ON3P SKIS Discussion

[adrenalated]

So 182/187 are new lengths, but here's what I can tell you about my older 186 BG and newer 184 BGTs (which are essentially the same ski, the 184 just lopped 2cm off the tail):

The 186/184 is a more substantial ski than the 188 S7. The 186 is physically longer too. It's stiffer and therefore more stable (especially in chop). It is a bit more work to turn on firmer snow but pivots easier in 3D snow thanks to the shape.

I'm lighter than you at 5'9" 145lbs. Given how you describe your skiing I'd normally tell you to go 187. But.... since you think your S7s are stable (not sure I agree with that), I'd be really surprised if you found the 182 BGs to be lacking in the stability/support department.

As for the length thing, it's actually really simple. Take a tape measure and go measure how long your S7s are. Seriously. Just hook one end to the tail and pull it straight to the tip and see how long they are. I bet the "188" is somewhere around 184-185cm ACTUAL length when you measure them. When you do the same thing to a 187 ON3P, you'll measure 187. It's that simple: 187cm ON3Ps are actually 187cm long.

[Sessiøn]

I've owned 191's all the way down to 184's. Get the 187. It won't be too much when you don't want it to be, but will be enough when you need it to be.

[Tailwind]

I think you’re question is a little hard given what the comparison points are. The 2010 S7 is a fairly different ski than the Billy Goat. I don’t doubt that you can ski the hell out of them, but they’re not what I would call a stable ski nor a particularly demanding ski. It’s kinda like you love domestic lagers and are trying to sort out what type of stout you’ll enjoy drinking.

My thought would be to buy the ski that best matches your aspirations. If you want to press harder as a charging skier, grab some 187’s. If you want to have a nimble tree ski and something easy going get the 182.

my guess would be 187cn based on height and weight. An aggressive skier of your size shouldn’t have an issue with the 187 but maybe go with the 50-50 core as that will make them a bit more quick feeling.

I’m a little over 6’ and 160lbs and I ski a 189cm wren in tight terrain and moguls without issue (which is a less nimble ski). I’d buy a 187cm Billy Goat for touring but 192cm for resort.

[Norseman]

/snip/

my guess would be 187cn based on height and weight. An aggressive skier of your size shouldn’t have an issue with the 187 but maybe go with the 50-50 core as that will make them a bit more quick feeling.

getting picky, but to call it a 50-50 core is misleading. There's a tour core (mostly paulownia) and a full bamboo core. The 50-50 build uses the normal thick base and edge on the tour core. If these are to be skied inbounds, go full boo.

and i vote 187

[Bandit Man]

“188 S7’s can be cumbersome in tight steep trees”…Billy Goats are my all time favorite powder day tree ski, but they are definitely more ski than a 188 S7. Some food for thought.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[jdadour]

Trying to decide between 182 and 187 BG118...could use some perspective...and I've already spoke with Scott at ON3P, but curious to get the community's take if there's anyone out there that's pondered/experienced the same...

What I'm going to use them for: 8"+ resort powder days and cat/heli ski days. mounted with look pivots (no cast, no touring). replacing my current powder ski (2010, 188cm Rossi S7's which, sidenote, have one of my favorite topsheets of all time; props to Will Barras)
Who I am: 5'10", 170lbs, aggressive, yet calculated skier.

What I like about the 188cm S7's: great float; super easy to throw sideways and slash pockets of pow; can straightline on top of the chopped up groomers to get to back to the lift quickly; big surface area to land on from cliffs and drops (will send [almost] anything in the right conditions); easy to lay down long, fast superG/downhill turns in wide open pow
What I don't like about the 188cm S7's: can be cumbersome in tight, steep trees; sometimes buckle when straightlining in chop; not very drivable when i need them to be; unsupportive tails; they're old, overcooked noodles with bases that are 50% ptex; they need replacing

My concerns with going 182 BG: not enough ski to land on from drops; not a long enough ski to lay down longer radius turns in open pow, forcing me into shorter radius turns; too similar to my daily driver 181cm QST 106's
My concerns with going 187 BG: too much ski in super steep/tight trees and chutes, especially since they will be stiffer than the S7's that i already find a bit cumbersome at the 188cm length; the whole "187 ON3P's are actually 190's from any other ski builder" type of talk that my brain can't compute

At your size, 187 FOR SURE.

[PeachesNCream]

Trying to decide between 182 and 187 BG118...could use some perspective...and I've already spoke with Scott at ON3P, but curious to get the community's take if there's anyone out there that's pondered/experienced the same...

What I'm going to use them for: 8"+ resort powder days and cat/heli ski days. mounted with look pivots (no cast, no touring). replacing my current powder ski (2010, 188cm Rossi S7's which, sidenote, have one of my favorite topsheets of all time; props to Will Barras)
Who I am: 5'10", 170lbs, aggressive, yet calculated skier.

What I like about the 188cm S7's: great float; super easy to throw sideways and slash pockets of pow; can straightline on top of the chopped up groomers to get to back to the lift quickly; big surface area to land on from cliffs and drops (will send [almost] anything in the right conditions); easy to lay down long, fast superG/downhill turns in wide open pow
What I don't like about the 188cm S7's: can be cumbersome in tight, steep trees; sometimes buckle when straightlining in chop; not very drivable when i need them to be; unsupportive tails; they're old, overcooked noodles with bases that are 50% ptex; they need replacing

My concerns with going 182 BG: not enough ski to land on from drops; not a long enough ski to lay down longer radius turns in open pow, forcing me into shorter radius turns; too similar to my daily driver 181cm QST 106's
My concerns with going 187 BG: too much ski in super steep/tight trees and chutes, especially since they will be stiffer than the S7's that i already find a bit cumbersome at the 188cm length; the whole "187 ON3P's are actually 190's from any other ski builder" type of talk that my brain can't compute

TGR is hardcore and will usually recommend the longer length. The BG is going to be a lot beefier and just more ski. It'll be better in chop and at speed at the same length S7. Also like you've mentioned, ON3ps are usually 2-3 cm longer than another brand. So the 187 BG is going to be a 190 Rossi. I'd say go with the 182 BG (eq 185 Rossi) due to it running longer, being a beefier ski, and you finding the 188 s7 cumbersome. That is unless you want all gas, then go longer.

Curious, what'd scott recommend?

[kid-kapow]

(page4)The last straw for the 188 Super 7 was when the pow turned to crud. Skiing fast through the heavily chopped up snow felt like I was slacklining down the mountain. The skis felt like they had two hinges in them, one just in front of the binding and one just behind the binding. I felt like I was constantly going to go over the tips (which I did a few times) or else I was going to pull massive wheelies (which is only cool on bikes). The amount of concentration needed to ride these skis in perfect balance was incredibly exhausting – both mentally and physically (much like reading this review!)- and more importantly, it just wasn’t fun. I had reached my boiling point and desperately wanted to get rid of these.

So yeah, this description of the more potent Super 7 compared to a S7 is the polar opposite of BGs.

BGs are supportive, yet agile, loose, yet incredible in variable.

So no, I am not trying to shit on your S7s, more just confirming that either length BG is going to be more ski than your S7s. I would usually advice people to size up with BGs as they are not demanding to ski in soft snow and I've found the longer lengths to ski better (179 vs 184), but I think you will get along well with either length.

Go 182 for an extra helping of nimbleness, 187 for added stability - or just follow Iggy's advice, it is usually spot on. Sorry if no help.

by the way, just a thought - why not split the difference and pick up a pair of used 184s? There are bound to be some for sale in gear swap as people get the new BG118. BG116s are great skis as well, so getting a pair of 184s and the savings could be the way to go no?

[oetk2]

I''m sure I've missed this at some point, are they direct only these days or still in some shops?

[kid-kapow]

I''m sure I've missed this at some point, are they direct only these days or still in some shops?

select retailers (fewer than before) and primarily direct

[WILLSKIFAST]

Appreciate all the help everyone. Not necessarily looking for an answer...just perspective, which you've given me plenty of.

As for the length thing, it's actually really simple. Take a tape measure and go measure how long your S7s are. Seriously. Just hook one end to the tail and pull it straight to the tip and see how long they are. I bet the "188" is somewhere around 184-185cm ACTUAL length when you measure them. When you do the same thing to a 187 ON3P, you'll measure 187. It's that simple: 187cm ON3Ps are actually 187cm long.

Did just that. 188cm skis measured 72.25" (with a normal measuring tape, "as the crow flys" from turned up tip to tail), which means they measure 183.5. Mind. Blown. So is this because ON3P starts with a longer piece of wood pre-press so that the end result after the rocker is in the ski, is actually 187? and Rossi started with a 188cm piece of wood pre-press, which makes them shorter after the press puts rocker in them?

Curious, what'd scott recommend?

182. His main reasoning, if I recall correctly, was that 182 will be less ski to manage (and pretty close to what I'm used to in the S7's length) but still stable and will still float my 165-170lb weight. Honestly, I'm kind of thinking that it's possible that the S7's have been cumbersome because they're so floppy and undrivable. My skiing has changed a ton in the 9 years i've owned these sticks. Maybe I'll feel more in control, and less cumbersome on the 187's because I'll have more ski to drive vs less? Or is that a stupid thought?

So yeah, this description of the more potent Super 7 compared to a S7 is the polar opposite of BGs.

That description is probably why my balance, legs, and skiing got so much stronger over the 9/10 years i've owned them. Slacklining down the mountain feels pretty accurate now that I think about it LOL. Let's call this "Exhibit A of why I may have no clue what I'm talking about because I've been on these same noodles for so damn long."

by the way, just a thought - why not split the difference and pick up a pair of used 184s? There are bound to be some for sale in gear swap as people get the new BG118. BG116s are great skis as well, so getting a pair of 184s and the savings could be the way to go no?

Because the idea of my black pants, black/green boots with black/green skis gives me a raging boner lol. Even considering springing for the green sidewalls for an extra $50 because I'm stupid in the head

[bearcub69]

So is this because ON3P starts with a longer piece of wood pre-press so that the end result after the rocker is in the ski, is actually 187? and Rossi started with a 188cm piece of wood pre-press, which makes them shorter after the press puts rocker in them?

This is exactly what they do. FWIW, all my ON3Ps measure "slighty" big, although true. For example, my 176 Kartels measure to be 176.5 exact, my 191 Caylors measured to be 191.75 exact.
So a 182 BG will be at least 182.. maybe 182.5 to be exact, which leaves only a difference in 1cm relative to your S7s.. I agree with Iggy, go 182 if the length of your Rossis is perfect

[kid-kapow]

Because the idea of my black pants, black/green boots with black/green skis gives me a raging boner lol. Even considering springing for the green sidewalls for an extra $50 because I'm stupid in the head

That is honestly the farthest you can come from being stupid in the head imho. The more stoked you are about equipment that you are going to use, the more you are likely to use it. So if you buy a ski you know will fit your needs and that look incredible as well, why not do it right? There's a reason a lot of us go custom, and it is not because the stock graphics are not killer. It is because there are other graphics that make us individually even more excited and stoked - both when acquiring said gear and when using it - so for me this sounds like a no brainer.

And yes, splurge on the sidewalls as well. If you get 10 years out of Rossi S7s then chances are that your new BGs will be going strong a few decades from now - ON3Ps are notoriously bombproof. As such you might as well save yourself the bother of thinking "oh no, what if, i should've" and just go full jeebus.

The measurement is usually of the base material pre-press, as it runs all the way from tip to tail. Rocker, splay and camber then makes the overall length shorter. It is the industry norm to measure it this way, but frankly - it is stupid. Why not measure the lenght and ee of the finished item so that one can in fact compare apples to apples?

[optics]

Also generally speaking, if you're asking about any kind of A-vs-B option within the on3p universe, you should just listen to what Scott says and stop thinking about it.

No amount of thinking or asking others will exceed the knowledge baked into his answer.

[CaliBrit]

Man, the 50/50 187 BG is kind of everything that I've hoped for for the next powder ski.

Still have 2 skis in plastic to try first so it's going to have to wait, but it will happen!

[WILLSKIFAST]

Also generally speaking, if you're asking about any kind of A-vs-B option within the on3p universe, you should just listen to what Scott says and stop thinking about it.

No amount of thinking or asking others will exceed the knowledge baked into his answer.

You are probably (actually, definitely) right, my friend. I certainly mean no disrespect to Scott (or his knowledge) by asking the community for their perspective; I hope he doesn't take any. I get a kick out of hearing from everyone, and this forum is fun.

[bearcub69]

I certainly mean no disrespect to Scott (or his knowledge) by asking the community for their perspective; I hope he doesn't take any. I get a kick out of hearing from everyone, and this forum is fun.

I doubt he takes any offense. It never hurts to hear others experiences/preferences. Scott designs and knows the skis inside/out, but personal preference plays a part..
I'm 174/175cm tall, used to ride 181cm Jmos. Went to 176cm when I replaced them with Kartels, why? The 181s were amazing for ripping around the mountain and park jumps, but I prefer a ski closer to my height when it comes to rails/butters.. regardless of the amount of rocker. Although some say I should be riding a 181 and that 176 would be too short.. but I've had previous experience on 176 and 181 ON3Ps so I knew what I'd be getting myself in to.

[Sessiøn]

These should look fancy with my Orange Mach 1's

[sf]

These should look fancy with my Orange Mach 1's

Which model?

[Sessiøn]

Which model?

W102

[kid-kapow]

W102

WD102 - so hot right now.

I couldn't refrain from getting a pair, so I went with an extra helping of some 50/50 magic to go almost full jeebus (no ti). They are to be mounted with Tectons like their wider wd110 50/50 quiver partner.



I have high hopes for these - they should be awesome

[sf]

W102

Yeah, I'm pretty interested in them as well. Just not quite sure about mount point, as -7,5 is slightly more forward than I tend to gel with

[kid-kapow]

man, these look a lot better "irl" than I thought they would. Sure, they are a bit much, but not too much. Nice.


It is kinda amazing how good a lot of these graphics look when you see them with high res photos - can't wait for the updated site.

Just not quite sure about mount point, as -7,5 is slightly more forward than I tend to gel with

to be fair, they will probably not feel terribly dissimilar to your custom softer wren108s wrt mount point / balance of the ski, just a bit more lively and easygoing due to their new flex pattern, shorter ee and more taper in the tails.

[HAB]

I've resisted (so far) but if I did a custom this year I think I'd do the floral tops... And maybe also bases. Not what I'd call my "normal" cup of tea, but I really, really like it for some reason.

[Sessiøn]

Yeah, I'm pretty interested in them as well. Just not quite sure about mount point, as -7,5 is slightly more forward than I tend to gel with

On the inverse when I see the description that they moved the mount point more back I'm wondering if a little more forward would be fine. But at the same time I have never questioned ON3P mount points so why start now.