^^^ marketing excuses are not what I was presenting...but sarcasm is.
Printable View
^^^ marketing excuses are not what I was presenting...but sarcasm is.
^^^ You didn't, but it's been mentioned here a couple times that larger burlier sizes don't sell as well. Other companies make a big kid size, and customers here are asking for it. Pay attention son
We would gladly make you any ski that you want if you'd like to fund a mold, but they do not sell more than just a couple of pairs a season if we are lucky...and have you tried out the Cease and Desist that is made already (191, 124 waist, heavy rocker, RES like a BG)? That seems to fit in that range of what you are seeking.
It is what it is from a financial and production standpoint for us, not marketing excuses. We have always been transparent from that front.
We appreciate the feedback in any form, however.
Ill definitely buy a pair 194-196 wren AND BGs for 2017/2018 season.
This might be the only place on earth where a great company making amazing products gets accused of making "excuses" when they do the right thing from a business perspective.
Ranks right up there with "other companies do it" as a business rationale for investing in producing a product that you know won't sell (especially a company that knows it won't sell - because they've built it, and they did not come.)
Stop asking this indie ski company to make your perfect dream ski. It's not that simple. And they already make a bunch of killer skis that are better than most of the skis being produced by the majors.
If you want something specific at least do it within realistic constraints based on the current line-up. They don't want to build a custom mold for one ski that makes you happy and loses them money.
These are the same guys, who when asked to fork over the do-rei-me, suddenly become scarce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by optics
Cheers,Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
Thom
I fail to understand what a 194 billygoat would do that a 189/191 wouldn't? We are talking about a 2" length difference.
Ok, then here's my feedback, glad you asked. Although the dimensions of a larger BG and C&D may be similar, they are definitely different animals. I have invested in the company with my purchases and some of them were home runs like the current BG, others were not.Quote:
Originally Posted by PowTron
Plenty of kool-aid drinkers here will always say nice things to stay part of the club, but I've seen a couple of your responses shutting down any suggestions for improvements, typically referencing their skill level vs the one you claim yourself. Telling me to fund the mold is a bitchy response and not one that would work as a rep for any other ski company. Listen more talk less
larger end of season dealz. it's a 189 now and you know itQuote:
Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier
''Tis the dilemma, I had a set of 191 OG Wren 11/12. Currently have 13/14 193 C&D. On the right days and in the right mindset they are the best ski in the universe to me. The wren was for days I was skiing alone, ear buds in, and they would flatten anything in my way. But I do not ski like that every day, nor I do not ski like that all day.
Similar to the C&D it is a quiver ski, so good a few days a season. But I can ski a Jeffery everyday and have fun. Same with the BG, and recent Wren. So I understand when a manufacturer can not sell a quiver ski. But I think every few years there should be a Big mountain or powder offering. ie: RC112, blue house shoots, 193 wren or stiff BG.
There will always be a blend of informed enthusiasts and Kool-Aid drinkers who endorse any product with limited production volume. I'd ask you to re-read your comments however, and see if you don't think that your posturing is coming off as just a bit arrogant. I've been there myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by tenB
At the end of the day, you're demanding that someone run their company on your terms, while accepting all of the risk. You have possible alternatives. One possibilty woud be to go to Wagner (for example) and pay ~ $2K for a pair of skis.
If however, you're so certain this ski makes sense for more than a handful of individuals, why don't you propose a group buy to Scott and coordinate it? You would not be singularly funding a mold, and if your business acumen is as good as you make yourself out to be, you might even propose a means of partially or fully funding the skis of your dreams if you commit to and deliver a certain number of orders.
Now, I don't doubt that this can be done. The Praxis Wootest is a prime example.
... Thom
I honestly think companies should make their big gun ski and say: this is it for the next 2-3 years. Maybe the graphics change, maybe not. Ideally they'd make a small batch each summer and sell to the people who claim to need themQuote:
Originally Posted by galenparke
I don't get why so many people get their panties in a bundle over this. It's pretty fucking simple. Some of us bring up longer lengths out of necessity, not for he TGR pipe dream of longer skis to show off.
I'm 25 years old, 6'3, over 200 lbs with extremely low body fat, athletic and also workout on the squat rack multiple times a week...I really don't wanna hear from the average sized crowd, what I do and don't need.. I ski very hard, weigh a lot, and 189 is bottom of the size range, for a serious charging ski for anyone my size and ability. No way around that. Is it really so hard for you guys that are 5'10, 175lbs or less, and ski with less force and aggression than some others on here, to wrap your head around why some of us need the long skis? It's obvious..
The less I overthink, the more clear that this is another simple decision for me... If On3p can't make skis for me over 190cm, I'll buy larger chargers for other companies and save On3p for my jib skis..
I used to rip 196 governors through all the tight spots in Jackson Hole, most days, and when I was a worse skier. Now I'm bigger, stronger, better, and don't ski as much tight/techy stuff as a I used to in the Tetons. On3p needs to make bigger skis to keep my business.
If they don't care about the big guys out there, that's fine, it's a smart business decision. It's just not one I can go forward with supporting, when other ski companies make big skis for me..
You asked why I bitch about long skis, well there's my answer.
*Drunk Rant
The wren 189 108 will be nowhere near as stable as the new dynastar legend pro or head monster 108, for us fatties... I can rattle off more skis burlier than the wren 108, but you get the picture. It's absolutely not the ski it's been marketed to me as..
The 191 wren 113 closes that gap a lot more in my opinion, but is a custom only ski, made once a year or so... it's Longer, significantly stiffer, has less rocker, and that makes a true playful charging ski for us larger folks. Once you go any less burly than that, especially without metal, it no longer occupies the same realm. IMO, the wren 108 is just not on the same level as some other semi-forgiving chargers on the market. Maybe if it came in a 196cm...
Some of the new 2017 skis make even the old wrens look like soul 7-type skis.. literally. My 191 head monsters are a full pound heavier, per ski, than my 191 wrenegades.. also they are twice as stiff, no joke.
I would wholeheartedly buy a 196cm On3p Beefmaster. I like On3ps non metal skis better than any other manufacturer, but I buy a new charging ski every year, at least, and On3p won't be able to make that happen for me without tweaking the current line.
*Drunk Rant
Where are all you big dudes when I have burly skis to sell in Gear Swap?
*Sober thoughts
Probably happily skiing on 189 Billygoats?Quote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
yup. You want the small guys to chat up ski design, quip with the I-could-be-in-a-TGR-movie-if-someone-saw-me-ski crowd, and take user feedback seriously, show a tad more humility and understanding of how little those guys get to ski these days in order to make a buck and the rest of us happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un
ugh, the same shit keeps me up on Saturday nights. I just wish it was longer.
Start a thread about what you'd like to see built and see if there is support for it. Its been done before for a babygoat and Scott stated if enough people committed, they would make the skis(post #739 from 14/15 thread).
The problem for me is balance. I think I have too much Neanderthal DNA in me..
I don't need a ski like the wren 108 to ski 45-50mph.. but when the headphones are in and I wanna turn it up to 65-70mph on piste, or 50 through firm crud piles, the wren 108 just wouldn't hold up to the forces that I can generate, as well as some other skis on the market.
I ski my noodle caboodle jib skis fairly fast. The differences between the Kartel lineup and the Wren lineup, are less pronounced for me now, and the wren 108 sits closer to the Kartel on the spectrum, rather than closer to a dynastar pro rider.. at least in my eyes.
The wren 108 isn't a powder ski, nor does it have the rocker profile or heft to be a shitfuck conditions charger.. I'm just confused on what it is? A more directional Kartel 108? I've always thought the wren as something else entirely.. and now that it's heading in the wrong direction, I couldn't spend my money on the 2017 version. I like the ends of the spectrum, either very stiff or very soft skis, built for one or two specific purposes, and they excel better than the rest of the market in those specific conditions..I do not like the skis in the middle. For some reason I don't get along with them.
The guy from abetterski dot com, told me how the belafonte was significantly burlier than a wren 108. And that was comparing the stock belafonte to an "extra stiff, extra carbon" wren 108.. well, to me, that means the wren just isn't a charger for my weight. It's a ski more like the Vicik, but slightly burlier, which I use as a groomer zoomer.
How are all you mags fine with the fact that On3p dialed back the new wren 108 from the older 191 wren? You guys that ski like a madman, should be livid..
Reading through the On3p threads from 2013-2015, every time they softened the Wrenegade, they got a hell of a lot of shit for doing so. Now, everyone's fine with it..
I'm not trying to make it out to be some wimp ski, but it didn't go the direction that personally I saw the wren 108 going.
The rest of the lineup is primo, besides a missing mid 190s BG.. I am one of the biggest On3p fanboys on here, full on pom poms over here, and I know the 189 BG and Wren will be a great ski. I just already own 186 viciks, and 191 Billy Goats, and I want "more ski" the next time I purchase a wren or BG..
Also, I want my fat voice heard, more and more, and hopefully On3p will SEE there are people who buy big skis. We just gotta coordinate better I think.
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by aevergreene
Serious question ... what mountains do you guys ski at these speeds (65-70 mph) without either killing someone or getting your tickets pulled?
At least in Colorado, I've never seen anyone skiing that quickly, but then again, I'm only on groomers when I'm going to and from the steeps.
BTW, I get the fact that there are big, heavy, competent, aggressive skiers out there. I also get that you don't like that the Wren has gone through a couple of iterations of softening. I don't think anyone ever contested that.
The unfortunate reality for you big guyz, is that you are small fraction of one percent of the market. Maybe you should all get together and form a "plus size" ski company :cool:
Cheers,
Thom
GoPro videos to come this winter.. ill put videos up of each On3p i own. I ski tahoe resorts, and Jackson/LCC/Big Sky. I go by what my stupid ski app used to say. Is it really 65mph plus, IDK i dont have a radar gun? My home resort is Heavenly lol, and i just straightline this bitch. Funny, because I have never had my pass pulled, or even been stopped/talked to for speeding here. Whereas when I lived in Colorado, i always got stopped and had a "warning" from the yellow jackets, at basically every Epic resort..Quote:
Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un
Tahoe epic is more chill than Colorado epic. Except with wind closures. It didnt take me long to figure that out. Idk if its because tahoe epic doesnt have their shit together, but hey ill take it. Only thing is they fucken close lifts with 30 mph winds.
Have you ever done a tram lap at Jackson, and beat the tram back down, just to get right back on it? AKA real tram laps. Idk if lift lines are conducive of that anymore, but those are the speeds Im talking about...Man do i miss tram laps.
A plus size ski company would be so sick.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...19467535e0.jpg