ON3P SKIS Discussion

[Reformed]

Shit. Posted in the previous thread by mistake. Moving this to the current discussion.

Any input on the production Steeple 108s? Are they simply a tour-able version of the BGs or an otherwise interesting love child of the BG and something else? I'm looking to update the touring spot in my collection and these are looking good. If they perform similar to BGs in pow and everywhere else I can't see why they wouldn't make a pretty ideal quiver of one touring ski (no extreme mountaineering or skiing down steep ice disguised as snow). This being the case, why aren't we hearing more about them?

[mr_pretzel]

Does anyone want to do a year by year comparisson of all the wrens?

09/10 OG version? Charges hard

10/11 same as OG, I have and love these skied them today and they have no speed limit, while still pivoting with ease

11/12 kills babies and makes all women moist?

12/13 ?

13/14 same as 12/13?

14/15 only made the 186, not a true wren?

15/16 ?

16/17 anyone have any reviews on these?

[TahoeJ]

Any input on the production Steeple 108s? Are they simply a tour-able version of the BGs or an otherwise interesting love child of the BG and something else? I'm looking to update the touring spot in my collection and these are looking good. If they perform similar to BGs in pow and everywhere else I can't see why they wouldn't make a pretty ideal quiver of one touring ski (no extreme mountaineering or skiing down steep ice disguised as snow). This being the case, why aren't we hearing more about them?

So, I don't have the Steeple 108's but I do have the same exact shape with the BG layup, making it a more direct comparison. They ski pretty similar to the BG's but they feel a bit shorter, I think because they turn quicker since they're narrower underfoot and lighter. So they're a little better in the trees (not that BG's are bad) but they can't charge through tracked out snow quite as hard (but still better than most other soft snow oriented skis I've been on). I would imagine the Steeple weighing a bit less with the tour layup would emphasize those differences a bit more.

While I'm not really a quiver kind of guy because I'm a gear whore, they do make for a great do it all BC ski assuming you generally go out looking for soft snow or corn and aren't some kind of masochist who gets off on boilerplate.

[CaliBrit]

Does anyone want to do a year by year comparisson of all the wrens?

09/10 OG version? Charges hard

10/11 same as OG, I have and love these skied them today and they have no speed limit, while still pivoting with ease

11/12 kills babies and makes all women moist?

12/13 ?

13/14 same as 12/13?

14/15 only made the 186, not a true wren?

15/16 ?

16/17 anyone have any reviews on these?

Too lazy to make this nice as I am ok my phone but info from Scott.:

The 09/10 & 10/11 were both full twin. The 09/10 had our original core material which was 100 grams heavier/ski then the material we moved to for 10/11 on. The 10/11 was slightly softer than the 09/10, but it was pretty hard to tell. They had full twins, equal height length, and a mount of -9cm from true center.



The 11/12 is the most...aggressive wren of the bunch. This is mostly due to the mounting location, which looking back we went a little overboard on. It went from the equal height & length tips and tails to a flat tail and an extended, shark nosed tip. We moved the the mounting location back to maintain the same effective edge, resulting in a mount that was -14cm from true center. They hand flexed a bit stiffer than the 09/10 & 10/11 skis just because, even accounting for it, the full twin of the older models just made them feel slightly softer. But as far as flex when actually skiing it, it was the same as the 10/11. These skis like to go really, really fast and basically don't want to stray more than 15 degrees from either side of the fall line. For the right person, they are a lot of fun, but not many people that want something that aggressive anymore.



The 12/13 was sort of a blend of the two. We wanted to get a more balanced mounting location that would make it a bit more maneuverable in tight places, but was a bit more directional than the 09/10 & 10/11 model. We also really liked to new shark nosed tip design, though we tweaked it so that it is now broader and fuller for better float. The length of the tip stayed the same, while the twin gained 3cm in length and we added the minimal tail rocker which does help you kick out the tails when you need to dump speed. The mounting location is now -9.75cm from true center and the ski as a whole combines everything we liked about the previous models. With the tail rocker and more balanced mount, it is definitely a more versatile ski so hopefully it will suit more people vs the 11/12, which was just a gun all the time.



(All the specific numbers listed above are for the 191cm, but the changes are proportionally made in the 181cm).

[mr_pretzel]

Too lazy to make this nice as I am ok my phone but info from Scott.
(All the specific numbers listed above are for the 191cm, but the changes are proportionally made in the 181cm).

Thanks! fun to know the evolution, does anyone have info on the rest?

[adrenalated]

Does anyone want to do a year by year comparisson of all the wrens?

09/10 OG version? Charges hard

10/11 same as OG, I have and love these skied them today and they have no speed limit, while still pivoting with ease

11/12 kills babies and makes all women moist?

12/13 ?

13/14 same as 12/13?

14/15 only made the 186, not a true wren?

15/16 ?

16/17 anyone have any reviews on these?

I posted this in one of the ON3P threads:

-1st gen: 09/10 and 10/11, full twin tail, mount point at -9cm, 181 and 191 lengths
-2nd gen: 11/12, shark nose tip and flat tail, mount at -14cm, 181 and 191 lengths
-3rd gen: 12/13 and 13/14, elliptical tip and low tail rocker, mount at -9.75cm, 181 and 191 lengths
-4th gen: 14/15 and 15/16, tighter sidecut, mount similar to 3rd gen (I think, haven't measured), 176 and 186 lengths, plus 181 for 15/16
-5th gen: 16/17 narrowed to 108, new rocker profiles (more tail rocker especially), new lengths of 179, 184, and 189. I talked about this ski and how it compares to the 4th gen here: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...62#post4860162

[Reformed]

Thanks TahoeJ. I saw your previous posts and was hoping that you'd chime in. A slightly quicker, slightly less chargeable BG sounds pretty awesome to me. I'm a firm believer in the "tool for the job" approach as well, but the backcountry here can dish out everything from blower pow in the trees to wind-hammered sastrugi in the alpine in a single run, so versatility is key. I'd rather skid around on hardpack than wallow in pow, so I typically reach for skis that ski pow well and are able to competently manage variable hardpack. It sounds like the Steeple 108 fits into this category.
Anyone else have thoughts on skiing steep(ish) windboard on these things? I know, I'll die, but let's have your thoughts anyhow.
Also, Lee, any further thoughts on the Steeple 98's pow performance? I know it's good for a 98 waisted ski, but is it good enough that you wouldn't want to be on something else during a deep day or a day where the snow was a bit abused by wind or temps?

[LeeLau]

Reformed. If it was a deep pow day then I'd go bigger waisted. But if it was variable conditions the 98 would be the choice. Its versatile and not in a jack of all trades master of none but in a solid all around performer kind of way.

Bear in mind what I said though. You've gotta be on them

[Drunken Shytbird]

Reformed. If it was a deep pow day then I'd go bigger waisted. But if it was variable conditions the 98 would be the choice. Its versatile and not in a jack of all trades master of none but in a solid all around performer kind of way.

Bear in mind what I said though. You've gotta be on them

If your in Variable, then the 108, in my mind, would be helpful. I have a stock layup 186 K108 and it skis the shit outta variable, especially if you consider the sidecut for a ski that wide. It has a slightly tighter sidecut than the 188 PB&J that is 101 waisted.

[Reformed]

If your in Variable, then the 108, in my mind, would be helpful. I have a stock layup 186 K108 and it skis the shit outta variable, especially if you consider the sidecut for a ski that wide. It has a slightly tighter sidecut than the 188 PB&J that is 101 waisted.

Depends on the kind of variable you're dealing with. Variable wind-hammered chicken heads and coral reef? Narrower ski wins. Variable density snow covered in variable density sun or wind crusts? Wider ski usually wins. The quest that I am on is for the ski that I am willing to haul uphill that does a passable job in hard variable and makes 3D variable easier or even enjoyable. Steeple 108 seems like it fits that bill. K108 would as well, but it's heavier and has a full twin tail, which is what I am trying to get away from. Steep kick-turns with long, center-ish mounted twins suck.

[shroom]

that fucking variable variability.

[sf]

https://www.friflyt.no/Ski/Se-Dennis-Risvolls-promodell

193, extra-stiff BG

[auvgeek]

^^Looks sick. I bet it's really similar to my old 191 Billy Goat but with slightly more effective edge.

Also, I've been meaning to post this, but I'm still head over heels for my extra-stiff 186 Jeffrey 110s. I skied them nearly every day last week in Wolf Creek. No speed limit that I can find (and I've tried), progressive mount, just an awesome ski. I bet an extra-stiff K106 would be similarly stoke-inducing. They work really well for the lighter pow of a continental snowpack, and despite the resort getting quite a bit of snow, I never grabbed my Billy Goats. I could easily ski them as a one-ski quiver there.

I don't really like them in heavy, deep, cut-up pow/chop, but that's because the balance point is weird with such a progressive mount. I grab my Billy Goats for those conditions anyway, since they're the best ski for those conditions I've found. The K108 and Billy Goat would make the perfect two ski quiver, IMO. (Both extra-stiff, if you like 'em that way.) Edit: If you don't care about landing switch, the Wren 108 probably makes more sense than the K108.

[ScrewYou]

https://www.friflyt.no/Ski/Se-Dennis-Risvolls-promodell

193, extra-stiff BG

Will be buying these next season for sure. Fo Sho.

[Norseman]

en spesialversjon av On3P Billy Goat

[auvgeek]

Norseman, kan du snakke norsk?

[ScrewYou]

Is that norse?

[auvgeek]

Ja.

(For the record, I speak very little Norwegian.)

[Sessiøn]

https://www.friflyt.no/Ski/Se-Dennis-Risvolls-promodell

193, extra-stiff BG

I have put hands on these. Burly indeed.

[Norseman]

Norseman, kan du snakke norsk?

Nei ... bare med en smarttelefon.

[sf]

Nei ... bare med en smarttelefon.

Juks [emoji3]

[Norseman]

Also, I've been meaning to post this, but I'm still head over heels for my extra-stiff 186 Jeffrey 110s. I skied them nearly every day last week in Wolf Creek. No speed limit that I can find (and I've tried), progressive mount, just an awesome ski. I bet an extra-stiff K106 would be similarly stoke-inducing. They work really well for the lighter pow of a continental snowpack, and despite the resort getting quite a bit of snow, I never grabbed my Billy Goats. I could easily ski them as a one-ski quiver there.

I don't really like them in heavy, deep, cut-up pow/chop, but that's because the balance point is weird with such a progressive mount. I grab my Billy Goats for those conditions anyway, since they're the best ski for those conditions I've found. The K106 and Billy Goat would make the perfect two ski quiver, IMO. (Both extra-stiff, if you like 'em that way.)

Hmmm.... compelling. Apologies for not going back through the whole thread, but have you also skied the Wren 98? I think the Wrens might suit my needs a little better, but you have me thinking hard about the K106.

[shroom]

^^Looks sick. I bet it's really similar to my old 191 Billy Goat but with slightly more effective edge.

Also, I've been meaning to post this, but I'm still head over heels for my extra-stiff 186 Jeffrey 110s. I skied them nearly every day last week in Wolf Creek. No speed limit that I can find (and I've tried), progressive mount, just an awesome ski. I bet an extra-stiff K106 would be similarly stoke-inducing. They work really well for the lighter pow of a continental snowpack, and despite the resort getting quite a bit of snow, I never grabbed my Billy Goats. I could easily ski them as a one-ski quiver there.

I don't really like them in heavy, deep, cut-up pow/chop, but that's because the balance point is weird with such a progressive mount. I grab my Billy Goats for those conditions anyway, since they're the best ski for those conditions I've found. The K106 and Billy Goat would make the perfect two ski quiver, IMO. (Both extra-stiff, if you like 'em that way.)

damn, we haven't talked skis in a minute. are you referencing the first pair you grabbed a few years back? i didn't think you were too into it at the time.

i like my caylors enough that the k106 may be my next buy after my cochise die.

[auvgeek]

damn, we haven't talked skis in a minute. are you referencing the first pair you grabbed a few years back? i didn't think you were too into it at the time.

Yeah, that pair. You're right; I didn't love them at first. I think that's because I was trying to ski them in the conditions I mentioned above: heavier pow (tracked or not). I really wanted to ski them right when I got them, despite the conditions being pretty ideal for the Billy Goat. Square peg, round hole and all that. You can't really lean on the tips in those conditions, and I found they required a little more neutral stance. A little balancey fore-aft like the 186 4FRNT Renegade, but less of an issue. In CO, they've been a pretty great ski so far in up 17" overnight of light snow. Had them in the PNW last winter, too—they did very well after the conditions firmed up and the Billy Goats were too much ski. I'd let you try 'em for sure if you didn't have Sasquatch feet.

The K108 seems sweet. Little less tail rocker than my pair, which is appreciated, though I wish the turn radius was a few m longer. Still think they're too soft in the tip & tail for how stiff they are underfoot in the stock flex, though. If you like the Caylor, it might not bother you, but I would have them built with the core milled a little thicker in the tip and tail (stock flex underfoot). It's awesome ON3P has that ability now. My Jeffreys were layed up with extra carbon in the tip and tail.

But if you're not skiing switch, I think you'd find the stock 189 Wren 108 really awesome. I haven't personally skied the 189, but I much prefer the 184 Wren 108 to the 185 Cochise. Just way more fun and poppy with about the same speed limit—at least, on the runs I skied. I bet you'd find the 189 Wren would be a pretty good combo of playful and stable, if you don't need a twin for riding switch.

Norseman: I haven't skied the 98, but I found the 184 108 about as stable as my pair of Jeffreys. I still like the ability to land switch, though. If I didn't care about that, I'd 100% be on a Wren 108.

Happy to try to answer any additional, specific questions.

[PowTron]

So quick update for those of you who already saw the 193 BG prototypes...

They are not a pro model and also not available yet. Friflyt posted something that was passed on from our Norwegian distributor and should not have been at this time.

Also the first time anyone has gotten to see that green topsheet in the finished state.

All I will say is that it is a 193cm, VERY stiff ski with some updates from any BG ever made.

If it does become available to the public it will be direct from factory only and in extremely limited quantities.

Glad people like the peek at it, but just wanted to clarify some stuff on that