Skis you HATED.. Recent edition, 2010 or newer.

[californiagrown]

Fool I got wide feet. That’s what bootfitters are for.

Jong question: Do tele boots need to have as dialed a fit as Alpine boots? Or do they need to have an even more dialed fit? Or does it not really matter?

[snojones]

I was told by the local ski shop, that tele boots did not deal well with manipulation. The same shop told me that AT boots are much the same.

Gosh, sorry I didn't pull that knowledge of the size of your foot out of the ether. MY BAD?!

[PB]

If your extra width is in the front third of your foot, where it almost invariably is, then you're SOL on punching them out due to the flexing bellows. I know cuz I tried it and ruined a $600 pair of Crispi Evo WCs.

So yeah, they don't deal well with the particular manipulation.

[SumJongGuy]

Nobody cares about your tele boot fitter.

[Judo Chop!]

Nobody cares about your tele boot fitter.

he's not wrong.


shitty skis:

Rossignol Super7 195... the one with the weird dark green & brown graphics with bright orange.
- they sucked.
- heavy but not stable.
- super hooky.
- too sensitive to fore/aft for a ski that length. either tip dive or wheelie.
- they would plow and feel like you hit a wall when you transitioned from hard snow to soft.
- they sucked.

I didn't like the Lhasa pows in the 190-whatevr length I had.
- hooky.
- the only ski I ever broke just from doing a turn.

[Vitamin I]

...As for the OG Billygoat hate above... if you thought you the OG 186s were bad at speed, you should try the OG 191 Billygoats, they are the exact opposite. Really not fun at slow speed or in moguls and a ton of work, but if you have the balls to get them up to speed they will smooth everything out and charge as good as anything ive ever been on... especially in variable or chop.

Good point. Yeah, I guess it makes sense that there's a big difference between O.G. BG 186 and O.G. BG 191, because there were like 3 years of ON3P evolution between those two skis. O.G. BG 186 was like a 2009 ski, and O.G. BG 191 was not created in that length until 2012.

So, I wonder which one people in this thread are referring to when they say "O.G. BillyGoat sucked". The 186 2009? Or the 191 2012?

.

[SumJongGuy]

I had always had the impression that the Billy Goats were marketed as the enduro of skis. Designed for picking your way through tight spots, steep trees, narrow chutes, etc at slow to moderate speeds. Saying they suck at high speed is the same as saying a downhill ski sucks on greens. Billy goats aren't race horses.

[SkiLyft]

Billy goats aren't race horses.

Ever skied a goat? Specialty the current gen with asym? Might want to check that assumption.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[2FUNKY]

I had always had the impression that the Billy Goats were marketed as the enduro of skis. Designed for picking your way through tight spots, steep trees, narrow chutes, etc at slow to moderate speeds. Saying they suck at high speed is the same as saying a downhill ski sucks on greens. Billy goats aren't race horses.

Be prepared, the goat hordes are coming.....

[SkiLyft]

Be prepared, the goat hordes are coming.....

Hahah


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SumJongGuy]

Ever skied a goat? Specialty the current gen with asym? Might want to check that assumption.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Not denying it is a blind assumption, simply based on the name of the model. Sounds like they have evolved beyond the name, but seeing that I haven't skied anything over 86 waist in 5 years and spend a lot of my time on narrow carvers and bump skis, GS race stock on cold hard days I'd wager that my GS skis are better at speed on groomed than any BG model ever made. Nice to hear that they do better at cruising. Are they sacrificing any of the maneuverability they were originally designed for to achieve better stability at higher speeds?

[TAFKALVS]

I had always had the impression that the Billy Goats were marketed as the enduro of skis. Designed for picking your way through tight spots, steep trees, narrow chutes, etc at slow to moderate speeds. Saying they suck at high speed is the same as saying a downhill ski sucks on greens. Billy goats aren't race horses.

Living up to your handle quite well here.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

The bad version of the BG was the first year. Couldn't tune the hookiness out of it. A series of major improvements after that.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Lindahl]

Living up to your handle quite well here.

Actually he’s right. The original BG was exactly that. The extreme pintail made it extremely manueverable, but had obvious drawbacks in open terrain at speed. When it was revised in 2011, the pintail was mellowed out quite a bit and it sacrificed some of its manueverability for better manners in more open terrain. They’re noticeably different skis. I’ve owned both. The RES shape in 2012 improved open terrain performance even more while still being manueverable (less pintaily, more reverse sidecutty). The original BG is still much better at banging out quick turns in tight terrain though IMO. Like all highly specialized skis, it did its thing really really well, but outside of that, it required a solid pilot to make it work. The Wrenegade was their open terrain charger. The BG didn’t need to be.

[SkiLyft]

Not denying it is a blind assumption, simply based on the name of the model. Sounds like they have evolved beyond the name, but seeing that I haven't skied anything over 86 waist in 5 years and spend a lot of my time on narrow carvers and bump skis, GS race stock on cold hard days I'd wager that my GS skis are better at speed on groomed than any BG model ever made. Nice to hear that they do better at cruising. Are they sacrificing any of the maneuverability they were originally designed for to achieve better stability at higher speeds?

No doubt a billygoat will not carve as well as a GS ski on ice (shorter EE - no rubber or metal). Compared to a Pro Rider there are areas it will come up short no doubt - once again - more rocker and less EE.

But for charging at looney speeds through chopped up snow, PNW mank, keeping speed through tight trees or slush. It hauls.

Tip it on edge and just stand on that mother fucker and it will rail. Then release on a dime.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Ted Striker]

So, I wonder which one people in this thread are referring to when they say "O.G. BillyGoat sucked". The 186 2009? Or the 191 2012?

First gen. And hate is too strong a word. It's just that they were one trick ponies. My wrens of basically the same vintage were more versatile - and that's telling you something.


EDIT: first year, not first gen. I don't want cause any confusion or cast bad mojo on my favorite ski builders.

[SumJongGuy]

I remember when people were all gaga over the first few series of the Gotama. Same level of fandom for BGs now?

[Doremite]

The bad version of the BG was the first year. Couldn't tune the hookiness out of it. A series of major improvements after that.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I still ski that first gen from time to time and a few days recently due to an ankle injury keeping me out of my tele boots. I’ve always jelled w this ski. It feels big in ec trees when things firm up but on anything remotely soft they pivot with ease. Just need to be willing to haul on the groomed. Fairly one dimensional and a dream in their element while tolerable out of it. Mine were built a bit lighter/softer than stock so maybe that is a factor. Still plenty burly for my 175lb frame. Originally a tele set up but at 186cm were just too big for me in the east. Since became my only alpine set and we are better friends now.

I am also perhaps the odd ball that has had no hookiness issues w any of the ON3Ps I’ve skied. Almost positive I hit something with my Wren 108s causing the uphill ski to catch and blown up my ankle but can’t say for sure. Happened incredibly fast and experienced no hooky feelings in the prior few day on ‘em all is pow ???

[Ted Striker]

I remember when people were all gaga over the first few series of the Gotama. Same level of fandom for BGs now?

The volkl cult ski was the explosiv. Those who can't bend a ski need not apply. Enter the gotama.

[Vitamin I]

But in the photo quoted below, the curvature at the widest point of the tip is WAY more gradual than the "sharp corner" at the widest point of the 186cm 2009 Billy Goat. I think the photo might be a 2011 BillyGoat---not first-gen.

First gen. And hate is too strong a word. It's just that they were one trick ponies. My wrens of basically the same vintage were more versatile - and that's telling you something.

[Ted Striker]

I took the pic, those were actually mine, and I'm 99% sure they were 10/11.

I believe the first year building in Portland was 09, so that would make them second year production, but I think they could still be considered first gen. They did make two changes from the 09/10 - lower camber underfoot, and increased sidecut + smoothing (well, also slightly wider waist). Maybe that made them better (like I said, I didn't hate them), but I still think of them as being first gen, because the next year had some really big changes.

11/12 was the first year 191 was a stock length, and the first year of RES, so to me anyway, I'd say that's the beginning of the next gen. And that's when the magic started.

[Lindahl]

Those are 10/11s. What you say jives with my knowledge. I think only the 191 had RES that first year (11/12).

[cyborg]

...As for the OG Billygoat hate above... if you thought you the OG 186s were bad at speed, you should try the OG 191 Billygoats, they are the exact opposite. Really not fun at slow speed or in moguls and a ton of work, but if you have the balls to get them up to speed they will smooth everything out and charge as good as anything ive ever been on... especially in variable or chop.

This has been 100% my experience with the OG 191s. I find them manageable in most cases (but lots of work), but the most stable thing ever charging through crud. You have to trust the ski, and it takes me a few days each season to really do that. Once I do, I'm like "oh that's right, you can just go this fast and be fine on these things."

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[ill-advised strategy]

Not denying it is a blind assumption, simply based on the name of the model. Sounds like they have evolved beyond the name, but seeing that I haven't skied anything over 86 waist in 5 years and spend a lot of my time on narrow carvers and bump skis, GS race stock on cold hard days I'd wager that my GS skis are better at speed on groomed than any BG model ever made. Nice to hear that they do better at cruising. Are they sacrificing any of the maneuverability they were originally designed for to achieve better stability at higher speeds?

Snow is everything. Cruising soft snow, stable in soft snow? Different ballgames.

[thefortrees]

I had always had the impression that the Billy Goats were marketed as the enduro of skis. Designed for picking your way through tight spots, steep trees, narrow chutes, etc at slow to moderate speeds. Saying they suck at high speed is the same as saying a downhill ski sucks on greens. Billy goats aren't race horses.

Disagree on the race horse thing. I’ve been using the 2010-11 186cm model for a few years and they are stable when hauling ass. They perform better at higher speed for me.