Check Out Our Shop
Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 12 13 14 15 16 17
Results 401 to 416 of 416
  1. #401
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    612
    Gaijin, are you still on Renegades mostly for soft snow days??

    Having owned the OG Renegade and the EHP in the past, I’d say those skis are legitimately faster in pow. The lack of camber and straight shape make them missiles, even when the entire ski is below the surface of the snow. Enough so that I had to adapt my technique in pow and turn more often when I used them.

    But for my tastes, I do prefer the BO118 for resort pow days now. Interesting take on human size versus mount point above… I’m 5’9” 150lbs and have my 186cm BO118s mounted at -1 cm from rec (-3.5cm from TC).

    As far as trampoline bounce Mario-jibby skis go: maybe Karl’s new pro model?? Never hand flexed or skied it but the Blister description is intriguing

    https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...k2-reckoner-kf

  2. #402
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    4,539
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post

    Having owned the OG Renegade and the EHP in the past, I’d say those skis are legitimately faster in pow. The lack of camber and straight shape make them missiles, even when the entire ski is below the surface of the snow. Enough so that I had to adapt my technique in pow and turn more often when I used them.

    But for my tastes, I do prefer the BO118 for resort pow days now. Interesting take on human size versus mount point above… I’m 5’9” 150lbs and have my 186cm BO118s mounted at -1 cm from rec (-3.5cm from TC).
    The Moment Chipotle Banana isn’t quite as much of a frictionless missile in untracked snow as the EHP and OG HALS Renegades but I prefer them for resort pow skiing since they’re so much more friendly and easier on the legs in chop and condensed snow. They destroy chop. But OG 196 Renegades are the best untracked powder ski I’ve ever used, more fun than Praxis Powderboards in my opinion.

    I’m 5’7’’ and I weigh about 165lb now and I’ve got the CBs -1 from recommended putting them at about -6cm from center. Had the Rens at -6cm when I weighed closer to 190lb.

  3. #403
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,324
    the point of the camber and weight is to add suspension, and to make a shape that is very loose and easy to ski at speed still be stable going mach looney regardless of snow condiitions (the same reason Volkl added camber to the R121 according to Markus Eder). Sure, they do - like other similar design such as MFree118, Koala 118 - require a bit of speed and skill to unlock said looseness. Yet to compare them to a full rocker designs skied in dry japanese, low angle untracked pow and mentioning trampoline as a design goal in the same sentence is missing the point entirely imho - juiced up or no. Sure, they will never be as frictionless as fully rockered ski in any snow condition, but then again they are not trying to be - so I am kinda unsure what nuance we are trying to unlock here?

  4. #404
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    camber + weight + supportive but still round flex pattern = suspension



    ah, no - my bad. I do not think that they change drastically from size to size though, and yes - the tune has been off on both of my pairs as well. Detuning the edges makes a for a ton of difference. If they reviews state that they are unwieldy, the tails get kinda stuck or are hooky and they are generally a handful -> detuning the edges forward/aft of the contact points and resetting the edge bevel underfoot will likely be the ticket. I did so on my latest pair, and it transformed them from being unexplainably a lot of ski off piste to being easy as can be, yet supportive.

    you can prob find them at killer prices now too, as they the current mountain graphic ski does not carry over to 24/25 - only the super black ops with neon colors do. BO98s are no longer in the catalogue. So you might as well just buy a pair, and sell them with a minimal loss if they are not what you hoped that they would be.

    I prefer BO98s to SF110s in slush. A bit more nimble, lighter but still heavy enough, and easy to schmear around.

    yeah, on3ps are even looser off piste in corn/slush, but that flip side is that the Rossis are better on hard snow - so pick your poison
    Outside of corn/slush the BO118s are everything I wanted the Kartel 116s to be. In fluffy, dry, untouched powder I think Kartel 116s did float a little better than BO118s, but if I know I'm skiing untouched I'm gonna pick out a wider ski (130mm+).

    I've read some people complain about the BO118s performance in powder. I'm a larger dude mounted -3.5 from true center, and I don't have any issues. They are such beefy skis, they float well for basically being submarines lol! I find them about as good as any of the Billy Goats I've tried (save for Supergoat) in untouched, dry powder. I never loved BGs in "perfect" snow. I felt the Kartels were better in the fluffy powder, and BGs were more for resort powder skiing (mostly chop bumps where I ski) as well as thick/dense wet untracked or chop. In the thick Sierra cement, BO118s perform about equal to Wildcats and slightly worse than BGs. Which is very impressive because the Wildcats have that longer radius and were designed for Tahoe, and BGs are the best in that stuff. BGs obviously aren't even on the same planet as the BO118 or WC on firmer snow.

    I think I am going to get some 101/118 Wildcats to directly compare to the BO98/118 next season. I'm craving Wildcats more than those $649 BGs or $599 Wren Pros in Factory Finds.

  5. #405
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    5,198
    If I’m going to ski deep snow but I’m unsure of the quality, I grab my BO118’s. As others have started, they cover similar ground as Billy Goats but seem more versatile. Still love my RES BG.s, but they didn’t get skied much this season as those other skis are less of a compromise.


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  6. #406
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    I’m going back and forth on whether or not I actually want BGs anymore. The best days I had skiing 2015 191 and 2017 189 BGs were the deep chop days where they just steamroll over everything like hero skis, when everyone else is stuck on their mortal skis. BO118s do that just as well.

    BGs crush dense snow, but so do Bodacious. Between BO118 and Bodacious, I feel like I’m covered for BG-conditions, and better prepared for firmer stuff.

    I’m also afraid they lost some BG magic. When I look at the new shape, idk if it’s just in my head or not, but I feel like I’m seeing more of a normal shape/sidecut compared to 2015s and 2017s. Especially the 2015 191 tip shape, looks so different.

    New 191 BGs seem like a no go. I don’t need more big powder skis like Supergoat that are too big for the chop bumps I ski on resort pow days. I mean I want the 191s, I wish I was flush enough to heli ski or I could ski big mtn, steep untracked lines more.

    I’d have to go 186, and the sizing makes overlap worse with 186 BO118 and 186 Bodacious.. versus the 191. Those $649 Mangos are so baller tho. I have some Forza 3.0s that would look so good on them.
    Last edited by forumskier; 05-10-2024 at 11:16 PM.

  7. #407
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,725
    ^^ being a forum dweeb myself, this is what I was wondering about a big cambered ski finally figuring out how to be loose.

    The BG chat has faded, although still has a cult. The MFree108 crowd chimed in, but I always wondered if that chatter was short-term. This new BO118 chat is rekindling my intrigue for a playful, bouncy cambered ski that also drifts and trons like a Ren.

    That combo seems to be what most manufacturers are aiming at. Almost a one-ski powder quiver. And we all know how hard it is to pull that off.

    Marshall calling the R110 a baby of the Renegade and the MFree108 really caught my attention. So I ordered it. (as a non-new-snow supplement to my Ren.)

    Is the BO118 another attempt at bridging these cultures?

    I wonder how springy the R110 or R120 will be.

    Maybe a C120 will be our next evolution.

    Fun times.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  8. #408
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Gaijin, are you still on Renegades mostly for soft snow days??

    Having owned the OG Renegade and the EHP in the past, I’d say those skis are legitimately faster in pow. The lack of camber and straight shape make them missiles, even when the entire ski is below the surface of the snow. Enough so that I had to adapt my technique in pow and turn more often when I used them.

    But for my tastes, I do prefer the BO118 for resort pow days now. Interesting take on human size versus mount point above… I’m 5’9” 150lbs and have my 186cm BO118s mounted at -1 cm from rec (-3.5cm from TC).

    As far as trampoline bounce Mario-jibby skis go: maybe Karl’s new pro model?? Never hand flexed or skied it but the Blister description is intriguing

    https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...k2-reckoner-kf
    Yes... still a Ren guy for fresh snow forests in JP. My ski is 10 years old now and while I really cannot fathom how a ski could be better in fresh forests, I do want to acknowledge that it is a decade old, and I may be fairly naive.

    Fresh snow, my Owl/Hals ren is absurd. But... and this is a big BUT... I hate crud on that ski. No suspension. Ten years ago we really had to trade suspension for crud vs reverse camber for smooth fresh snow.

    I'm on a legit quest to find a ski that melds both worlds as best it can. I'm guessing Heritage is on my path at the moment. But I'm legit curious if this BO118 is poppy as well as easy to surf... perhaps it reads as Best in Class at the moment with HL C120ST (or R120ST) being next up for a thread of reviews.

    I can't recall any other ski on the market aside from this BO (and the HL) that has me remotely curious for bridging this gap in pow ski performance.

    I admit it's a big ask. That's a big gap. And it's why I wait. "The answer is to have 5 pairs of skis." I agree with you.

    Maybe the solution is a poppy wood (bamboo) and a poppy shell (carbon) and a flatish camber.

  9. #409
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    I don’t find the BO118s poppy. Maybe slightly more than flat camber, equally heavy Bodacious, but that’s not saying much.

    They soak up most of the energy put into them, whether from me or the mountain and snow conditions. I sometimes find myself wishing they would “pop” more off stuff, since they are so confidence inspiring and catch-free I just want to throw a 720 lol (I cant, but BO118 make me feel like anything is possible)

    I do find them very “sendy” though. They get going so fast, so quickly they can send far distances. They are great takeoff and landing platforms. I just don’t feel like I’m getting a lot of pop or height for tricks. They feel super jibby, and make me want to try new things so badly, but they aren’t actually the best ski for getting that extra rotation. Unless you’re a pro**.

    All forgiven when you realize that lack of pop is why they have class leading suspension. Gravity Fed Led Sled

    I can feel the camber on BO118s in their precision. It’s very noticeable, just not for much pop. BGs do feel more like a reverse camber ski to me, much less precise. My 2015 BGs and AeverSupergoats were way more poppy than BO118. 2017 goats were slightly more poppy than BO118s

  10. #410
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,324
    BGs aint dead. The current iteration is on paper the perfect mix of pre-asym and asym BGs. Both main generations were freaking magical for hauling in dense snow, and based on my time on pre-asyms, asyms and last years post-asyms, all are very good soft snow skis.

    BO118s feel pretty different when skied though. They are much more in the snow, whereas BGs just hatefuck their way through it. The best way to describe the differences is that the magic of BGs to me is slightly in front of the toe binding, whereas the BO118s magic is in schmearing the tails all over the place. Yes - that is an odd description when considering the pin tail design of the BG, yet the BG is a directional ski with loose tails while the BO118 is progressive ski that is loose. Both are heavy, both are freaking amazing.

    And yes, sadly - I have too been considering if I really need the BG in the quiver. I prefer C&Ds in untracked (and in super dense snow(, and BO118s are as stated above more versatile while being magical for most conditions, so....

    The roofbox is only that big ya know.

    As I've mentioned in other threads - I am frankly surprised at just how much I am enjoing my time on BO98s, SF110s and BO118s (and C&D 189s).

  11. #411
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    I'm almost sure the 192 BO98s are my next ski

    190 Wildcat 101s I think will be too stiff for what I'm looking for

    Kid Kapow, it's AEV/Betel/Beetle/Velo. My real name is Vail. Where do you live again? Europe right?

    I agree that the BGs feel more in the tip than pintail. And the BO118s feel suprisingly pintail in soft snow for 118-14x

  12. #412
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by forumskier View Post
    Where do you live again? Europe right?
    This is where I ski 98% of the time:


    you are a strong skier. BO98s might not be the solution to all your narrow ski needs, but they are sure to a ski a ton of things well. I bought a pair of 180 Sender 106 ti+ to get a stronger ski between the BO98 and SF110, but - found the BO98s to be more capable, and looser and just more fun. Especially the section forward of the binding seems kinda underwhelming on the 106ti+.

    You know how big of a ON3P fan boii I am, and I do so want to order me some ON3Ps, I just find it so hard to justify replacing said BO98, SF110, BO118 quiver - they just all ski so damned well.
    Last edited by kid-kapow; 05-17-2024 at 10:51 AM.

  13. #413
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    This is where I ski 98% of the time:


    you are a strong skier. BO98s might not be the solution to all your narrow ski needs, but they are sure to a ski a ton of things well. I bought a pair of 180 Sender 106 ti+ to get a stronger ski between the BO98 and SF110, but - found the BO98s to be more capable, and looser and just more fun. Especially the section forward of the binding seems kinda underwhelming on the 106ti+.

    You know how big of a ON3P fan boii I am, and I do so want to order me some ON3Ps, I just find it so hard to justify replacing said BO98, SF110, BO118 quiver - they just all ski so damned well.
    Ahh yes, you’ve shown me where you ski before. Thanks for the reminder.

    Interesting take on the 106Ti+. I have actually been looking into the 106Ti+ after I saw the 2350g/ski weight in the largest length, and read some reviews saying “big mtn” things..but maybe that’s all in the tail. Your reaction to the section forward of the binding sounds like my experience with Nordica Enforcers. Skis a lot of people found to be charger, but that I couldn’t rely on the tips AT ALL off piste (I’ve had softer skis I can rely on more, IDK what it was(hinge point versus consistent flex pattern?)).

    I don’t need another wide ski, I need 98 and under so BO98 definitely should be the one. What now is hanging me up with the BO98s is I’ve been reading a couple of east coast US reviews talking about how they do better in soft snow and aren't the best for firm snow. I’m buying something under 100mm underfoot for the sole purpose of firm snow and low tide, so maybe I should be thinking about something thinner or different(like the more precise and better sized for me 186 Unleashed 98). I would like something shorter than the 192 BO98s, quite a bit heavier, and absolutely rips firm snow. Idk if it exists. Think 184 Head Monster 98 with a twin tip, or just a 20mm thinner all around 186 BO118, thats 2350g/ski instead of 2550. Now I’m dreaming.



    For anyone looking, Slope Style in Breck has 186 BO118s for $469. He’s a mag on here, sometimes he takes off a few percentage points for mag deals.

    Levelnine also has them for $469 with code extra15, which ends tonight at Midnight mountain time I think.

    I’m probably going to buy a backup set of swamp 118s. They are too good to chance it. I have high hopes for the 95% same Sender Free 118s.

  14. #414
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by forumskier View Post
    Interesting take on the 106Ti+. I have actually been looking into the 106Ti+ after I saw the 2350g/ski weight in the largest length, and read some reviews saying “big mtn” things..but maybe that’s all in the tail. Your reaction to the section forward of the binding sounds like my experience with Nordica Enforcers. Skis a lot of people found to be charger, but that I couldn’t rely on the tips AT ALL off piste (I’ve had softer skis I can rely on more, IDK what it was(hinge point versus consistent flex pattern?)).
    I think it is a length thing. Most people seem to find the 187 and 192 sender 106 ti+ to be a lot of ski. And to be fair to the 180s - I've done like five runs on them, so hardly a comprehensive review. I might have gone into it thinking that they would be more ski due to being told of people struggling with the 187s + I def need to ski them more to unlock their secret sauce. It could've been that I should have went with 187s, but the idea was to get something potent that was still nimble. I might have overthought it a bit - after all BO98s and SF110s are pretty damned capable for what they are.

    re BO98s - they are great if you want something playful/loose that can also be skied hard. If you want a groomer zoomer or piste carver, well, then there are other skis that are better, yet the titanal underfoot together with a damp and pretty poppy construction still make the BO98 pretty damn solid on groomers. They honestly do all I need them to.

    and to be clear - my quiver goal is to have as "few" skis as makes sense to me - so a 98-110-(116-)118-124-(124) resort ski quiver makes sense to me in that regard. I am not looking to bring super niche skis into it, but build a quiver of condition appropriate skis that do a lot of things more than well enough. I am a bit surprised that I have so many Rossi skis now to be honest, but then again - their combination of dialed shapes and construction using different materials to bring forth different characteristics is something I can appreciate.

  15. #415
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    55
    I definitely would want the BO98s for off piste. Pretty much exclusively, except seeking out some park laps too. They would have to turn into my dedicated mogul ski for firm/low tide/refrozen spring. I need something to replace 2015 full rocker 191 Mantras that currently fill that role. The Mantras are very precise on edge, but super loose when not, and this combo is excellent off piste in weird firm moguls for me. On Mantras I can slow down and pick my way through huge refrozen moguls, or zipper as best I can when they get a little nicer. NEED my next ski to all do this as well, that’s exactly what I’m looking for.

    I just want a little camber without getting rid of too much looseness, as well as a twin tip for messing around more. Blackops 98 and Wildcat 101s seem the closest thing for me.

    Looking back, although I did really enjoy them for other reasons, Moment PB&Js (Wildcat 101 without dual radius) weren't quite loose enough when I wanted them to be in moguls, nor precise enough when I needed them to be on super firm steeps. Better in the park, but not as loose nor precise as M4 Mantra. If BO98s can manage to be looser than Wildcat 101s because of the softer ends of the tips/tails, as well as more precise underfoot being a Rossi*, they could work really well for me. *I’ve never loved Moment skis edge grip, except for Wildcat 118s, the widest lol. I don’t love Wildcat 108s edge grip. I’m looking for a lot more grip underfoot from my next twin tip, but also looser. Hard to find both in one ski like the full rocker metal skis have, but at least I’ve never been disappointed by the edge grip of a Rossi.

    I generally still like very precise skis off piste too. I mostly ski off piste, so if I have enjoyed a set of skis, I’ve enjoyed them off piste. Loved Monster 98s/108s off piste, love all my Volkls off piste that I read the masses complain about being unforgiving off trail. A 184 Monster 98 twin tip that was slightly longer (186) would be perfect for me. Not loose, but now short enough that I can manhandle them around anywhere tight, and still stable enough for me. I can’t find any super beast twins like this ha, I guess expectedly.

    A lot of this is confusing for me to type, because some sounds contradictory with me liking loose and precise in the same ski. But something does seem right with the BO98s, and I may have re-convinced myself that they are the right ski for me to replace M4 Mantras.

  16. #416
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    222
    just mounted up these Sender 118’s.
    Pretty much skied the last few pair of BO 118’s I owned on the line but decided to go back a couple cm on these. I know I know why the Solly Strives vs the usual Pivots.
    They look saucy and I wanted to try a Strive 16. 240 grams a pair lighter than Pivot 15’s fwiw. This pair had some pretty Gucci individual weight numbers. Within 8 grams of each other at 2479 and 2487. Flex is strong AF. The tail and tips flex similar to years past but the fore body and just behind the bindings feel stronger or I’m just weaker now.
    I have mounted a couple pair of these and most ya already know to do this but I both tap and countersink the holes after drilling. Turns out bueno if ya do but thats just me. Previously I believe 3.6 x 9.5 was the bit size to use. These are stamped 3.5 x 9.0/9.5.
    Have all the bit sizes pretty much but I chose 3.6 x 9.5 and it was perfect.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1716342822.264980.jpg 
Views:	8 
Size:	1.84 MB 
ID:	494030Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8489.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	1.64 MB 
ID:	494031Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8488.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	1.87 MB 
ID:	494032Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1716342921.672768.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	1.23 MB 
ID:	494033


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Posting Permissions

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