, even that had nothing to do with why I did not click with my late BGs. I did me fall out of love with my Lib Tech POWs though, after seeing the light riding wren108s.

    Just primarily came on to chime in on w88s. Holy hell, but they do have a pretty substatial flex pattern! That people are riding Supergoats that are as stiff is one of those does not compute moments for me for sure.
    Last edited by kid-kapow; 05-11-2019 at 04:08 PM.

  25. #6900
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    ahead
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    Just primarily came on to chime in on w88s. Holy hell, but they do have a pretty substatial flex pattern! That people are riding Supergoats that are as stiff is one of those does not compute moments for me for sure.
    Ha yeah, actually, I got a chance to try a friend's 189's before buying, and even though the SG's 193cm length is a bit more suitable for a person my size, I was scared off by the 1.5x stiffness relative to the BG. The BG is already plenty stiff for a pow ski, and pretty friggin heavy, so I figured I wouldn't over-gun myself for once.

Posting Permissions

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