Quick review: Sego Big Horn skis

[Climber Joe]

Got a chance to get out on these this week. Skied them in bumped up groomers, 2'+ pow, and chopped pow/crud. They might be the "most days" ski I have been looking for. They have a twin tip tail, early taper, low profile tips, and enough camber to be poppy. I feel like they are the perfect all mountain jib ski when the snow is anything but total trash. They did just fine busting through chopped up deep pow, and didn't bat an eye tossing off pillows cliffs.

I envision these replacing my Qlabs, JJs, and Skinny Billy and doing just fine where all of those shined.

I need to try out the Blizzard Rustler, but I might end up getting these anyway.

I skied the 2017-2018 model, which replaces the carbon with good ol' fiberglass. The rep said people have preferred the glass, and I can't say I wish they were lighter.

[snapt]

I wasn't a fan of some of their earlier stuff but skied the 17/18 Prospect in a 187 a few weekends back and thought it was fantastic. Need to get on the Bighorn as well. Ms. Snapt had good things to say about the UP Pro despite her disdain for Lynsey Dyer.

[ticketchecker]

Any more updates on the Big Horns Joe? Or anyone else have Sego experiences to share?

[Climber Joe]

Any more updates on the Big Horns Joe? Or anyone else have Sego experiences to share?

I haven't had a chance to ski them yet, I had shoulder surgery this fall and I don't want to be getting sendy till the rocks and stumps have better coverage to avoid re-injury. We have 2 Sego reps in the locker room this season though, so there should be several demo pairs going around for people to try. I will gather some reviews and thoughts from others and post them here when I get them, and I will get a more thorough review from myself as soon as I can.

[ticketchecker]

Thanks Joe! Wondering if the Cleaver 102 might fit the bill for your 100ish chargeyish ski thread, which I'm looking for too

[profahoben]

I own the prospect 112 in 187 and sloppy joe in a 189. Very impressed with the build quality on them.

Prospects have A LOT of rocker, and I am very very excited to get them in some actual soft snow. I think they will be a great Squaw pow charger. Very pivoty and really easy to dump speed with. Softer nose than I am used to, but so far on my early season charging they have done great on keeping the chatter down. Little scary on ice, but they are 112 and pretty much full rocker so I expected that. Been keeping the underfoot razor sharp and have been fine.

Sloppy joes....these things have just been awesome so far. I like to compare them to my bentchetlers, but I like them more. Slightly less rocker, and a little more contact area really seems to help them out. Solid underfoot and medium/softish flex in the tips/tail. Held up to the little chunder that i have put them through so far, and they feel more stable than my bents. Got them in a couple inches of soft stuff at squaw last week, and my god I cant wait for a deep storm to play around on them. Popped some 3s off natural airs and the swing weight was great.

There is my little flash review on both of those. If any of y'all have a 295ish bsl boot and are in Tahoe, I would be willing to let you take a couple runs on them

[anotherVTskibum]

I've got three short days in on my Bighorn 96s so far. I bought them intending to use them for springtime couloir chasing, perhaps some sled-accessed skiing, and maybe touring when the snow is on the firm side and my Huascarans aren't a great choice. I'm now thinking they're very likely to become my go-to all-mountain ski for any day that doesn't warrant 135 underfoot or call for the charge-everywhere mode the Lhasas seem to prefer.

They're a little nervous straightrunning on groomed snow, but they ski just fine when on edge, and they're pretty damn good off the groom.

Getting them mounted proved slightly more involved then I had hoped, because the bootcenter line on one ski appears to have been applied with the ski in the wrong direction (85cm to the tip instead of 85cm to the tail). Talked with the guy mounting them about it and settled on 85cm to the tail as bootcenter on both skis, which matches how one ski was marked.

They do seem to hold up well to shark attacks, I found a few good ones the other day but still have minimal base and edge damage.

[Climber Joe]

I have been spending lots of time on the Big Horns in the past few weeks, and I continue to enjoy them.

I decided to mount them farther back than recommended, due to the recommended mount being only 3.5cm back from true center. I think I put them at 5cm from true center, and I think I would even enjoy them farther back, but they ski great at -5.

My ONLY gripe with the Big Horns is the flex. The flex underfoot and through the camber is a nice responsive, poppy mid-stiff flex. The rockered portions of the tip and tail however, are way too soft. In untouched pow its not really a problem, but in heavier pow the tip flexes too much and create a drag force that is noticeable and frustrating. In choppy stuff or heavier slop/windpack it becomes even more noticeable. The tip will bend to the point where the front of the ski starts to put the brakes on. The Bighorn could easily be considered a big mountain jib ripper, but with the tip and tail flex as soft as it is, its simply a fun jibby ski with a weight/speed limit.

By stiffening the tip and tail they would make the Big Horn much more resilient and skiable in chop/crud or at speed, and the only real compromise would be that the ski is smoother in pow, which I would consider a good thing. I also think the tip and tail should be tapered slightly more, to keep the sidecut matched to the camber, but they ski fine how they are.

I had originally thought that these might replace my ON3P skinny billy, but after spending more time on them I have decided they will just be my work skis, and the Skinny Billy will be my freeskiing version.

Disclaimer: I have the demo pair from last year, so while they are this years model, I don't know for certain if they are the same layup. Could be different.

[mr_pretzel]

I have been spending lots of time on the Big Horns in the past few weeks, and I continue to enjoy them.

My ONLY gripe with the Big Horns is the flex.

That's too bad, I was excited to try them from your earlier reviews, but I absolutely hate when tips and tails give up at speed

The Condor Ti they are releasing next year looks interesting. Not too interested in the Tatir tot, symmetrical skis er meh

[Climber Joe]

That's too bad, I was excited to try them from your earlier reviews, but I absolutely hate when tips and tails give up at speed

The Condor Ti they are releasing next year looks interesting. Not too interested in the Tatir tot, symmetrical skis er meh

I agree about symmetrical skis. they are basically garbage.

[anotherVTskibum]

I decided to mount them farther back than recommended, due to the recommended mount being only 3.5cm back from true center. I think I put them at 5cm from true center, and I think I would even enjoy them farther back, but they ski great at -5.

Interesting. My 181 Big Horn 96s had the line at -5cm back from center (well, er, one of them did, the other had it at +5cm, like someone had just come back from a smoke break and put the line on with the ski facing the wrong way...and yes, we made very sure that we didn't have a ski pointing in the wrong direction, even considered that the topsheet might be upside-down).

Figured that -5cm seemed reasonable and went with it, and I think I'm happy with the positioning...I've enjoyed them in everything except variable, soft-ish conditions with some mankiness mixed in, and I'm not quite sure if that was me, the skis, or the snow—they felt a little harder to stay balanced on than my other all-mountain skis (Lhasas in a 186 and a pair of Dynafit Huascarans in a 177 both seem a little more forgiving in crappier snow), but again, that could be me, it could be the skis, it could be the ramp angle of the Tectons, or it could be some combination of the above.

[Climber Joe]

Interesting. My 181 Big Horn 96s had the line at -5cm back from center (well, er, one of them did, the other had it at +5cm, like someone had just come back from a smoke break and put the line on with the ski facing the wrong way...and yes, we made very sure that we didn't have a ski pointing in the wrong direction, even considered that the topsheet might be upside-down).

Figured that -5cm seemed reasonable and went with it, and I think I'm happy with the positioning...I've enjoyed them in everything except variable, soft-ish conditions with some mankiness mixed in, and I'm not quite sure if that was me, the skis, or the snow—they felt a little harder to stay balanced on than my other all-mountain skis (Lhasas in a 186 and a pair of Dynafit Huascarans in a 177 both seem a little more forgiving in crappier snow), but again, that could be me, it could be the skis, it could be the ramp angle of the Tectons, or it could be some combination of the above.

No that sounds about right. Variable density snow bends/knocks the tips around. They are just too soft up there.