ON3P SKIS Discussion

[jacob_dbu]

nice PowTron - all time conditions over yonder!



To be fair, the new 110s feel quite different compared to the old 108s - at least in the 182 length. My time on them is pretty limited yet in not the greatest conditions (I have also been skiing like shit), but they are a lot more easy going than the OG WD108s. The tails are def on the mellower side of the spectrum. I can't really compare them to MF108s yet, but first impression is that they are closer to MF108s than both first gen 108s and wood108tours were. Actually, my first impressions of the new tails is so favorable that I have been thinking about asking Iggy to start thinking about a 118 version, preferably with the XavierD graphic

I am also very pleasantly suprised by wood96s. They are great. I can actually feel the difference between their old core tails (they are still a fair bit softer than og wd108 tails) and the new 110s - the new core layup feels a bit different. I def prefer wood96s to Rustler10s on groomers.

I've been less impressed with my travel quiver - aka wood102+wood110 in 50/50 layup with Tectons. I think the issue there is a difference in ramp angle comparing Tectons to Cast, not anything that the skis do that is wonky or that their tune is off. I love how Cast skis, whereas Tectons not so much - so there is something there that causes it I believe. Time will tell. It is almost like I can't ski when I use them on groomers, though they ski soft snow off piste better. I mean, my technique is shit at the best of times, but with these I ski like a (insert person who have never skied living in a country with no snow skiing fo the first time). I am leaning towards remounting the 102s with Cast as a part of the quiver consolidation project.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts SF - much appreciated.

If you decide you need to move your wood110 50/50 let me know

[SnakeMagnet]

Compared to my Mantra 102s they had less edge hold, but also more "demanding" when not in a carve.

Can you elaborate further? This and above making me feel like I made the right choice in holding off on the 110's..

This also sounds just like the skis I am trying to troubleshoot now, and also in comp to a m102. Weirdly hooky in the tails and constantly fish-tailing in variable; as if the low-splay-long-taper gets caught under powder and chop. Feels like i'm constantly getting dragged into the backseat if it gets steep or technical and you can't carve the turns, because the ski wants to hook up and go across the fall line and the tail will not release predictably. Am I correct in assuming this is similar to what you have problems with?

[TAFKALVS]

Those are all tuning issues... detuning isn't the right choice, you need to have the edge angles and bevel set properly and potentially also check the bases for flatness etc.

[kid-kapow]

If you decide you need to move your wood110 50/50 let me know

worry not, no such plans as of yet

Can you elaborate further? This and above making me feel like I made the right choice in holding off on the 110's..

(I am not saying that you are saying that they do ski similarly, but) No woodsman that I have been on (96, 102, 108, 110, 116) skis particularly similarly to m102s. I've not skied m102s a ton, but their balance points are pretty different as are their respective flex patterns - especially the front part of the ski. Woodsman are generally looser at speed. If you want a woods with even more grip - and especially the 108s were not lacking in that respect - you can always order a pair with titanal through customs.

I know the quoted part was not directed at me, but have m102s as well so thought I should chime in.

[cocoapuff]

Should be getting a few days in on these 187 WD110s soon. May have gotten a little carried away but have 187 BG110s and 186 J110s coming too so will offer some comparisons/impressions later this winter.

[jacob_dbu]

Should be getting a few days in on these 187 WD110s soon. May have gotten a little carried away but have 187 BG110s and 186 J110s coming too so will offer some comparisons/impressions later this winter.

You a Michigander or just a map guy?

[cocoapuff]

Both. Call MT home these days though. The matching top sheet wasn't intentional. Factory Find.

[jacob_dbu]

Both. Call MT home these days though. The matching top sheet wasn't intentional. Factory Find.

Nice I am as well. Those are my favorite topsheets. Original map topsheet was on the 2017 BG if I recall right.

[cocoapuff]

Well aloha. These are the WD108 Tour tops from last year. The 2016-17 BG tops you are referring to are my favorites as well. In fact they are going on my BG110s.

[grinch]

I have a day on WD 102's. They gave me memories of the OG Vicik, but a little more easy going. Heavily detuned rocker sections.

Hmmm i mah have to keep an eye out for a vicik. That makes total sense now that you mention them. My new interwebz search begins

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[undertow2]

Hmmm i mah have to keep an eye out for a vicik. That makes total sense now that you mention them. My new interwebz search begins

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Grinch, my buddy has a pair of OG Vicik’s he asked me to sell that has a total of 10 runs and he would let go for $250 plus shipping…. Top sheet and bases 10 out of 10…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[EWG]

I'm eager to tick off Day 1 on these WD110. I've only skied the WD on a single run before, and it was the older WD108.

Attachment 398785

These are gorgeous. And my kid showed me these on the ON3P insta earlier today. Awesome.

[Huskier]

Anybody going from old to new bg find that is the camber has significantly changed? My 2017's are nearly bases flat. 2021 BGT are at least 4-8mm maybe more. Am I nuts?

[Eluder]

Anybody holding a pair of 181 Wren 112’s?

Also curious about 182 Woodsman 116’s

[grinch]

Grinch, my buddy has a pair of OG Vicik’s he asked me to sell that has a total of 10 runs and he would let go for $250 plus shipping…. Top sheet and bases 10 out of 10…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

That sounds sweet, thanks. What length are they?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[undertow2]

That sounds sweet, thanks. What length are they?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

186’s - they are truly like new…. If interested PM me your number and I will send pics…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MiddleOfNight]

Thoughts on a rearward mount for the pair of 161 Jessie 102’s I picked up from my 5’ 3”, 115-lb daughter?

why not on the line?

[grinch]

186’s - they are truly like new…. If interested PM me your number and I will send pics…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Despite just ordering mfree 99's ,and the fact that i need to sell rather than buy atm, i wouldve bought those viciks in a second if they were 176. Thanks Ut im looking for something shorter though

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[MHSP1497]

Anybody going from old to new bg find that is the camber has significantly changed? My 2017's are nearly bases flat. 2021 BGT are at least 4-8mm maybe more. Am I nuts?

You’re not nuts, there’s more camber. Even my Jeffrey 108’s from last year have significantly more camber than my C&D’s and Caylor’s. My BGT 108’s are also damn near flat camber too. With the Jeff108’s I noticed more pop, better edge hold on firm snow and more of the “suspension” feeling in soft snow. I like it.

Edit to add my Jeff108’s are very custom with soft flex and the Caylor type rocker added to them so, take that variable as needed.

[undertow2]

Despite just ordering mfree 99's ,and the fact that i need to sell rather than buy atm, i wouldve bought those viciks in a second if they were 176. Thanks Ut im looking for something shorter though

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Good luck - I also own a custom 186 and love it…. You won’t be disappointed when you find a pair…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[sf]

Can you elaborate further? This and above making me feel like I made the right choice in holding off on the 110's..

This also sounds just like the skis I am trying to troubleshoot now, and also in comp to a m102. Weirdly hooky in the tails and constantly fish-tailing in variable; as if the low-splay-long-taper gets caught under powder and chop. Feels like i'm constantly getting dragged into the backseat if it gets steep or technical and you can't carve the turns, because the ski wants to hook up and go across the fall line and the tail will not release predictably. Am I correct in assuming this is similar to what you have problems with?

That sounds like a far worse version of my experience.
As far as I can tell there is nothing that should make the WD demanding, except for tune issues.

For now I'll detune properly. In your case I would check the tune, as others have suggested

[grinch]

Good luck - I also own a custom 186 and love it…. You won’t be disappointed when you find a pair…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I went and did a deep dive after "session's" post and its pretty much what im after other thzn i was looking for a touch narrower but still lusting after a 102 woodsman. The mfree won out at 99 waist and a few $ saved with a sale price. I think all 3(woods, vicik, mfree) have their similarities and would be in a similar category, or atleast if sounds like it to me. Im not sure i can restrain my self though. A $250 vicik sounds like titties

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[SnakeMagnet]

worry not, no such plans as of yet


(I am not saying that you are saying that they do ski similarly, but) No woodsman that I have been on (96, 102, 108, 110, 116) skis particularly similarly to m102s. I've not skied m102s a ton, but their balance points are pretty different as are their respective flex patterns - especially the front part of the ski. Woodsman are generally looser at speed. If you want a woods with even more grip - and especially the 108s were not lacking in that respect - you can always order a pair with titanal through customs.

I know the quoted part was not directed at me, but have m102s as well so thought I should chime in.

I mean that's just my point i'm confused about: How would a softer ski that weighs the same, with less edge hold and more rocker, be more demanding in pivoting? That would sound like a shitty ski. The 110 still sounds like the ski I want on paper, but I would love to have these issues above confirmed to just be a tuning fault first before i go for it.

That sounds like a far worse version of my experience.
As far as I can tell there is nothing that should make the WD demanding, except for tune issues.

For now I'll detune properly. In your case I would check the tune, as others have suggested

I've already taken a gummi up to the taper points, if things aren't any better next day and the bevel is fine i'm getting a base grind. But the more I look at the tail the less sense it makes. There's ~15cm more taper over the M102, and both skis have the same total splay back there. With a -5.5 line. Is it some sort of a pseudo-pintail?

[grinch]

Id do more thsn a gummi. Hit them harsmd with a file from tip/tail to where the rocker begins not taper. Feather it a bit just into the effective edge. "Effective" edge

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[atree]

Going to post a pair of last year's 182 Woodsman 108 Tours in gear swap. If anyone is interested I'll skip that process. Skis are in Bend/HR/PDX