ON3P SKIS Discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sf

This.
The worst thing isn’t the tunes themselves, but the lack off transparency / information, especially on tgr.
The last two pairs I bought were both without base bevel, in the first case Scott replied, when I informed him of the second case I never heard back.
I’ve been a regular customer since the first season, and while the skis have been good I’ve primarily chosen on3p because of the link to tgr and their presence on this board.
With that gone and these minor, but annoying, issues it’s pretty easy for me to choose other brands

---

Yeah. I've kind of aged out of most of their skis anyway. When I couldn't get the 98 Wrens to work for me after 2 seasons of trying it left me kind of forced to look elsewhere. Replaced with Nordicas that skied perfect out of the box.

That 100ish ski that can handle everything is a pretty important stepping stone. I realize they aren't into every man's skis though, which is fine. I'm 51 and need a ski that is still fun at speeds somewhere south of mach looney.

Recently was looking for a pair of skis for my stepson and didn't really even consider ON3P which sucks, but I wouldn't want him to be stuck with a pair that doesn't work right out of the box, he isn't technically knowledgeable and would just power through. So he got the 192 M Free 108. They came dialed af and he loves them fwiw.

Super stoked that they are selling out of everything still. Lord knows my crew is still flush with their skis, mostly on my recommendations, and I'll part with my BG's only when they die.




Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uglymoney

Yeah. I've kind of aged out of most of their skis anyway. When I couldn't get the 98 Wrens to work for me after 2 seasons of trying it left me kind of forced to look elsewhere. Replaced with Nordicas that skied perfect out of the box.

That 100ish ski that can handle everything is a pretty important stepping stone. I realize they aren't into every man's skis though, which is fine. I'm 51 and need a ski that is still fun at speeds somewhere south of mach looney.

Recently was looking for a pair of skis for my stepson and didn't really even consider ON3P which sucks, but I wouldn't want him to be stuck with a pair that doesn't work right out of the box, he isn't technically knowledgeable and would just power through. So he got the 192 M Free 108. They came dialed af and he loves them fwiw.

Super stoked that they are selling out of everything still. Lord knows my crew is still flush with their skis, mostly on my recommendations, and I'll part with my BG's only when they die.




Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

---

Yep. After the now acknowledged "camber issues" on the 192 BG118s (which I paid for custom), I don't see myself buying another ON3P until I see multiple positive reviews straight out of the plastic.

Having to pay for a tune to get a skiable ski is straight up ridiculous. Especially when so many of the big ski makers are making awesome skis. I want to support the smaller guy, but they still have to deliver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uglymoney

Yeah. I've kind of aged out of most of their skis anyway. When I couldn't get the 98 Wrens to work for me after 2 seasons of trying it left me kind of forced to look elsewhere. Replaced with Nordicas that skied perfect out of the box.

That 100ish ski that can handle everything is a pretty important stepping stone. I realize they aren't into every man's skis though, which is fine. I'm 51 and need a ski that is still fun at speeds somewhere south of mach looney.

Recently was looking for a pair of skis for my stepson and didn't really even consider ON3P which sucks, but I wouldn't want him to be stuck with a pair that doesn't work right out of the box, he isn't technically knowledgeable and would just power through. So he got the 192 M Free 108. They came dialed af and he loves them fwiw.

Super stoked that they are selling out of everything still. Lord knows my crew is still flush with their skis, mostly on my recommendations, and I'll part with my BG's only when they die.




Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

---

Had the base issue with 2 of 3 pairs, the first in 2021, the second in 2022. Love the skis, but it's super weak qc.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doremite

I will be very unhappy if my yet to be skied new Wren 102s aren’t true out of that gate.

---

All these stories are kind of shocking considering the ridiculous build quality of their skis. Nothing I've ever had comes close.

My pair of custom 102tis from '20 or' 21 are beyond dialed, wouldn't trade em for anything. Picked them up here though from Viva, not sure if he had to do any work to get them like this.



Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk

I’ve been trying to figure out a pair of Kartel 98s and I have to assume that it’s a base bevel issue. Just so I have the right info for the technician - in most cases a base reset and an edge angle of 1/1 is what I’m looking for?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatty

Yep. After the now acknowledged "camber issues".

---

At the risk of re-hashing things, what camber issues? Limited to just the 118's?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

So I picked up some 2014 191 Caylors from shroom. So stoked. To avoid hole conflict, mounting options are -0.5 or +1.5 from recommended. Pretty sure recommended is -5 from center, so that's -5.5 or -3.5 from center.

I'm like 5'11", 170#. Mounting with P18s with a 303 bsl. I know Scott has mentioned concern in the past over going too far forward with a smaller boot and the pivot's smaller footprint, but I'm not sure how much of a concern that is.

I think like going +1.5 would be super super fun, but probably the more prudent option is to go back 0.5 cm. Thoughts from the collective?

---

I think recommend is -4 or -4.5. Having skied caylors in front of the line and behind I would go -0.5 back and never think about it.

Im also sad about the loss of Scott from the board having bought skis from On3p since season 2. They also didn’t have these tune issues before, only the last few seasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Huskydoc

At the risk of re-hashing things, what camber issues? Limited to just the 118's?

---

Limited to 192 BG118s. It seems there's been an acknowledgement that something with the camber profile is messed up and they are looking at updating it. Early reports are that mounting +1 helps, but that's limited feedback so far as most who bought got fed up trying to make it work and sold them. I plan to remount mine and get them tuned since I do want them to work out. They still ski fine in continental snow, but are lacking in PNW snow. Word is the 187 is still as awesome as the BGs we know and love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Im also sad about the loss of Scott from the board.

---

Where'd he go?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lrn2swim

Where'd he go?

---

He's posted twice in the past year. Not totally gone, but not really here either. Not much to update us on with no new models or changes this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lrn2swim

All these stories are kind of shocking considering the ridiculous build quality of their skis. Nothing I've ever had comes close.

My pair of custom 102tis from '20 or' 21 are beyond dialed, wouldn't trade em for anything. Picked them up here though from Viva, not sure if he had to do any work to get them like this.



Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk

---

I have 6 pairs of ON3P skis in my garage right now (2016-2021 build years). 5 in active-use and 1 pair retired.

None have had any QC issues whatsoever.

Newest pair of mine are stock BG 108T’s from Jan 2021. A friend got a pair of custom BG110 50/50 layup in Jan 2022. Both pairs were perfect out of the package. I’m 45 and find their skis to be magnificent for me and my skiing style. Plus, they eat up Mt. Hood terrain like nothing else I’ve skied and I was an active Ski Patroller there for 5 years. My friend is 63 and says his BG’s make him a better skier and in his opinion Woodsman’s were designed for Telemark

ON3P is a small company that likely had to make some serious adjustments during/post Covid. I suspect some of these issues may be simply related to higher turnover of employees or training of new employees that are still coming up to speed. Comparing them to the big manufacturers is extremely unfair, the big operators do things at a scale 10x or more than ON3P.

The ski tunes shouldnt be messed up and On3p would agree. They set high standards for themselves which is why we love them, however we then expect that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MHSP1497

Comparing them to the big manufacturers is extremely unfair, the big operators do things at a scale 10x or more than ON3P.

---

Not sure about this. If part of their pitch is "our skis are always ready to go right out of the plastic", and then they aren't - often - then it's definitely fair to judge them by that.

Tight QA is one of the best ways to get new hires up to speed on expectations. Letting b-quality product go out the door because of new hires is a path to those new hires never learning.

Jesus. It's a base bevel problem, it always has been. It's not a b quality product problem. That being said, the damn tune should be the easiest part of the build.

Yeah, but… this constant complaint of poorly tuned out of the box is why people like me haven’t pulled the trigger yet.

I’m not gonna buy a ski that expects me to spend another 100 on finishing.

ON3P does have a cult following. But they also have a reputation for being shit out of the box. So, there’s that

That’s not a hard hurdle to overcome.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I get it.
But, resetting a base bevel can be done w) basic ski tuning tools(which I don't want to do on a brand new ski either). No need to spend $100. Also, if you're spending a $100 on a ski tune, find a new shoppe...

Somewhat on-topic regarding edge tuning...

I have a base/side tool with a steel file that lets me set angles from 0 to 2 degrees on either. Cost me about $15.

I have a pair of Jeff 102s that were misbehaving when trying to set an edge on hard-pack/piste. I reset the edge/base bevel on my Jeff 102s and took some advice from folks on this forum on how to drive them; even-footed pressure on your heels and forefoot where you almost sit into your edge before driving it at all. Intentionally took them down a few steep piste runs last night and I was able to get them into all sorts of turn shapes, short and long. Jeffs definitely aren't carving skis but you can still rail on them.

I've been on Line/Dynastar/Volkl/Salomon skis these past few winters but now that I'm jiving with my Jeffs there aren't any skis I'd rather be on where I ski (Mt. Hood).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaijin

But they also have a reputation for being shit out of the box.

---

no, they do not.

Sure, there has been some intermittent issues with tunes being off over the past two or so years, but ON3P's reputation is that of immaculate build quality. I would know, having owned a fair few by now. The ones with the tune issues have all been of more recent date, and other than the tune the build quality has been excellent. So kind of a fumble, not a bad play.

Is the tune issue freaking annoying and can overshadow what is an excellent product for its intend use? Yes.

But being shit out of the box? Hell no.

So perhaps try em for yourself before making such bold statements gaijin - especially when they are opinions based a limited sampling of other skiers' experience. If nothing else I would urge you to refrain from making such bold generalisations based on heresay when talking about a fellow mags livelihood.

And as for Iggy not being present much over the past few years - well, sorry about that. I have been a massive part of making this thread into too much a fanboii-thread. I imagine it being hard for Iggy to thread the needle between building on the hype and managing expectations. As such, stepping to one side and letting the thread live its own life was probably the prudent thing to do, especially with the past years issues due to covid and key personnel nearly dying. So sorry if I have contributed to you feeling it hard to contribute in the thread Iggy - such was not my intent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

Sure, there has been some intermittent issues with tunes being off over the past two or so years, but ON3P's reputation is that of immaculate build quality.

---

+1 to this

I jumped ONTO a submerged shark from ~6ft high on my 2nd day this season. Big chunk got taken out of the base, but no core shot and it filled in nicely with P-Tex. Top-sheets are also seemingly indestructible, I clack my shit together all the time and they're still looking good.

I've got friends going on 6+ years of ownership for their pairs.

Build quality/longevity is what ON3P is known for IMO.

Has ON3P chimed in on the tune issues? My Jeff 102's were all the way fucked on the tune out of the box.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by big kook

Has ON3P chimed in on the tune issues?

---

yes, they have in the past, not as of late - but I think the issue has been underreported back to them as of late. That was at least the key take away the first time this arose as an issue a few years back (when the woods were introduced). Iggy followed it up and reached out to a fair few customers, even offering to cover a retune.

It is hard to follow up on an issue if the issue is not made known to them. I know I have not been as diligent in reporting back to them as I could have been - I have wanted to try to diagnose the issue ahead of reaching out. As such, a feedback loop that could've helped resolve the matter sooner did not work. Sure, steps should be taken to prevent customers from being an integral part of the loop - but mistakes happen. And of all the mistakes that could happen a tune is probably the best as it is so easily remedied.

That being said, I have no idea what the issue is as of late. In the beginning the issue was newly acquired machinery not delivering according to spec. I know Moment had some issues as well, or rather found that they needed to refine their processes to get consistent results (aka increase base bevel on wider skis to prevent them feeling hooky).

As for the BG118 192 camber / mount point issue - luckily I have not found 182 BG118s to feel that way at all. I can totally see how the BG110 would benefit from being mounted a bit more forward and how that would improve the balance in that ski, but not so for the 182 BG118 - thhey felt great at recommended imho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Thanks. Yeah, I have a Jeffrey 110 mounted on the line and I like it there. But these Caylor would be soft snow only, which kind of changes things vs the narrower skis that see more 2D snow. I've never felt like the BG mount was anything but perfect, for example, even though I tend to dislike rearward mount points on 2D snow.

If anyone has experience with the Caylor specifically, I'd love to hear it.

---

I had demo jesters on mine. -1 was my favorite

I bought 3 pairs of skis, not 1 tune issue in the bunch. 1 pair of Jeffrey 108 and 2 pairs of Mera 102.

All used primarily in the midwest, so plenty of hard snow and ice. Jeffrey does well on the crusty, icy, snow cone surface we have here. It's not a race ski, but I can get an edge to grab and not think about the icy conditions underfoot. My daughter and wife use the Meras, I've asked, and they never once mentioned any tune issues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Thanks. Yeah, I have a Jeffrey 110 mounted on the line and I like it there. But these Caylor would be soft snow only, which kind of changes things vs the narrower skis that see more 2D snow. I've never felt like the BG mount was anything but perfect, for example, even though I tend to dislike rearward mount points on 2D snow.

If anyone has experience with the Caylor specifically, I'd love to hear it.

---

Rocking 2012 191 caylors, which may be slightly different. But given the mount options, I'd go with -0.5 over +1.5. It's already fairly forward and generally I'd say less disruption to recommended the better. It's the greatest ski of all time, glad some are still kicking around. I'll ride mine until they die, which may be never considering the build quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

I know Scott has mentioned concern in the past over going too far forward with a smaller boot and the pivot's smaller footprint, but I'm not sure how much of a concern that is.

---

This is interesting. I snapped a pair of kartel 110s with the older tour layup after a second, forward, pivot mount with a 305? Bsl. So potential confirmation, that said, I was also going mach stupid straight into avy debris when it happened. Only pair of ON3Ps I've ever been able to damage through 10+ seasons in Colorado and Oregon. Can't say the same for any other brand I've owned.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Any Jeff 118 love out there?

Just took mine for their first a rip today in the heavy sierra pow we just received and they preformed beautifully. Mounted on the line, don’t really need to do anything but keep it neutral and the skis literally do all the work. Blasting off cat tracks into untouched and chop they just blasted straight through without any deflection.

Didn’t notice a tune issue on groomers getting back to the lift. Just felt the looseness of the ski and the ease at which they ski. Attachment 440860


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums