ON3P SKIS Discussion

[Bandit Man]

have you guys asked Iggy?

The "SG model" is kinda what every non-18x length is for most ski models outside of park skis. C&Ds too. The only difference is that they are not made to order, but in very limited once-and-done-for-the-season runs. The stock layup BG110 and 177 stock layup BG118s arguably were those skis last year, the wren110pro for the last two years. If a new C&D is released this coming season it might be it for 2023.

My point being, if you guys can drum up SG level commitment to buying a particular iteration of the BG in a specific length, and ask Iggy ever so nicely if he can make 10-20pairs of a pre-sold ski in a way where it can be slotted into the production cycle, then perhaps he will make it happen. It could also potentially be offered as one off customs for all I know, though the time needed for mold alterations might be what could make a limited run more feasible.

I have no idea though - this is 100% speculation on my part. The idea is not build pressure on you to build them Iggy, but have mags ask directly (and commit to buying) if it is something they really, really, really want and something you might be persuaded to offer.

I talked to Scott directly about it two seasons back. Not sure the molds are around anymore. He chuckled a bit when I mentioned my affinity for that specific design. I’ve also had conversations with some other early ON3P “players” and they agree with my perspective of those years being the best soft snow/powder BG’s, especially for PNW conditions.

The newer designs are better chargers and better in a broader range of conditions, but if you haven’t skied a 2014-2016 vintage, then I guess you don’t know what you are missing.

[kid-kapow]

Iggy & crew wouldn't even reply to questions about the changes to the BG line last year. In hindsight, they probably saved me $500 as it turns out the 192 was a huge turd so everyone is here lamenting the past cult classics.

they had their work cut out for them getting the skis produced amid supply chain issues, covid and a lead employee nearly dying - so go figure Iggy did not take the time to revisit a decision that was already made (before explaining the changes on the Blister podcast).

As for the 192 being a turd or not - some people seem to like em, some do not. That seems to be the case for a lot of skis as specific as BGs.

My 182s skied a bit differently to my original 179s, but they are def a bit easier to ski and easier to stay in a slarve in dry snow than 184 asyms. I like the 182s though, though I prefer the asyms. I have not been on earlier iterations, in spite of owning a custom stiffer 16/17 pair - so can't compare.

But if they're listening and offer a reissue of the 191 Bearpaw BG I'd consider it.

I am sure they are dying to get started on the special run with that kind of commitment levels And if we are dreaming aloud - I would be extremly curious to try a BG with a standard sidecut in the front ski. Yeah, it would probably take away the particular hoover craft floaty feeling, but could make them more versatile. Sacrilege I know

The newer designs are better chargers and better in a broader range of conditions, but if you haven’t skied a 2014-2016 vintage, then I guess you don’t know what you are missing.

For sure re the last point, though my desire would be changes that make them more versatile, not more soft snow specific. Then again there are a lot of good 116/118 directional pow skis

And no, I am not trying to start a new "BG on groomers" or "driving BGs in soft snow" shit show / debate We are not that far into missing winter yet, or ever

[Norseman]

Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.

[adrenalated]

Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.

Yup.

[kid-kapow]

Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.

The rocker profile is the same yes, the shapes are most certainly not - so pretty different ride feel imho.

There are more that differentiates how a woods108/110s vs BG108/110, and WD116 vs BG116/118s than "just" the RES. The taper lines front and aft and front to back taper are a fair bit different. As are the balance points / mount points.

Yes, a "BG" without the RES would not have the same lift in front of the binding, but I am still curious how it would ski - it is something I've thought more than once. Its taper lines, straight sidecut, rocker profile and stiff flex would still make them missiles with more than ample float, even if the would probably not pivot as effortlessly in soft snow. I kinda feel like Dynastar MF118s feel like a ski that is between wood116s and BGs in terms of looseness. A modified "BG" would then inch closer to the MF118s - especially if the mount point was moved forward a cm or two, but be better in denser snow (even if the widest point in the tails were made a tad bit wider) than MF118s, while being better on hard snow and in light snow than BGs. A ski that would merge the defining characteristics of MF118s and BGs into a single ski would be nigh of perfection imho. WD116s is not that ski, even if is a very capable and fun ski.

Anyway, it is not something that will be built - I've just wondered how such a ski would ski. #myskiboxistootinytobrbingallmyskisallthetime

[jackattack]

Um, the trait that defines a BG is the reverse sidecut front half. Make it standard and you have the Woods, which has the exact same rocker profile of the BG.

kapow:

[kid-kapow]

kapow:

whatever man.

My point was that the overall pintail design probably has a lot to do with the ride feel as well, not "just" the RES. The ability of the tails to release in dense snow is not only caused by front ski float.

The Woods comparison is also just plain wrong - or at best incredibly un-nuanced - something my reply tried to elaborate on. I see that effort was wasted time, for me and you alike. Oh well.

I actually bought a second pair of Koala119s today to see if that ski is kinda in between a BG and MF118, to be mounted with pivots instead of Shifts like my last pair. Should be fun.

also this just in:

I think this graphic is bonkers. I had kinda convinced myself that I should not buy j118s to try them with Pivots (as it turned out that the ride feel I did not like with my now sold pair of custom stiffer K116s was caused by ramp angle, and not anything to do with the ski), but man... The universal praise from those that have been on j118s do not help either. Must not buy more skis!

[mr_pretzel]

I wrote a small review of the BG on a PM to bry that he can post if he still has it.

I’m for sure bummed on the new 192.

[pfluffenmeister]

@kidkapow

At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189?
I only have about one day total on my pair.

[mr_pretzel]

@kidkapow

At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189?
I only have about one day total on my pair.

They’re fucking awesome. Crush chop and have nice float.

[pfluffenmeister]

They’re fucking awesome. Crush chop and have nice float.

Sweet.
With a quiver like yours this is a data point I can respect.
I have three partial days on mine and agree with you regarding chopping and floating.
Die Chicken Heads!!!

I can also remember some surprisingly good (for width) groomer turns.

[Norseman]

whatever man.

My point was that the overall pintail design probably has a lot to do with the ride feel as well, not "just" the RES. The ability of the tails to release in dense snow is not only caused by front ski float.

The Woods comparison is also just plain wrong - or at best incredibly un-nuanced - something my reply tried to elaborate on. I see that effort was wasted time, for me and you alike. Oh well.

My northern brother, I don't like to argue nor do I have the time to ruminate at length. Was I lazy to generalize and not mention sidecut? Sure.

The broader point was that a RES-les BG (longish rad rockered pintail) is already covered by existing shapes and might not be worth developing. Lhasa, Lotus, maybe a modern K2-whatever.

peace

[PeachesNCream]

also this just in:

I think this graphic is bonkers. I had kinda convinced myself that I should not buy j118s to try them with Pivots (as it turned out that the ride feel I did not like with my now sold pair of custom stiffer K116s was caused by ramp angle, and not anything to do with the ski), but man... The universal praise from those that have been on j118s do not help either. Must not buy more skis!

Damn, good looking ski. Exactly what I'm looking for but new skis are not in my budget. Only 1 pair in stock per length

[kid-kapow]

My northern brother, I don't like to argue nor do I have the time to ruminate at length. Was I lazy to generalize and not mention sidecut? Sure.

The broader point was that a RES-les BG (longish rad rockered pintail) is already covered by existing shapes and might not be worth developing. Lhasa, Lotus, maybe a modern K2-whatever.

peace

My bad - I should have just said that I would like there to be something between the BG and WD116 - taper lines like BG, sidecut like WD116 - mount point in between. So a loose ski that can charge and demolish groomers too, just with ON3P build quality. Sure, there are some skis out there that fits the ticket, but not from ON3P as of now. Being a fan boy I would like there to be

Like, I would probably have gotten along well with WD116s as my only 115ish ski if I had not been on a bunch of other skis before / after, but having been now after obsessing over the perfect quiver of the past 5 or so years I feel that there are some steps that could be taken to merge both designs to make something really awesome. A thought driven by a want to merge a fair few skis into a single "good enough" ski for a ton of conditions. And I would just prefer that ski to be from ON3P.

At the risk of thread drift: what was your impression of the Koala 119; and do you have the 189? I only have about one day total on my pair.

I only had a day on my first pair. Mounted at -,5 cm with Shifts. I really liked them - they were freaking great both when driven from a centered and a more aggressive stances. I preferred them to WD116 to be perfectly honest, though that was down to the tune for the most part. Sold them though as I freaking hate DPS and wanted to figure out the WD116s (they were great after a tune, switch to pivots from Shifts and -1 mount). I can see k119s being a handful in some conditions.

First thoughts now, without skiing them - holy shit 184s are stiff. I cannot remember my first pair being this stiff. If 189s are 15% stiffer then they must be freaking planks. And yes, I managed to find a second pair of 119s, not the new 118s (that ski is slightly softer and more importantly have a different shape (wider tails)). It will be fun to try them back to back with PR-OTOs, MF118s and BGasyms.

I bought some Koala103s and Lotus124pagodas too (40-50% off is a real driver to try skis you are wanting to try) - aka the new catch and release quiver. 185 Lotus124s are not terribly dissimilar to BG118 182s wrt length, though the BGs are stiffer. I am a bit surprised by the flex pattern of the Koala103s though, they are fairly supportive for being DPS' attempt at a kibbby ski for the masses imho. TBC.

I wrote a small review of the BG on a PM to bry that he can post if he still has it.

I’m for sure bummed on the new 192.

I have yet to get back to iggy on my take on the current skis, but as far as BG118/110 are concerned - I am not 100% sold on the increase in camber on BGs to be honest, nor the +2/+1 tip/tail addition. I really like the shape in general though, the lower tail splay especially. The flattish camber skis were even looser without being less capable though, so flattish camber + lower tail splay might be even better - I dunno, though that would make it harder to run a limited set of molds in production.

I would also not be terribly surprised if tune issues is somewhat to blame for some of the less than stellar experiences - the addition of fancy euro machines have not been a force multiplier thus far imho. The more prominent tails probably exacerbate a wonky tune. But, that is just speculation on my part - I have not been on the 192s (even if it was a thing for my BG110s, not my BG118s).

BG110s - size up. The narrower pin tail design needs more stiffness and effective edge than the 182s possess (for me) to sing. I preferred the 184 BG108tours to BG110stock layup to be honest - BG108t were freaking magical. I would really like to try a pair of BG110 stock layup 187s, but alas

[CallMeAl]

I've got some 2019 184 BG asyms w/1 Attack mount @300 that I'd be willing to trade + cash for current model 110s or 118s in 187 flavor just because I'm curious.

[CallMeAl]

Well that was quick. Got some 187 BG 118s coming.

I'm also half-ass looking to trade some 187 Woodsman 110Ts w/1 Tecton mount @300 for BG 110s, either layup.

I really like this ski too. Regular layup WD is my DD, just curious about the BG 110 as a long time 116 fan and trying to keep my shed to a one in, one out rule.

[cocoapuff]

Love both the 187 WD 110 and BG 110 (stock). Looking forward to spending more time on them this winter. You'll feel a bit more support in the tail of the BG 110s than 116s but its something I have come to enjoy and actually prefer. They are still very easy to release. Im in Missoula so not quite maritime, not quite continental snowpack. Seems like those in maritime zones still prefer the Asym.

[CallMeAl]

Love both the 187 WD 110 and BG 110 (stock). Looking forward to spending more time on them this winter. You'll feel a bit more support in the tail of the BG 110s than 116s but its something I have come to enjoy and actually prefer. They are still very easy to release. Im in Missoula so not quite maritime, not quite continental snowpack. Seems like those in maritime zones still prefer the Asym.

Nice, that’s pretty much what I’m looking for.

I toured on steeple 116s for years until they fell victim to a sled rollover mishap.

Replaced with wd110t for the sake of weight and not adjusting to a new shape between DD resort and DD tour skis.

However I really miss RES every time we have a breakable top layer, which is often in SWMT, and I don’t always want to lug my castified stock BGs around out there.

[hossman]

DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

[detrusor]

Seeming that I’m outta luck on this one. No euro maggots to help out?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[waxoff]

Seeming that I’m outta luck on this one. No euro maggots to help out?

Yurp calling. Outta luck with what? What assistance is needed?

[SkiJitsu]

6669827[/URL]]DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

I haven’t skied the woods 110, but I think the Wren Pro is probably the closest to a 184 Katana based on mount point and general feel. The Katana and Mindbender 108Ti were the other skis is was thinking about when I got the Wren Pro and I love that ski. The 186 length feels close to the 184 in volkl thanks to more tip rocker.

[kid-kapow]

DD? resort/resort BC replacing OG katana 184.. woodsman 110 182 or 187? or other option?

100% agree with the last poster - the wren110pro is the more comparable ski, both wrt mount point, geo and intention - so I would consider it too.

If you want a wren110 then I would suggest going for 187s. 184 Katana VWs are 182 straight pull like wood 182s, but the latter have way more splay so have less effective edge.

[5 Cents]

Snagged a pair of 118 Jeffreys. Will post some unorganized thoughts after I (hopefully) get a few days on them this Winter.

[kid-kapow]

The eagle eyed might have noticed this new graphic in the mt hood clips from ON3P lately. Nice with more options.