Filthy rich- 171 or 176?+ Filthy rich vs vice/frankenski

[SagoCabala]

I'm 5'9 1/2"170lbs Expert in off trail and chutes moguls etc, but learning how to ski park. Live in socal where snow isnt amazing, looking to get on3p filthy riches. I plan on mounting bindings in the center, should I go get 171 or 176 in length? Also what do you guys think of the moment vices/frankenskis compared to the filthy rich.

 

[hot.pocket]

NS fucking loves their ON3Ps, I can't speak for them personally but just wait another 5 minutes and 20 people will come in ranting and raving about them.

Vice for jumping 65% rails 35%, early rise in the tip / tail give a playful nature to it without compromising the grip in turns / landings of big jumps.

Frankenski for 65% rails 35% jumps, Triple Camber holds up in the craziest of carving turns, and full bamboo core gives a nice buttery flex to the ski without turning it into a noodle piece of garbage.

I ski the Frankenski throughout Tahoe's parks on the regular and if you want a playful ski for the park that'll still hold up if you venture out, I would recommend the Frankenski.

 

[yungcigsmoker]

NS fucking loves their ON3Ps, I can't speak for them personally but just wait another 5 minutes and 20 people will come in ranting and raving about them.

Vice for jumping 65% rails 35%, early rise in the tip / tail give a playful nature to it without compromising the grip in turns / landings of big jumps.

Frankenski for 65% rails 35% jumps, Triple Camber holds up in the craziest of carving turns, and full bamboo core gives a nice buttery flex to the ski without turning it into a noodle piece of garbage.

I ski the Frankenski throughout Tahoe's parks on the regular and if you want a playful ski for the park that'll still hold up if you venture out, I would recommend the Frankenski.

How would you describe the frankenski's flex compared to the vice's?

 

[hot.pocket]

How would you describe the frankenski's flex compared to the vice's?

Vice is going to be slightly stiffer with an Aspen / Ash core, as it's more of our jumping park ski. It still has early rise in the tip and tail, so while butters might not come as easily as they do on the Frankenski, it's not hard at all to throw a bit of margarine into your riding.

Frankenski definitely flexes whenever the @$#% you want it to, but Triple Camber helps you really hold an edge when you need to. The Frank is built more around jibbing and buttering, but I've never had a problem hitting large jumps with them.

 

[macavity]

NS fucking loves their ON3Ps, I can't speak for them personally but just wait another 5 minutes and 20 people will come in ranting and raving about them.

*obligatory masturbational ON3P post*

seriously though ON3P makes fucking great skis. super solid construction and incredibly fun to ski. btw, you HAVE to mount filthy riches center since they are a symmetrical ski, otherwise they won't ski well. I'm 5'10" 145lbs (I'm a skinny bitch, I know) and I ski the 176. I would not recommend going under 176 for you, especially due to the rocker profile on them. a 171 will feel waaaaaaaaaay to small unless you're used to skiing on skiblades, which I assume you're not.

they are very fun and floaty when the snow is nice, but I do have to say they aren't the GREATEST outside of the park when the snow is moderate/bad (i.e. they are pretty much pure park), so if you are just getting into it and want a ski you can take in and out of the park, I'd check out the ON3P kartel 98 as well. I've never skied them personally, but I know a lot of people love them in and out of the park.

 

[SagoCabala]

Thanks guys I appreciate it, I've heard that on3ps are bomb proof and thanks for the info about the moments!

 

[SagoCabala]

NS fucking loves their ON3Ps, I can't speak for them personally but just wait another 5 minutes and 20 people will come in ranting and raving about them.

Vice for jumping 65% rails 35%, early rise in the tip / tail give a playful nature to it without compromising the grip in turns / landings of big jumps.

Frankenski for 65% rails 35% jumps, Triple Camber holds up in the craziest of carving turns, and full bamboo core gives a nice buttery flex to the ski without turning it into a noodle piece of garbage.

I ski the Frankenski throughout Tahoe's parks on the regular and if you want a playful ski for the park that'll still hold up if you venture out, I would recommend the Frankenski.

I've heard the durability of the frankenskis haven't been that great but I've also heard that the newer models are more durable whats your opinion on the durability aspect because I know that the on3ps are solid. Also moments are undeniably sexy looking lol

 

[SagoCabala]

*obligatory masturbational ON3P post*

seriously though ON3P makes fucking great skis. super solid construction and incredibly fun to ski. btw, you HAVE to mount filthy riches center since they are a symmetrical ski, otherwise they won't ski well. I'm 5'10" 145lbs (I'm a skinny bitch, I know) and I ski the 176. I would not recommend going under 176 for you, especially due to the rocker profile on them. a 171 will feel waaaaaaaaaay to small unless you're used to skiing on skiblades, which I assume you're not.

they are very fun and floaty when the snow is nice, but I do have to say they aren't the GREATEST outside of the park when the snow is moderate/bad (i.e. they are pretty much pure park), so if you are just getting into it and want a ski you can take in and out of the park, I'd check out the ON3P kartel 98 as well. I've never skied them personally, but I know a lot of people love them in and out of the park.

someone posted on an on3p gear talk thread for 2016-2017 and apparently theyre discontinuing the prestors and filthy riches and replacing them with a 90 underfoot "magnus" what is your opinion on this?

 

[hot.pocket]

I've heard the durability of the frankenskis haven't been that great but I've also heard that the newer models are more durable whats your opinion on the durability aspect because I know that the on3ps are solid. Also moments are undeniably sexy looking lol

The first time around we tried some ridiculous edge step up with a separate piece of edge underfoot, turned out terrible. After that we've gone to a traditional full length piece of edge.

I've ridden mine for a good 20+ days in the park and I am not nice to them, rocks, trees, disasters, I beat them up pretty good in a normal day. No edge cracks yet, no terrible base gashes, barely any chipping on the topsheet. We added semi cap to the topsheet, which has reduced the chipping by a great margin.

ON3Ps have a great track record of being a solidly built ski, but it comes at a price. More durable materials mean a heavier ski overall. Nothing that's going to ruin the performance of the ski, just different choices in materials create different styles of skis. Between the ON3Ps and the Frankenskis, I'm sure you'll be over the top happy with whatever you decide upon.

 

[SagoCabala]

The first time around we tried some ridiculous edge step up with a separate piece of edge underfoot, turned out terrible. After that we've gone to a traditional full length piece of edge.

I've ridden mine for a good 20+ days in the park and I am not nice to them, rocks, trees, disasters, I beat them up pretty good in a normal day. No edge cracks yet, no terrible base gashes, barely any chipping on the topsheet. We added semi cap to the topsheet, which has reduced the chipping by a great margin.

ON3Ps have a great track record of being a solidly built ski, but it comes at a price. More durable materials mean a heavier ski overall. Nothing that's going to ruin the performance of the ski, just different choices in materials create different styles of skis. Between the ON3Ps and the Frankenskis, I'm sure you'll be over the top happy with whatever you decide upon.

Cool thank you that was probably my biggest worry about the frankenskis thanks!

 

[macavity]

someone posted on an on3p gear talk thread for 2016-2017 and apparently theyre discontinuing the prestors and filthy riches and replacing them with a 90 underfoot "magnus" what is your opinion on this?

I heard that, I suppose it's official now. I don't think the presters were all that popular, so that doesn't really affect me. as far as the filthy riches go, I heard that most guys on the ON3P team actually rode kartel 98s over the filthies (idk how true this is but I heard it multiple times), so I think it's good. allegedly they gave a lot of control over the design to magnus, so I think the new skis will reflect his style of skiing a lot more. I don't think they will be all that different, honestly. if they are 90 underfoot, that's only 2mm wider than the current filthy rich, and I doubt the tip and tail will be much different. it'll probably be a better ski than the filthy rich when all is said and done.

 

[macavity]

someone posted on an on3p gear talk thread for 2016-2017 and apparently theyre discontinuing the prestors and filthy riches and replacing them with a 90 underfoot "magnus" what is your opinion on this?

I heard that, I suppose it's official now. I don't think the presters were all that popular, so that doesn't really affect me. as far as the filthy riches go, I heard that most guys on the ON3P team actually rode kartel 98s over the filthies (idk how true this is but I heard it multiple times), so I think it's good. allegedly they gave a lot of control over the design to magnus, so I think the new skis will reflect his style of skiing a lot more. I don't think they will be all that different, honestly. if they are 90 underfoot, that's only 2mm wider than the current filthy rich, and I doubt the tip and tail will be much different. it'll probably be a better ski than the filthy rich when all is said and done.

actually read up on them, seems like they are going to be completely different than the FR. but from the looks of it, they'll be an amazing ski.

 

[SagoCabala]

actually read up on them, seems like they are going to be completely different than the FR. but from the looks of it, they'll be an amazing ski.

Okay thanks for the input man I'll read up on it!

 

[macavity]

Okay thanks for the input man I'll read up on it!

no problem, happy to help!

 

[Swandog7]

NS fucking loves their ON3Ps, I can't speak for them personally but just wait another 5 minutes and 20 people will come in ranting and raving about them.

Vice for jumping 65% rails 35%, early rise in the tip / tail give a playful nature to it without compromising the grip in turns / landings of big jumps.

Frankenski for 65% rails 35% jumps, Triple Camber holds up in the craziest of carving turns, and full bamboo core gives a nice buttery flex to the ski without turning it into a noodle piece of garbage.

I ski the Frankenski throughout Tahoe's parks on the regular and if you want a playful ski for the park that'll still hold up if you venture out, I would recommend the Frankenski.

Do you mean Vice 65% rails 35% jumps, Frankenski 65% jumps 35% rails? I got about 75 days on my vice and thats how i feel about them. The triple camber on the Frankenski would give it more stability for jumps? The Vice is really nimble, really quick, and rockered. I know your the expert, and I've never ridden the frankenski, but I love my Vice no matter what I'm hitting, though I'm like 80% rails 20% jumps. I guess thats just my personal opinion.

 

[shin-bang]

*obligatory masturbational ON3P post*

seriously though ON3P makes fucking great skis. super solid construction and incredibly fun to ski. btw, you HAVE to mount filthy riches center since they are a symmetrical ski, otherwise they won't ski well. I'm 5'10" 145lbs (I'm a skinny bitch, I know) and I ski the 176. I would not recommend going under 176 for you, especially due to the rocker profile on them. a 171 will feel waaaaaaaaaay to small unless you're used to skiing on skiblades

Not trying to be a prude, but you do not have to mount all Symetrical skis at true center. Depending on what that person wants to be riding.

But as in ops case, if you plan on doing lots of rails and jumps, true center is the way to roll

 

[s-hand]

If you do go with the filthies, I would highly recommend considering the 181. I'm 5'8, 140lbs and thats what I ride. Due to the immense rocker, even the 181s ski a little shorter than I would like.

 

[supersquid]

Vice is going to be slightly stiffer with an Aspen / Ash core, as it's more of our jumping park ski. It still has early rise in the tip and tail, so while butters might not come as easily as they do on the Frankenski, it's not hard at all to throw a bit of margarine into your riding.

Frankenski definitely flexes whenever the @$#% you want it to, but Triple Camber helps you really hold an edge when you need to. The Frank is built more around jibbing and buttering, but I've never had a problem hitting large jumps with them.

I love my vices and am going to buy them again this summer for COC. i also love my filthy riches. Have no experience with the frankenski. i woild imagine that the filthy riches would be more of an all mountain ski compared to the frankenski but still a great park slayer

 

[hot.pocket]

Do you mean Vice 65% rails 35% jumps, Frankenski 65% jumps 35% rails? I got about 75 days on my vice and thats how i feel about them. The triple camber on the Frankenski would give it more stability for jumps? The Vice is really nimble, really quick, and rockered. I know your the expert, and I've never ridden the frankenski, but I love my Vice no matter what I'm hitting, though I'm like 80% rails 20% jumps. I guess thats just my personal opinion.

The general consensus is that the stiffer ski is the jumping ski while the flexy ski is the jib ski. That's usually how I'll go describing the two to people just based off characteristics. This by no means that the Vice won't handle rails like a boss or that the Frankenski won't hold up on huge jumps. I mean Frej was doing huge double 7's on massive booters on the Frankenski a year or two ago. We used to have a more dedicated jump ski (The Jib / Team) which was full camber and stiff AF but now we've transitioned to the Vice / Frank combo.

Both work great on jumps and rails, just one is stiffer and one is softer so we market one as a jump ski and one as a jib ski.

 

[Swandog7]

The general consensus is that the stiffer ski is the jumping ski while the flexy ski is the jib ski. That's usually how I'll go describing the two to people just based off characteristics. This by no means that the Vice won't handle rails like a boss or that the Frankenski won't hold up on huge jumps. I mean Frej was doing huge double 7's on massive booters on the Frankenski a year or two ago. We used to have a more dedicated jump ski (The Jib / Team) which was full camber and stiff AF but now we've transitioned to the Vice / Frank combo.

Both work great on jumps and rails, just one is stiffer and one is softer so we market one as a jump ski and one as a jib ski.

Gotcha, I understand that, I was going by more rocker/camber than flex. The Vice is a rail ripper if anyone is looking at them. Jumps are pretty dam fun too

 

[SagoCabala]

Gotcha, I understand that, I was going by more rocker/camber than flex. The Vice is a rail ripper if anyone is looking at them. Jumps are pretty dam fun too

Hows the vice out of the park? Because its pretty narrow underfoot, It seems like an awesome park ski but in case you were say with your gf and had to do something other than park that day how would it hold up?

 

[macavity]

Not trying to be a prude, but you do not have to mount all Symetrical skis at true center. Depending on what that person wants to be riding.

But as in ops case, if you plan on doing lots of rails and jumps, true center is the way to roll

obviously I could mount them -15cm back from center, or on the noses of the skis even, but why would you mount them anywhere but center? the filthy rich is pretty much a designated park ski, there would be no purpose to mount them anywhere else. they're engineered to be ridden at center.

 

[hot.pocket]

Hows the vice out of the park? Because its pretty narrow underfoot, It seems like an awesome park ski but in case you were say with your gf and had to do something other than park that day how would it hold up?

They'll work just fine, I've got plenty of friends that ski the vice all over Kirkwood without a problem. Obviously they're not going to shred as well as a dedicated all mountain ski, but for a park ski they handle the rest of the mountain without too much trouble.

 

[Swandog7]

Hows the vice out of the park? Because its pretty narrow underfoot, It seems like an awesome park ski but in case you were say with your gf and had to do something other than park that day how would it hold up?

For the specs they have they ski alright. Fun in trees because they are nimble. Not great in soft stuff. They will do for groomers and such for a day.

 

[SagoCabala]

They'll work just fine, I've got plenty of friends that ski the vice all over Kirkwood without a problem. Obviously they're not going to shred as well as a dedicated all mountain ski, but for a park ski they handle the rest of the mountain without too much trouble.

For the specs they have they ski alright. Fun in trees because they are nimble. Not great in soft stuff. They will do for groomers and such for a day.

Thanks guys, appreciate it

 

[SagoCabala]

They'll work just fine, I've got plenty of friends that ski the vice all over Kirkwood without a problem. Obviously they're not going to shred as well as a dedicated all mountain ski, but for a park ski they handle the rest of the mountain without too much trouble.

Because the Frankenski is 92 underfoot and after skiing it do you think it would fare that much better out of the park than the vice?

 

[hot.pocket]

Because the Frankenski is 92 underfoot and after skiing it do you think it would fare that much better out of the park than the vice?

They're going to fare just about the same, depends on whether you like a softer or stiffer ski.

The Vice is stiffer which is going to give you a little more control at high speeds but the Frank has Triple Camber, which is going to help bite into the hardpack a little better than the Vice.

At the end of the day, they're both park skis. They'll handle stuff outside the park just fine, but if you're looking for more of a park / all mountain ski, check out the PB&J.

 

[RudyGarmisch]

*obligatory masturbational ON3P post*

This should probably be applied before all of my posts.

The Magnus reflects some of the changes and further understanding when it comes to park skis recently - a non symmetrical park ski simply does better riding switch because you ride switch in an entirely different stance and position than forward. You saw symmetrical park skis because it was understood that something needed to be different. Now comes the second generation with even better understanding, and that design is asymmetrical, as you should would expect.

I am very, very stoked for the Magnus.

 

[SagoCabala]

This should probably be applied before all of my posts.

The Magnus reflects some of the changes and further understanding when it comes to park skis recently - a non symmetrical park ski simply does better riding switch because you ride switch in an entirely different stance and position than forward. You saw symmetrical park skis because it was understood that something needed to be different. Now comes the second generation with even better understanding, and that design is asymmetrical, as you should would expect.

I am very, very stoked for the Magnus.

How would the kartel 98's compare to these skis in terms of weight, and ease of learning how to ski park? I live in so cal and a lot of the time the snows going to be pretty shitty so I don't need that wide of a ski, but occasionally I'll want to go down some more demanding terrain to change it up on occasion, but, I figure if I do do off trail in a an area like Utah or Colorado for example I would just demo skis, and leave these newer park skis at home potentially the moment vices/frankenskis or these new magnus's you're referring too. I've heard that the Kartel 98 can do just about anything so I'm curious what your thoughts are about the kartel vs the new magnus

 

[shin-bang]

obviously I could mount them -15cm back from center, or on the noses of the skis even, but why would you mount them anywhere but center? the filthy rich is pretty much a designated park ski, there would be no purpose to mount them anywhere else. they're engineered to be ridden at center.

Duh you can mount them wherever nub. I have 3 designated park skis all Symetrical, and I like the way the one pair rides more at -1.25 . I ride the whole mountain, cliffs, jibs, rails, and jumps.

It's personal preference. Pure park, I would definitely go center. If if he plans on riding everywhere, op may consider going -1.

Also what you and lots of others dont take into account, is ramp angle and forward lean. too much of both, and a center mounted ski will have you going over the handle bars more often than what you're used to.

 

[SagoCabala]

Duh you can mount them wherever nub. I have 3 designated park skis all Symetrical, and I like the way the one pair rides more at -1.25 . I ride the whole mountain, cliffs, jibs, rails, and jumps.

It's personal preference. Pure park, I would definitely go center. If if he plans on riding everywhere, op may consider going -1.

Also what you and lots of others dont take into account, is ramp angle and forward lean. too much of both, and a center mounted ski will have you going over the handle bars more often than what you're used to.

Cool thanks for your help! How much does mounting perfectly center affect riding outside of park? I demoed Armada Arvtis (probably more similar to the Kartel 98's) at Alta and believe the were -1 not sure though, and they worked fairly well, but since Alta doesn't have a park I wasn't able to try them on any jumps. The set up worked well on everything on the mountain though

 

[shin-bang]

Cool thanks for your help! How much does mounting perfectly center affect riding outside of park? I demoed Armada Arvtis (probably more similar to the Kartel 98's) at Alta and believe the were -1 not sure though, and they worked fairly well, but since Alta doesn't have a park I wasn't able to try them on any jumps. The set up worked well on everything on the mountain though

Really depends on your style. True center won't effect carving on groomers much at all. the differences I notice are more in moguls, variable condition snow, and blasting through crud. For me, mounting slightly back allows me to drive the ski more, and gives me more confidence.

However, as a pure park ski, none of that really matters, because you'll be in the park on rails and jumps. And In that case, id go true center.

If if you're worried about mounting points on the Filtby, PM iggyskier

good luck. Cheers

 

[SagoCabala]

Really depends on your style. True center won't effect carving on groomers much at all. the differences I notice are more in moguls, variable condition snow, and blasting through crud. For me, mounting slightly back allows me to drive the ski more, and gives me more confidence.

However, as a pure park ski, none of that really matters, because you'll be in the park on rails and jumps. And In that case, id go true center.

If if you're worried about mounting points on the Filtby, PM iggyskier

good luck. Cheers

Ok man, appreciate your help!

 

[Swandog7]

Forgot to mention, go for the 176 On3P, or 178 Moment

 

[SagoCabala]

Forgot to mention, go for the 176 On3P, or 178 Moment

Thanks!

 

[SagoCabala]

Forgot to mention, go for the 176 On3P, or 178 Moment

If I were to purchase a ski with all camber rather than a ski with an early rise rocker, would I be better off with the ski being 170 or 180? Thanks! I know a ski with rocker at 170 would feel really short but with all camber would the ski ski longer?

 

[Foley1221]

someone posted on an on3p gear talk thread for 2016-2017 and apparently theyre discontinuing the prestors and filthy riches and replacing them with a 90 underfoot "magnus" what is your opinion on this?

The presters werent that popular and on3p is mostly known for there rockered skis so thats probably y they were discontinued. And as for the filthy rich replacing it with the magnus isnt bad. As it is a bit wider than the filthy rich u will have more ski underfoot for rails and jumps and also will help in deeper snow. It will mostly likely have the same rocker flex/camber as the filthy rich. The most signifigant change is that it doesnt have simmetrical sidecut like the filthy rich. But this isnt a bad thing. If u think abt it u dont ski switch the same way as u do forward so it makes sense for the tip and tails to have different widths. Overall the magnus should be a good solid replacement of the filthy rich.