Page 342 of 343 FirstFirst ... 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 LastLast
Results 8,526 to 8,550 of 8571
  1. #8526
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by Orthoski View Post
    Has anyone noted a difference in "tail forgiveness" when using FKS/Pivot bindings over a binding with a longer heel mounting point (STH2 or Axials)? It's an interesting question across any skis - I guess I can theoretically imagine it being an issue the more rearward-mounted a ski is designed to be, but wonder if anyone has actually noted this in vivo.
    I've noticed skis to be more "supple", i.e. the flex seems more progressive, behind the boot w/ Pivots over say a STH or Jester. For me this seems to translate to more playful w/ Pivots. Not scientific by any means and it is probably psychosomatic...

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  2. #8527
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Orthoski View Post
    Has anyone noted a difference in "tail forgiveness" when using FKS/Pivot bindings over a binding with a longer heel mounting point (STH2 or Axials)? It's an interesting question across any skis - I guess I can theoretically imagine it being an issue the more rearward-mounted a ski is designed to be, but wonder if anyone has actually noted this in vivo.
    Yes, I've noticed this. Axial -> Pivot remount on the same ski revealed more even ski flex during loading. Not a huge difference but obvious. The short mount pattern is a plus for pivots imo.
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  3. #8528
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,146
    Long wood in the haus.

    Skis look great. They are stout! Thanks Iggy.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162526.jpeg 
Views:	104 
Size:	37.2 KB 
ID:	322100Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162746.jpeg 
Views:	109 
Size:	93.8 KB 
ID:	322101
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  4. #8529
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Long wood in the haus.

    Skis look great. They are stout! Thanks Iggy.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162526.jpeg 
Views:	104 
Size:	37.2 KB 
ID:	322100Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162746.jpeg 
Views:	109 
Size:	93.8 KB 
ID:	322101
    Just grabbed a pair of these in 177 for the boy.......love my 192 116s. Arguably my favorite model in the stable. Green looks really great. White pivots going on ours......


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #8530
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Long wood in the haus.

    Skis look great. They are stout! Thanks Iggy.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162526.jpeg 
Views:	104 
Size:	37.2 KB 
ID:	322100Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200324_162746.jpeg 
Views:	109 
Size:	93.8 KB 
ID:	322101
    Those are super sexy! Nice pick up.

  6. #8531
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    202
    Have any of you BG owners/lovers skied a Rossi black ops 118? I'm trying to decide b/w 184 goats and a 186 black ops for next yr and having trouble. I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft. My favorite skis at the moment are 184 devastators (old construction, not the new lighter ones) and 181 masterblasters, if that helps give an idea of what I like. These would be my soft/deep snow skis for trips out west (mostly CO/UT, but may hit PNW at some point).

    If I went with the black ops I would mount ~5cm from center to get a little closer to a traditional mount point.

    Build quality is obviously superior with the BGs, and I think they are likely to perform a bit better when the snow gets deeper due to RES, more rocker, mount point, and pin tail. I think both should float well though, as I am not a big guy. I do like the idea of the easy-to-pivot nature of the BG. Black ops looks like it would be better in chop due to weight and shape (less taper) and on groomers (I don't plan to ski a lot of groomers on these, but low tide days happen to me more than I would like on trips out west). Folks I generally trust on these issues love both skis--Blister is in love with the Black ops, you all are generally in love with the BG. I get the feeling that I won't be sad with either...

    There are essentially no comparisons of these on the net that I can find, so hoping that someone here has skied both and can give me some insight. Unfortunately demoing isn't an option for me given my location away from the real mountains. Hunch right now is to go with BG because I want to support ON3P and that might put it over the top, but curious if you guys have any additional insight.

    Thanks

  7. #8532
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    On the mountain
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by waxloaf View Post
    Have any of you BG owners/lovers skied a Rossi black ops 118? I'm trying to decide b/w 184 goats and a 186 black ops for next yr and having trouble. I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft. My favorite skis at the moment are 184 devastators (old construction, not the new lighter ones) and 181 masterblasters, if that helps give an idea of what I like. These would be my soft/deep snow skis for trips out west (mostly CO/UT, but may hit PNW at some point).

    If I went with the black ops I would mount ~5cm from center to get a little closer to a traditional mount point.

    Build quality is obviously superior with the BGs, and I think they are likely to perform a bit better when the snow gets deeper due to RES, more rocker, mount point, and pin tail. I think both should float well though, as I am not a big guy. I do like the idea of the easy-to-pivot nature of the BG. Black ops looks like it would be better in chop due to weight and shape (less taper) and on groomers (I don't plan to ski a lot of groomers on these, but low tide days happen to me more than I would like on trips out west). Folks I generally trust on these issues love both skis--Blister is in love with the Black ops, you all are generally in love with the BG. I get the feeling that I won't be sad with either...

    There are essentially no comparisons of these on the net that I can find, so hoping that someone here has skied both and can give me some insight. Unfortunately demoing isn't an option for me given my location away from the real mountains. Hunch right now is to go with BG because I want to support ON3P and that might put it over the top, but curious if you guys have any additional insight.

    Thanks
    BG, hands down. They do everything you called out well. Billygoats eat chop for breakfast...

  8. #8533
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    389

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Yeah my comment out of all of that would be that Id be surprised if the Black Ops out chopped the BG. Groomers, yeah probably.

  9. #8534
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by waxloaf View Post
    Have any of you BG owners/lovers skied a Rossi black ops 118? I'm trying to decide b/w 184 goats and a 186 black ops for next yr and having trouble. I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft. My favorite skis at the moment are 184 devastators (old construction, not the new lighter ones) and 181 masterblasters, if that helps give an idea of what I like. These would be my soft/deep snow skis for trips out west (mostly CO/UT, but may hit PNW at some point).

    If I went with the black ops I would mount ~5cm from center to get a little closer to a traditional mount point.

    Build quality is obviously superior with the BGs, and I think they are likely to perform a bit better when the snow gets deeper due to RES, more rocker, mount point, and pin tail. I think both should float well though, as I am not a big guy. I do like the idea of the easy-to-pivot nature of the BG. Black ops looks like it would be better in chop due to weight and shape (less taper) and on groomers (I don't plan to ski a lot of groomers on these, but low tide days happen to me more than I would like on trips out west). Folks I generally trust on these issues love both skis--Blister is in love with the Black ops, you all are generally in love with the BG. I get the feeling that I won't be sad with either...

    There are essentially no comparisons of these on the net that I can find, so hoping that someone here has skied both and can give me some insight. Unfortunately demoing isn't an option for me given my location away from the real mountains. Hunch right now is to go with BG because I want to support ON3P and that might put it over the top, but curious if you guys have any additional insight.

    Thanks
    I have not skied the Black Ops, but like you my hard snow ski is the 181 Masterblaster, a great fun ski! I have the 184 BGs for my soft snow ski. As long as the snow is soft it skis great everywhere. Also never had a ski that skis the moguls after a snow so well. Busts chop likes its not even there. However it is a goofy ski on hard snow, which is understandable given its design. Given that, I picked up a pair of 182 Woodsman 116s a couple of weeks ago (thanks Iggy for the sale) for those days (at Breck) where you have to ski both hard snow (ie groomers) then head to the soft snow when they get the top open. Others will disagree on their view of the BG as an all a rounder, but I would go Woodsman 116 or Wren 114 as a more "all around" soft snow ski.

  10. #8535
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by waxloaf View Post
    Have any of you BG owners/lovers skied a Rossi black ops 118? I'm trying to decide b/w 184 goats and a 186 black ops for next yr and having trouble. I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft. My favorite skis at the moment are 184 devastators (old construction, not the new lighter ones) and 181 masterblasters, if that helps give an idea of what I like. These would be my soft/deep snow skis for trips out west (mostly CO/UT, but may hit PNW at some point).

    If I went with the black ops I would mount ~5cm from center to get a little closer to a traditional mount point.

    Build quality is obviously superior with the BGs, and I think they are likely to perform a bit better when the snow gets deeper due to RES, more rocker, mount point, and pin tail. I think both should float well though, as I am not a big guy. I do like the idea of the easy-to-pivot nature of the BG. Black ops looks like it would be better in chop due to weight and shape (less taper) and on groomers (I don't plan to ski a lot of groomers on these, but low tide days happen to me more than I would like on trips out west). Folks I generally trust on these issues love both skis--Blister is in love with the Black ops, you all are generally in love with the BG. I get the feeling that I won't be sad with either...

    There are essentially no comparisons of these on the net that I can find, so hoping that someone here has skied both and can give me some insight. Unfortunately demoing isn't an option for me given my location away from the real mountains. Hunch right now is to go with BG because I want to support ON3P and that might put it over the top, but curious if you guys have any additional insight.

    Thanks
    I don't know much about the back ops but the two pros you gave the black ops were chop and groomers. The BG is known for being the king of chop so the black ops (or any ski) would have a hard time out performing the BG in chop, but once again, I don't know much about the black ops. As for groomers, that's not why you buy a 115+ width ski.

    Another point is on3p is just a hell of a company. Someone last week had a pair of BGs fly off their ski rack and get ran over by a car. On3p offered to give them a tune and fix them up a little for him, you think rossignol would do that? Not to mention the ski wasn't that damaged anyways because of the build quality.

    Also, you may not care but I would rather have my money to towards a smaller american made company than a mega company, especially in times like these.

    With all this being said, you are posting on the on3p thread so you will get a biased answer and both are great skis.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  11. #8536
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    581

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    Edit: if you think you need the Blackops, maybe you should consider the Kartel/Jeffrey

    If not, get the BG

  12. #8537
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Edit: if you think you need the Blackops, maybe you should consider the Kartel/Jeffrey

    If not, get the BG
    This. Sounds like I have a similar ski style: jibby, but not much for tricks. After having my mind set on the BG for months, I made a thread after questioning if the BG would be playful enough and my mind was changed to the Jeffery 116. Lots of good info on the thread, I'll see if I can find it. Either way, the debate should be Jeffery 116 vs BG

    Edit, here's the link. My post I think is #33
    https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app


    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  13. #8538
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Big Guy Country
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by waxloaf View Post
    Have any of you BG owners/lovers skied a Rossi black ops 118? I'm trying to decide b/w 184 goats and a 186 black ops for next yr and having trouble. I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft. My favorite skis at the moment are 184 devastators (old construction, not the new lighter ones) and 181 masterblasters, if that helps give an idea of what I like. These would be my soft/deep snow skis for trips out west (mostly CO/UT, but may hit PNW at some point).

    If I went with the black ops I would mount ~5cm from center to get a little closer to a traditional mount point.

    Build quality is obviously superior with the BGs, and I think they are likely to perform a bit better when the snow gets deeper due to RES, more rocker, mount point, and pin tail. I think both should float well though, as I am not a big guy. I do like the idea of the easy-to-pivot nature of the BG. Black ops looks like it would be better in chop due to weight and shape (less taper) and on groomers (I don't plan to ski a lot of groomers on these, but low tide days happen to me more than I would like on trips out west). Folks I generally trust on these issues love both skis--Blister is in love with the Black ops, you all are generally in love with the BG. I get the feeling that I won't be sad with either...

    There are essentially no comparisons of these on the net that I can find, so hoping that someone here has skied both and can give me some insight. Unfortunately demoing isn't an option for me given my location away from the real mountains. Hunch right now is to go with BG because I want to support ON3P and that might put it over the top, but curious if you guys have any additional insight.

    Thanks
    A closer comparison here would be a Black Ops 118 vs a Jeffrey 116. Though it's the loosest of the bunch, the BG is a directional ski, BO118/JF116 are true twins. Don't get me wrong, I've owned every iteration of the BG and it's probably my favorite ski of all time, it's just not in the same category as a BO 118/JF.

    However, Quandary nailed it. Your comment "I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft." is exactly why the Woodsman line exists. It's for those of us that are willing to trade some switch/jib performance and for more stability in a wider range of conditions.

  14. #8539
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,779
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Edit: if you think you need the Blackops, maybe you should consider the Kartel/Jeffrey

    If not, get the BG
    This is what I was thinking. BO vs BG comparing vastly different designs. Go Jeffrey. I have Caylors, which are Jeff predecessors and I'd say they slay chop just fine. On3P's have a strange blend of damping, yet still have a ton of pop. I find myself constantly eye fuckin' the mountain for features to slash or pop off.

  15. #8540
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,779
    Quote Originally Posted by CallMeAl View Post
    A closer comparison here would be a Black Ops 118 vs a Jeffrey 116. Though it's the loosest of the bunch, the BG is a directional ski, BO118/JF116 are true twins. Don't get me wrong, I've owned every iteration of the BG and it's probably my favorite ski of all time, it's just not in the same category as a BO 118/JF.

    However, Quandary nailed it. Your comment "I don't spin or trick, but like to pop off of things and enjoy a playful ski with backbone and some heft." is exactly why the Woodsman line exists. It's for those of us that are willing to trade some switch/jib performance and for more stability in a wider range of conditions.
    I'm a directional skier as well. I also own Woodsies(thank you brother)
    I think I prefer my Caylors slightly over Woods(so far). Not enough days on the Woods, but those Caylors I think are the funnest ski I've ever been on.

  16. #8541
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    202
    Appreciate all the input guys, super helpful as always. If anyone has skied both and can do a direct comparison that would be awesome, otherwise I think the responses so far have given me plenty of good info to think on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  17. #8542
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    12
    Searched the thread and couldn't find much about the Wren 108 TI-I'm currently in the search for a new daily driver and I think they're calling my name. Wondering if anyone can speak to the difference between the 184 and 189 specifically in the Ti layup, as I don't have any firsthand experience with ON3P apart from a pair of Billy Goats around 10 years ago. I'm a pretty light guy at 5'11" and 140 lbs, and am leaning towards the 184, but I'm curious if anyone has experience with either length they can speak to. For reference, I currently ski on a 192 DPS Wailer RPC and am a huge fan, and have never felt it's too much ski.

  18. #8543
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    325
    If the 192cm wailer normally feels like enough ski, I would go 184cm.

    The 189cm wren is WAY more ski than the 192cm wailer.

    My experience - 192 wailer easy, quick, light touch. Not really a charger even in the RPC build.

    189 Wren - Freight Train that you can still pivot with some effort.

    That being said, I have not skied the 184cm Wren.

    You also might like the woodsman more if you are coming from the Wailer and like it. 187cm.

    Quote Originally Posted by popcorn View Post
    Searched the thread and couldn't find much about the Wren 108 TI-I'm currently in the search for a new daily driver and I think they're calling my name. Wondering if anyone can speak to the difference between the 184 and 189 specifically in the Ti layup, as I don't have any firsthand experience with ON3P apart from a pair of Billy Goats around 10 years ago. I'm a pretty light guy at 5'11" and 140 lbs, and am leaning towards the 184, but I'm curious if anyone has experience with either length they can speak to. For reference, I currently ski on a 192 DPS Wailer RPC and am a huge fan, and have never felt it's too much ski.

  19. #8544
    Gman's Avatar
    Gman is online now Mack Master William Large
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by popcorn View Post
    Searched the thread and couldn't find much about the Wren 108 TI-I'm currently in the search for a new daily driver and I think they're calling my name. Wondering if anyone can speak to the difference between the 184 and 189 specifically in the Ti layup, as I don't have any firsthand experience with ON3P apart from a pair of Billy Goats around 10 years ago. I'm a pretty light guy at 5'11" and 140 lbs, and am leaning towards the 184, but I'm curious if anyone has experience with either length they can speak to. For reference, I currently ski on a 192 DPS Wailer RPC and am a huge fan, and have never felt it's too much ski.
    I'm about the same height and maybe 15lbs heavier and I ski the 179 Wren 108. I definitely wouldn't go 189. I got my 179's when I lived on the east coast and have since relocated to CA. Pm me if you have any questions.

  20. #8545
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Taos Ski Valley or my truck
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman View Post
    I'm about the same height and maybe 15lbs heavier and I ski the 179 Wren 108. I definitely wouldn't go 189. I got my 179's when I lived on the east coast and have since relocated to CA. Pm me if you have any questions.
    Chiming in on this as well as a fellow smedium dude. 510 150lbs, developing Covid beer gut.

    Ski 186 Billy Goat and 179 Wren 96ti. Owned both 179 and 184 Wren 108. Searching for the in between and still am. Depends on where you ski really, Taos for me. Steep and tight.

    In soft snow I absolutely loved the 184, a really let er rip ski. Once it got harder and bumpier the 184 was a bit cumbersome to get through a fair amount of terrain here.

    Then I got the 179. Definitely handled the super tight terrain better and way more fun once things started to get bumpy. In soft snow, I was always looking for a bit more float.

  21. #8546
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    389
    Quote Originally Posted by the_flying_v View Post
    Chiming in on this as well as a fellow smedium dude. 510 150lbs, developing Covid beer gut.

    Ski 186 Billy Goat and 179 Wren 96ti. Owned both 179 and 184 Wren 108. Searching for the in between and still am. Depends on where you ski really, Taos for me. Steep and tight.

    In soft snow I absolutely loved the 184, a really let er rip ski. Once it got harder and bumpier the 184 was a bit cumbersome to get through a fair amount of terrain here.

    Then I got the 179. Definitely handled the super tight terrain better and way more fun once things started to get bumpy. In soft snow, I was always looking for a bit more float.
    182 Woodsman?

  22. #8547
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Taos Ski Valley or my truck
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by mtskibum16 View Post
    182 Woodsman?
    Probably.

  23. #8548
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    389
    Im 510 and 170. ON3P said theyd usually put someone my size on the 182 but that the 187 would certainly be doable. Im still torn.

  24. #8549
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    4,893
    I'm at 6' 170-175 and bought the 87. But I'm old school and prefer a longer board. I'd buy the 192 if I was still out west. And also when you think about it, we're talking 5cm. Approx 1 inch tip n tail adder. Not a lot.
    Tight trees shorter is probably better...eastcoast style. Which is me and I went longer. So yeah, don't listen to me. I'm an idiot.

  25. #8550
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    the most beautiful place in the whole wide world
    Posts
    1,579
    Quote Originally Posted by the_flying_v View Post
    Chiming in on this as well as a fellow smedium dude. 5’10” 150lbs, developing Covid beer gut.
    Isn't this the truth. my 'home office' located about 2 ft away from a beer fridge and greatly reduced bike commute mileage aren't helping ...

Posting Permissions

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