Page 513 of 516 FirstFirst ... 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 LastLast
Results 12,801 to 12,825 of 12888
  1. #12801
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,595
    My new 192s were awesome when I took them to Utah. They slayed the way I was hoping they would. In the PNW, they were lacking the pivoty goodness of my 191s. Starting in September I'll have kids in college in UT for the foreseeable future, so they will get used plenty. My 191s will continue to be my PNW pow ski until I can find another pair.

  2. #12802
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    3,938
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    My new 192s were awesome when I took them to Utah. They slayed the way I was hoping they would. In the PNW, they were lacking the pivoty goodness of my 191s. Starting in September I'll have kids in college in UT for the foreseeable future, so they will get used plenty. My 191s will continue to be my PNW pow ski until I can find another pair.
    I'm glad you found out they work for you but I can't help but ask, did you buy them to ski Alta or Alpental?

    Any 2x6 will slay the greatest snow on earth -- this is what I learned in college and I hope your kids learn it too.

  3. #12803
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,727
    Yep, never a bad snow day here

  4. #12804
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,595
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    I'm glad you found out they work for you but I can't help but ask, did you buy them to ski Alta or Alpental?

    Any 2x6 will slay the greatest snow on earth -- this is what I learned in college and I hope your kids learn it too.
    They didn't work out for what I bought them for, no denying that. While many things can ski great in UT, they ski awesome the way I want to ski. I'm trying to make lemonade now.

    I was super pumped, bought custom and had them looking the way I wanted. After a few days of fighting them, I was ready to sell. Skiing them at Brighton on a good day (6" of new) at least gave me a hope I could still enjoy them. I may still sell them, but who knows. I think they work great for people with continental snow. Now I just keep my eyes open for 191s (let me know if you are holding!).

  5. #12805
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    4,424
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    have you guys asked Iggy?

    The "SG model" is kinda what every non-18x length is for most ski models outside of park skis. C&Ds too. The only difference is that they are not made to order, but in very limited once-and-done-for-the-season runs. The stock layup BG110 and 177 stock layup BG118s arguably were those skis last year, the wren110pro for the last two years. If a new C&D is released this coming season it might be it for 2023.

    My point being, if you guys can drum up SG level commitment to buying a particular iteration of the BG in a specific length, and ask Iggy ever so nicely if he can make 10-20pairs of a pre-sold ski in a way where it can be slotted into the production cycle, then perhaps he will make it happen. It could also potentially be offered as one off customs for all I know, though the time needed for mold alterations might be what could make a limited run more feasible.

    I have no idea though - this is 100% speculation on my part. The idea is not build pressure on you to build them Iggy, but have mags ask directly (and commit to buying) if it is something they really, really, really want and something you might be persuaded to offer.
    I talked to Scott directly about it two seasons back. Not sure the molds are around anymore. He chuckled a bit when I mentioned my affinity for that specific design. Iíve also had conversations with some other early ON3P ďplayersĒ and they agree with my perspective of those years being the best soft snow/powder BGís, especially for PNW conditions.

    The newer designs are better chargers and better in a broader range of conditions, but if you havenít skied a 2014-2016 vintage, then I guess you donít know what you are missing.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  6. #12806
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    Iggy & crew wouldn't even reply to questions about the changes to the BG line last year. In hindsight, they probably saved me $500 as it turns out the 192 was a huge turd so everyone is here lamenting the past cult classics.
    they had their work cut out for them getting the skis produced amid supply chain issues, covid and a lead employee nearly dying - so go figure Iggy did not take the time to revisit a decision that was already made (before explaining the changes on the Blister podcast).

    As for the 192 being a turd or not - some people seem to like em, some do not. That seems to be the case for a lot of skis as specific as BGs.

    My 182s skied a bit differently to my original 179s, but they are def a bit easier to ski and easier to stay in a slarve in dry snow than 184 asyms. I like the 182s though, though I prefer the asyms. I have not been on earlier iterations, in spite of owning a custom stiffer 16/17 pair - so can't compare.

    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    But if they're listening and offer a reissue of the 191 Bearpaw BG I'd consider it.
    I am sure they are dying to get started on the special run with that kind of commitment levels And if we are dreaming aloud - I would be extremly curious to try a BG with a standard sidecut in the front ski. Yeah, it would probably take away the particular hoover craft floaty feeling, but could make them more versatile. Sacrilege I know

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    The newer designs are better chargers and better in a broader range of conditions, but if you haven’t skied a 2014-2016 vintage, then I guess you don’t know what you are missing.
    For sure re the last point, though my desire would be changes that make them more versatile, not more soft snow specific. Then again there are a lot of good 116/118 directional pow skis

    And no, I am not trying to start a new "BG on groomers" or "driving BGs in soft snow" shit show / debate We are not that far into missing winter yet, or ever

  7. #12807
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,988
    Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.

  8. #12808
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    7,739
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.
    Yup.

  9. #12809
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.
    The rocker profile is the same yes, the shapes are most certainly not - so pretty different ride feel imho.

    There are more that differentiates how a woods108/110s vs BG108/110, and WD116 vs BG116/118s than "just" the RES. The taper lines front and aft and front to back taper are a fair bit different. As are the balance points / mount points.

    Yes, a "BG" without the RES would not have the same lift in front of the binding, but I am still curious how it would ski - it is something I've thought more than once. Its taper lines, straight sidecut, rocker profile and stiff flex would still make them missiles with more than ample float, even if the would probably not pivot as effortlessly in soft snow. I kinda feel like Dynastar MF118s feel like a ski that is between wood116s and BGs in terms of looseness. A modified "BG" would then inch closer to the MF118s - especially if the mount point was moved forward a cm or two, but be better in denser snow (even if the widest point in the tails were made a tad bit wider) than MF118s, while being better on hard snow and in light snow than BGs. A ski that would merge the defining characteristics of MF118s and BGs into a single ski would be nigh of perfection imho. WD116s is not that ski, even if is a very capable and fun ski.

    Anyway, it is not something that will be built - I've just wondered how such a ski would ski. #myskiboxistootinytobrbingallmyskisallthetime

  10. #12810
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    3,938
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.
    kapow:
    Name:  missed-point-point.gif
Views: 1054
Size:  188.9 KB

  11. #12811
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    kapow:
    Name:  missed-point-point.gif
Views: 1054
Size:  188.9 KB
    whatever man.

    My point was that the overall pintail design probably has a lot to do with the ride feel as well, not "just" the RES. The ability of the tails to release in dense snow is not only caused by front ski float.

    The Woods comparison is also just plain wrong - or at best incredibly un-nuanced - something my reply tried to elaborate on. I see that effort was wasted time, for me and you alike. Oh well.

    I actually bought a second pair of Koala119s today to see if that ski is kinda in between a BG and MF118, to be mounted with pivots instead of Shifts like my last pair. Should be fun.

    also this just in:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Skjermbilde 2022-08-05 kl. 21.18.44.jpg 
Views:	183 
Size:	575.8 KB 
ID:	423167
    I think this graphic is bonkers. I had kinda convinced myself that I should not buy j118s to try them with Pivots (as it turned out that the ride feel I did not like with my now sold pair of custom stiffer K116s was caused by ramp angle, and not anything to do with the ski), but man... The universal praise from those that have been on j118s do not help either. Must not buy more skis!

  12. #12812
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,488
    I wrote a small review of the BG on a PM to bry that he can post if he still has it.

    I’m for sure bummed on the new 192.

  13. #12813
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    6,214
    @kidkapow

    At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189?
    I only have about one day total on my pair.

  14. #12814
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,488
    Quote Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister View Post
    @kidkapow

    At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189?
    I only have about one day total on my pair.
    Theyíre fucking awesome. Crush chop and have nice float.

  15. #12815
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    6,214
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Theyíre fucking awesome. Crush chop and have nice float.
    Sweet.
    With a quiver like yours this is a data point I can respect.
    I have three partial days on mine and agree with you regarding chopping and floating.
    Die Chicken Heads!!!

    I can also remember some surprisingly good (for width) groomer turns.

  16. #12816
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,988
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    whatever man.

    My point was that the overall pintail design probably has a lot to do with the ride feel as well, not "just" the RES. The ability of the tails to release in dense snow is not only caused by front ski float.

    The Woods comparison is also just plain wrong - or at best incredibly un-nuanced - something my reply tried to elaborate on. I see that effort was wasted time, for me and you alike. Oh well.


    My northern brother, I don't like to argue nor do I have the time to ruminate at length. Was I lazy to generalize and not mention sidecut? Sure.

    The broader point was that a RES-les BG (longish rad rockered pintail) is already covered by existing shapes and might not be worth developing. Lhasa, Lotus, maybe a modern K2-whatever.

    peace

  17. #12817
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    also this just in:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Skjermbilde 2022-08-05 kl. 21.18.44.jpg 
Views:	183 
Size:	575.8 KB 
ID:	423167
    I think this graphic is bonkers. I had kinda convinced myself that I should not buy j118s to try them with Pivots (as it turned out that the ride feel I did not like with my now sold pair of custom stiffer K116s was caused by ramp angle, and not anything to do with the ski), but man... The universal praise from those that have been on j118s do not help either. Must not buy more skis!
    Damn, good looking ski. Exactly what I'm looking for but new skis are not in my budget. Only 1 pair in stock per length

  18. #12818
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    My northern brother, I don't like to argue nor do I have the time to ruminate at length. Was I lazy to generalize and not mention sidecut? Sure.

    The broader point was that a RES-les BG (longish rad rockered pintail) is already covered by existing shapes and might not be worth developing. Lhasa, Lotus, maybe a modern K2-whatever.

    peace


    My bad - I should have just said that I would like there to be something between the BG and WD116 - taper lines like BG, sidecut like WD116 - mount point in between. So a loose ski that can charge and demolish groomers too, just with ON3P build quality. Sure, there are some skis out there that fits the ticket, but not from ON3P as of now. Being a fan boy I would like there to be

    Like, I would probably have gotten along well with WD116s as my only 115ish ski if I had not been on a bunch of other skis before / after, but having been now after obsessing over the perfect quiver of the past 5 or so years I feel that there are some steps that could be taken to merge both designs to make something really awesome. A thought driven by a want to merge a fair few skis into a single "good enough" ski for a ton of conditions. And I would just prefer that ski to be from ON3P.

    Quote Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister View Post
    At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189? I only have about one day total on my pair.
    I only had a day on my first pair. Mounted at -,5 cm with Shifts. I really liked them - they were freaking great both when driven from a centered and a more aggressive stances. I preferred them to WD116 to be perfectly honest, though that was down to the tune for the most part. Sold them though as I freaking hate DPS and wanted to figure out the WD116s (they were great after a tune, switch to pivots from Shifts and -1 mount). I can see k119s being a handful in some conditions.

    First thoughts now, without skiing them - holy shit 184s are stiff. I cannot remember my first pair being this stiff. If 189s are 15% stiffer then they must be freaking planks. And yes, I managed to find a second pair of 119s, not the new 118s (that ski is slightly softer and more importantly have a different shape (wider tails)). It will be fun to try them back to back with PR-OTOs, MF118s and BGasyms.

    I bought some Koala103s and Lotus124pagodas too (40-50% off is a real driver to try skis you are wanting to try) - aka the new catch and release quiver. 185 Lotus124s are not terribly dissimilar to BG118 182s wrt length, though the BGs are stiffer. I am a bit surprised by the flex pattern of the Koala103s though, they are fairly supportive for being DPS' attempt at a kibbby ski for the masses imho. TBC.

    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    I wrote a small review of the BG on a PM to bry that he can post if he still has it.

    I’m for sure bummed on the new 192.
    I have yet to get back to iggy on my take on the current skis, but as far as BG118/110 are concerned - I am not 100% sold on the increase in camber on BGs to be honest, nor the +2/+1 tip/tail addition. I really like the shape in general though, the lower tail splay especially. The flattish camber skis were even looser without being less capable though, so flattish camber + lower tail splay might be even better - I dunno, though that would make it harder to run a limited set of molds in production.

    I would also not be terribly surprised if tune issues is somewhat to blame for some of the less than stellar experiences - the addition of fancy euro machines have not been a force multiplier thus far imho. The more prominent tails probably exacerbate a wonky tune. But, that is just speculation on my part - I have not been on the 192s (even if it was a thing for my BG110s, not my BG118s).

    BG110s - size up. The narrower pin tail design needs more stiffness and effective edge than the 182s possess (for me) to sing. I preferred the 184 BG108tours to BG110stock layup to be honest - BG108t were freaking magical. I would really like to try a pair of BG110 stock layup 187s, but alas

  19. #12819
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Where full grown men pretend to be cowboys
    Posts
    487
    I've got some 2019 184 BG asyms w/1 Attack mount @300 that I'd be willing to trade + cash for current model 110s or 118s in 187 flavor just because I'm curious.

  20. #12820
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Where full grown men pretend to be cowboys
    Posts
    487
    Well that was quick. Got some 187 BG 118s coming.

    I'm also half-ass looking to trade some 187 Woodsman 110Ts w/1 Tecton mount @300 for BG 110s, either layup.

    I really like this ski too. Regular layup WD is my DD, just curious about the BG 110 as a long time 116 fan and trying to keep my shed to a one in, one out rule.

  21. #12821
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    191
    Love both the 187 WD 110 and BG 110 (stock). Looking forward to spending more time on them this winter. You'll feel a bit more support in the tail of the BG 110s than 116s but its something I have come to enjoy and actually prefer. They are still very easy to release. Im in Missoula so not quite maritime, not quite continental snowpack. Seems like those in maritime zones still prefer the Asym.

  22. #12822
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Where full grown men pretend to be cowboys
    Posts
    487
    Quote Originally Posted by peglegg View Post
    Love both the 187 WD 110 and BG 110 (stock). Looking forward to spending more time on them this winter. You'll feel a bit more support in the tail of the BG 110s than 116s but its something I have come to enjoy and actually prefer. They are still very easy to release. Im in Missoula so not quite maritime, not quite continental snowpack. Seems like those in maritime zones still prefer the Asym.
    Nice, thatís pretty much what Iím looking for.

    I toured on steeple 116s for years until they fell victim to a sled rollover mishap.

    Replaced with wd110t for the sake of weight and not adjusting to a new shape between DD resort and DD tour skis.

    However I really miss RES every time we have a breakable top layer, which is often in SWMT, and I donít always want to lug my castified stock BGs around out there.

  23. #12823
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    EastBumble
    Posts
    309
    DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

  24. #12824
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    4,598
    Seeming that Iím outta luck on this one. No euro maggots to help out?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I rip the groomed on tele gear

  25. #12825
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    619
    Quote Originally Posted by detrusor View Post
    Seeming that I’m outta luck on this one. No euro maggots to help out?
    Yurp calling. Outta luck with what? What assistance is needed?

Posting Permissions

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