ON3P SKIS Discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

I took a setup on my 182 WD110 that I was *very happy* with and I think I fucked it up a little, oops!

Had: Pivot Duals on the line, LOVED it in my K2 Recons w/ spoiler (14 degrees?) or Tecnica Cochise w/ spoiler (15 degrees?)
Did: Replaced Pivots with Duke PTs at +0.7, felt way too far over the front of the ski, oversteering with my shins, struggled to find balance, tail felt a lot longer than 0.7 cm!

Damn! I didn't factor in the increased ramp delta from the brake assembly of the Duke, and that Pivot Duals have a higher AFD so I was starting from a flatter position initially - so it was a double whammy of increased ramp and mount moved forward. I removed the cuff spoiler from my Cochises (back to 13 degrees) and I felt a lot more balanced and less over the front of the ski ... but at this mount point I'm still finding the skiing style is totally different than before. I now feel like so much more edge is engaged behind the boot, the ski carves much faster but it feels like I have a lot less suspension in the skis, much less stability, and the rear is staying more hooked up more of the time as I struggle with the new balance point.

---

Did some hasty measurements and found that for my Cochise boots, the AFD height on the Duke resulted in 5mm of binding ramp, not bad. However the Pivot Dual WTR that I had on there was 2mm of binding ramp. So I think I'll shim the Duke toe with 1/8" ABS, order 3mm longer screws, and I suspect that will bring my knees and hips a lot closer to the previous position that I had on these skis. Probably won't get this sussed out before the end of the resort season, lol.

Might be just where I am looking (on TGR and Newschoolers..try not to get into the Reddit feeds for ski advise), but I don't see a lot about the Woodsman line. Very easy to find feedback and info on the Jeffrey and, especially as on this forum recently, the Billy Goat. Is the Woodsman just not that popular? I have been eying up the 108 as a daily driver mid winter in PNW. I've only been on the Jeffrey 100 and found it a bit too freestyle for my taste (would love to know if the 108 charges better though). I do getting in the air every chance I can get, do spins, drop cliffs, land switch, etc. However, I also like to run out landings and point and shoot on steeps at higher speeds. The Woodsman intrigues me because of this, but I am still interested in the Jeffrey 108 as well. If anyone does have experience on the Woodsman 108/110, I'd be curious if they mount at rec or go forward at all? Anyone able to compare the Jeffrey 108/110 to the Woodsman 108/110? Currently, I have Moment DW 104 (mounted at -6/rec), Praxis MVP 108 (mounted at -6/rec), and Moment Chipotle Banana (mounted at -5/rec). All of these skis I felt are pretty versatile in allowing me to be more center and also lean forward and drive the skis a bit. I am also considering the DW 112, but I actually really like how poppy the bamboo cores are for ON3P skis. That is the one thing I loved about the Jeffrey 100. You can really load up the ski and pop off big on pretty much any side hit.

I currently tour on the woodsman 108, and have a few days on some demo resort build 108s. Both 186, mounted on the line, I?m 5?10? and currently over 220 lb.

It?s happiest in the fall line on steeper terrain, being driven from about halfway between the boot and tip of the ski, right behind the contact point. Very comfortable in chopped up variable snow. The tail releases effectively enough to schmear turns but the ski prefers to stay in the fall line. It?s not as effortless as a BG in breaking in and out of the fall line in 3D snow. Makes up for it with a significantly improved performance on firm snow. Float is more than sufficient for a 108 ski. It won?t ever be my pow ski, but it floats significantly better than the DW 112 you mentioned. I think the Dynastar MFree 108 is a better pow ski in the same width, but doesn?t want to be driven through chop.

Woodsman is still not a wrenegade though, if you just want to go as fast as possible get a wren. Woodsman is way less brutal to ski though.

If you like the DW112 this probably isn?t the ski for you. It wants to be driven from the mid tip, right around the contact point. If you skied the DW112 the same way you would feel like you were on an especially hooky slalom ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XavierD

I currently tour on the woodsman 108, and have a few days on some demo resort build 108s. Both 186, mounted on the line, I?m 5?10? and currently over 220 lb. It?s happiest in the fall line on steeper terrain, being driven from about halfway between the boot and tip of the ski, right behind the contact point. Very comfortable in chopped up variable snow. The tail releases effectively enough to schmear turns but the ski prefers to stay in the fall line. It?s not as effortless as a BG in breaking in and out of the fall line in 3D snow. Makes up for it with a significantly improved performance on firm snow. Float is more than sufficient for a 108 ski. It won?t ever be my pow ski, but it floats significantly better than the DW 112 you mentioned. I think the Dynastar MFree 108 is a better pow ski in the same width, but doesn?t want to be driven through chop. Woodsman is still not a wrenegade though, if you just want to go as fast as possible get a wren. Woodsman is way less brutal to ski though. If you like the DW112 this probably isn?t the ski for you. It wants to be driven from the mid tip, right around the contact point. If you skied the DW112 the same way you would feel like you were on an especially hooky slalom ski.

---

I haven't actually been on the DW 112. The DW 104 is somewhat similar to the 112, but its actually stiffer and can charge more than the 112. The softness and more planted nature of the DW 112 is what has me hesitant on grabbing it. The DW 104 is my chill resort ski. It fun in just about condition, but one dislike is it does leave me wanting more pop off sides hits/ natural features (probably coming from my experience with the Jeffrey 100). The Woodsman sounds like it has a nice of charge to play with its bamboo core, tail rocker, stiffness, etc.

See the post I quoted above. I?m basically on a +1 mounted WD110 right now (actually I think it?s +0.7 cm) and its fun surfy spinny but I?ve lost some suspension skiing it here as I?m more used to staying on my shins the whole time which I can?t do at this mount. It has a lot of rocker (allegedly same rocker profile as the BG, also allegedly more than the Praxis MVP) so I?ve found it very sensitive to shifting the mount point. I?m a directional skier, ski more aggressively than my ability warrants, no spins, just straight airs and drops, my ?skinny Woodsman? is an Enforcer 94, so I find that I much preferred the Woodsman on the line. On the line it is chargey but still loose and could get sideways, and very versatile terrain and snow wise. WD110 is surprisingly good on firm snow and I would have had my next smaller quiver slot be an Enforcer 88 but I found a good deal on the E94 - had I gone E88 I think I would have been totally fine with nothing between that and the E110.
One thing about my posts quoted above is that I didn?t just move the mount forward, I switched bindings to one with more ramp delta so it totally threw me off - I am in process of shimming my binding to the same delta I was running on the line and I suspect I will feel better about the mount once I do. I think +1 should be fine for you coming off the Jeff and talking about spins and landing switch. I?m 5? 8? 140 lbs on the 182 (now 181), I find that length great for charging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio

See the post I quoted above. I?m basically on a +1 mounted WD110 right now (actually I think it?s +0.7 cm) and its fun surfy spinny but I?ve lost some suspension skiing it here as I?m more used to staying on my shins the whole time which I can?t do at this mount. It has a lot of rocker (allegedly same rocker profile as the BG, also allegedly more than the Praxis MVP) so I?ve found it very sensitive to shifting the mount point. I?m a directional skier, ski more aggressively than my ability warrants, no spins, just straight airs and drops, my ?skinny Woodsman? is an Enforcer 94, so I find that I much preferred the Woodsman on the line. On the line it is chargey but still loose and could get sideways, and very versatile terrain and snow wise. WD110 is surprisingly good on firm snow and I would have had my next smaller quiver slot be an Enforcer 88 but I found a good deal on the E94 - had I gone E88 I think I would have been totally fine with nothing between that and the E110.One thing about my posts quoted above is that I didn?t just move the mount forward, I switched bindings to one with more ramp delta so it totally threw me off - I am in process of shimming my binding to the same delta I was running on the line and I suspect I will feel better about the mount once I do. I think +1 should be fine for you coming off the Jeff and talking about spins and landing switch. I?m 5? 8? 140 lbs on the 182 (now 181), I find that length great for charging.

---

Thanks for the feedback. I'd probably go on the line with the Woodsman. I think the reason I didn't get a long with the Jeffrey 100 was due to how I like to ski steep terrain. I find myself most comfortable being able to get forward so I can get light on my tails/be able to get my tails in the air when needed (nothing revolutionary here, but it seems like a good amount of people tend to just turn and slash to control/direct themselves in steep terrain). The DW 104 allows me to do this to an extent, but a ski like the Woodsman is going to do it even better.

I have a DW112, 2021 woodsman 102, kartel 96 and have been on the newer shape/mount woods 102. The new woodsman really wants to rip, it was an adjustment coming from the 2021 shape. That being said they are really fun to hammer on but will move quick if you are a strong skier. If the Jeff is too freestyle it would be a good option. I also love the DW112 but there is something special about that on3p feel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tschoppe9@gmail.com

I have a DW112, 2021 woodsman 102, kartel 96 and have been on the newer shape/mount woods 102. The new woodsman really wants to rip, it was an adjustment coming from the 2021 shape. That being said they are really fun to hammer on but will move quick if you are a strong skier. If the Jeff is too freestyle it would be a good option. I also love the DW112 but there is something special about that on3p feel.

---

Yeah I am sure I'd love to have the DW 112 and the Woodsman 108 for different reasons. I will say (and I am only saying on this forum and not the Moment forum ha) I am a bit concerned with the top sheet durability of Moment per a few people I have chatted with and my DW 104. I only have about 20 days on my DW 104 and its has a ton of wear on the top sheet (one solid slice off of it as well). I acknowledge I am really rough on skis i.e. dropping cliffs and maybe hitting a rock in the process, getting air off everything, ski them aggressively in tight trees with a disregard for hitting a branch or tree stump, etc. With that being said I kind of expected a bit more than what I expect from some of the other brands. I am guessing that ON3Ps top sheet might be a bit more durable from my short experience with the Jeffrey 108 (it just felt premium and didn't have a single mark after 5 or so days).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNazWIcoWA

I will say (and I am only saying on this forum and not the Moment forum ha) I am a bit concerned with the top sheet durability of Moment per a few people I have chatted with and my DW 104. I only have about 20 days on my DW 104 and its has a ton of wear on the top sheet (one solid slice off of it as well).

---

As someone who also destroys skis I would agree. Similar days on my DW and there is a lot of chipping, enough on the tips I will probably epoxy them soon. on3ps still looking factory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tschoppe9@gmail.com

As someone who also destroys skis I would agree. Similar days on my DW and there is a lot of chipping, enough on the tips I will probably epoxy them soon. on3ps still looking factory.

---

Yeah I am still supportive of Moment. They are an great brand and all their skis are awesome, but was under the impression they were on par with ON3Ps as "bulletproof" considering the feedback on the various feeds about Moment. I do wonder if that is due, and just a guess here: 1) ON3P at its core is a company that caters largely to folks who are bashing skis on rails and hitting big airs in the park and off natural features. That bulletproof build has carried across to non-park/freestyle lines such as the BG, Wood, and Wren. 2) Moment seems to have become more mainstream and may cater to more intermediate skiers who are keeping their skis on the snow and probably not venturing off piste all that often, hitting cliffs, getting in the air, etc. They probably perceive Moment as bulletproof, because they aren't really destroying their skis in general. No doubt both brands have crazy skiers both sponsored and unsponsored who are doing gnarly stuff, but I am thinking of the average ON3P and Moment skier.

ON3Ps are significantly more durable than Moments, in my opinion, but that comes with added weight that not everyone wants.

Re: BG vs Wildcat, the BG is a pow ski whereas the Wildcat is more a wide all mountain ski. BG floats much better and is looser in deep snow or weird crusts. Wildcat charges better in firmer snow and I could actually enjoy skiing it everyday, whereas I only want to ski the BG on pow days.

"Re: BG vs Wildcat, the BG is a pow ski whereas the Wildcat is more a wide all mountain ski. BG floats much better and is looser in deep snow or weird crusts. Wildcat charges better in firmer snow and I could actually enjoy skiing it everyday, whereas I only want to ski the BG on pow days."

I have a pair of WC108's that I've been reaching for as a DD since moving up here and really enjoying in everything up to full on pow days. I think I do want something that's more of a powder specialist, and again re: coastal snow pack, I think the BG fits the bill. The one thing I've been reading is that apparently the BG is more of a traditional ski as far as driving the tips which seems different from the more centered stance that WCs want. I was looking at the Jeffrey 118 but they seem too jibby/center-mounted for me. I am keen to see what the hype with the BG is all about too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jvhowube

"Re: BG vs Wildcat, the BG is a pow ski whereas the Wildcat is more a wide all mountain ski. BG floats much better and is looser in deep snow or weird crusts. Wildcat charges better in firmer snow and I could actually enjoy skiing it everyday, whereas I only want to ski the BG on pow days."

I have a pair of WC108's that I've been reaching for as a DD since moving up here and really enjoying in everything up to full on pow days. I think I do want something that's more of a powder specialist, and again re: coastal snow pack, I think the BG fits the bill. The one thing I've been reading is that apparently the BG is more of a traditional ski as far as driving the tips which seems different from the more centered stance that WCs want. I was looking at the Jeffrey 118 but they seem too jibby/center-mounted for me. I am keen to see what the hype with the BG is all about too.

---

It's the greatest PNW powder ski made. I'm J118 curious and am always watching for a 191 to pop up.

I skis the bgs (asym 184) as my pow skis and wc108(184) as my dd. The first couple runs on the bg it took me a bit to figure them out but it's more about having your turn take advantage of the res and the surfiness the extra surface area in the front provides vs having to drive the tips. I wouldn't describe it as having to ski it in a traditional way. It's not the same type of transition in type of skiing as switching from my wc108s to my head monsters. Once they click it's magic, you can charge, drift and ski it in a verity of ways. After those first two runs ive had no problem switching between the two. In softsnow my bigger trouble is switches back to the wc108 and losing the plush suspension of the bgs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASmileyFace

Damn good stuff on there. Those $599 Jeff Tour 118s

---

Thanks to the two who scooped these up, don’t really need but couldn’t resist much longer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatty

It's the greatest PNW powder ski made. I'm J118 curious and am always watching for a 191 to pop up.

---

BG owner who's also J118 curious [emoji23]

But I may also just need to detune my BGs a bit... Hard to say with no snow to test on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jvhowube

" The one thing I've been reading is that apparently the BG is more of a traditional ski as far as driving the tips which seems different from the more centered stance that WCs want.

---

I wouldn't say the BG is overly traditional, it's more like "slightly forward of centered stance."

Like you just tip forward a little bit and the turns happen, no need to drive or press your shins.

This is my preferred skiing style and the BG fits like a glove.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

You guys are gonna make me spend money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jvhowube

You guys are gonna make me spend money.

---

That’s why you come here.

Glad I could save people from blowing money. Fingers crossed 186 isnt too short for my fat ass, but I've been happy with 187 BG110 so I'm hopeful.

Got in touch w the guys - looks like the BG isn't changing at all for next season so not going on sale. Gonna wait for a coworker to drive by Portland or until I'm going down to Bend for work to buy them I think for tax-related reasons. Think I'm gonna pull the trigger though. Got a pair of gold p15's ready to go on those bad boys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jvhowube

Got in touch w the guys - looks like the BG isn't changing at all for next season so not going on sale. Gonna wait for a coworker to drive by Portland or until I'm going down to Bend for work to buy them I think for tax-related reasons. Think I'm gonna pull the trigger though. Got a pair of gold p15's ready to go on those bad boys.

---

I think you have to live in state to do factory pickup. You may want to email them and ask.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tschoppe9@gmail.com

I have a DW112, 2021 woodsman 102, kartel 96 and have been on the newer shape/mount woods 102. The new woodsman really wants to rip, it was an adjustment coming from the 2021 shape. That being said they are really fun to hammer on but will move quick if you are a strong skier. If the Jeff is too freestyle it would be a good option. I also love the DW112 but there is something special about that on3p feel.

---

I forgot to ask..how did you find the Woodsman to perform on hard pack and ice? Especially steep stuff where you get dust on crust? It was laughable how bad the Jeff 100 was at being able to grab in especially steep hard pack and icy conditions vs the DW 104 (I know the DW 104 with the triple camber is uniquely great at this).

The WD110 is particularly impressive at very firm and dust on crust conditions, though of course I reach for my Enfrocer 94s when those conditions are likely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNazWIcoWA

I forgot to ask..how did you find the Woodsman to perform on hard pack and ice? Especially steep stuff where you get dust on crust? It was laughable how bad the Jeff 100 was at being able to grab in especially steep hard pack and icy conditions vs the DW 104 (I know the DW 104 with the triple camber is uniquely great at this).

---

The new shape has some a long way in these regards. Rode them back to back with a prototype woodsman 96 on a December day in New Hampshire, all man made freeze thaw snow, and the new shape has a lot more grip. Still an on3p so the big tip rocker isn’t going to help you rail gs turns but I was pleasantly surprised. Ski has a lot of backbone.