ON3P SKIS Discussion

[SkiJitsu]

6669827[/URL]]DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

I haven’t skied the woods 110, but I think the Wren Pro is probably the closest to a 184 Katana based on mount point and general feel. The Katana and Mindbender 108Ti were the other skis is was thinking about when I got the Wren Pro and I love that ski. The 186 length feels close to the 184 in volkl thanks to more tip rocker.

[kid-kapow]

DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

100% agree with the last poster - the wren110pro is the more comparable ski, both wrt mount point, geo and intention - so I would consider it too.

If you want a wren110 then I would suggest going for 187s. 184 Katana VWs are 182 straight pull like wood 182s, but the latter have way more splay so have less effective edge.

[5 Cents]

Snagged a pair of 118 Jeffreys. Will post some unorganized thoughts after I (hopefully) get a few days on them this Winter.

[kid-kapow]

The eagle eyed might have noticed this new graphic in the mt hood clips from ON3P lately. Nice with more options.

[ASmileyFace]

182 Woodsman 110s tours on the way to my door courtesy of Benneke10. Needed a new touring daily driver for this season after killing my QST 106s last year (which I never really jived with) and had been curious about both the tour core/woodsman shape so figured I'd check both out at the same time. The Woodsman seems perfect for a strong directional and somewhat playful soft snow orientated touring set up. I'm a little worried the 182 version is going to feel a little small, but so much of the touring I do in the San Juans during the winter is lower angle weird tree skiing and I hated the QSTs for that stuff. I expect since they are still ON3Ps that when I get to open it up a little more that they will be more than adequate.

I've put over 300 days on my old school 184cm stiff Steeple 102s. Most versatile skis I own. They are pretty clapped out at this point, but I still like to ski them a few days a year when the conditions are a mixed bag. I don't expect the woodsmans to cover quite that same lifespan and versatility, but I'm psyched to check them out.

[snowaddict91]

182 Woodsman 110s tours on the way to my door courtesy of Benneke10. Needed a new touring daily driver for this season after killing my QST 106s last year (which I never really jived with) and had been curious about both the tour core/woodsman shape so figured I'd check both out at the same time. The Woodsman seems perfect for a strong directional and somewhat playful soft snow orientated touring set up. I'm a little worried the 182 version is going to feel a little small, but so much of the touring I do in the San Juans during the winter is lower angle weird tree skiing and I hated the QSTs for that stuff. I expect since they are still ON3Ps that when I get to open it up a little more that they will be more than adequate.
.

Ha, I was going to pick those up but we had a miscommunication and they sold to you in the mean time. Hope you enjoy em!

[5 Cents]

For a PNW resort quiver of two would you rather have J118/J102 or J118/J96? I can get a deal on the 102s but the 96s might be better for low-tide?

[NW_SKIER]

Billygoat should be your big ski if you're in the PNW

[5 Cents]

My buddy has a pair of Billy Goats mounted in the same BSL that I get to use sometimes. They're only 177cm though, since he's a bit shorter than me. I was thinking of getting some BGs in 182 or 187, but I know I trend towards center-mounted and playful skis. So, my personal pair of fatties are going to be the J118s.

[FullStop]

My buddy has a pair of Billy Goats mounted in the same BSL that I get to use sometimes. I like more center-mounted and playful skis though, so my personal pair of fatties are going to be the J118s.

I own 116 BGs and Jeffreys, the J116s give up a little bit of the looseness and wack snow capabilities of BGs but they're pretty damn close. The Js are definitely more well rounded.

[ASmileyFace]

Ha, I was going to pick those up but we had a miscommunication and they sold to you in the mean time. Hope you enjoy em!

I had messaged him back during the summer about them and jumped on them as soon as he made that thread. Bummer there weren't two pairs but that deal was hard to pass up.

I know your local-ish to Silverton so if the BSL works and you want to take em for a rip this winter let me know!

[5 Cents]

I own 116 BGs and Jeffreys, the J116s give up a little bit of the looseness and wack snow capabilities of BGs but they're pretty damn close. The Js are definitely more well rounded.

Sweet, that is what I was hoping for.

[snowaddict91]

I had messaged him back during the summer about them and jumped on them as soon as he made that thread. Bummer there weren't two pairs but that deal was hard to pass up.

I know your local-ish to Silverton so if the BSL works and you want to take em for a rip this winter let me know!

Yeah, I had messaged him too and then missed the thread lol. All is good and I just got a great deal on some Armada Tracers, I remember really digging them when I demo'd them. Let's try and get out for some turns this winter!

[kid-kapow]

I just noticed that BG118 172s are (back) in stock, the first time in years a sub 179 length has been stocked

Good thing for my wallet that there is no mrs Kapow I could buy a pair to

[davjr96]

I just noticed that BG118 172s are (back) in stock, the first time in years a sub 179 length has been stocked

Good thing for my wallet that there is no mrs Kapow I could buy a pair to

Oh no this is not good, the one saving grace of ON3P for my wallet was that they don't really make most skis in my short person size. Although I got a pair of 172 woodsman's a few years back. I don't even really have use for a pow ski being a Tahoe Weekend warrior with a pair of 116 Praxis already, but the want has always been strong for a pair of BGs. Someone talk me into or out of them ;p

[californiagrown]

A brief scan of this thread and it doesnt look like there is too much on the J102s. Im looking to replace my dailydriver/hard snow ski this year... been skiing a 2015 190 Sir Francis Bacon for a while and i think its time. Im 6'3" 200lbs with gear on and ski at alpental- meaning extremely variable and challenging snow conditions, and lots of steep moguls and steep tight techy stuff, not too many wide open places to open it up when it hasnt snowed very recently. I like a progressive mount and a nuetral stance, but do not like light feeling, easily deflected skis. I prefer to slarve around, find the fun terrain to make cool feeling turns on, pop off bumps and terrain features and very rarely want to be going +40mph, but I do need the skis to hold an edge when i dynamically make a series of aggressive slalom turns in steep tight terrain.

Are there any recent reviews of the J102s out there?

[Sessiøn]

I had some J102's, They ski on par with the 110. They don't feel light, they still have the sturdy feel of an ON3P. The only reason I ditched them is I thought I would grab them more but I prefer the wider platform. I ski on Hood, and I'm 210 BTW. Sounds like we ski similarly.

[CYJ]

I had some J102's, They ski on par with the 110.

Thanks for this. I'm also looking in to the J102s as my low tide PNW ski as I favor edge grip for this spot in my quiver. I take this to mean they also require a centered upright stance like the 110? I like progressive mounts, but I also like being able to get forward some in crud/chop skiing.

Also looking at the Moment WC101 since the Blister guys said you can get forward on at least the WC108, even with the heavy rocker profile. Only issue is in terms of length, I'd prefer the J102's 186.

[5 Cents]

Thanks for this. I'm also looking in to the J102s as my low tide PNW ski as I favor edge grip for this spot in my quiver. I take this to mean they also require a centered upright stance like the 110? I like progressive mounts, but I also like being able to get forward some in crud/chop skiing.

Also looking at the Moment WC101 since the Blister guys said you can get forward on at least the WC108, even with the heavy rocker profile. Only issue is in terms of length, I'd prefer the J102's 186.

I am also wondering how the J102s performs in lower-tide conditions. I have some J118s that I can bring out if the snow is choppier/cruddy and I need to blast through stuff. Should I just go the custom route and roll with some J96s or get the stock J102s?

@ CYJ: If you're wanting to get more forward in some crud/chop skiing and want to stick with ON3P offerings I would also check out the Woodsman? Dynastar M-Free 99 also performs surprisingly well for me in icier conditions and is fairly stable. Both of those have mount points that are less centered than the Jeffrey, though.

[kid-kapow]

Dynastar M-Free 99 also performs surprisingly well for me in icier conditions and is fairly stable. Both of those have mount points that are less centered than the Jeffrey, though.

The difference between MF99s, WD96/102s and J102s has less to do with mount point than how the cambered sections are set up imho.

MF99s have a way longer cambered section ahead of the bindings than behind it, which together with the relatively softer cambered sections give the skis a natural imbalance that makes them very loose and strong on groomers (can I say a directional feel that also caters well to an upright stance?) - helped by titanal binding plates and lots of PU in the construction. They feel stronger when mounted forward of recommended.

Woodsman on the other hand are much more symmetrical in the cambered section, which given their stout underfoot flex makes them feel more present or stronger underfoot on hard snow if that makes sense. Not strong as in Bonafide type ski carve monster, but strong as in locked in - where their shape makes them plenty loose still. J102s are more likely than not fairly similar to WD102s - their flex patterns and cambered sections should not be terribly different - at least more alike than either compared to MF99s. Both ON3Ps should be way better/floatier in shallow fresh than MF99s though.

Both WD96s and WD102s are fine skis. I personally prefer 102s as I find that the slightly wider platform better enhances their soft snow intent without loosing much performance / quickness wise on harder snow. I would be super curious to try both jeffs and woods with a metal layup, if that is even offered (woods tis have been made in the past - I have no idea for jeffs) - especially if like wren96tis the ti version is slightly softer underfoot, yet still more capable and grippy as a whole due to the construction.

[5 Cents]

Thanks for the TED talk about camber.

I think I'll have lots of fun rolling with a 2-ski quiver of J102/J118 at Meadows this season.

Do you know if the camber changes between waist-widths for ON3P skis in the same layup (ex: Woodsman 102 vs. Woodsman 110)? Just curious. After reading your comment I was looking at rocker-profile pics on the ON3P website and couldn't notice a difference.

[RudyGarmisch]

Thanks for the TED talk about camber.

I think I'll have lots of fun rolling with a 2-ski quiver of J102/J118 at Meadows this season.

Do you know if the camber changes between waist-widths for ON3P skis in the same layup (ex: Woodsman 102 vs. Woodsman 110)? Just curious. After reading your comment I was looking at rocker-profile pics on the ON3P website and couldn't notice a difference.

It commonly doesn’t but I’d imagine there are some tweaks to some models, and then throwing a different than stock layup may affect total camber as well.

[Sessiøn]

Thanks for the TED talk about camber.

I think I'll have lots of fun rolling with a 2-ski quiver of J102/J118 at Meadows this season.

Do you know if the camber changes between waist-widths for ON3P skis in the same layup (ex: Woodsman 102 vs. Woodsman 110)? Just curious. After reading your comment I was looking at rocker-profile pics on the ON3P website and couldn't notice a difference.

This is a great meadows 2 ski quiver IMO.

[CYJ]

Do you know if the camber changes between waist-widths for ON3P skis in the same layup (ex: Woodsman 102 vs. Woodsman 110)?

I actually emailed ON3P a few weeks ago asking if there were any differences in camber contact length between the J102 and J110. Their response was that given the same lengths between the two, the contact length are the same. Didn't ask about tip/tail rocker splay, but I imagine they're the same as well.

Between the WD102 and WD110, if they look identical on their site, my guess is the camber/rocker profile are also the same between the two widths.

[SkiLyft]

Woahhhh just saw that too! 172 BG 118. Just asked if the 110 could be available as a 172 too!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums