ON3P SKIS Discussion

[PeachesNCream]

Pics didn’t work for me, but very curious to hear more about these lower camber BGs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also I probably missed this, but sounds like the jeff118 got lower camber as well. Has anyone been on the lower camber jeff118? Sounds money


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PeachesNCream]

It wouldn’t let me post. Do we have to use a Google share now?

I use Tapatalk where pics still seem to be working so couldn’t tell ya. But non-Tapatalk users are all not able to post pics


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

Also I probably missed this, but sounds like the jeff118 got lower camber as well. Has anyone been on the lower camber jeff118? Sounds money


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cocoapuff loves his. I’m sure he will chime in!

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

This work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MHSP1497]

Also I probably missed this, but sounds like the jeff118 got lower camber as well. Has anyone been on the lower camber jeff118? Sounds money


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is money. In the right snow…

[cocoapuff]

It is money. In the right snow…

Ditto

[ASmileyFace]

Those bases are unbelievable. What a score. That rocker profile looks money with the low camber.

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

Those bases are unbelievable. What a score. That rocker profile looks money with the low camber.

I’m really pumped on it. I know the 187 was pretty dialed so I’m hoping I’m getting some of the positive traits from both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sf]

What’s the mount point on the newest gen BGs?

[Sylvan]

191 is -10.5, .25 cennies forward per size from there.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[The Iron Horse]

191 is -10.5, .25 cennies forward per size from there.

The 181 is actually -9.5 (81cm from the tail) although it is listed as -10 on the website. I contacted ON3P about the discrepancy and they replied that the chart on the website was mistakenly listing flat mount vs final. Not sure if that pertains to all the lengths.

[PeachesNCream]

It is money. In the right snow…

Little looser, little less versatile?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sf]

The 181 is actually -9.5 (81cm from the tail) although it is listed as -10 on the website. I contacted ON3P about the discrepancy and they replied that the chart on the website was mistakenly listing flat mount vs final. Not sure if that pertains to all the lengths.

Thanks.
Didn’t know they had started putting it on the site.

Looking forward to hearing peoples views on the bg108.

[MHSP1497]

Little looser, little less versatile?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No… it’s just not the right tool for dust on boilerplate snow. Anything soft and 3+ inches deep and they’re glorious. They’re just a lot to manage on icy boilerplate, scraped-off groomers. The Jeffrey 108 is much more composed in these conditions. Still not awesome, but are less of a problem child.

[PeachesNCream]

No… it’s just not the right tool for dust on boilerplate snow. Anything soft and 3+ inches deep and they’re glorious. They’re just a lot to manage on icy boilerplate, scraped-off groomers. The Jeffrey 108 is much more composed in these conditions. Still not awesome, but are less of a problem child.

I mean a 118 ski on boilerplate is usually not a good combo, but good to know. Pretty stoked on this less camber situation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sessiøn]

Little looser, little less versatile?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not at all. I actually felt the soft snow performance was unchanged. However they felt more composed going fast in chunder.

[cocoapuff]

Not at all. I actually felt the soft snow performance was unchanged. However they felt more composed going fast in chunder.

funny I found myself skiing much faster and more composed than I expected down crusty low elevation groomers back to the lift in a year where the only quality snow was on upper 1/3. Probably just anecdotal. No idea why that would be on current iteration and less camber. But I surprised myself. Or the J118 surprised me. Oh and so so surfy in pow. I ski mine at -1.5cm.

[Jvhowube]

funny I found myself skiing much faster and more composed than I expected down crusty low elevation groomers back to the lift in a year where the only quality snow was on upper 1/3. Probably just anecdotal. No idea why that would be on current iteration and less camber. But I surprised myself. Or the J118 surprised me. Oh and so so surfy in pow. I ski mine at -1.5cm.

Seems like they'd be kinda similar to a Wildcat? Maybe not as stiff? Any insight on that?

[cocoapuff]

Seems like they'd be kinda similar to a Wildcat? Maybe not as stiff? Any insight on that?

I have skied 184 WC's. In comparison, the 186 Jeff requires a more neutral stance. You can drive the WC's shovels harder. The WC's are stiffer, feel more precise and are better on firm. The Jeffs have better float, suspension, and are significantly surfier. They are quicker and more nimble in tight spaces for me as well. More of a true pow ski that handles variable really well whereas the WC is more of a wider all mountain ski that also floats.

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

I had the Chipotle Blades in my cart but bought the finds BG instead.

Was it a sign that I needed to 4/20 blade it with the grizzly corn blade?

(My favorite top and base)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk