ON3P SKIS Discussion

Just picked up a pair of asym 184 C+Ds for no good reason other than they kept popping up on local FB marketplace for the last two weeks and I just couldn't help myself. It's one of the few ON3Ps I've never skied. Ended up trading the prior owner my old Kartel 108s for them straight up and everyone is stoked.

But now, they need bindings, and I could use some nudging from the collective here one way or another.

Should I put some Attacks on them for the three days a year I'd grab them over my current year BG 118s at the resort?

Or Tectons for the three days a year I'd grab them over my BG108Ts for touring?

I think I'm leaning Tecton but can absolutely be swayed. I have both bindings and jigs sitting on my bench right now, so those are the options.

That was weird, somehow my post got deleted.

But in summary, you should mount attacks, and see if you prefer the C&D over your Billy Goat’s in resort. That CD should more or less be a slightly wider BG, with a slightly lighter core/more round flex profile. It’s one of the best deep resort pow skis in my opinion.

Sell whichever you like less. You may find the C&D is better in low angle or you jive with the core layup better, or perhaps the hard snow chops of the BG is better for you. Neither are a good ski for touring, too heavy. (Twenty three hundred + grams?)

If you have two pow skis, you’d be a lot better off keeping the C&D, selling the BG, and getting something in the one hundred ten mm underfoot range like the MFree one o eight or the heritage labs r one ten. Put tecrons on the narrower ski

Much more balanced quiver.

Thanks, I saw your first post- it deleted as I was responding. Weird.

I should've mentioned that if I mount these with Tectons, they'll only be used for very short tours/sled skiing. A ~2200g Steeple with Tectons filled this slot before I rolled a sled on to them and broke one. They never felt too heavy for what I was doing with them, and yeah, certainly wouldn't want to take them too far away from a machine.

But, as you say, the round flex on these C+Ds seems like a ton of fun, especially with the added width. It would almost be a shame to put touring bindings on them just knowing how many fewer laps they'd see, and how much more prudently they'd be skied.

However, I'm not getting rid of BG118s w/Attacks or BG108Ts w/Tectons, and that's root of the excellent problem that presenting here. It's an "I don't need this ski, but this ski needs me" kind of situation, but we still have a few walls to break through before we can really start to enjoy ourselves.

FWIW, I stumbled onto this thread while looking into the Woodsman 100s.

Both for factory wax or edge tuning, I would never assume that they were where I'd end up wanting them from ANY ski manufacturer. (I also happen to think that ON3P makes bomber skis.)

It's real easy and takes little time to check edges and tweak. Same for factory wax and getting an optimal glide out of the bases.

This past week, I took out a pair of wider skis on packed powder and chalky bumps to just see what the factory tune felt like (plus just to see how well they rode on harder snows), knowing that they were 'burr sharp' and had a mini step in them. They carved great on low angle, but gripped hard and/or chattered on steeper runs and caught the side of bumps. After 15 minutes on the bench with a few diamonds to get a 1:2, smooth, sharp edge, I went out and it was night and day on how smooth they carved on everything and more forgiving in the bumps. In short, they were tons of fun.

So, in less time that it would take to write a post in this thread, put your new skis on a bench and 'get to know them'. Make adjustments as you see fit....or take them out first and see how they ski before making adjustments. Bring a back up pair if they don't perform for you that day. By test driving and adjusting, you just might learn something that helps you get better and more efficient at tuning your gear.

CallMeAl - go with Tectons on the asyms and run the C&Ds will full on binders - that makes the most sense given your quiver. Asyms makes for an awesome sidecountry / short tours ski - they make skiing difficult/unpredictable snow really easy. And C&Ds deserves to be used. So freaking good pow weapons. Alpi - Tunegate / tunes being a topic in this thread is not about the tunes being slightly off with preferences being the driver. It is about skis being damned near unskiable. Which rankles when it results in skiing days being a write off. Hopefully things will improve as the Blister hot take is bound to produce a shit ton of questions on the tunes going forward - as you say, the construction and craftmanship is (the tune nothwithstanding) just about as good as one can get. ON3P makes amazing soft snow skis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

Alpi - Tunegate / tunes being a topic in this thread is not about the tunes being slightly off with preferences being the driver. It is about skis being damned near unskiable. Which rankles when it results in skiing days being a write off. Hopefully things will improve as the Blister hot take is bound to produce a shit ton of questions on the tunes going forward - as you say, the construction and craftmanship is (the tune nothwithstanding) just about as good as one can get. ON3P makes amazing soft snow skis.

---

If you were to unwrap a pair, throw ‘em on a bench, check them out and ‘make them skiable’, what’s involved and how much time? Where is it on a scale of 1st world inconvenience/annoyance to a real world problem? My impression for some patience, a little effort and ‘short term pain’, they should be well worth it. You’ve got me real curious now.

Just like untuned skis sent out for demos, letting Blister test untuned skis seems odd.


Sent from my iPad SlideWright Ski & Snowboard Tools

Regarding the tunes: as a dude that spent yrs in a shop tuning and fixing skis, the tunes have never been that far off. Skis have always been flat w/great stone structure from edge to edge. It seems to be an edge finishing issue w/ a fairly standard rebevel and repolish. Seemingly a simple remedy moving forward.
Just as baffling as sending a janky tune to blister is the tune that was described to me that came on Yuk's skis, cuz they were hand tuned!

I have a BG question, wtf is wrong with me? After reading all the praise and love of this ski, I've come to the conclusion is must be me, not you BG. I'm on the Asym 184 with pivots. (190lb, ex-ski patroller, decent technique, aspiring best skier on the mtn). I don't get the hovertoe effect or super easy pivoting in trees. The tails feel like they are "in" the snow thus feeling like they release after hanging on a bit. I've detuned the crap out of the tails and tips with a file/gummy stone. It has a tapered tail and rocker, so it's not like super hard to release, but it's not super easy either.

Up front, they're super powerful and float. Maybe it's the Asym? I feel like they were trying to increase inside edge of the outside ski on groomers, but honestly, Idgaf about groomers if I'm taking these out. Maybe the BG 118 version would appeal to me more?

I dunno. I'm a huge ON3P fanboy and I LOVE the 1st gen woodsman 108, it's powerful, yet playful and slashy. It's my go to with anything soft and can handle themselves in some deeper snow as well. I have some M-free 118s that are amazing in untouched, but I think may have too much taper to be as enjoyable in tracked out stuff vs the Woodsman.

I feel like the M-free is super drifty, the Woodsman can drift, but likes slashing and as far as pivoting goes, and my 184 Devs are pivot machines. The old full rocker ones. I was kinda hoping to get a super maneuverable powerful ski for heavy wet PNW pow.

I've read through most of this thread and I feel like there's a mixture of people who love them and people like me.

@Tuco, that sounds more like what I experienced with my Pioneer 109s. I can see how some might characterize them as ‘unskiable’ while others not. As noted above, it was an easy fix.

@iceCoastBBPatrol and others how might moving the mount help or hurt what you (or others) are experiencing? My Endurance 98s’ tips would dive in stiffer snows, launching me forward. Moving my Pivots back (3cm IIRC) made a world of difference to that issue with no problems to the tails.

Food for thought and curious how this relates to ON3P recommended mount locations:

“Where should I mount my skis?

Every Icelantic Ski features a BC-I mark on the left side of the ski next to the serial number. This is our recommended “Boot Center” mounting point for the majority of skiers who want to be the most balanced over their ski.

Our new 24/25 Freeride Collection (Nomads and Maidens) also have a PC-I mark. This is our recommended freeride mounting point “Progressive Center” and should be used by people wanting a more neutral stance. Being closer to the camber height gives the ski more natural pop and balances the swing weight of the ski. This is where you mount your skis if you want a maneuverable, poppy, all mountain jib stick to accompany you as you jump and stomp every feature on the mountain.

Every Ski also features a CC-I mark. This is the “Core Center” mark and should only be used for those looking for a true center mount. This mostly applies to park skiers and otherwise should mainly be used as a reference.”


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IceCoastBBPatrol

I have a BG question, wtf is wrong with me? After reading all the praise and love of this ski, I've come to the conclusion is must be me, not you BG. I'm on the Asym 184 with pivots. (190lb, ex-ski patroller, decent technique, aspiring best skier on the mtn). I don't get the hovertoe effect or super easy pivoting in trees. The tails feel like they are "in" the snow thus feeling like they release after hanging on a bit. I've detuned the crap out of the tails and tips with a file/gummy stone. It has a tapered tail and rocker, so it's not like super hard to release, but it's not super easy either.

Up front, they're super powerful and float. Maybe it's the Asym? I feel like they were trying to increase inside edge of the outside ski on groomers, but honestly, Idgaf about groomers if I'm taking these out. Maybe the BG 118 version would appeal to me more?

I dunno. I'm a huge ON3P fanboy and I LOVE the 1st gen woodsman 108, it's powerful, yet playful and slashy. It's my go to with anything soft and can handle themselves in some deeper snow as well. I have some M-free 118s that are amazing in untouched, but I think may have too much taper to be as enjoyable in tracked out stuff vs the Woodsman.

I feel like the M-free is super drifty, the Woodsman can drift, but likes slashing and as far as pivoting goes, and my 184 Devs are pivot machines. The old full rocker ones. I was kinda hoping to get a super maneuverable powerful ski for heavy wet PNW pow.

I've read through most of this thread and I feel like there's a mixture of people who love them and people like me.

---

As always, have you check the bases are flat and you have good recent wax on them?

Bad wax for the conditions or dry bases makes skis suck. Have had a few days over the years where skis I love have been grabby and cumbersome because i neglected waxing them enough

Ha, oh man, I have PTSD from railed skis. After THREE different pairs (Voile, DPS, WNDR) of skis I bought, 2 new, 1 used were all railed I'm paranoid for flat bases, hah.

Hopefully waxing will do the trick.

A true bar is a good tool to own, worth checking of you have one or taking to a shop to check. If you can slide more than a sheet of paper under the middle of the bar they probably need a grind


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Good call on the paper. I’ve always used a backlight, but that works best with black bases and poorly with translucent or clearish bases. Now I’ll use the same card stock that I use for setting my AFDs!

Keith at praxis told me that one, you want normal printer paper. Light will shine under a true bar when it’s only the tiniest of gap, so the paper is a more reliable measure


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

True bars are great, but edge bevel needs to be confirmed and/or redone first before using one and relying on the results for your next move.

A flat ski with an off bevel can perform very similarly to one that is truly railed/edge high, and mentioned above, a bevel issue is much more common/likely than a base that is not flat in my experience.

^^Agreed completely. I've had varying degree of off bevel, but all my on3p's have been dead flat across the base.

PSA: Saw on Marketplace

[ATTACH]51[emoji646][emoji645]52[/ATTACH]

I bought some Wren 108 Ti's over the Summer, finally took them out for the first time yesterday on a groomer day. I had the exact same experience as a lot of posts here recently with the factory tune. My pair is borderline unskiable out of the box. They feel concave, unable to maintain a straight line when flat, but also resistant to getting on edge when you want to. If I was demoing these, I would have given them back after 1 run. Fresh wax. Bases are perfectly flat. Mounted as recommended. I don't think it's a skill issue, I ski ~90 days a year and would usually be on racing skis for a day like that. So after reading this thread, I am going to redo the tune and try again. Just posting to say that the people having these issues are not making it up.

No doubt there is an issue. Is it a consistent or inconsistent? What needs to be done to fix it?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

You guys are going to give Sessions a brain aneurysm. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2FUNKY

You guys are going to give Sessions a brain aneurysm. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Nah, he’s busy over in the HL threads [emoji1745]

Alright, so my Woodsman 108s finally delivered a good ski day.

I mounted them -2 from recommended, (so -10, I dunno I can measure if anyone cares that much), I sort of wish I'd have gone -1.5 but whatever small thing.

I got them tip to tail wintersteiger'd to 1/2, then did a pretty aggressive de-tune to about 2 inches before the contact point then a light detune to the contact. Also detuned the tails about 6 inches moderately aggressively.

The skis ski well now. I still have some learning to do on them, but they held up all day to whatever I did, including steeps, moguls, chalk, fast runouts, groomers, whatever. They leave things to be desired on the groomers, but this isn't their purpose, and they perform fine, or even very fine as long as you aren't trying to crank turns. Pretty forgiving in odd snow, and damp in the chattery chalk. They were pretty fun actually which is a massive improvement from day 1 when they were absolutely un skiable.

I will update once I get a few more days, and a 3 to 5 inch day which is what I bought them for.

6'1" 165lb and pretty aggressive directional skier for futures searchers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emill_

I bought some Wren 108 Ti's over the Summer, finally took them out for the first time yesterday on a groomer day. I had the exact same experience as a lot of posts here recently with the factory tune. My pair is borderline unskiable out of the box. They feel concave, unable to maintain a straight line when flat, but also resistant to getting on edge when you want to. If I was demoing these, I would have given them back after 1 run. Fresh wax. Bases are perfectly flat. Mounted as recommended. I don't think it's a skill issue, I ski ~90 days a year and would usually be on racing skis for a day like that. So after reading this thread, I am going to redo the tune and try again. Just posting to say that the people having these issues are not making it up.

---

So I don't have much experience ski tuning, but I used the sharpie method to do a sanity check on these. And the side bevel is greater than 90 degrees lol. Using my Toko adjustable side edge scraper set to 90*, it is removing material on the topsheet edge while not touching the base edge. Am I way off here or did these go through the tuner upside down?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yukonrider

Woodsman 108s finally delivered a good ski day.

I mounted them -2 from recommended, (so -10, I dunno I can measure if anyone cares that much), I sort of wish I'd have gone -1.5 …
6'1" 165lb and pretty aggressive directional skier for futures searchers.

---

For the sake of curiosity and redneck engineering, what boot and binding combo are you on? Bonus points if you happen to know the boot lean angle and binding delta.

All of my recent experience f’ing around with mount points has me thinking that my next skis (or next remount of existing skis) will be a Strive 13 Demo to see how I like the stack height and the feel of the toepiece/flex. I have a theory that aggressively rockered skis are pretty sensitive to small (say 5mm) changes in mount point in mostly 2D conditions due to such short camber contact length; getting too far forward can give a teeter totter feeling over the front of the skis, and I suspect that getting too far back would make the ski feel too locked in. But I’m really curious to see if the optimal mount point varies more by boot angle and binding delta than it does by preferred stance …

I can tell you that changing my binding delta from 5mm to 1.7mm made a remarkable difference at my current slightly forward mount. I’m about to experiment with running it at 2.9mm delta.

Watch this as he explains the tuning process well and how to deal with your sidewalls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2MGvdHWZ2s&t=2s