ON3P SKIS Discussion

[sf]

What's the reasoning behind going with +2 mm width and 182/187/192 lengths on the entire lineup?

Miniscule adjustments make sales?

Will be interesting to see if there is other adjustments as well.

For me the 118/187 is the true goldilocks size for replacing mye old 186s, and perhaps even the 189 C&Ds, which I get to ski far to rarely

[kid-kapow]

Yo. I’m not really looking to accomplish anything. Not trying to stir the pot. Just trying to iterate why I haven’t pulled the trigger on a Billy Goat yet.

yeah, my bad if I came across as confrontational or as a defensive ON3P fanboi - such was not my intent. And rest assured that BGs are not a wheelie type ski - their flex pattern is too supportive for that. The RES design kinda feels like you get air pillows underneath the balls of your feet if you adopt a centered/forward, balls of your feet stance - it is kinda hard to describe as it feels so different to a lot of other skis. The front ski lift together with the pin tail maneuverability and stout flex pattern is probably what makes them pivot so effortlessly and slay variable so well, while still being fairly supportive.

For me it’s the opposite. the reason I’m hesitant to pull the trigger on billy goats is that I’m worried they won’t have enough tail rocker. I’ve had a hard time adapting to the locked in feeling of the tail on my woodsmans and the BG doesn’t seem to have much more splay or rocker length. For me the rocker on Volkl revolt 121s is spot on. Anyone had a chance to compare a BG with a revolt and want to convince me to add some goats to the quiver?

BG tails are a lot looser than Woodsman tails, though the latter are plenty loose if you pivot more than angulate (if that makes sense). You have more tail (surface area) to push against with the Woodsmans, while RES design skis with more surface area in front of the binding + pin tails = pivot on a dime characteristics.

Wrt to the Revolt121s, I would think that the difference that you feel there is in the flex pattern, not the rocker depth/splay height as such. Revolts have a relatively softer flex pattern underfoot/behind the heel which probably makes them a bit easier to manipulate, while Woodsman are a bit stouter in the back half of the ski. So for the latter to be equally loose one just have to shift ones weight a bit more forward - which seeing that you have more front ski to push against too, makes a lot of sense. I dunno - I find the regular layup Wood108s to be looser than wood108tours in deep snow, they just require more speed and commitment to unlock it.

BG tails are still fairly supportive wrt flex pattern - their looseness is due to their shape and mount point, not down to being soft. I usually find stiffer skis easier to pivot in deep soft snow - though with tails as long as R121s a softer flex pattern probably helps. Still, BGs are plenty supportive fore/aft, but probably as easy as they come short of a full on full rocker design wrt pivoting or being loose in soft snow. I dunno, there's a reason they have a cult following, they are pretty spectacular variable and soft snow skis for your intermediate and up skier.

pre-asym BG vs R121s (the info I want to get across is the relative flex patterns first and foremost, secondly shapes and mount point differences/similarities)


I have never skied R121s, just fondled them excessively in my local shop - their shape + flex pattern have had me really, really curious to ski a pair, though in the end their centered mount point has made me go with other skis.

IMO just go 50/50. The stability/durability vs weight savings is well balanced - it has enough weight that the ski does work for you - and frankly still skis hard - but the weight savings are noticible. We have employees now only going 50/50 on their skis.

Great - thanks for the input Iggy, much appreciated

The new graphics are all fairly spectacular - as always - good job Iggy

Edit: man, those BG118tour graphics are something else. Holy crap. I would be hard pressed to decide between them and getting another C&D graphic ski.

[Norseman]

Asym is done?

[Bandit Man]

What's the reasoning behind going with +2 mm width and 182/187/192 lengths on the entire lineup?

Marketing…
Product differentiation…
110 is more better than 108…
118 is more better than 116…
Gives us something to debate endlessly on the interwebz while Iggy enjoys the show.

Also, think of all the vacillating that will happen between folks try to choose a 182 vs 187 length. Many will be lamenting the loss of the 184.

But none of it really matters. We will all buy new Billy Goats regardless.

On a more serious note…187 or 192? BG110 or BG118? See what I mean? [emoji6]

[N1CK.]

187cm, 118mm, 50/50, stock flex ... with sprinkles.

[floatnotsink]

yeah, my bad if I came across as confrontational or as a defensive ON3P fanboi - such was not my intent. And rest assured that BGs are not a wheelie type ski - their flex pattern is too supportive for that. The RES design kinda feels like you get air pillows underneath the balls of your feet if you adopt a centered/forward, balls of your feet stance - it is kinda hard to describe as it feels so different to a lot of other skis. The front ski lift together with the pin tail maneuverability and stout flex pattern is probably what makes them pivot so effortlessly and slay variable so well, while still being fairly supportive.



BG tails are a lot looser than Woodsman tails, though the latter are plenty loose if you pivot more than angulate (if that makes sense). You have more tail (surface area) to push against with the Woodsmans, while RES design skis with more surface area in front of the binding + pin tails = pivot on a dime characteristics.

Wrt to the Revolt121s, I would think that the difference that you feel there is in the flex pattern, not the rocker depth/splay height as such. Revolts have a relatively softer flex pattern underfoot/behind the heel which probably makes them a bit easier to manipulate, while Woodsman are a bit stouter in the back half of the ski. So for the latter to be equally loose one just have to shift ones weight a bit more forward - which seeing that you have more front ski to push against too, makes a lot of sense. I dunno - I find the regular layup Wood108s to be looser than wood108tours in deep snow, they just require more speed and commitment to unlock it.

BG tails are still fairly supportive wrt flex pattern - their looseness is due to their shape and mount point, not down to being soft. I usually find stiffer skis easier to pivot in deep soft snow - though with tails as long as R121s a softer flex pattern probably helps. Still, BGs are plenty supportive fore/aft, but probably as easy as they come short of a full on full rocker design wrt pivoting or being loose in soft snow. I dunno, there's a reason they have a cult following, they are pretty spectacular variable and soft snow skis for your intermediate and up skier.

pre-asym BG vs R121s (the info I want to get across is the relative flex patterns first and foremost, secondly shapes and mount point differences/similarities)


I have never skied R121s, just fondled them excessively in my local shop - their shape + flex pattern have had me really, really curious to ski a pair, though in the end their centered mount point has made me go with other skis.



Great - thanks for the input Iggy, much appreciated

The new graphics are all fairly spectacular - as always - good job Iggy

Edit: man, those BG118tour graphics are something else. Holy crap. I would be hard pressed to decide between them and getting another C&D graphic ski.

You should hop on some revolts at some point. So loose yet you can also get them rly high on edge. I may have to pull the trigger on some goats... now just gotta decide if I’ll go 110 or 118.

[phatty]

Marketing…
Product differentiation…
110 is more better than 108…
118 is more better than 116…
Gives us something to debate endlessly on the interwebz while Iggy enjoys the show.

Also, think of all the vacillating that will happen between folks try to choose a 182 vs 187 length. Many will be lamenting the loss of the 184.

But none of it really matters. We will all buy new Billy Goats regardless.

On a more serious note…187 or 192? BG110 or BG118? See what I mean? [emoji6]

192 BG 118 is likely incoming. Now to decide if custom (grizzlycorn) or stock graphics. Stock are looking pretty sweet.

[SkiLyft]

I’m here wondering if they kept the tail rocker lines the same on the 192 goat or went with the supergoat profile which is the absolute tits!!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[PeachesNCream]

What year did the billy goat become THE billy goat? I read 11/12 was RES, 12/13 was refined RES, and 17/18 was when they went asymmetric. Specifically wondering about these ones


Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[kid-kapow]

ON3P 11/12 catalogue with those in it. All past year catalogues up to the 17/18 season.

You should hop on some revolts at some point. So loose yet you can also get them rly high on edge. I may have to pull the trigger on some goats... now just gotta decide if I’ll go 110 or 118.

yeah, I probably should, they seem like killer skis - though that part of the quiver is a bit bloated already. I even bought a pair of revolt104s, but moved them on before skiing them due to the mount point just being too far forward for how I ski.

[Skeeze]

Spotted on Instagram, the dimensions of the 187cm Billy Goat 118 appear to be 144/118/128, so exactly 2mm wider in tip/waist/tail than the dimensions of the previous gen 184 BG.

Hopefully it doesn’t change too much from previous versions since I’m not sure that ski can be improved significantly, although a 187cm size is perfect for me.

[floatnotsink]

ON3P 11/12 catalogue with those in it. All past year catalogues up to the 17/18 season.



yeah, I probably should, they seem like killer skis - though that part of the quiver is a bit bloated already. I even bought a pair of revolt104s, but moved them on before skiing them due to the mount point just being too far forward for how I ski.

Yeah makes sense. Despite being a fairly directional skier the 121s have been pretty great for me. I have demo bindings on em and tend to ride around -4/5 from recommended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Adrgha]

Lots of new topsheets available in the custom builder now. I think my personal favourite so far is the Woodsman 110/110 tour. I bet those things are going to POP on snow.

Also: No asym on the BG 118 anymore?

[phatty]

The new topsheets look sick. Will make for some tough choices.

Bring back the Jammin Salmon!

[kid-kapow]

Lots of new topsheets available in the custom builder now. I think my personal favourite so far is the Woodsman 110/110 tour. I bet those things are going to POP on snow.

Man, the BG110tour and BG118tour graphics are both amazing too, even if the Wood110 is stupendously good and hard to beat. I never knew I loved clouds/smoke on skis as I apparently do - the wood110 graphic is looking better and better every time I look at it.

I am guessing the wood102/110tours will look pretty sensational on snow too - as you say, pop will be the name of the game.

The new topsheets look sick. Will make for some tough choices.

ain't that the truth!

Miniscule adjustments make sales?

I guess there is that, but more so that incremental changes makes for marginal gains, and those can add up to making a big difference For the most part I suspect that it is a case Iggy the Tinkerer strikes again. There have been some changes made to most of the skis in the lineup every year over the past few seasons, be it wrt sidecut, shape, flex pattern or layup - all adding up to making skis that are good to begin with even better.

[Sessiøn]

Man, the BG110tour and BG118tour graphics are both amazing too, even if the Wood110 is stupendously good and hard to beat. I never knew I loved clouds/smoke on skis as I apparently do - the wood110 graphic is looking better and better every time I look at it.

I am guessing the wood102/110tours will look pretty sensational on snow too - as you say, pop will be the name of the game.



ain't that the truth!



I guess there is that, but more so that incremental changes makes for marginal gains, and those can add up to making a big difference For the most part I suspect that it is a case Iggy the Tinkerer strikes again. There have been some changes made to most of the skis in the lineup every year over the past few seasons, be it wrt sidecut, shape, flex pattern or layup - all adding up to making skis that are good to begin with even better.

For me when I got my J118 is was kind of a no brainer. The J108 was killing my quiver. And having owned a J116 and also a BG in 116 along side it. I simply pull the 108 much more often.

But now I'm probably going to fuck that all up by getting a Woodsman 110.

[123ski]

For me when I got my J118 is was kind of a no brainer. The J108 was killing my quiver. And having owned a J116 and also a BG in 116 along side it. I simply pull the 108 much more often.

But now I'm probably going to fuck that all up by getting a Woodsman 110.

I have J108, WD108, and BG as well as some non ON3P skis.

I ski WD 80% of time, BG 10% of time, everything else splits the balance


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iggyskier]

What's the reasoning behind going with +2 mm width and 182/187/192 lengths on the entire lineup?

Pretty much came down to a ski factory full of people with powder skis hardly skiing them. Everyone wanted just a bit more width to make the skis a bit more apt for the role. And I'm sure just a bit of mental ebb and flow to our style here. With that, shifted the wide skis back to more of a true powder width - vs straddling on the powder-width-but-could-still-ski-everyday zone (114-116).

Length change (in BGs only) was to get a bit more tip to drive and increase float.

Miniscule adjustments make sales?

That is what graphics are for.

Asym is done?

In the BG.

Gives us something to debate endlessly

Don't think my help is needed there...

I’m here wondering if they kept the tail rocker lines the same on the 192 goat or went with the supergoat profile which is the absolute tits!!

Bit lower tail rocker across the entire BG line.

What year did the billy goat become THE billy goat? I read 11/12 was RES, 12/13 was refined RES, and 17/18 was when they went asymmetric. Specifically wondering about these ones

Really 2013 (next year with the hand). 2012 in 191 is a really fun powder ski but was pretty rudimentary by comparison.

[EWG]

Pretty much came down to a ski factory full of people with powder skis hardly skiing them. Everyone wanted just a bit more width to make the skis a bit more apt for the role. And I'm sure just a bit of mental ebb and flow to our style here. With that, shifted the wide skis back to more of a true powder width - vs straddling on the powder-width-but-could-still-ski-everyday zone (114-116).

Length change (in BGs only) was to get a bit more tip to drive and increase float.


That is what graphics are for.


In the BG.


Don't think my help is needed there...



Bit lower tail rocker across the entire BG line.



Really 2013 (next year with the hand). 2012 in 191 is a really fun powder ski but was pretty rudimentary by comparison.

Just a subtle reminder that you know you want to make some more of the trippy t shirts....

[SkiLyft]

Bit lower tail rocker across the entire BG line.

Oh my- this is music to my ears



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[tuco]

Pretty much came down to a ski factory full of people with powder skis hardly skiing them. Everyone wanted just a bit more width to make the skis a bit more apt for the role. And I'm sure just a bit of mental ebb and flow to our style here. With that, shifted the wide skis back to more of a true powder width - vs straddling on the powder-width-but-could-still-ski-everyday zone (114-116).

Length change (in BGs only) was to get a bit more tip to drive and increase float.


That is what graphics are for.


In the BG.


Don't think my help is needed there...



Bit lower tail rocker across the entire BG line.



Really 2013 (next year with the hand). 2012 in 191 is a really fun powder ski but was pretty rudimentary by comparison.

That's why I said in the past to bring back the Caylor.
Now I'm going to say bring back the Jeffery 122

[Bandit Man]

Oh my- this is music to my ears



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

And yet somewhat disappointing to those of us who ski dense coastal snowpack. [emoji20]

[NW_SKIER]

And yet somewhat disappointing to those of us who ski dense coastal snowpack. [emoji20]

Get off your tails then

[SkiLyft]

Get off your tails then

Ding ding, skied SG’s in plenty of heavy snow this past year. Never had an issue with the tails, lower rocker line only provided much better hard snow performance.

If you dig more rocker - keep your existing stable of goats.

Lower rocker on the 110 BG sounds like competition for the Mfree maybe?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

And there we have it. The totally expected “I’m a better skier” call-out. [emoji849]

I do agree that less rocker probably makes more sense on a BG110.

I also know that I’m not the only Seattle local who prefers the pre-asym tail profile…and I know most of those guys ski better than me.

But a change to the BG means sales for ON3P. I’m glad they are still in the game and producing skis to list over.