• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Help me decide, wider all-mountain or powder ski? ON3P

BC.

NEPA ShopRat/Skier
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Aug 27, 2017
Posts
2,035
Location
Lake Wallenpaupack, PA
Gee, here is a typical PugSki customer agonizing over a decision of which ski number X to get... you got answers from Blister AND the company. AND ON3P makes the skis in the region where you ski... .

Point one, quiver overlap. Today’s skis are so good that you can ski any of them on any day. So try not to overlap too much. Point 2, consider marketing, companies need to sell more skis, so they are coming with new skis that are “ ideal” for a given set of conditions, slicing and dicing their line. Almost no new ski offers a significant benefit over an "old" ski n the lineup, unless it is a totally new line. Point 3, instead of agonizing over skis, I would rethink the binding strategy. Attack demos are great for a demo binding, and the keyword is demo. On a powder ski every ounce of weight near your feet is loss of enjoyment and no contribution to stability. And the idea of swapping demo binding on skis during the day is a pipe dream. On a good day you don’t have time to go down to swap. I regularly bring two pairs and I only swap when I use a race pair in the morning to run gates (badly by the way, but that’s still fun). And I cannot think of a day good for a powder ski in the morning and then calling for a Z90 in the afternoon. And I prefer any regular binding over any demo any day. Point 4, you are in the Pacific Northwest, you surf over the snow, not in the snow like they do in Colorado or Utah, so wider will always be better.

ON3P and Pivot 18’s on da line go perfectly together.:hug:
 
Thread Starter
TS
David Chaus

David Chaus

Beyond Help
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
5,529
Location
Stanwood, WA
Gee, here is a typical PugSki customer agonizing over a decision of which ski number X to get... you got answers from Blister AND the company. AND ON3P makes the skis in the region where you ski... .

Point one, quiver overlap. Today’s skis are so good that you can ski any of them on any day. So try not to overlap too much. Point 2, consider marketing, companies need to sell more skis, so they are coming with new skis that are “ ideal” for a given set of conditions, slicing and dicing their line. Almost no new ski offers a significant benefit over an "old" ski n the lineup, unless it is a totally new line. Point 3, instead of agonizing over skis, I would rethink the binding strategy. Attack demos are great for a demo binding, and the keyword is demo. On a powder ski every ounce of weight near your feet is loss of enjoyment and no contribution to stability. And the idea of swapping demo binding on skis during the day is a pipe dream. On a good day you don’t have time to go down to swap. I regularly bring two pairs and I only swap when I use a race pair in the morning to run gates (badly by the way, but that’s still fun). And I cannot think of a day good for a powder ski in the morning and then calling for a Z90 in the afternoon. And I prefer any regular binding over any demo any day. Point 4, you are in the Pacific Northwest, you surf over the snow, not in the snow like they do in Colorado or Utah, so wider will always be better.

Yeah, but I’m not a typical PugSki customer...except in all the usual ways. ogwink

So, I’m not just jumping on the latest and greatest marketing BS. Keep in mind I got my Rev’s in 2012-2013, so I’ve had these skis for 6-7 years, I tend to keep things a while rather than get new equipment every other year. I’m totally happy with my Z90. I don’t have a powder ski, and realistically it should be a good crud ski as well. Based on what I’ve actually demoed, it’s the BG. Maybe if I wait until I can demo the Woodsman, I’d change my mind. No matter; I’m pretty adaptable and likely will love whatever I acquire.

As far as swapping out skis, actually I can do that pretty easily. The way Stevens is set up, returning to base from anywhere on the mountain is one chairlift ride; it is not a big deal. And some days I’m instructing in the morning and freeskiing in the afternoon, where the crudability of the wider, surfier ski would help.

As far as bindings you make several good points. That said, I haven’t noticed a huge difference in weight and performance on the Attack demos vs the regular Attacks. Maybe I’m just not good enough to notice the difference. I would think that if anything, I would a notice the difference more on the Z90’s or any other frontside ski.
 

Mike Rogers

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Posts
753
Location
Calgary
I skied the BGs quite a bit last year. I am really happy with them in soft snow. They offer plenty of float for me in dry, cold snow, but they really shine in less perfect "fresh" and chop. I have had a number of "PNW" style days at Fernie and in the spring, and was supper happy to have the goats on my feet.

That said, I don't find them to be as versatile as others have. I don't like them in bumps, and they can be a bit of a chore in skied out trees (hunting for fresh).

It's part of a 3 ski quiver for me. I have Brahmas for dry stretches, Billy Goats for fresh, and moment deathwishes for stash hunting days after the storm (and for trees in general). The difference in float between the BGs and Deathwishes (which are not skinny skis at all) is quite noticeable. BGs are more stable, Deathwishes more playfull.

I think the BG would be a solid choice. You might feel that you want an in between ski to round out your quiver (I did), but I would start with the Z-90 and BG and see if that middle ski would really suit your needs. The Woodsman wold likely be a compromise on the deep days, and you might be overlapping with the Z-90 a bit in between storms

For what is is worth, Liz loves her fatter powder skis (Wildcats), and she's 2-3 inches shorter (and lighter) than you. No need to go smaller. :)

For length, I have the 184s. I would go longer if I had to do it again, but a 184 ON3P is not a short ski (same length as my 187 brahmas). I'm about your height and 25ish pounds heavier.
 
Thread Starter
TS
David Chaus

David Chaus

Beyond Help
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
5,529
Location
Stanwood, WA
Thanks @Mike Rogers, that’s helpful, and as we’ve skied together in exactly the conditions I’d be using this ski, that’s extra helpful.
 

BMC

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Posts
778
The Rev 105 should be more than adequate as a powder ski at 150lbs anyway shouldn’t they? That’s a pretty wide ski. Indeed it is the very definition of a wide all mountain ski!!

Having made that observation my view is, if you want differentiation, go a forgiving wider powder ski. You may find though either you see deep enough snow to pull out the pow skis so infrequently they hardly see any use, or alternatively your renouns cover everything but deep days so well you’re never tempted to pull out the Heads.

Personally I love the Head feel. I’ve owned so many of them including an iM82, Rev Pro 85, and currently own a Monster 83 (and Brahma @88, QLab @103 and Mtn Lab @114). If though the Rev 105 has a similar feel to my 85s I might “get” why you have less than perfect love for them. The shape of my 85s definitely prioritised carving over off piste performance. I found the tip grabby in denser snow, and the tail loved to hang on to the end of a turn. Is that what’s happening on the 105? If so I imagine the 105 would be great innopen bowls full of powder or crud where you can just open up your turns. Not so much in bumps and trees I assume?

Anyway the answer may be to just sell the Rev 105s if that’s how you feel, and get a new ski of similar dimensions that’s more forgiving? One that comes to mind because it interests me is the Salomon QST 106. It’s an all mountain ski but is also a powder ski and would cover anything really.

I leave my Mtn 114s in Niseko and only use them there. Based on my experience with the QLab and QST 99 I personally imagine I’d have little to no use for the 114s even in one of the snowiest places going, if I had the QST 106.
 

John O

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Posts
423
Location
Seattle, WA
The Rev 105 should be more than adequate as a powder ski at 150lbs anyway shouldn’t they? That’s a pretty wide ski. Indeed it is the very definition of a wide all mountain ski!!

I think David explained that pretty well with this comment:
Well, the issue with the Rev 105 isn’t so much the width (the tip is 144), is the sidecut and tail. It’s got a 16m turning radius and minimal tip rise and a tail that wants to finish a turn, so it ends up being harder to release in crud and soft snow that I now want, and it doesn’t really plane up in powder. It’s a wider all-mountain ski, and a great carver for it’s width, but it doesn’t float anywhere like a powder ski.
 

BMC

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Posts
778
Fair call. Too much skim reading.

I say just sell the Rev 105s then and get a more forgiving similarly dimensioned all mountain ski. Which for a 150lb skier is basically a powder ski anyway
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
The thing to remember is that any ski is going to have limits in it’s versatility in certain conditions so there is no such thing as one ski that can “do it all”. That’s why you have a quiver!

As many have said, ideal would be a 3 ski wider quiver and you may end up going that way eventually. The positives in going BG first though is you have tried that ski and liked it and you have a ski that’s decent on harder snow which is of course the downfall of ANY powder ski. Overlap will be less in the BG/Z 90 quiver and decision of which ski to use each day is super easy.

If it were me, I’d get the BG first and see how you use each ski this year and think of the times/days you wished you had something “in between”. Might be able to get deals on a RES BG as it’s been out for a bit where as all the 104-108mm skis I think you should try out are new within the last 6 months so no huge deals yet. The big issue is that you haven’t physically tried any of the narrower soft snow skis out yet and you may find the Woodsman 108 your least favorite of the group. Who knows?

So get a good deal on some BG with Attack2 13 bindings(demo hater here too!) and then after skiing your Z90 and BG a few days in different conditions, try out the Nordica Enforcer 104 Free, Moment Wildcat 108, ON3P Woodsman 108, K2 Mindbender 108. All would be very versatile in softer snow conditions and the way I listed them is TOTALLY NOT the way I would rank them for your needs......:roflmao:
 

Tom Co.

life's new window
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Posts
629
Location
Seattle
David, as a fellow Crystal and Stevens skier,, here is my take. As you know almost all of the off piste terrain at Stevens has some kind of moguls or snowboard ruts. It is very difficult to find smooth flat terrain.. Even the tight gaps in the trees you will find snowboard ruts. The same is true at Crystal only to a slightly lesser extent. Also powder days have become power hour. After which you were sneaking around from stash to stash. I recently downsized my powder ski from a 113 mm 185 mm to a 108 mm 181mm ski because I got tired of muscling the bigger ski around in the bumps and ruts. I have had no regrets. The 108 has plenty of float for me at at 5'11" 175#.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,603
Location
PNW aka SEA
Hmmm...before I started this thread, I had been thinking Woodsman 108. The input I’ve received has allowed me to reconsider. The advantage of the BG is it would be an easier decision of what to use on a given day.

Of course, I can keep evaluating if I really need something in between the Z90 and a BG. Because I’m not opposed to saving some shekels and buying a middle quiver ski later.

The only thing to add to the subject is, if you've demoed a ski and liked it, you're done shopping. You have a daily driver, anything else is a 'sometimes' ski. At your size and weight, you've got a ton of options, which gets us back to ^^^^^ .
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,920
Location
Front Range, Colorado
On length: the last year BG was in 184 and 189, I believe. At the same weight/height as you, these two would be my options. (This ski used to come in a single in between length of 186, I believe. That would have been tops.) If you are inherently a slow to medium speed slalom type skier or similar technical shorter turn skier only, that would be the only way I'd consider shorter for a powder/crud ski like the BG.

P.S. The RES shape on the BG makes it very good in powder day bumps over the full range of powder to chop to crud, as you probably know. (Not so much for old snow days.)
Myself, I'd suggest the 184.

On bindings: I only notice detrimental differences with demo bindings with race skis, skied aggressively, wanting a less playful, more direct edge feel.

With any at least partial playful type of skiing, including playful charging, I also can't really tell a disadvantage to adjustable bindings (including demoes and schizos). They are slightly different, but there are pros and cons there that for me equal out or are even sometimes preferable (depending on the ski and use).

The bigger difference, for me, is in the mount point: for instance, usually, with heavier, deeper snow, a slightly farther back mount position with powder skis is nice. (although the BG may well be super dialed in for just one mount point, as suggested earlier, dunno; I've found that even with skis of that sort, slight mount shifts are fun (1/4 or so up to 1 1/2 cm., now and then). It's a bonus that one can thus really know what the best custom mount point is for oneself in any given conditions, not just take advise or guess.
 
Last edited:

Alexzn

Ski Squaw
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,956
Location
Bay Area and Truckee
^^^^ what @markojp said.

The Rev feedback is puzzling a144 tip should plane in powder, especially in the Cascade concrete. Consider this thought asvwell: a powder ski is fundamentally designed either to bend or to sink the tail. A crud ski like a typical 105-ish ski is not necessarily optimized for either. You are much better adding a real powder ski than splitting the difference.
 

BMC

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Posts
778
I suspect it’s a matter more of the tip catching in chalky style soft snow, rather than an issue in powder proper. That’s certainly the experience I had on the Rev Pro 85, which had a similar proportional geometry.
 

silverback

Talking a lot about less and less
Skier
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Posts
1,416
Location
Wasatch
I have the last year of the 191 Billy Goats. I'm 56, 5'10", 165lbs.

They took some getting used to but I love them. The balance point and, to some extent the technique, is just different than other shapes I have. Multiple, consecutive days and a chargey attitude make them shine for me. That said, if I know there will be substantial time on groomers or big moguls mixed into my day, I'm glad I have other skis (at least waiting in the car).

As far as depth of new snow goes, I love the BG in just a few inches of fresh and when it is really deep. For crud, I find the BG just gobbles it up with more of a "hover over the snow" feel at speed, fun. I have MX98's and Belafonte's that are better at hooking up the side cut and skiing through/proposing out of it, (but are not in the same class when the snow is deep). I like both styles depending on mood.

I think the OP should get some Goats and commit to really figuring then out. There is some magic there that he shouldn't miss out on.
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
David Chaus

David Chaus

Beyond Help
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
5,529
Location
Stanwood, WA
FWIW my avatar pic is on my Rev 105’s a few years ago at Whistler, so it’s not like I can’t make them work, rather I find them a little too easy to over-turn in powder and crud and make turns smaller than I want and cut across the slope rather than stay in the fall line. More work to smear/slarve, and very subtle movements to make larger radius turns. They were great for teaching me to be subtle in my movements, and I kept them as long as I did because I felt they had a few things to teach me.

@silverback, Goats in a 191? At your size? :hail:
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,490
Location
Colorado
...
@silverback, Goats in a 191? At your size? :hail:

FWIW, the 191 Goats are the same ski length as the 189 Goats. They just relabeled them because selling 190+ skis scares off many.

But for those who complained endlessly about the loss of the 191, they made a truly huge goat -- the 193 SuperGoat. Now only available as a custom.

Shared a lift with a SuperGoat skier. But there was no way I could keep up after we got off the lift.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,920
Location
Front Range, Colorado
I know that with the RES shape, the old 186 Goats were super easy to turn, thus powder bumps. And Blister says there isn't as much difference between the 184 and 189 goats as there is with some skis. So it's probably a win-win situation either way. If you're a bit of a charger in powder/crud usually, then the 189. If a bit more laid back and appreciating a touch more of playful, usually, then the 184. Since you were considering the even shorter version for your style, seems like the 184 is a no brainer.

I know that for myself, it's a pleasantly hard choice. For a number of years the best skier on a powder day at Copper Mtn. was a youngish dude on a pair of 191 BGs. For him it was a one ski quiver. He could really be versatile with that ski, but generally fast and elite turns both, no matter what the conditions or slope, it almost seemed like. Powder bumps, trees, steeps, open snow - just a joy to witness.

And a bonus was he'd very occasionally wait for me for a few breather moments at the bottom, to go up the lift together again. (I'd often be taking an easier way down.)
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,603
Location
PNW aka SEA
I suspect it’s a matter more of the tip catching in chalky style soft snow, rather than an issue in powder proper. That’s certainly the experience I had on the Rev Pro 85, which had a similar proportional geometry.

The 105 and 85pro were similar in 'rev' name only. No metal in the 105, and a ton of side cut. Really too much for deep heavy crud. The 85pro on the other hand was a swiss army knife. It could do anything and do it pretty darn well. At any rate, skis have lifespans. David's have seen their day, and probably awhile ago. ogsmile
 

silverback

Talking a lot about less and less
Skier
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Posts
1,416
Location
Wasatch
FWIW, the 191 Goats are the same ski length as the 189 Goats. They just relabeled them because selling 190+ skis scares off many.

But for those who complained endlessly about the loss of the 191, they made a truly huge goat -- the 193 SuperGoat. Now only available as a custom.

Shared a lift with a SuperGoat skier. But there was no way I could keep up after we got off the lift.


Actually they cut two inches off the upturned tail to make the 189cm. They added asymmetrical side cut and some other stuff too.

They are a lot of heavy ski sometimes but mostly they are money. For low angle pow the size is great for keeping speed and momentum. I can turn em tight or let them run. Great tree skis and open terrain skis if the snow is fresh.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top