Results 7,376 to 7,400 of 14839
Thread: ON3P SKIS Discussion
-
11-17-2019, 03:33 PM #7376
-
11-17-2019, 04:13 PM #7377
-
11-17-2019, 04:33 PM #7378
I mean always from a position of respect... no intention to slaag the brand in the least. But I haven't lied about why I sold my Steeples, either.
Ok, now I STFU
-
11-17-2019, 04:54 PM #7379
adding my 2 cents to the growing pile:
BG, 189cm, 1800g max. no bamboo.
-
11-17-2019, 07:53 PM #7380Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
11-17-2019, 10:22 PM #7381Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2017
- Location
- Evergreen Co
- Posts
- 969
I think 2000g-2100g would be fine if they performed well. I'm happy to save a bit of weight on bindings and work a little harder if they ski great. You can get in better shape but you can't fix a ski that's made compromises.
-
11-17-2019, 11:21 PM #7382Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
-
11-18-2019, 07:15 AM #7383Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2017
- Location
- Evergreen Co
- Posts
- 969
I can agree with that.
I think my fear is always that you chase weight in order to make the specs look good online go further than you out to have. But to your point, Moment’s tour cores ski great in BC snow and they’re around 1800 grams.
An Billy Goat built with similar construction to a Wildcat tour would be pretty incredible.
-
11-18-2019, 08:25 AM #7384
Skis are lookin fine.
Last edited by Norseman; 11-18-2019 at 09:01 AM.
-
11-18-2019, 09:16 AM #7385
Problem > Solution. You can make a ski no one wants and force it down throats, but sales will taper after the hype does. That’s a solution looking for a problem. Iggy knows this.
There’s tons of 2000g skis as galib mentioned. There’s even tons of 1800g skis.
but there are few 1800g skis that are shaped to handle BC snow and execute. The ones that do have a strong following, year over year.
The problem with 2000g skis nowadays isn’t so much the weight, it’s that there are comparable options that weigh less. When we had to pick between a 2100g ski and a terrible 1800g ski, myself included picked the 2100g ski. And was immediately annoyed.
I just won’t buy a touring ski over 1800g anymore. There are too many other good options. There’s room easily for a “best” option at 1800g, aka a BG, but not room for a touring ski at 2000g.
calling a 2000g ski a touring ski is a misnomer. It’s just an inbounds oriented lighter core version of the stock setup at that weight.
-
11-18-2019, 09:20 AM #7386
^ Yep
-
11-18-2019, 09:28 AM #7387
Sorry guys, couldn't be bothered to go through the entire thread.
Anybody got suggestion for a superlight binding to mount on my OG C&Ds?
-
11-18-2019, 09:29 AM #7388
Apologies up front...! Executive summary on difference between BIlly Goat & Woodsman 116?
Seems like woodsman has a shorter turn radius but much else is similar...?
& follow up: differences specific to the 193 sg vs 192 woodsman?
-
11-18-2019, 09:49 AM #7389
-
11-18-2019, 09:51 AM #7390
BG is RES. Woodsman is bi-radius sidecut. BG has a more traditional mounting point, Woodsman has a more forward mount point. BG is a directional powder ski that can get you to/from the lift, Woodsman is a wide all-mountain ski with a more playful side.
As for weight of touring skis, I haven't found a 189cm 115 underfoot ski that weighs 1800g that skis well AT ALL. I haven't tried everything on the market, but c'mon... you need to make serious sacrifices in durability and/or ski feel to get down to that kind of weight on a ski that big.
Sub-2000g is fine for that size of ski. That's 9lbs per pair. Match them with a Salomon MTN Pin or similar and a 1300-1500g boot like an Atomic Hawx XTD 130 and you've got a sweet setup that's not that heavy and skis great.
Yes there are a lot of 2000g skis. And a lot of 1800g skis. You know what there's not? A BG in either of those weight classes.
-
11-18-2019, 09:52 AM #7391
Just got on my new Woodsman 96s yesterday, those things rip! Can’t wait to get out in some softer snow on them. Thanks Iggy for the great work!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
11-18-2019, 10:12 AM #7392
2 totally different designs, in just about every way imaginable. Woodsman = lovechild of Wrenegade + Jeffrey. Billygoat, Cease & Desist, Supergoat are all soft-snow focused and oranges to your apples, as said earlier. Did you even look at ON3P’s site and compare these at all?
-
11-18-2019, 10:33 AM #7393
yeah & still didn't get it...from the web site
- the geometry seems to be within millimeters of each other, except turn radius, which implies a softer (or at least geometrically different) flex [i have no idea what bi-radius vs RES means to my skiing]
- camber profile is indistinguishable
- tip/tail shape is slightly different
- mount point is not shown
- both are directional soft snow skis
my takeaway was the woodsman was a more mobile forgiving ski comparatively
thanks for the replies
-
11-18-2019, 10:42 AM #7394
RES = Reverse Elliptical Sidecut, basically a reverse sidecut design from boot-front forward. Makes the shovel of the ski handle/turn much better in deep, soft snow. It’s effect is much more effective in a wider ski, which is why the Billygoat is 116mm, Cease&Desist is 124mm and Supergoat is 118mm. The back-half of the these skis are more pintailed (Supergoat excepted, it’s got a stouter tail). This gets the tail-half of the ski deeper in the snow as well as allows for a more tradition sidecut to enable hard-snow manageability. These skis are not a first-choice on a hard, no-new-snow-in-weeks day, they’re manageable but not exactly ideal. Anything soft though, 1”+ and these skis are magical. In a way that’s difficult to put into words. They’re very different than any traditional sidecut design ski, so comparing them to skis built that way is a challenge. You’d have to ride them to really understand what we’re all getting at...
-
11-18-2019, 10:44 AM #7395
RES = reverse elliptical sidecut. Basically the front half of the ski, from boot toe forward, is reverse sidecut, but with an elliptical arc that still creates a wide point in the front of the ski. But the curvature of the ski is reverse sidecut all the way from the wide point back to the boot toe. The rear half of the ski has a traditional, positive sidecut. The effect of this is that in 3D snow a RES ski can pivot and slarve nearly as easily as a true reverse sidecut ski (Praxis Pow, Volant Spatula) or a ski with a very dramatic 5-point shape (Armada ARG, Praxis Protest, etc). However, the wide point in the tip and positive sidecut in the tail combine to create a longer effective edge on hard snow, resulting in a ski that feels more manageable on hardpack than other skis with similar 3D snow chops.
Bi-radius sidecut is basically normal sidecut. There's one radius in the front half of the ski, a different radius in the back half of the ski, and the turn radius number you see published is the effective radius of the two combined. Both are normal, positive sidecuts. Many skis are built combining one or more radii into their average radius. Basically, this is a traditional ski.
So as I said, the Billy Goat is a powder-specific ski that can still get you around on hard snow. The Woodsman is a more traditionally shaped ski and should be better on firm snow, a little more easy going, and a little more playful, but won't offer the wonderful non-hooky slarvability of the BG in powder.
-
11-18-2019, 10:59 AM #7396
I still think it's possible... but yes, 1800g is an aggressive goal for the current BG geometry.
Look at the V-Werks line. All those skis fuckin rip and do not feel pingy or overly carbonated. The cores are thin and use the 3D CF cap for torsional rigidity. And they're using poplar and beech/ash, which IMO could be lightened still by going to paulownia or something.
VW Katana 1885g @ 184cm
VW BMT109 1737g @ 186cm
Maybe it's too much work or too expensive to develop a similar milled core and cap, or some other special technique... but a 18x RES ski in the 1800g realm is possible IMO, and I don't think it would ski poorly. The RES shape is inherently stable.
Leave the current line alone, it's so dialed for resort riding.
-
11-18-2019, 10:59 AM #7397
thanks, guys
that's helpful
I have maybe 4hrs total from two days in different seasons on a 189 BG...still need to demo properly
just trying to understand the skis goals...
-
11-18-2019, 11:08 AM #7398
I too would be interested in an 1800g RES billygoat type ski
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
11-18-2019, 11:16 AM #7399
ON3P SKIS Discussion
for touring? for what boots? lots of folks think on3ps too heavy to tour (read the recent discussions about tour layup unicorn requests).
I don’t think too heavy .. I have dynafit rotations on supergoats and also on pillowfights, they do great.
Mounting my C/D with shifts out of necessity, may remount pillows with shifts if i like. a little more control and power on that ‘yüdge ski.
not sure if either fit your definition of ‘super light’ but that’s all i got.north bound horse.
-
11-18-2019, 11:20 AM #7400
The V.Werks Katana is 1880g for the 184cm and 1910g for the 191cm (actually Volkl has those two backwards on their website, which I'm assuming is a typo). A 189 ON3P is probably the same actual length as a 191 Volkl and the Katana is narrower than the Billy Goat shape. So you're asking for another 100g/ski lighter in a wider ski. (Edit: Blister measured the 18/19 V-Werks Katana, in 184cm, at 1960-1975g/ski!)
I just don't see 1800g from ON3P in a 115ish underfoot, 189cm ski in stiffer flexes. They'd have to go thinner bases, thinner edges, no bamboo, and those three things are distinctly not ON3P. I'm not saying it's impossible to build a ski with a Billy Goat shape in that weight class, I'm just saying they would have to make serious tradeoffs in ski performance, durability, or both in order to do that and I just don't see that aligning with ON3P's philosophy as a company.
I maintain that sub-2000g would be a good target for 189cm/115 underfoot. Obviously shorter and narrower skis would be lighter. That's light enough and could realistically and affordably be built, would be substantially lighter than any of the previous tour core skis, and would not require massive sacrifices to achieve.
But this is TGR, where unrealistic expectations are de rigueur.
Bookmarks