ON3P SKIS Discussion

[SchralphMacchio]

Well then it’s a good thing that those bases are also the sexiest looking bases I’ve ever seen [emoji12]

[ApexSkua]

Do you happen to be in Seattle and willing to extend that offer to me as well

Definitely, they are 182 length and Tectons have 12mm of adjustment either way. If we get a late spring storm then for sure people can try them out

[Joey311]

Damn. Attachment 454944

Those might be the best looking skis ever.

[BeHuWe]

Those might be the best looking skis ever.

I don’t need another pair but that point break veneer looks 🤌🏻


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SupreChicken]

Man. 1700g on a BG tour 182 is so impressive. And they feel damp? They feel like on3ps? They do billy goat things in 3D snow?

[jackattack]

Man. 1700g on a BG tour 182 is so impressive. And they feel damp? They feel like on3ps? They do billy goat things in 3D snow?

My 189 bg108t are 1800g.

They don’t feel like all other on3ps but they’re damp relative to other touring skis. They do some Billy goat things very well like ski 3d snow, manage odd crusts and get a little drifty but they don’t mash chop.

[TripleT]

My 189 bg108t are 1800g.

They don’t feel like all other on3ps but they’re damp relative to other touring skis. They do some Billy goat things very well like ski 3d snow, manage odd crusts and get a little drifty but they don’t mash chop.

Take this with a grain of salt as I only have a few days on my BGT118s, and I never skied a standard BG, but I humbly and somewhat shockingly disagree.

Not their intended use but I really wanted to get these out and so I skied them on a pretty decent inbounds pow day last weekend. Holy shit they were GOD MODE pow and chop destroyers. I was shocked. I could ski perhaps as fast as ever, just gliding and smashing the chop trenches, despite being on tech binders!

I am indeed BGT110 curious, so if you ever make it up to Baker and wanna trade runs on the 118 hit me up Apex.

[adrenalated]

I have both BG116T (asym, before they went to the 118) and much older 13/14 standard BGs as well as a variety of other ON3Ps including tour and standard Woodsmen.

It's always going to be difficult to directly compare the tour layup vs. standard layup because if you're doing things right, you're not skiing them with the same boots and bindings. I have Pivots on my standard BGs and ski them with a Lange race boot. On my BGTs I have G3 Zeds and ski them with a Atomic Hawx XTD. Yeah, the BGTs don't mash chop as well. Duh.

What I think I can say is this: the ON3P tour layup feels a lot like a standard, non-metal layup from MOST manufacturers. It doesn't feel like a carbon-y lightweight touring ski, it doesn't get kicked around at the hint of a suboptimal snow condition, it doesn't transmit vibration to your feet the way some ultralight skis can. It's also not super damp like a metal race-inspired layup. They are not as damp as a standard ON3P. They do generally retain the pop and liveliness of a standard ON3P. In other words, they are much more damp and smooth than any ski at that weight would be expected to be, just like standard layup ON3P's are much more damp and smooth than any ski without metal would be expected to be. IME you will find the limits of your touring boots and bindings before you find the limits of the ski (unless you are trying to tour on frame bindings and alpine boots in which case WTF why are you trying to save weight on the ski?)

[grinch]

You should try a stock bg inbounds then. Invincible best describes the feel. Lovd my bgt 110's , but like jack said, that shape works extremely well and theyre damper than other touring skis in the category but they dont crush like the stock build, or even a steeple for that matter

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[MHSP1497]

I have both BG116T (asym, before they went to the 118) and much older 13/14 standard BGs as well as a variety of other ON3Ps including tour and standard Woodsmen.

It's always going to be difficult to directly compare the tour layup vs. standard layup because if you're doing things right, you're not skiing them with the same boots and bindings. I have Pivots on my standard BGs and ski them with a Lange race boot. On my BGTs I have G3 Zeds and ski them with a Atomic Hawx XTD. Yeah, the BGTs don't mash chop as well. Duh.

What I think I can say is this: the ON3P tour layup feels a lot like a standard, non-metal layup from MOST manufacturers. It doesn't feel like a carbon-y lightweight touring ski, it doesn't get kicked around at the hint of a suboptimal snow condition, it doesn't transmit vibration to your feet the way some ultralight skis can. It's also not super damp like a metal race-inspired layup. They are not as damp as a standard ON3P. They do generally retain the pop and liveliness of a standard ON3P. In other words, they are much more damp and smooth than any ski at that weight would be expected to be, just like standard layup ON3P's are much more damp and smooth than any ski without metal would be expected to be. IME you will find the limits of your touring boots and bindings before you find the limits of the ski (unless you are trying to tour on frame bindings and alpine boots in which case WTF why are you trying to save weight on the ski?)

My experience with my BG108T’s echoes adrenalated’s in that they are much more damp and smooth than other touring skis. I have skied mine inbounds a few times, mostly to test drive them. They were a bit more skittish on hard groomers than my old BG116’s or my Jeffrey 108’s. However, the flex profile and mixed snow handling are superior IMHO. I ski mine w/ Scott Orbit’s or Sportiva Synchro’s with Tectons. I feel like I can stand on them just like I can with my other ON3P’s and they provide the support and behavior I would expect from a 1790 gram version of a Billy Goat. They’re certainly miles better for me than the Scott Scrapper’s I started with for touring skis.

[ApexSkua]

I also agree with what adrenalated said. I wouldn't reach for the 110Ts on a resort pow day over the 189 BGs I have, but if I had to, I wouldn't be upset. They don't crush crud as hard, but I still felt like they are super confidence inspiring in soft chop, for how light they are. I took them in a trip to the Monashees, and absolutely went way faster through some glades then I should have because of how easy they are to shut down. There was a zipper crust in one area that people in our group were complaining about, but I hardly noticed it.

[Muggydude]

I have skied my bg108 tours with alpine bindings inbounds (have inserts for tech too). They definitely get kicked around a bit and aren’t super damp in firm/icy and cruddy snow. A little more damp than praxis UL core with carbon and veneer maybe? Although I’m in love with my Praxis Kusala collabs (inbounds and out).
I’d like to to a back to back test with both layups to evaluate more.

I would not put the ON3P tour layup in the same league as standard ON3P layup or praxis heavy/veneer core skis for crud and charging. And order of magnitude down IMO.

They do well though, but wouldn’t be my first choice (or second) for chop. Anything homogenous or soft and they’re awesome. Which is what I bought them for. Small weight penalty definitely worth the improved feel and dampness over most touring sticks.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ApexSkua]

To add to my midnight post below - tour core feels very tuned for backcountry terrain. Damp enough that it smooths out imperfections in the snow, but if I was planning on doing any resort skiing I would opt for the 50/50 layup. I did not like the feeling of the Tours on hardpack - probably a combination of imperfect factory tune, lightweight, and the BG shape not being well suited for that. Other terrain I have experienced them in - wet Baker storm snow, cream cheese, zipper crust, a few inches on crust, soft chop - feels like they live up to the ON3P reputation.

Granted, I don't have much experience with touring skis - what I'm basing this on are Dynafit Hokkaidos which were heavier and much less tapered. Despite being heavier, they were much more chattery in variable terrain than the BGTs. I'm planning on mounting a pair of Lhasa Pow 184s and interested to see the comparison, although they are also substantially heavier than the BGTs.

[RudyGarmisch]

Love the Tour layup appreciation. J118T's with ATK Freeride spacered heels, XTD Boots - I absolutely love how this setup skis in the backcountry. Kick turns can be a little annoying, but its a small price to pay:

[eSock]

damn that looks like a good time. you aren't a 28.5 boot by any chance are ya?

[grinch]

I could ski my steeple 102's with simple dynafits or my steeple 108 w ions in bounds pretty much like my stock asym bg's w cast. Steeples still smashed thru anything w zero deflection. Inbounds i have to pay attention more on my bgt 110's with raider 14's. Bgt still has a lot of those bg good traits inbounds but theyre impressively light and that weight cant be completely compensated by design. Still my favorite dd touring ski to date, by a healthy margin

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Reformed]

I could ski my steeple 102's with simple dynafits or my steeple 108 w ions in bounds pretty much like my stock asym bg's w cast. Steeples still smashed thru anything w zero deflection. Inbounds i have to pay attention more on my bgt 110's with raider 14's. Bgt still has a lot of those bg good traits inbounds but theyre impressively light and that weight cant be completely compensated by design. Still my favorite dd touring ski to date, by a healthy margin

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

I’m interested in hearing your take on Steeple 108 vs BGT 110. Apart from weight and ability to smash crud do you notice any other significant differences? What lengths were/are you on? Only thing I can really imagine that would make my Steeple 108s better is less weight, but even that is pretty well mitigated with light bindings.

[SupreChicken]

I’m interested in hearing your take on Steeple 108 vs BGT 110. Apart from weight and ability to smash crud do you notice any other significant differences? What lengths were/are you on? Only thing I can really imagine that would make my Steeple 108s better is less weight, but even that is pretty well mitigated with light bindings.

If I spring for the BGT, I’ll be able to compare to the steeple 116. That was a great very inbounds worthy ski that imo was inbounds worthy because it was heavy.

I never discount the feel of a ski - I’m drawn to bamboo because I prefer the feel.

That said I think the performance variability here within the on3p brand is due to the weight differences. I don’t think it is any more complex than that.

I don’t really care how the bgt skis in bounds. It will get Zeds or alpinists. I cannot imagine riding lifts with it ever at 1700g. Like…why?

Where I imagine it shines:
-powder
-weird layered snow

Where it is perhaps suspect:
-firm snowshoe roads
-firm icy entrances

[grinch]

I’m interested in hearing your take on Steeple 108 vs BGT 110. Apart from weight and ability to smash crud do you notice any other significant differences? What lengths were/are you on? Only thing I can really imagine that would make my Steeple 108s better is less weight, but even that is pretty well mitigated with light bindings.

My bgt is a 177 and the steeple 108 was a 179. The main noticeable differences were the obvious weight and length. Bgt feels like a touch more energy out of a turn but i think thats weight. I dont think i notice anything different that the newer design of the bgt has. I get along well w any bg. I do prefer tge 177 length. Any bg im always thinking i could probably mount forward a touch. With my lighter shorter touring boot i ended up +.5 on my steeple 102 and prefered it and thought i could safely do +1. Ive had zero issues with tip dive on a bg ever. The bgt is no surprises. It is what it is. A light , by todays current standards, fat touring ski thats still a bg that allows you to feel good on skis in places you shouldnt feel that good. Just not as much as the heavier versions. Still impressive how it handles but some of that impressiveness can lean towards the lack of weight you have to drag up a hill.
Part of the reason i asked about 50/50 reviews earlier in the thread is because the steeples seemed like they hit that mark. The light bindings on my steeples didnt negatively effect the steeples skiability. I think its the core lay up in those. Steeple with the thinner base and edge for the 50/50 makes the most sense to me for a slackcountry ski. For a bc ski a steeple with an ultra light binding could be rationalized for a pure touring ski as well. Very little compromise there. I like the balance my bgt w raiders bring, especially when i get the 2cm short 177. I was splitting hairs but its exactly what "i" wanted

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[adrenalated]

I don’t really care how the bgt skis in bounds. It will get Zeds or alpinists. I cannot imagine riding lifts with it ever at 1700g. Like…why?

Yep

Where I imagine it shines:
-powder
-weird layered snow

Yep. I'll expand that to "all mostly untracked 3D snow." Which is, you know, kinda what you should be looking for when touring on a BGT.

Where it is perhaps suspect:
-firm snowshoe roads
-firm icy entrances

"Suspect" might be a strong word. It is not the ski that I'd chose to ski firm snowshoe roads all day on (actually I wouldn't chose any ski for that other than Nordork skis maybe). I also don't take the BGTs when I'm planning to ski more firm snow than 3D snow (I take the Woods Tours). But the BGT handles those conditions *fine*, it will get you down them and into the good snow that you brought them for. A few turns on a firm entrance into a long run of 3D snow? Sure, BGT. A long couloir of mostly firm snow with maybe some soft snow in the apron? Woods.

[jacob_dbu]

Does anyone have a line on a 182 Woodsman 102 Tour? The more I think about it, the more I want a pair. Trying to decide if my best bet is to pull the trigger on the late season discounts new, or if I have any chance of finding one used for sale.

[kid-kapow]

keep in mind that steeple 108s and 116s are more or less the same weight as the current layup BG118 and BG110 one size down - so 2cm shorter and with the new, lighter layup. Steeples will "just" be slightly softer.

As such, they should be very different beasts than the current tour layup skis in anything variable if more alike in untracked light snow.

Steeple108&116s are less touring specific skis than rounder / softer flexing versions of the BGs of the day imho - aka less tour, more untracked / soft snow specific, over variable capable.

So if you want to compare Steeples to something similar, it would be the current resort layup ordered custom softer (milled down core) imho - not the tour layup or 50/50 versions imho.

Sure, 50/50s will be similar though - just probably a tad bit stiffer and a few hundred grams lighter -> so probably slightly better on the up, no real difference in untracked and slightly less potent in variable (stiffer and lighter will probably be marginally less capable than softer and heavier due to risk of deflection, if still plenty capable).

[grinch]

Good comparison. I didnt find my steeple 108 softer than my asym bg 116's but my steeples were labeled "prototype" , whatever that means as far as construction goes

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[grinch]

keep in mind that steeple 108s and 116s are more or less the same weight as the current layup BG118 and BG110 one size down - so 2cm shorter and with the new, lighter layup. Steeples will "just" be slightly softer.

As such, they should be very different beasts than the current tour layup skis in anything variable if more alike in untracked light snow.

Steeple108&116s are less touring specific skis than rounder / softer flexing versions of the BGs of the day imho - aka less tour, more untracked / soft snow specific, over variable capable.

So if you want to compare Steeples to something similar, it would be the current resort layup ordered custom softer (milled down core) imho - not the tour layup or 50/50 versions imho.

Sure, 50/50s will be similar though - just probably a tad bit stiffer and a few hundred grams lighter -> so probably slightly better on the up, no real difference in untracked and slightly less potent in variable (stiffer and lighter will probably be marginally less capable than softer and heavier due to risk of deflection, if still plenty capable).

Im wondering if the thick standard bases and edges on their new tour core(a 50/50)bg is going to make the ski noticeably damper than a bg tour with the thinner bases and edges, or is that just durability. I wouldnt doubt it is a little but i wouldnt think it would ve close to a standard bg

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Stuntmonkey]

Skied my Jeff 110s for the second time this season (I'm 85% of the time on BC Atris). Conditions were soft chalky snow with variable patches. Really, REALLY loved them. Very surprised. I had detuned the tips and tails after a bad first experience in punch-through-pow at the start of the season. I'm not sure if they are a tour layup, or if its just the topsheet. Either way, LOVE them. So playful, great flex, alright on groomers, but down the fall line for some surfy turns is where the like to be.