Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,233

    Who owns a Skinny Billy?

    Does yours have RES? Does it ski like you’d expect aka a slimmed down BG? Observations? Guess this applies to Steepl owners too now that I think about it??
    I started a dating advice app because I always need advice

    Charmed Chat lets you tinder for your friends

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    6,426
    I skied a res pair. I think for that width range a shape that allows slightly better hard snow performance is better. They are loose and pivoty like a billygoat but narrow. I didn’t really enjoy them that much for skiing in the resort. Touring would be a different situation I think.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    105
    I just got on a steeple 108 with res and heavy core and I'm into it. Not many days on them but ^he's pretty much right I think. Never skied a real bg. I got it because I wanted a single resort ski that would be fun always and I feel like it nails that need. It'd be a weird quiver ski though, something else will be better on any given day. Observations are that it sometimes has less edge grip on firm than I expect, it floats better than 108 should and it's a blast in "used snow." I appreciate the weight in the resort, but now I wish I had a touring core pair too.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,063
    I have a steeple 102. Amazed on what it does in deep or funky snow. Skis like a 120. On the hill it does get loose when flat . Roll it over on edge and it stabilizes and rails. I’d like a 108 in the same build. Even with light dynafit speeds on my 102 it’s still doesn’t get bounced around on the hill

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    ...big fog
    Posts
    760
    I have a pair of steeple 102 extra stiff with res mounted with KP’s for slack/ yo yo laps. They really handle all conditions well and ski much fatter when the snow gets deep. Had them in 18” of dry Idaho snow today and they stayed.

    Skied them in the resort with pivots previously and liked them for general purpose stash searching.....but agree that something flatter might suit most resorts better especially if the snow is not soft
    one step forward, no step backward

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    185
    My old 102’s punched way above their width in Japan pow. Honestly miss the Steeple 102. Best quiver of one tour ski I’ve owned.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,063
    Anyone had the steeple 112? Did they have res? That might be a better compliment to my 102 rather than I 108. I’m not into assym skis

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SW, CO for now
    Posts
    553
    I have the a stiffer 102 version from a few years back that have been my go to ski for the past few seasons. They pull above their weight width wise. Their soft snow capability is silly. As a touring quiver of one I have been extremely happy.

    Recently I've been driving them hard inbounds too. If there is any soft snow to play in they thrive. They don't seem to have much of a speed limit until you hit the hard pack, where they still carve well enough to have fun.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Anyone had the steeple 112? Did they have res? That might be a better compliment to my 102 rather than I 108. I’m not into assym skis
    I have the 116, which I've been touring on and digging a lot. It's my first RES ski, but so far no complaints, but I've really only skiied it in soft snow so far.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Anyone had the steeple 112? Did they have res? That might be a better compliment to my 102 rather than I 108. I’m not into assym skis
    I had the Steeple 112s and used them inbounds a few days when it was soft. They were epic. I always wanted a heavy core version, no asym, I think it would have been more versatile than the BGs.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,063
    Nice. Was thinking a 112 W CAST set up would be good. Maybe too heavy for outright touring but crush it in/out of the gate

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,233
    Good beta in here. From owners of the 102/108 that also owned the 116 — which was the better compliment? Would you say the 102 because if you’re on the 108, you could probably be on the 116?

    If anyone is getting rid of 102 or 108 Steeple or Billy w/ RES, HMU!
    I started a dating advice app because I always need advice

    Charmed Chat lets you tinder for your friends

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Nice. Was thinking a 112 W CAST set up would be good. Maybe too heavy for outright touring but crush it in/out of the gate
    With the newer shift/tecton designs, they would rock as a 50/50 soft snow ski. That was one of my favorite On3ps ever.

    With the tour core, I actually thought that they floated better in softer fluffier snow than BGs do, but obviously not as good in resort chop/crud as BGs. Both are similar in deep heavy wet snow. The steeple 112 felt “carvier” than my 2015 191 BGs, and more similar to my 2017 189 BGs.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    194
    Steeple 108s continue to check a lot of touring boxes for me. Predictable and easy to ski in everything from firm windboard to deep pow. As others have suggested, they punch well above their waist width in deep snow and will surf, slash and rip any sort of turn you want in pow. Would I go ski groomers all day with them? Probably not. Will they get you down steep, firm slopes in the back country? You bet! These have been the best touring quiver of one that I have been on. Sure they could be lighter, but the combination of pop and dampness that they deliver is really well balanced and fun. I personally wouldn't be willing to change the ski's character for the sake of some grams.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Betelgeuse View Post
    With the newer shift/tecton designs, they would rock as a 50/50 soft snow ski. That was one of my favorite On3ps ever.

    With the tour core, I actually thought that they floated better in softer fluffier snow than BGs do, but obviously not as good in resort chop/crud as BGs. Both are similar in deep heavy wet snow. The steeple 112 felt “carvier” than my 2015 191 BGs, and more similar to my 2017 189 BGs.
    Ok good. Kind of what I was thinking . CAST because I’ll put tectons on my gpo’s . Steeples aren’t light so I figured I’d make my standard gpo for touring oriented as they’re lighter than the 112

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Reformed View Post
    Steeple 108s continue to check a lot of touring boxes for me. Predictable and easy to ski in everything from firm windboard to deep pow. As others have suggested, they punch well above their waist width in deep snow and will surf, slash and rip any sort of turn you want in pow. Would I go ski groomers all day with them? Probably not. Will they get you down steep, firm slopes in the back country? You bet! These have been the best touring quiver of one that I have been on. Sure they could be lighter, but the combination of pop and dampness that they deliver is really well balanced and fun. I personally wouldn't be willing to change the ski's character for the sake of some grams.
    Exactly my thinking with the 102. I’d hate to screw them and have a lighter pair and ruin how good they ski. Can
    Only imagine how capable a 108 would be

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    194
    Bumping this up after a couple very different days on Steeple 108s which further convinced me of their radness. Day 1 was a lengthy stroll and a few thousand feet of climbing to ski a zipper crust which transitioned into dust on un-supportive crust over a thin snow pack. "Character building" was the descriptor that was used when all members of the group eventually emerged from the forest. I can't say that the Steeples magically transformed the conditions, but the tips didn't hook, I was able to point them where I wanted to go and the tails broke free when I wanted/needed them to. These traits allowed me to link turns and ski in the fall line for the most part. Lots of other skis that I've been on would have been a hooky mess in these conditions.
    Day 2 was closer to the sort of day that we dream of having in the backcountry: 40 cm of storm snow over a healthy and reasonably well consolidated mid pack. Storm and wind slabs and low viz kept us off of alpine lines, but some steep trees and sub-alpine openings were in play and delivered some great turns. The Steeples' pow performance continues to impress. Zero float issues, any turn size/shape/style and so easy to schmear and dump speed in tighter places. I hate to say it, but if these were mounted alpine or I had tech compatible boots that were a little closer to alpine (currently in OG Maestrale RS) I'd give them a chance on the next pow day at the hill to see if they might take the place of my much-loved 190 Bibbys. My gut feeling is that Steeples might be better in pure pow but likely not as good as Bibbys once things get tracked out. These are good quandaries to have, but in reality they point to the acquisition of a Billy Goat or C&D to fill the role of hill pow day weapon, as it's kind of crazy to be comparing a 108 underfoot touring ski to a 118 underfoot crud killer, but that's what I find myself doing... C&D is increasingly sounding like the way to go for me.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma & Truckee
    Posts
    11,073
    Yes, the skinny Billy's ski like you'd expect. I mostly used them in the backcountry though... benefits of RES and still chargy but a lot lighter.

Posting Permissions

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