ON3P SKIS Discussion

[grinch]

I for one am happy that iggy will have no boots to clean now and will have ample time to respond to people hitting rocks.
My bg 110 tours w raiders are awesome. Survivors of multi rock strikes and barely a scratch, subject to change i guess

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[optics]

That Iggy in this case could do no right - not respond, wrong, respond after the case being made public, also wrong.

Uh yeah...because *any* company holding onto a customer's property for months while ignoring multiple calls and emails is definitively "wrong". You seem to be missing that fact. You don't get out of something like that without some "wrong" on your back.

After that, there's a choice to explain what's up and why it happened - or not. Everyone and every company fucks up now and then. You learn something when you see how it's handled.

I would never *expect* a CEO/founder to publicly chime in on what's happening with weak spots in their operations. But the world is transparent now, and people are people, so that void gets filled other ways when there's no communication.

There's no catch-22 here. It's just about consequences for actions/decisions. This group's pretty damn sympathetic and supportive when there's communication.

A message of "We fucked up, here's what we're doing about it, here's why you can trust us in the future" goes a long way.

[MoeSnow]

Have you skied both? I have the 192 and old 191s. The 192 absolutely skis groomers wayyyy better than the 191. They absolutely truck on groomed. My problem was they gave up PNW powder performance for that and it's a trade I didn’t want to make.

I am not lucky enough to have skied both. I will pick up the new BG at some point this year. I tried out all of the Jeffrey's in their different waist-widths last year (102/110/118) and came to the conclusion that I prefer more directional skis. Planning on buying the 186 length and not the 191, though.

I think the two year model turnover is tough. It would be cool if we could get a table/chart of how each model's ride characteristics have changed since the last model update for a point of reference. This would help us decide whether or not we want to pick up whatever iteration we are on.

Right now we get some explanatory text that looks like (pulled from the BG product page on the website):

For 2024, we've extended our trademark RES into the tips for a less boxy, more drivable sidecut, capable of adjusting on-the-fly to pilot feedback. We also cinched some tail length, which allows for better mount proportions to drive into the forefoot, and improve responsiveness. We kept the flatter tail of its predecessor for strong tail support, and both lowered the camber and pushed its apex forward for a more predictable ride in the face of unpredictable terrain - the Billy Goatblurs the limits of line choice as far as you're willing to go.

From this I'm gathering/guessing

• Improved groomer performance might be staying due to flatter tails?
• Lowered camber might mean a more pivoty right overall, a bit less performance on the groomers perhaps? Maybe a bit more fun in off-piste terrain due any increase in pivoty-ness.
• Pushing RES farther into the tips means more contact area in the front of the ski, I think (more float, higher swing-weight?). Not 100% familiar with how messing with RES affects how skis ride.

Would be nice if somewhere we could summarize where/how the ski will perform better/worse than last year's iteration. Ideally, a ski gets better everywhere after going through an iteration, but realistically there are always trade-offs being made.

[MoeSnow]

Uh yeah...because *any* company holding onto a customer's property for months while ignoring multiple calls and emails is definitively "wrong". You seem to be missing that fact. You don't get out of something like that without some "wrong" on your back.

After that, there's a choice to explain what's up and why it happened - or not. Everyone and every company fucks up now and then. You learn something when you see how it's handled.

I would never *expect* a CEO/founder to publicly chime in on what's happening with weak spots in their operations. But the world is transparent now, and people are people, so that void gets filled other ways when there's no communication.

There's no catch-22 here. It's just about consequences for actions/decisions. This group's pretty damn sympathetic and supportive when there's communication.

A message of "We fucked up, here's what we're doing about it, here's why you can trust us in the future" goes a long way.

The guy posted here to ask people about their warranty experience. He was rightfully a bit worried and was not getting a good customer experience. He ended up getting a call and an apology. Seems like it was all handled between him and the factory? Why does anybody need to hop on here and apologize to all of us?

[phatty]

I am not lucky enough to have skied both. I will pick up the new BG at some point this year. I tried out all of the Jeffrey's in their different waist-widths last year (102/110/118) and came to the conclusion that I prefer more directional skis. Planning on buying the 186 length and not the 191, though.

I think the two year model turnover is tough. It would be cool if we could get a table/chart of how each model's ride characteristics have changed since the last model update for a point of reference. This would help us decide whether or not we want to pick up whatever iteration we are on.

Right now we get some explanatory text that looks like (pulled from the BG product page on the website):



From this I'm gathering/guessing

• Improved groomer performance might be staying due to flatter tails?
• Lowered camber might mean a more pivoty right overall, a bit less performance on the groomers perhaps? Maybe a bit more fun in off-piste terrain due any increase in pivoty-ness.
• Pushing RES farther into the tips means more contact area in the front of the ski, I think (more float, higher swing-weight?). Not 100% familiar with how messing with RES affects how skis ride.

Would be nice if somewhere we could summarize where/how the ski will perform better/worse than last year's iteration. Ideally, a ski gets better everywhere after going through an iteration, but realistically there are always trade-offs being made.

The bummer is we used to get an annual post from Iggy outlining the changes and the reasoning behind them. It was a whole lot better than the ad copy on the website. Maybe we all became whiny beeatches and he's decided it's not worth his time, which just makes us all whinier.

Honestly I want ON3P to kill it. The Jeff is a ski I plan to try this year. With the BG, I'm on a wait and see basis at this point. For Woods, I just don't think they do all mountain skis as good as the majors (or Moment), so until I hear otherwise, I'll keep skiing my Commander and MFree.

[kid-kapow]

Uh yeah...because *any* company holding onto a customer's property for months while ignoring multiple calls and emails is definitively "wrong". You seem to be missing that fact. You don't get out of something like that without some "wrong" on your back.

After that, there's a choice to explain what's up and why it happened - or not. Everyone and every company fucks up now and then. You learn something when you see how it's handled.

I would never *expect* a CEO/founder to publicly chime in on what's happening with weak spots in their operations. But the world is transparent now, and people are people, so that void gets filled other ways when there's no communication.

There's no catch-22 here. It's just about consequences for actions/decisions. This group's pretty damn sympathetic and supportive when there's communication.

A message of "We fucked up, here's what we're doing about it, here's why you can trust us in the future" goes a long way.

man....

First of all, I've never stated the lack of reply or lack of follow up on Iggy's part was axcceptable, so please leave the straw man at the door.

Second of all, whoever is saying that there should not be some kind of fallout or criticism? But it is a bit pitch fork looney mode if one first criticizes when there is no action and then level critique when things are resolved. I mean, you could always try the arguement "it should have been resolved sooner", but alas - you would be kicking in an open door. The point that I was trying to make - and that guy I quoted in that case understood - was be satisfied that it got resolved, and lets make sure it does not happen again eh.

For reference, how many instances in this (and the previous ON3P thread) is there of Iggy going way above and beyond in trying to rectify stuff, or just provide customer support way outside the norm. Like having skis sent back to be retuned (wonky tunes are not excactly that unusual across the industry), sending out base patches or offering to cator to very specific custom builds (for instance how some skis were cured/pressed wrt to heat to provide a certain camber shape) - often without added / any cost to the customer.

So yeah, let's burn down the house and get Iggy cancelled eh - there neeeds to be consequences!!!! - after all, from this one incident one can just forget years of pretty damn good customer service and let this one case be the new baseline....

• Improved groomer performance might be staying due to flatter tails?
• Lowered camber might mean a more pivoty right overall, a bit less performance on the groomers perhaps? Maybe a bit more fun in off-piste terrain due any increase in pivoty-ness.
• Pushing RES farther into the tips means more contact area in the front of the ski, I think (more float, higher swing-weight?). Not 100% familiar with how messing with RES affects how skis ride.

I think the increased groomer performance of latter year BGs is largely due to the transition point underfoot from the aft sidecut to the RES part being refined and the RES part becoming straight and not elliptical like the earlier versions of the design.

The camber probably helps a bit too with groomer performance (creates grip out back), but I kinda thought its main additions to the mix was more support out back off piste and increased suspension.

The tips of 182 BGs of the outgoing design skied no differently for me than 2016s or asyms. I really liked the 182s, but not as much as my 184 2016s. Why? The 182 was just the wrong size being a 179 with more length - I prefer the stiffer flex and increased weight of the 184s. And I find the meaningful differences to be out back.

Then again I am so thick that I would seriously like to try a BG with standard sidecut throughout - sacrilege I know. I bought a pair of DPS Lotus117 last year to try such a shape (really damn fun, just a bit too light and soft to be a true resort slayer - and DPS which sucks....). I also just bought a pair of Revolt 114s for the same reason just the other day (got a pair at a steal). I kinda prefer to have a tad more float underfoot than toe ball / slightly ahead of the toe like RES provides, and as I love going mach looney doing GS turns on piste with wide skis the standard sidecut just works a lot better for how I like to ski. So yeah, count me in the boring crowd who likes versatility

man, I need to learn how to be less wordy. My apologies

[MoeSnow]

The bummer is we used to get an annual post from Iggy outlining the changes and the reasoning behind them. It was a whole lot better than the ad copy on the website. Maybe we all became whiny beeatches and he's decided it's not worth his time, which just makes us all whinier.

Honestly I want ON3P to kill it. The Jeff is a ski I plan to try this year. With the BG, I'm on a wait and see basis at this point. For Woods, I just don't think they do all mountain skis as good as the majors (or Moment), so until I hear otherwise, I'll keep skiing my Commander and MFree.

Sounds like we want the same thing: more insight/explanation on what/why changes were made.

I liked the Jeffs, I think I bought them in too short of a length for me, which might have had to do with some of my frustrations with them. TBH I am still a bit undecided on what my yearly (trying to be responsible $$$ ) ON3P buy will be. I feel like I owe it to myself to have a dedicated spot for a BG in the quiver tho.

[optics]

Why does anybody need to hop on here and apologize to all of us?

Who said they did?

What I said is that every company has two choices when they fuck up...explain, or not. If they choose not, assumptions and guesses will fill the void.

[optics]

man....

First of all, I've never stated the lack of reply or lack of follow up on Iggy's part was axcceptable, so please leave the straw man at the door.

So yeah, let's burn down the house and get Iggy cancelled eh - there neeeds to be consequences!!!!

Dude, you need to wipe your chin. It's too much. Your credibility is shot.

Also this combo from you is pretty hilarious...telling me to leave the straw man at the door and then throwing your own big-ass straw man into the mix.

No one is trying to get anyone "canceled". Just pointing out that sometimes silence is fucking loud. This place is for discussion, not shilling, not boot-licking, not advertising. This is a valid discussion to have. And for the record: I've spent thousands with this company, have supported them as much as anyone on here.

Also "consequences" isn't a negative term. It's a term for cause>effect, not meant like "you're in trouble little kapow".

How 'bout we drop it and let everyone get back to the pre-asym BG nostalgia...that's the best way to support iggy, right?

[Velomayniac]

man, I need to learn how to be less wordy. My apologies

I type way too much as well

You’re a smart guy, you got a lot going upstairs and you wanna get it out.

Lots of essays today in the On3p thread.

[phatty]

Sounds like we want the same thing: more insight/explanation on what/why changes were made.

I liked the Jeffs, I think I bought them in too short of a length for me, which might have had to do with some of my frustrations with them. TBH I am still a bit undecided on what my yearly (trying to be responsible $$$ ) ON3P buy will be. I feel like I owe it to myself to have a dedicated spot for a BG in the quiver tho.

Buy the 191s and let us know how they are! [emoji6]

[MoeSnow]

Who said they did?

What I said is that every company has two choices when they fuck up...explain, or not. If they choose not, assumptions and guesses will fill the void.

Fair enough. I think it's a bit silly to continue to make assumptions and guesses long after the whole thing is resolved.

Poster said he got a phone call and he's being communicated with after some lackluster customer service. What gaps are left in the story to fill assumptions and guesses with?

[MoeSnow]

Buy the 191s and let us know how they are! [emoji6]

Chances are 191s would ski me more than I would ski them

[benk]

This was how the 2021 192 was for me , as well. I skied it in UT last year and thought it was great. Came home to Alpental and they just didn't work. Got back on my 2014 191s and they felt like they were part of my body.

Man, I wanted the 192 to work for me. Best looking skis I've had. Just didn't work. I've heard moving the mount back can help but I don't want to put more holes in them. Really hoping this new 191s have fixed the issues, but I'll wait for more reviews to hit.

I mean, look at these!

I thought the consensus is to move the 192BG mount Fwd 1cm? I’m about to swap Shifts for ATKs on my 192BGT and don’t want to go in the wrong direction. Couldn’t be more excited about the stock 192BGT

Maybe I need to try a pair of ‘14s to see what all this fuss is about.

[phatty]

I thought the consensus is to move the 192BG mount Fwd 1cm? I’m about to swap Shifts for ATKs on my 192BGT and don’t want to go in the wrong direction. Couldn’t be more excited about the stock 192BGT

Maybe I need to try a pair of ‘14s to see what all this fuss is about.

I've heard +1 and I've heard -1. I ended up doing neither because I don't want to add any more holes. Could do demos, but then I'm stuck with bindings I don't like on a ski I was hoping to love.

I trust XavierD and his input due to his connection to ON3P and the BG.

[auvgeek]

Then again I am so thick that I would seriously like to try a BG with standard sidecut throughout - sacrilege I know. I bought a pair of DPS Lotus117 last year to try such a shape (really damn fun, just a bit too light and soft to be a true resort slayer - and DPS which sucks....). I also just bought a pair of Revolt 114s for the same reason just the other day (got a pair at a steal). I kinda prefer to have a tad more float underfoot than toe ball / slightly ahead of the toe like RES provides, and as I love going mach looney doing GS turns on piste with wide skis the standard sidecut just works a lot better for how I like to ski. So yeah, count me in the boring crowd who likes versatility

ON3P has made various iterations of this ski. Most recently, it was the Woodsman 116. Lots of other companies have made similar traditional pow skis. And if you want even more float underfoot, the Protest and Renegade are both not-quite-reverse options.

RES is special. Fine if you don’t like it, but not every ski needs to be versatile.

[Sessiøn]

True. But Moment seems to do pretty darn well selling >25m radius skis.

I think Moment has a couple more SKU's with greater than 25m radius, and some of those are exisitng molds in a tour layup. I would bet money those are probably their lowest numbers sold ski's in their entire lineup.

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

I think Moment has a couple more SKU's with greater than 25m radius, and some of those are exisitng molds in a tour layup. I would bet money those are probably their lowest numbers sold ski's in their entire lineup.

I believe Luke said in the last blister pod the top selling are the DW followed by the full size kitty.

[Velomayniac]

I believe Luke said in the last blister pod the top selling are the DW followed by the full size kitty.

So the 23-28m radii skis are the best selling? Hmm.

[kid-kapow]

Dude, you need to wipe your chin. It's too much. Your credibility is shot. ....
How 'bout we drop it and let everyone get back to the pre-asym BG nostalgia...that's the best way to support iggy, right?

Good thing I try to contribute on this forum to get credibility and not out of a personal desire to learn as much as I can abbout skis in trying to build a good enough quiver for me to bring my somewhat hyperfocused self to a new project.

So yeah, whatever advice people get out of what I am typing is more accidental than the main effort on my part - I am on here to learn, not school people, even if I might not come across that way at times (alas reactivity - I am a bit of a hot head).

then again you are right - mine, just like everybody on here, is just an opinion.

I will try to provide my 2cents worth and yeah, as I've stated multiple times before - I've prob been too much the hype man in this thread over the last few years in terms of ON3P contributing to making it harder for Iggy to post on here, for which I apologize. I do love the brand though, even if I feel that some of their skis (like Moment (since they were mentioned before)) skis are a work in progress.

I can't wait for the fatter jeff to drop, if rumours are to be believed.

[GoSlowGoFar]

I think Moment has a couple more SKU's with greater than 25m radius, and some of those are exisitng molds in a tour layup. I would bet money those are probably their lowest numbers sold ski's in their entire lineup.

Their two best sellers for years now are 25m skis…

This whole thread should be shut down due to the bad optics

[Velomayniac]

Their two best sellers for years now are 25m skis…

This whole thread should be shut down due to the bad optics

If Iggy wants to make Enforcers, let him. Hopefully it allows him to make $bank$ so we can get some more Wren/RES experiments in the future

[Sessiøn]

Their two best sellers for years now are 25m skis…

This whole thread should be shut down due to the bad optics

I'm sure we should shut down a thread because a couple of blow hards get mad about changes in ski design, or CS issues that we only hear one side of.

[Sessiøn]

Their two best sellers for years now are 25m skis…

This whole thread should be shut down due to the bad optics

I'm sure we should shut down a thread because a couple of blow hards get mad about changes in ski design, or a CS issue that we only hear one side of.

[Bandit Man]

I'm sure we should shut down a thread because a couple of blow hards get mad about changes in ski design, or CS issues that we only hear one side of.

But Enforcers actually handle firm
snow well…[emoji14]