Page 464 of 476 FirstFirst ... 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 ... LastLast
Results 11,576 to 11,600 of 11898
  1. #11576
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    3,597
    I thought those looked familiar. I'm pretty sure the 184 Wren ti's were in CallMeAl's demo fleet at the BBI at Alpy in '19. If so, I've skied both pairs -- I preferred the 189's.
    Quote Originally Posted by mfcf13 View Post
    The world needs more Donnely and less Stainless.

  2. #11577
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Big Guy Country
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by Brasso View Post

    The seller said they were previously factory demos, but the topsheet has me thinking they might be protos of some sort on top of that. I'm happy to wait for iggy to chime in, or for someone else to edumacate me a bit!

    The printed ski "specs" are keep-worthy imo.

    Attachment 388146
    I think those came from one of my demo fleets. If so, they were one of the final protos of the ski that became the Wren108TI.

  3. #11578
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,477
    check these bishes out







    So in comparing to my ol' 12/13 191s, these new 192s are VERY similar. The stated sidecut dimensions are the same, 145/118/128. Looking down both skis when clamped together, I cannot detect a difference in the sidecut profile when the mount markings are aligned. Is there a short straight section underfoot on the new skis? If it's there it's subtle. It seemed obvious on prior models.


    To compare the two, I'll start at the tails and work up. The following five shots show the 191 and 192 clamped together with mount marks lined up.


    Rocker length looks pretty much the same but tail splay is a couple centimeters less on the 192.





    Tail splay:




    Mount point is back a smidge on the 192, making the 191 tail just a bit longer. Notice the edge wrap length difference, too.




    Tip rocker and splay look pretty much the same, with a little bit more material at the very tip on the 192:







    And here's the length difference when stood on the floor:







    Flex feels pretty damn similar throughout, maybe a touch more pop from the new ones, as expected versus a set with hundreds of days (but the 191s def ain't dead, they feel great still actually). Core thickness appear to be the same. Something I keep thinking about is how fuckin great the 191 was and still is, with the new bitchin sauce basically back to its measurements. And how damn durable the skis are. Top shelf builds. Great work Scott & crew. Cheers, all.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  4. #11579
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Where the climate suits my clothes.
    Posts
    5,091
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    check these bishes out







    So in comparing to my ol' 12/13 191s, these new 192s are VERY similar. The stated sidecut dimensions are the same, 145/118/128. Looking down both skis when clamped together, I cannot detect a difference in the sidecut profile when the mount markings are aligned. Is there a short straight section underfoot on the new skis? If it's there it's subtle. It seemed obvious on prior models.


    To compare the two, I'll start at the tails and work up. The following five shots show the 191 and 192 clamped together with mount marks lined up.


    Rocker length looks pretty much the same but tail splay is a couple centimeters less on the 192.





    Tail splay:




    Mount point is back a smidge on the 192, making the 191 tail just a bit longer. Notice the edge wrap length difference, too.




    Tip rocker and splay look pretty much the same, with a little bit more material at the very tip on the 192:







    And here's the length difference when stood on the floor:







    Flex feels pretty damn similar throughout, maybe a touch more pop from the new ones, as expected versus a set with hundreds of days (but the 191s def ain't dead, they feel great still actually). Core thickness appear to be the same. Something I keep thinking about is how fuckin great the 191 was and still is, with the new bitchin sauce basically back to its measurements. And how damn durable the skis are. Top shelf builds. Great work Scott & crew. Cheers, all.
    Curious about that rack behind the first picture. Looks solid. Can you elaborate?

  5. #11580
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    well, sheiat - those throwback tips do look nice. Dammit, too many awesome graphics.

    thanks for the lowdown - like I needed to get more hyped on the new 118s...

  6. #11581
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Mount point is back a smidge on the 192, making the 191 tail just a bit longer. Notice the edge wrap length difference, too.



    The new BG is everything I was hoping for except for this... I was hoping for a slightly further forward mount, if anything... Not further back.

  7. #11582
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,477
    It's millimeters, man. Mount forward or just get the Woodsman.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  8. #11583
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by beeeom View Post
    The new BG is everything I was hoping for except for this... I was hoping for a slightly further forward mount, if anything... Not further back.
    you could just try to mount a pair at +1 or +2 if that is more your cup of tea.

    Rex Sheperd - an ON3P rider located in good ol' AK - mounts his RES skis at +2 and is very happy them there. They are pow skis, so it'll probably be fine.

  9. #11584
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,477
    And the mount position isn't different on the sidecut. There's just a little more tip and a little less tail vs the old 191. All eyeballed, mind ya
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  10. #11585
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    hah, so buy the next size up and trim the tips a bit - problem solved and win-win (outside the warrenty going to shit of course unless you ask Iggy if they can do it as one-off custom ski).

    They'll have plenty of tips regardless.

  11. #11586
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,097
    Those look super sexy, Norse. Love to hear that it seems like a return to the 191 (my favorite pow ski ever). Looks like I need to finally make a decision on graphic...

  12. #11587
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    you could just try to mount a pair at +1 or +2 if that is more your cup of tea.

    Rex Sheperd - an ON3P rider located in good ol' AK - mounts his RES skis at +2 and is very happy them there. They are pow skis, so it'll probably be fine.
    Ya that's what I do. +1.5 seems to be the sweet spot on my 186’s. Which I use for anything and everything at the resort.

    I've got my 189’s at +1 but they are 95% touring dedicated. Would be curious to try +2 on them.

    Was looking to replace my 186's with the new 187’s... Would be tempted to go +2 on them too. But alas I am broke and they are not in the cards until the 186’s actually die

  13. #11588
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    638
    I have Wren 114’s as my daily resort ski and a couple powder skis with touring bindings. Logically know I should do a narrow ski to compliment the Wren… but dang if the Billy Goats don’t look incredible.

  14. #11589
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Renton, WA
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    I thought those looked familiar. I'm pretty sure the 184 Wren ti's were in CallMeAl's demo fleet at the BBI at Alpy in '19. If so, I've skied both pairs -- I preferred the 189's.
    You have a hell of a memory, nice! Good to know, I wonder if I'll decide the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by CallMeAl View Post
    I think those came from one of my demo fleets. If so, they were one of the final protos of the ski that became the Wren108TI.
    Very cool. Cheers!

  15. #11590
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    271
    Full topsheet porn Norse, I need to see that graphic

  16. #11591
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    271

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Stoked
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1633920656.167691.jpg 
Views:	161 
Size:	1.70 MB 
ID:	388567

  17. #11592
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,673
    Anyone got a link to Iggy's post on the new BG specs?


  18. #11593
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowen View Post
    Stoked[/ATTACH]
    Holy shit Rowen, those throwbacks look amazing. Def make me second guess my choice not to go with that graphic.

    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    Anyone got a link to Iggy's post on the new BG specs?
    I can't remember if he (if so just go into his profile and go through his most recent posts in this thread), I think it was Norse (?) who did in sumarizing calls with Iggy on the Woodsman.

    Sumarized; BG line goes 177, 182, 187, 192, and 118 underfoot across the range. Wider, flatter tail rocker (similar to SuperGoat), but with softer flex and no asym, along with a bit more tip to drive - so more of a powder ski again. Mount points are 2cm aft of Woodsman which the various BGs share rocker profile with now, with mount point at -9.5 for 187, +/- .25 for each longer (further back)/narrower (closer to center) size ( as far as I know).

  19. #11594
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portland by way of Bozeman
    Posts
    3,889
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    Holy shit Rowen, those throwbacks look amazing. Def make me second guess my choice not to go with that graphic.



    I can't remember if he (if so just go into his profile and go through his most recent posts in this thread), I think it was Norse (?) who did in sumarizing calls with Iggy on the Woodsman.

    Sumarized; BG line goes 177, 182, 187, 192, and 118 underfoot across the range. Wider, flatter tail rocker (similar to SuperGoat), but with softer flex and no asym, along with a bit more tip to drive - so more of a powder ski again. Mount points are 2cm aft of Woodsman which the various BGs share rocker profile with now, with mount point at -9.5 for 187, +/- .25 for each longer (further back)/narrower (closer to center) size ( as far as I know).
    Good summary.

    As an aside, I do smirk that people didn't think the 116 BG wasn't pow-oriented enough. They slay everywhere in their 116-waist iteration, so much so, I rarely ski my 4FRNT Renegade Owls on the deepest days.

  20. #11595
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,318
    Rowen what a beautiful sight!

  21. #11596
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,477
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowen View Post
    Full topsheet porn Norse, I need to see that graphic
    ...
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20211011_162456.jpeg 
Views:	125 
Size:	33.4 KB 
ID:	388679
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  22. #11597
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    638

  23. #11598
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    926
    SOLD

    Any interest in some minty 184 BG Tour 108s with ST Rotation 12's and Glidelite skins? Mounted at -1cm for 321mm BSL. Skied less than 5x, so spotless. I would split and keep the binders... as I fucking love them. They're too short for my fat ass, and I have too many skis...but they tour like a dream.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1812.jpg 
Views:	137 
Size:	831.7 KB 
ID:	388945

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1811.jpg 
Views:	129 
Size:	856.0 KB 
ID:	388946

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1809.jpg 
Views:	128 
Size:	466.5 KB 
ID:	388947

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1808.jpg 
Views:	127 
Size:	451.2 KB 
ID:	388948
    Last edited by sierraskier; 10-14-2021 at 03:13 PM.

  24. #11599
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    15
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	FAC44207-0839-4261-923D-862089CAFD84_1_201_a.jpg 
Views:	105 
Size:	1.15 MB 
ID:	388954Click image for larger version. 

Name:	942BAEFD-3CBC-4450-AC29-84A7F1D5A2DB_1_201_a.jpg 
Views:	100 
Size:	1.27 MB 
ID:	388955

    Quiver is starting to come together; these beauties arrived yesterday. 192 Woods 110 w/ 102 Tour top sheet. Waiting for CAST to ship but think these Raw P15s will make a nice pair.

    Thanks to Iggy and Co for the unreal customer service (well documented here but pretty unreal you can email a company and receive a call directly from the CEO to talk skis); thanks as well for all the wicked info in this thread. And the snow line is almost at the valley floor. Today is a good day.

  25. #11600
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    985
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig View Post
    Good summary.

    As an aside, I do smirk that people didn't think the 116 BG wasn't pow-oriented enough. They slay everywhere in their 116-waist iteration, so much so, I rarely ski my 4FRNT Renegade Owls on the deepest days.
    I sold my renegade owls when I got my BG because they were better in every way


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

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