Page 490 of 508 FirstFirst ... 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 ... LastLast
Results 12,226 to 12,250 of 12697
  1. #12226
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ten Mile Vistas
    Posts
    3,910
    Quote Originally Posted by cmsummit View Post
    Has anyone skied the Woodsman 110 at -2cm from reco? Sorry if this has been covered, I looked back thru the last ~40 pages and haven't found exactly what I'm looking for. It does look like somebody mounted at -2cm tho.

    So, I have 2 full days on the WD187s (50/50 layup) and can't help but feel that I'm too far forward on the ski for my skiing style (I'm old school). I had the 184 Wren 108 and really liked that ski, but wanted something just a little more easy going in bumps and tight spots and lighter for some slack country. I mounted these with the CAST system.

    What I've found is that the WD mounted at recommended feel squirrely as hell and I can't carve a turn to save my life. I pulled some measurements last night to verify the mount point per the "ball-of-foot" method and come up the ball of my foot about 2-2.5cm forward of the middle of the contact points of the ski when de-cambered. I can't help but think that moving from -7.5cm to -9.5cm could solve my issues. Skis that I've liked on the line.....Wren 108, Enforcer 100/110, Black Crows Corvus. What was the recommended mount point on the 184 Wren 108 from a few seasons ago?
    EDIT - looks like the mount point on the 184 Wren 108 is -9.25cm. Hmmm.....

    My next step is to make sure these are detuned properly, ski them again and then reassess.

    Thanks!
    Well, my skis were edge high (aka 'railed') and that was attributing to the 'squirrelly' nature. They behave more predictably now, but I'm still not 100% 'clicking' with them. I detuned the tips and tails some more last night and going to give them another shot in the next day or two. Still feel like I'm too far forward with too much tail that occasionally gets 'hung up'. Did some better precise measuring last night and confirmed that the ball of my foot is 2.5cm-2.8cm ahead of the midpoint of the ski base contact points when the ski is de-cambered. I don't know if that is also contributing to the issue or not. I gotta say that it's pretty disappointing that I spent another $40 on a $900 custom ski to get the bases flat. I like the way the skis feel, just not how they're currently behaving.
    Old's Cool.

  2. #12227
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    4,554
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    While these are def not a ski I would need, it is still kinda hard not to appreciate just how good they look - limited release Mango 90 veneers.

    Attachment 402779Attachment 402780Attachment 402781

    Same price as the trash cans, so also out of my price range. But still, hard not to appreciate the craftmanship.
    I said the trash cans might have been the best looking skis I’d ever seen. Well, these are even better.

    Gorgeous.

  3. #12228
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by cmsummit View Post
    Still feel like I'm too far forward with too much tail that occasionally gets 'hung up'. Did some better precise measuring last night and confirmed that the ball of my foot is 2.5cm-2.8cm ahead of the midpoint of the ski base contact points when the ski is de-cambered. I don't know if that is also contributing to the issue or not.
    I would just give ON3P a call and debate a potential remount with them. Iggy has previously stated that the mounting range for woodsmans is +1 to -2, so perhaps mounting slightly back or detuning more aggressively aft of the contact points will make them be the ski you want them to be.

    As for the railed part - yeah, unfortunate and a bummer for sure - yet ON3P usually go above and beyond to fix and issues if you reach out to them.

  4. #12229
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ten Mile Vistas
    Posts
    3,910
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    I would just give ON3P a call and debate a potential remount with them. Iggy has previously stated that the mounting range for woodsmans is +1 to -2, so perhaps mounting slightly back or detuning more aggressively aft of the contact points will make them be the ski you want them to be.

    As for the railed part - yeah, unfortunate and a bummer for sure - yet ON3P usually go above and beyond to fix and issues if you reach out to them.
    Scott reached out to me and has offered to cover the cost of the tune, so that's above and beyond ON3P service right there! Gotta give PowTron a shoutout too, for making it happen......Iggy's pretty busy these days. He did say that it was more likely the base edge wasn't properly beveled rather than being truly edge high.....I can see that.

    I'm gonna give them another go soon with the new tune plus a proper detune of the tips and tails. If that doesn't solve the issue, Iggy confirms that mounting +/- 2 are within the typical range. It was probably stated in here too, but 490 pages is a lot to sift thru. I'm fairly old school, so maybe 1.5-2cm back is the ticket. All I know is that I want to love these things and I'm hoping that they will achieve that 'lighter and slightly more easier-going Wren 108' feel. I did like that ski......just too heavy (IMO) for a CAST mount.

    Thanks ON3P crew!
    Old's Cool.

  5. #12230
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,205

    ON3P SKIS Discussion

    It always surprises me when people on this board post about an issue and rather than going to the manufacturer they post it here…. When I have a issue with my car I reach out to the manufacturer and don’t post on an open forum…. Always funny how things workout…


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  6. #12231
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    at work
    Posts
    1,199
    Quote Originally Posted by Undertow View Post
    It always surprises me when people on this board post about an issue and rather than going to the manufacturer they post it here…. When I have a issue with my car I reach out to the manufacturer and don’t post on an open forum…. Always funny how things workout…


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Prob cuz we have a tendency to bounce our ideas off our spouses/ friends (random internet kooks) first to gauge if there really is an issue or it’s just us. Sounding board if u will. I do agree that occasionally the pitchforks come out too soon publicly
    "What moves men of genius, or rather what inspires their work, is not new ideas, but their obsession with the idea that what has already been said is still not enough."

    -Eugene Delacroix

  7. #12232
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ten Mile Vistas
    Posts
    3,910
    Quote Originally Posted by mn_teleswede View Post
    Prob cuz we have a tendency to bounce our ideas off our spouses/ friends (random internet kooks) first to gauge if there really is an issue or it’s just us. Sounding board if u will.
    Exactly. 490 pages of information, first hand accounts and stoke dedicated to a single ski brand.....this place isn't your typical 'public forum'. There's lots of useful knowledge here. I still haven't found a maggot-approved problem solving flow-chart when it comes to 'WTF is wrong with my skis?" I just want the issue resolved and I really don't care what path I take to get there.
    Old's Cool.

  8. #12233
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,610
    man, BGasym 184s truck. They are just soooo good. Especially so after I ditched the silly Shifts and remounted them with a pair of FKS 180s aka brbight pivot 18s. Very nice, even if my skiing is still shit. I still need to detune them a bit more after sharpening them a bit too much last winter, but damn - so much fun when you pick up pace and let them just run.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5035.jpg 
Views:	163 
Size:	852.0 KB 
ID:	402902

    They are as you'd expect noticeably more ski than BG118 182s. Both are great, if for slightly different uses for the same rider. You def notice the stiffer overall flex and longer ee on asyms, though it is no surprise with the 182 being a tweaked 179 asym. So BG118s 182s are a bit looser and pivots even easier, whereas BGasym 184s have more support throughout and haul.

  9. #12234
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    at work
    Posts
    1,199
    The White Eagles and White Wolves are my 2 favorite On3p graphics.




    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    "What moves men of genius, or rather what inspires their work, is not new ideas, but their obsession with the idea that what has already been said is still not enough."

    -Eugene Delacroix

  10. #12235
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,205
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    man, BGasym 184s truck. They are just soooo good. Especially so after I ditched the silly Shifts and remounted them with a pair of FKS 180s aka brbight pivot 18s. Very nice, even if my skiing is still shit. I still need to detune them a bit more after sharpening them a bit too much last winter, but damn - so much fun when you pick up pace and let them just run.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5035.jpg 
Views:	163 
Size:	852.0 KB 
ID:	402902

    They are as you'd expect noticeably more ski than BG118 182s. Both are great, if for slightly different uses for the same rider. You def notice the stiffer overall flex and longer ee on asyms, though it is no surprise with the 182 being a tweaked 179 asym. So BG118s 182s are a bit looser and pivots even easier, whereas BGasym 184s have more support throughout and haul.
    Dam kid those are absolutely beautiful skis - the white eagle/wolf top sheet and wood veneer are impossible to beat….

    Also, I am with you as I have the 193 Asym SG’s and love them and are my favorite of the 3 Billy’s year have owned…. In a moment of weakness I did buy a custom 192 118 Billy’s that I am super stoked on and hope to ride them soon…. I am a huge fan of the less rockered tail and know this was a carryover from the SG…. Will be interesting to see how the two compare and with some other reviews it appears the 118 is well liked..:


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  11. #12236
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SW, CO
    Posts
    990
    Who's got a decent amount of time on the new Jeff 110? What are your thoughts? My daily drivers are getting thrashed this season and I'm trying to convince myself I need a 50/50 layup Jeffery for late spring/next season mounted with CAST.

  12. #12237
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    187
    Nice looking setup Kapow. Feedback on the 118 seems to be a bit all over the place with some noting a more locked in feel and others, as yourself, finding them looser. Though that could be a result of an apples to oranges size comparison. Either way, looking forward to winter's return and getting more feedback from other's on the new goat.

    On another note, might let go of my skied one-day WD110s 187cm to make room for some BG110s and J110s. PM if interested.

  13. #12238
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Ten Mile Vistas
    Posts
    3,910
    Quote Originally Posted by peglegg View Post
    On another note, might let go of my skied one-day WD110s 187cm to make room for some BG110s and J110s. PM if interested.
    What didn't you like? Are they mounted at recommended?
    Old's Cool.

  14. #12239
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Bend
    Posts
    147
    Yep. FWIW I've purchased three pairs of skis from them over the past two seasons and two of the three were literally unrideable on hardpack until I got the edges fixed. Love the skis and like buying local, but I do think it's pretty lame to send out brand new skis that aren't ready to ski. Never experienced that with any other brand. When I get a pair of skis in the mail I'm just stoked to get on them and enjoy. The path of least resistance once you realize they're hosed is drop them off at the local shop and pick them up the next morning. Mailing them back to the company so that they can do it for you and then waiting for them to get sent back, while it would save money, is a PIA. I'm pretty easy going on this stuff.

  15. #12240
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,205
    Quote Originally Posted by ASmileyFace View Post
    Who's got a decent amount of time on the new Jeff 110? What are your thoughts? My daily drivers are getting thrashed this season and I'm trying to convince myself I need a 50/50 layup Jeffery for late spring/next season mounted with CAST.
    You may want to PM Session or wait for him to respond to your post but he is a HUGE fan of the 110 Jeff - from what I recall he unloaded Woods and BGs have been on the sidelines because of the 110…


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  16. #12241
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by cmsummit View Post
    What didn't you like? Are they mounted at recommended?
    Mine skied fantastic. Mounted 1/2cm forward with fairly aggressive tail detune. 296bsl w/ Attacks for anyone interested. Goats and Jeffs will just be more manageable for the terrain I ski... lots of steep trees and bumps. For resorts with more open terrain and bowls I'd go Woodsman hands down. Hope you get yours resolved. I think Scott really dialed the ski this year having skied the OG 108 and not really clicking with it.

  17. #12242
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by mn_teleswede View Post
    The White Eagles and White Wolves are my 2 favorite On3p graphics.
    agreed - especially the eagles are just bonkers. So fresh and so clean. My BGs would look even better with Raw or Black pivots, but oh well - fluro orange works too

    Quote Originally Posted by Undertow View Post
    Also, I am with you as I have the 193 Asym SG’s and love them and are my favorite of the 3 Billy’s year have owned…. Will be interesting to see how the two compare and with some other reviews it appears the 118 is well liked...
    Yeah, can't wait to get your take on SG vs BG118s - you are in for some fun times for sure!

    Quote Originally Posted by ASmileyFace View Post
    Who's got a decent amount of time on the new Jeff 110? What are your thoughts? My daily drivers are getting thrashed this season and I'm trying to convince myself I need a 50/50 layup Jeffery for late spring/next season mounted with CAST.
    I thought about doing this with my wood102 50/50s, but in the end I refrained. I want my resort sticks to have a bit more weight, especially in the 100-110 range - aka skis that see low tide variable a lot of the time.

    I do think it is a good idea if you want lower swingweight though.

    Also keep in mind that the stock skis are a bit lighter now than in years past, so I would err toward stock for skis that see a lot of resort use. That is unless you are both wanting lower swing weight and will do some missions with a ton of vert where time on the up needs to be minimized.

    Quote Originally Posted by atree View Post
    Yep. FWIW I've purchased three pairs of skis from them over the past two seasons and two of the three were literally unrideable on hardpack until I got the edges fixed.
    I know that they value feedback when somthing is off. So remember to let them know so that they can adjust whatever went awry in the production.

    Some new Factory Finds were uploaded today ( I think) but a lot of them (Mangos) have gone already. Fancy some tasty C&Ds?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2022_FactoryFinds_210124-8091_1800x1800.jpg 
Views:	115 
Size:	285.5 KB 
ID:	402927
    Last edited by kid-kapow; 01-26-2022 at 10:05 AM.

  18. #12243
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Emerald City
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    man, BGasym 184s truck. They are just soooo good. Especially so after I ditched the silly Shifts and remounted them with a pair of FKS 180s aka brbight pivot 18s. Very nice, even if my skiing is still shit. I still need to detune them a bit more after sharpening them a bit too much last winter, but damn - so much fun when you pick up pace and let them just run.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_5035.jpg 
Views:	163 
Size:	852.0 KB 
ID:	402902

    They are as you'd expect noticeably more ski than BG118 182s. Both are great, if for slightly different uses for the same rider. You def notice the stiffer overall flex and longer ee on asyms, though it is no surprise with the 182 being a tweaked 179 asym. So BG118s 182s are a bit looser and pivots even easier, whereas BGasym 184s have more support throughout and haul.
    Those look beautiful! I wish I had ditched the shifts on my asymBGs for the CAST setup I'd picked up for em sooner...then maybe one of them wouldn't be buried in the snow for the rest of the season

    My friend picked up some new BG 118s, interested to hear how he likes em since I've only got experience on the 116s

  19. #12244
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    ColoRADo
    Posts
    5,871
    The black and white mix-match CD is so, so, so, so incredibly tasty. The swapped sidewalls, too. Swoon.
    You should have been here yesterday!

  20. #12245
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Mostly the Elks, mostly.
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by PowTron View Post
    The black and white mix-match CD is so, so, so, so incredibly tasty. The swapped sidewalls, too. Swoon.
    +1. Glad I already have C&D, or I would be powerless to resist.
    north bound horse.

  21. #12246
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,462
    agreed, those are super nice. I need more powder days, not more powder skis.

    that said, somebody tell me about a Jeffery 102 for an every day driver. I know they're sold out, I'm just wondering.

  22. #12247
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,968
    I have some 2020/21 BG tours (so new light weight core) I’m about to drill and am still waffling on bindings. I have some tectons but am wondering if I should go lighter. It’s a pow touring ski obviously but if the bg shape shines through even with the lighter weight I’d stick with the tectons, if they don’t do well in the 3d it may make sense to mount a lighter option… Any real world input?
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  23. #12248
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    203
    I have the old tour core, but wish I'd gone lighter on the binding. IMO, go with a light u spring, don't ski it in the resort, call it a day

  24. #12249
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by ASmileyFace View Post
    Who's got a decent amount of time on the new Jeff 110? What are your thoughts? My daily drivers are getting thrashed this season and I'm trying to convince myself I need a 50/50 layup Jeffery for late spring/next season mounted with CAST.
    I have about 30 days this season on a 187 Jeff 110 with a stiffer flex. I skied them for about 30 days on the stock tune with waxing and polishing edges every two days of skiing. The stock tune is phenomenal if you like looser overall feel to the ski.

    The Jeff 110 floats above its waist width (that is based off the past two storms the Sierras were blessed with this year) and they just truck through soft chop after it gets tracked out. Following up on the day or two after the storm when skiing refrozen leftovers they are still really fun and stable off piste and in tracked out trees.

    On low tide days they still rip. I remember reading on the blister review of the Jeff 108(I know it’s a different ski) that they didn’t hold an edge on icy hard pack, well this revised version of that ski does really well. Whether I’m doing switch carves down corduroy or doing my best impression of a GS turn they have reliable grip.


    I mounted mine with a CAST and on Bc windboard/sastrugi they hold their own. Lastly they do great in variable Bc snow conditions. Not as well as a more directional offering but if you like to spin and throw tricks in the Bc then the Jeff should definitely be on your radar.




    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  25. #12250
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by PowTron View Post
    The black and white mix-match CD is so, so, so, so incredibly tasty. The swapped sidewalls, too. Swoon.
    Ain't that the truth. Being the latest iteration they should also have the new, reduced tail rocker - so it could be that these represent the high water mark for a chargy C&D if the next generation is made more pow specific. So if you want a BG that is even wider than 118 and have a bit rounder flex pattern in the shovels for max floatation, then this is a good time to pounce.

    I took my 184 C&Ds out today (full day except one run on woodsman116s), and man - aren't they just something. So loose yet supportive. I am so pleased with these skis - they make me able to ski deep fresh just like I prefer to. My 184s have more tail splay than the 21/22s on offer now, but the tails are still very supportive. And yes, def improvement with Pivots over Shifts on these as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eluder View Post
    I have some 2020/21 BG tours (so new light weight core) I’m about to drill and am still waffling on bindings. I have some tectons but am wondering if I should go lighter. It’s a pow touring ski obviously but if the bg shape shines through even with the lighter weight I’d stick with the tectons, if they don’t do well in the 3d it may make sense to mount a lighter option… Any real world input?
    I can't speak to BGtours, but BG108tour 184s are still very supportive in spite of being lighter. They still have that awesome shape and supportive flex pattern so that you can rally, but you def notice them being lighter than stock in dense variable.

    That being said, Tectons are a good choice, as is say ATK FR12-16s - it just depends on what you prioritize. Front elasticity at a 350gr weight penalty (increased smoothness in variable snow) or max light weight for the ups while still being ready to charge. The more fresh snow they will see the more I would err toward type ATKs. A shit ton of people in my neck of the woods ride pow with skis that weigh kind of the same as BGtours with tech bindings, and most seem very happy with that kind of setup. I prefer Tectons/Vipecs, but mostly because I just hate the harsheness of regular tech toes.

Posting Permissions

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