Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88

    Current Moment Wildcat Tour vs On3p Billygoat Tour

    Yes i SEARCHED JONG! already.

    Current tour quiver is :
    Voile V6 -- skinnyish ski that does ok in a bit of new snow

    Praxis Wootest--these are fine as a dedicated midfat (113) powder ski and i actually enjoy them for that. But i got the 187 instead of whatever the longer length was and they're just too short.
    Really the main thing tho is I've come to realize i want that general waist width to actually be able to carve. And they carve like greased dogshit.

    Praxis Protest--ive found that these actually arent my ideal style. Just too center mounted even though they're mounted back 1.5 from the dimple. I'll admit i do really enjoy these on deep days though. They've got a really fun blend of charge and smear even with the touring core.
    Wanted ro get the quiver documented so y'all have a frame of reference.

    So want to replace the Woos with either the 190 Wildcat tours which are actually 118 UF, or the 0n3p billygoat tours in 189. Billygoats will actually be longer. Also feel like they'll be a bit more ski. From reviews I've read of the Wildcat it sounds alot more jibby/stunty. Im ok with that if they'll accept a good amount of shin pressure but dont want too centered of a feeling ski. Then again i know the billygoat isnt super carvy or wants a ton of shin pressure. So I'm no racer and can adapt to semi-centerish skis but want to be able to push through the chunder and on firmer patches while touring.

    Not much i could find about the current (or last years) version of these skis. And no direct comparisons.
    Not gonna parse back thru a bonkers amount of pages in both threads either.
    Plus it seemed rude to ask about the Wildcat in the On3P thread and i didnt want to turn the Moment discussion into another On3p thread. 😉

    Sorry bout the blog post 👅
    Do what you like. Try not to arbitrarily be an ass. -- skizix

    the bumps are just better without hooveprints in them. -- lightranger

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    714

    Current Moment Wildcat Tour vs On3p Billygoat Tour

    Iíve skied both the Wildcat Tour and Billy Goat Tour in a 184 for each. Wildcat Tours were mounted with Shifts, on which I always struggled a bit with the ramp angle. BGTs mounted with Alpinists, so flat ramp (my preference).

    For me, the BGTs float much better and are less locked in, so easier to slide the tail around, particularly at lower speeds. I have never used the BGTs in anything besides powder, but I canít imagine theyíd be very good on firm snow. Iím a long time Billy Goat user and they donít excel on firm snow.

    The Wildcat Tours, on the other hand, carved pretty well on smooth groomers. The more bumpy the snow, the more they got knocked around given the low weight, and they donít love to be driven with an ultra-forward race-type stance (same can be said of the BGTs).

    If I could only have one touring ski, I think I could manage on the Wildcat Tours, whereas I wouldnít be excited to ski the BGTs in a wind blown chute. However, given you have the V6s, Iíd go Billy Goat Tour for better powder performance.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    7,213
    There are many comparisons out there between the Bibby/Blister/Wildcat and the Billy Goat. They apply to the Tour models as well.

    Wildcat is going to carve more confidently on hard snow. Billy Goat is going to float better and provide a wider range of turn shapes in 3D snow. It'll also be less hooky in crusts. Wildcat is going to want a more centered stance.

    My 184 BG Tour 116s tolerate more shin pressure than my 187 Protests (which are mounted at -1.5cm)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Thanks for the responses guys.

    @adrenalated
    Yeah I've read most of the reviews and comparisons between the regular versions. Just not too much on the CURRENT Touring versions.
    The non-hooky character of the BGT is a big selling point. Good to know about them accepting more shin pressure as compared to the protest too.

    @Skeeze
    Nice to hear your views on the BGT tail coming around in crap snow.
    So whichever i get it def wont be one ski quiver. V6 usually only comes out in the spring or doing a bigger up day. V6 if expecting firm but alot of times you find a bit of windblown or suncrust before or after the goods. So want something that'll handle that crap even if it doesn't excel. Heck, I've taken my Protests out for 5000-6000 vert and it was manageable but slow uphill.

    Im wanting this new ski to be my DD that'll handle non-rediculously deep days but also the typical PNWET chunder we get often. Skiing goop (Hotschmoo) on top of raincrust..... ah good times.
    Billygoat tour is prob the best call. Kind of wish the Wildcat wasnt so center mounted.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,296
    the "problem" is that your description kinda excludes both - WCTs due to their centered mount point that in spite of deep rocker lines and a ton of splay have rather supportive skis aft of the bindings, and BGTs which aren't carvy, at all. The two skis are not at all similar too, one being a somewhat centered playful charger, the other being a more directonal variable slayer that pivots on a dime, but is pretty uninspiring on hard snow.

    If you by carvy mean pivoty, sure, BGTs should be your jam. They can be driven through the front ski rather hard, but not in the typical carving pow manner where the tails are not supportive enough.

    at the end of the day though you are describing a balance point more than anything else, so BGTs sounds like the more appopriate ski. I've also found narrower RES skis / BG108t to be more conducive to being driven even harder through the front, so perhaps you could consider BG110tours as well? No, they will not be terribly inspiring on hard snow and it could be that the new none asym BG118 is more similar to BG108s than BG116asym in respect to being driven, - I dunno, chat with ON3P directly to find out.

    neither ski will suck though - both should be a meaningful upgrade on the woos, even if the BGTs arguably fits into your quiver a bit better wrt consistency on how to ski the ski.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Yeah Kapow I totally get what you're saying. I'd started to put down some of the ideas you've got there but i was already feeling long winded.
    My main attraction to the BGT is it's reputation for float and looseness in the manky stickiness while still maintaining a reasonable edgehold on firm. I seem to recall a whole discussion/argument in the on3p thread about stance/driving the billygoat.? And it is a more directional ski, yes? Dont want it to carve like a GS ski, just hold an edge when i touch down to some firm.
    I didnt know about that BG110, interesting.
    OTOH my intrigue with the Wildcat tour is more due to the better carving and firm snow ability even though it's a big ski.

    "a more directonal variable slayer that pivots on a dime, but is pretty uninspiring on hard snow."
    If this is an accurate description of the BGT (and almost everything I've seen says it is) then it's probably my best bet.

    FWIW the ski i had in that middle spot prior to the Woo's were the original 5 point Armada JJs. Too short for me by a good bit and too soft and too twichy tight sidect for fast runouts across old chunder and when the snow got wet. But we all know all about that already right?🙄
    So during my research that brought me to the Protest i read about the Wootest which seemed like it was fixing all the twichy JJ problems. But i went WAY too far in the other direction.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    413
    Have you considered the Woodsman 110 tours? Someone mentioned in the on3p thread they would actually be more floaty than the BG 110s. I have woodsman 96s and like the general shape and mountain point. They can definitely handle shin pressure and get through some firmer stuff.

    If you were considering the 118 BGs instead of the 110s then this might not apply.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Actually looking at this years BGT (2021)
    Both the narrower BG and Woods are intriguing but wanting this quiver slot to be 115-120

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,296
    Quote Originally Posted by HotSchmoo View Post
    I seem to recall a whole discussion/argument in the on3p thread about stance/driving the billygoat.?
    yeah, I started that whole shitshow. That discussion didn't really leave us anything of value imho. BGs can be driven plenty hard, but you def feel the pintails if you "overdrive" them, to use Iggys description. Then again that looseness is what makes them so increadibly pivoty and good in variable.

    BGs do two feet carving well enough on groomers, but not like Wildcats that can actually be engaging to do big carves with on hard snow. It is just a trade off - you sacrifice the BG's groomer performance for their pivoty nature off piste. It is a good tradeoff as long as people understand that they do not get a wide groomer zoomer with BGs.

    The tour versions def gives up a bit in variable compared to the stock version wrt either ski - rounder flex and less mass, so duh - but they still ski well.

    Another option is to ask Iggy nicely if he'd be willing to make you a pair of Woodsman116tours through the custom sale, just with the updated flex pattern / core profile. I do not know if that is something they even offer though, but only one way to know right? That could be an awesome ski for this quiver segment as well and is def more engaging on harder snow than BGs. They are still loose (or stock wood116s are anyway) in soft snow, if not as effortlessly pivoty as BGs. They should also be somewhat more directional than WCs, though one is kinda splitting hairs there - their mount point is really similar.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Rossland
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by HotSchmoo View Post
    My main attraction to the BGT is it's reputation for float and looseness in the manky stickiness while still maintaining a reasonable edgehold on firm. I seem to recall a whole discussion/argument in the on3p thread about stance/driving the billygoat.? And it is a more directional ski, yes? Dont want it to carve like a GS ski, just hold an edge when i touch down to some firm.
    Haven't been on the BGT but the regular BG will hold an edge and arc turns just fine on groomers that aren't ice. I wouldn't take the BGs out for a day of groomer zooming but they're plenty predictable for the inevitable groomer to the chair.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    2,053

    Current Moment Wildcat Tour vs On3p Billygoat Tour

    For what itís worth, the BG and BGT were both updated this year with the lowered tail rocker taken from the super goat. So those who have not skied the SG probably are unfamiliar with that tail rocker profile and those on snow characteristics.

    The new tail profile is very sportive when on edge and adds WAY better on piste performance. Iíve said it before but if the snow is edgable the BGs can RAIL (neutral/balanced two footed pressure). If you are in a blue ice situation the WC likely will win out. That said after fondling the BGT yesterday at my local shop, that ski looks really balanced.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    For what itís worth, the BG and BGT were both updated this year with the lowered tail rocker taken from the super goat. So those who have not skied the SG probably are unfamiliar with that tail rocker profile and those on snow characteristics.

    The new tail profile is very sportive when on edge and adds WAY better on piste performance. Iíve said it before but if the snow is edgable the BGs can RAIL (neutral/balanced two footed pressure). If you are in a blue ice situation the WC likely will win out. That said after fondling the BGT yesterday at my local shop, that ski looks really balanced.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Yeah i dont ski blue ice😵
    Those Woodsman options are interesting but trying to save a buck. So im looking at old stock.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,296
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    The new tail profile is very sportive when on edge and adds WAY better on piste performance. I’ve said it before but if the snow is edgable the BGs can RAIL (neutral/balanced two footed pressure).
    how does changes made fore/aft of the contact points - asym be-gone and rocker profile alterations - alter BG's groomer performance?

    And yes, we agree that if skied with a two foot stance BGs do groomers just fine.

    Our differing experiences might be caused by me being a lighter/smaller dude, so you may very well be able to eek out groomer performance of BGs that I am unable to by flexing the skis harder or just being a stronger skier - who knows.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    2,053
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    how does changes made fore/aft of the contact points - asym be-gone and rocker profile alterations - alter BG's groomer performance?
    I think of it as more suspension which gives subtle pressure on the snow due to the lowered tail rocker (I havenít measured but did the EE also lengthen just a skosh too?).

    In the real world while skiing I could give MUCH more boot cuff pressure and actually drive the tips through a turn not fearing the tails would wash out.

    Iím 205# with gear and 6ft, so size could definitely have an impact.

    Fun to hear everyoneís take on a given ski too, ultimately it comes down you YOUR individual perspective and what works / gives you confidence.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    ahead
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by HotSchmoo View Post
    Yes i SEARCHED JONG! already.

    Sorry bout the blog post 
    If you have issues with the Protest mount point, you will almost certainly have issues with the Wildcat mount point.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    338
    Going to zig to some of the zag. I have skied the Wildcat -2 from recommend on the 190 flavor and could drive the shit out them. Since my decade long plus version of racer recovery program is going well I now ski on the Wildcat tour at plus 2 and I find it as an incredible balanced and versatile pow ski to tour on. The bg is a ton of fun. While I have not been on the tour version the full fat version is an amazing shape and not very versatile for me.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by VON View Post
    If you have issues with the Protest mount point, you will almost certainly have issues with the Wildcat mount point.
    Yeah this concerns me.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by lemonhead View Post
    Going to zig to some of the zag. I have skied the Wildcat -2 from recommend on the 190 flavor and could drive the shit out them. Since my decade long plus version of racer recovery program is going well I now ski on the Wildcat tour at plus 2 and I find it as an incredible balanced and versatile pow ski to tour on. The bg is a ton of fun. While I have not been on the tour version the full fat version is an amazing shape and not very versatile for me.
    Wait
    You ski the regular Wildcat at -2 and the tour version at +2.
    WUT?

    It also concerns me u dont find the BG to be versatile.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    ahead
    Posts
    102
    Relatively speaking, the BG isn't AS versatile as the Wildcat. Edge hold isn't as good, it isn't as carveable, def doesn't ski chalky or icy snow as well. That being said, it's completely fine in those regards, and I was still a happier BG owner than I was a Wildcat owner BECAUSE I was using the BG as a powder ski, not an every day ski. If it was a one-ski quiver question, I'd take the Wildcat every time.

    For powder days and the next few days afterwards, the BG's high volume forebody and more traditional mount point make it more effortless in powder (especially if you find yourself worrying about over-pressuring the tips), and the BG is certainly the better ski in heavy snow and wet snow. It's probably marginally better in choppy pow.

    You cannot go wrong with either ski. But if you're not completely comfortable with more "progressive" mount points and have had tip-dive issues on such skis in the past, I think it'll be much easier for you to choose the BG than to change your skiing style.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    7,213
    Quote Originally Posted by HotSchmoo View Post
    "a more directonal variable slayer that pivots on a dime, but is pretty uninspiring on hard snow."
    If this is an accurate description of the BGT (and almost everything I've seen says it is) then it's probably my best bet.
    IMO this is an accurate description. "Uninspiring" s a good way to describe their hard snow performance - they are never the ski you grab when you expect to ski a lot of firm, but they aren't scary or anything. In 3D snow they fuckin' rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by HotSchmoo View Post
    FWIW the ski i had in that middle spot prior to the Woo's were the original 5 point Armada JJs. Too short for me by a good bit and too soft and too twichy tight sidect for fast runouts across old chunder and when the snow got wet. But we all know all about that already right?🙄
    FWIW I convinced a buddy last year to replace his clapped out JJs with BGTs and he's beyond stoked on them.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by lemonhead View Post
    Going to zig to some of the zag. I have skied the Wildcat -2 from recommend on the 190 flavor and could drive the shit out them. Since my decade long plus version of racer recovery program is going well I now ski on the Wildcat tour at plus 2 and I find it as an incredible balanced and versatile pow ski to tour on. The bg is a ton of fun. While I have not been on the tour version the full fat version is an amazing shape and not very versatile for me.
    I wanna hear more about this -2, +2 thing. I skied WC108's on the line and loved them in everything but > boot top pow. Just too much tip dive. I feel like I would have liked them even more at -2 and hated them at +2 for versatility.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,296
    yeah, I kinda felt the same about the WC108s - a bit too much / too strong tails in deeper, moist snow.

    My problem though is that I loved them on the line everywhere else, so I would be hesitant to go back if get a new pair of 108s or a pair regular WCs. If going back to improve pow performance "compromises" (meaning lessens) their awesome ride quality everywhere else then it would probably not be worth it for me. I think for me it is one of those know yourself moments where slightly more directional skis fit me even better. That does not mean that WC or WC108s are not absolutely killer skis, but that there are other skis that are an even better fit for how I ski.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    yeah, I kinda felt the same about the WC108s - a bit too much / too strong tails in deeper, moist snow.

    My problem though is that I loved them on the line everywhere else, so I would be hesitant to go back if get a new pair of 108s or a pair regular WCs. If going back to improve pow performance "compromises" (meaning lessens) their awesome ride quality everywhere else then it would probably not be worth it for me. I think for me it is one of those know yourself moments where slightly more directional skis fit me even better. That does not mean that WC or WC108s are not absolutely killer skis, but that there are other skis that are an even better fit for how I ski.
    Same, although maybe a WC with demo bindings would be a cool ďcompromiseĒ

    But yes I think -8cm skis are really the sweet spot for how I like to ski. The WD110 is really exciting to me, but I already have a W116 so Iíll probably use those another year first.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    88
    Appreciate the discussion here guys, thanks👍

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,296
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    The WD110 is really exciting to me,
    I have a hard time explaining how excited I am to get on the new WD110s. Not relevant to this thread at all, but every change I wanted to see from the first gen have been put into the new design - happy times

    Also, in case the OP haven't seen it in the Moment thread (I thought I had posted it there too), a Moment employee wrote the definite guide to where to mount WCs imho:

    Quote Originally Posted by hot pocket [URL="https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/862905/Moment-Skis-Discussion-Thread?page=9"
    page 9 moment thread NS[/URL]]
    kid-kapow hm, interesting. Would you care to elaborate a bit on the effect various mount points will have on Wildcats specifically and the effects of going back/forward of rec will do? (more than the websites "more nimble vs mr sluggish" description) Especially as I had been considering going back a cm, but your points above describes going forward as the more appropriate action.
    In general, forward puts you ahead of the sidecut apex, making the ski engage quicker and more abruptly, backwards gives more float, but turn initiation becomes delayed and feels like driving a boat. Additionally, quite a bit of this is also dependent on (word vomit) how you like to ski as well as how you like to make the ski behave in a way that allows you to ski like how you like to ski. Some employee examples below.

    Both Luke and I mount the Wildcat 108 at rec.

    Luke (the form lord) prefers to drive the ski and mounting on the line rewards his aggressive, racer stance when skiing fast through a variety of terrain. Why doesn't he mount back a bit to give him more ski up front? Because this puts him behind the apex of the sidecut, making turn initiation slower and creating a feeling of driving a boat, where the turn is ever so slightly delayed from input to output, not something most ex racers are fans of.

    I (the wiggle worm) like to ski with a more centered stance and tend to surf and slash my way through stuff, remaining light on my feet. I don't have the raw skiing strength or technique of Luke, so I try to 'bob and float' through chop and crud as opposed to simply bashing through it. Why don't I mount forward for added maneuverability? Because I like the consistency of the turn on the rec line and am not as much of a fan of the 'twitchiness' that can arise by bumping forward, as being in front of the sidecut apex will push the ski to engage quicker in the turn. I've adapted how I make the ski behave to allow me to remain on the rec line for turn consistency, while also increasing the maneuverability by being light on my feet (lots of keeping the tips planted while lifting the tails up / throwing them around, and being very over the front of my boots).

    Fasa and Tyler mount the Wildcat 108 at ~+2cm from rec.

    Fasa (the anti-turner) makes very few turns. I also don't know if I've ever seen Fasa ski switch in the several seasons I have with him as a daily ski partner. Why doesn't Fasa ski on the rec line if all he does is charge forward and (basically) only turn when trees get in the way? Because he rocks a very upright and centered stance, and while he can fold his boot effectively, having the ski engage into the turn with the slightest pressure aids his skiing style. Most of it is fast and straight, but occasionally he needs the ski to quickly turn left or right a touch.

    Tyler (the high diver) skis very aggressively and in a lot of high consequence terrain, but is also a young gun who likes to throw a variety of spins and flips off big cliffs. Moving forward allows him some better air control and flickability for those big lofty threes or dumping 7's off Revy diving boards (see pic below). Now while he would get some help in the aggressive skiing department by being on the rec line, the air control and maneuverability are more important in his ski, because he can muscle through the chop and crud and doesn't need his ski to do as much work for him. The pros of air control and maneuverability are worth the extra leg work when driving through challenging terrain.



    kid-kapow I haven't had the same experience on my woodsman108s, in spite of them being more ski (stiffer, heavier). As such I am not sure if it was just specific conditions on that day that caused the feeling or (perhaps more likely) if was caused by the relatively softer tails with more splay on le wc108s (most likely a combination of the two).
    Heavier, stiffer ON3P is probably pushing the dense snow around with the tail with more authority at speed, which requires less effort from you. At least that's my guess.

    kid-kapowSo do you think that moving the mount aft/forward will ease this characteristic at all? I am kinda hesitant to move the mount too as I so enjoyed the 108s at recommended in all but this one condition.

    thanks in advance for any and all input!
    I would be hesitant to move back as you will rely more on the tail of the ski and I think it will get tougher to move the tail around in dense 3D snow, as it will be more difficult to dump the tip of the ski into the next turn. The tail follows the tip, and if dumping the tip left or right becomes more difficult, the feeling you're experiencing might become more drastic.

    You could certainly bump a cm or two forward, but it will cause the ski to engage into the turn much quicker and with a slight abruptness. If it's love in 90% of situations, I would probably stick with the rec line and make minor adjustments in how you ski that exact condition to both keep your skiing style that you enjoy, while making that 10% easier on you.

Posting Permissions

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