ON3P new ski widths

whatsamonad

whatsamonad

Member
Does ON3P not make anything sub 102 anymore? Seems like they have no park ski at 90 anymore, and no Jeffrey at 96 anymore…

Is this permanent? Why did they change it? 102 is pushing it on too wide for every day east coast use
 
It’s definitely not too wide for the east coast. It’s too wide for east coast skiers who don’t know how to ski because they all think that you need to be skiing skis that are 75mm underfoot…. My daily in New Hampshire is 106 and the only time I ski anything narrower is if I’m skiing purely jumps one day. They still offer the Jeffrey 96 and the Mango 90 in customs anyway
 
From my understanding, Since magnus left they haven’t had the mango/magnus model available unless thru a custom order which is very annoying. Hopefully they will be available for a lower price soon. I’d also like someone to review the 110 mango
 
14384869:animator said:
It’s definitely not too wide for the east coast. It’s too wide for east coast skiers who don’t know how to ski because they all think that you need to be skiing skis that are 75mm underfoot…. My daily in New Hampshire is 106 and the only time I ski anything narrower is if I’m skiing purely jumps one day. They still offer the Jeffrey 96 and the Mango 90 in customs anyway
Click to expand...

So you’re telling me you enjoy riding on ice instability and washing out on turns for all mountain at 106 when it’s icy out. 106 is way to wide for regular east coast days 80-mid 90s is the sweet spot over here
 
14384871:switchlip2 said:
From my understanding, Since magnus left they haven’t had the mango/magnus model available unless thru a custom order which is very annoying. Hopefully they will be available for a lower price soon. I’d also like someone to review the 110 mango
Click to expand...

The Crushin Cans is a Magnus 102.

Scott said in a blister podcast they put everything under 100 in the custom due to sales metric's. They simply don't sell many.
 
14384928:AMango99 said:
So you’re telling me you enjoy riding on ice instability and washing out on turns for all mountain at 106 when it’s icy out. 106 is way to wide for regular east coast days 80-mid 90s is the sweet spot over here
Click to expand...

This, i have my daily is 87 and if we get 3+ inches of fresh stuff ill go 98. I really see no point in going 105+, any major dump will get skiid off in a couple hours most places
 
14384928:AMango99 said:
So you’re telling me you enjoy riding on ice instability and washing out on turns for all mountain at 106 when it’s icy out. 106 is way to wide for regular east coast days 80-mid 90s is the sweet spot over here
Click to expand...

What I’m saying is that there is a very common misconception as to how waist width effects edge hold…. Shape and rocker profile have a much bigger impact on how well a ski holds an edge. When it’s icy no ski short of a slalom ski will actually dig in anyway. When it comes to normal groomers, I can carve a 106 just as easily as a 95. It’s definitely not “way too wide.”
 
14385041:animator said:
What I’m saying is that there is a very common misconception as to how waist width effects edge hold…. Shape and rocker profile have a much bigger impact on how well a ski holds an edge. When it’s icy no ski short of a slalom ski will actually dig in anyway. When it comes to normal groomers, I can carve a 106 just as easily as a 95. It’s definitely not “way too wide.”
Click to expand...

I definitely agree that edge hold is mostly about rocker profile and shape. However, that doesn’t change the fact that a 105 ski is unnecessarily wide for east coast. Can you ski it well, especially with a less aggressive rocker for edge hold? Absolutely. Is it unnecessary for 90% of east days? Yes.

**This post was edited on Jan 24th 2022 at 10:53:51am
 
topic:whatsamonad said:
Does ON3P not make anything sub 102 anymore? Seems like they have no park ski at 90 anymore, and no Jeffrey at 96 anymore…

Is this permanent? Why did they change it? 102 is pushing it on too wide for every day east coast use
Click to expand...

Custom mango 100s and 90s r there
 
Waist width is definitely not the issue for on3ps, I have jeffery 96s that blow on hard snow and 104 sfbs that are way nicer on hard snow for carving due to the taper and rocker differences. The only advantage a narrower ski that doesnt carve as well will offer is an easier time doing tech rail tricks and faster edge to edge in sketchy situations where there is good grip which isn't something most people are after.

Fatter skis also have more leverage on your knees on hardpack when railing turns and now that im getting older and have some lingering injuries from my youth I can really feel the difference between a 104 ski and something narrower underfoot. Even my fis sl skis hurt my knees less these days then my sfbs just cause the waist is like 40mm narrower even though the fis skis are way more aggressive and I do like twice as many turns every run. An on3p wont really rail turns so you might as well just take the extra float.

Aka at the end of the day on3ps are gonna suck for carving on hard snow so its not surprising the lowest non custom waist width is creeping up especially with all the covid effects on how many skis they can make a season. Its definitely not a brand with skis that are designed for daily use while east coast skiing so they might as well focus production on the skis that have wider appeal/width.
 
14385137:Mortbrokemyskis said:
Waist width is definitely not the issue for on3ps, I have jeffery 96s that blow on hard snow and 104 sfbs that are way nicer on hard snow for carving due to the taper and rocker differences. The only advantage a narrower ski that doesnt carve as well will offer is an easier time doing tech rail tricks and faster edge to edge in sketchy situations where there is good grip which isn't something most people are after.

Fatter skis also have more leverage on your knees on hardpack when railing turns and now that im getting older and have some lingering injuries from my youth I can really feel the difference between a 104 ski and something narrower underfoot. Even my fis sl skis hurt my knees less these days then my sfbs just cause the waist is like 40mm narrower even though the fis skis are way more aggressive and I do like twice as many turns every run. An on3p wont really rail turns so you might as well just take the extra float.

Aka at the end of the day on3ps are gonna suck for carving on hard snow so its not surprising the lowest non custom waist width is creeping up especially with all the covid effects on how many skis they can make a season. Its definitely not a brand with skis that are designed for daily use while east coast skiing so they might as well focus production on the skis that have wider appeal/width.
Click to expand...

True, east coast isn’t in their brand design. Still I love my pairs that I have from them. It would be hard for me to buy a different company’s skis considering how well built ON3Ps are. I don’t think anyone but moment matches their quality of materials, edge thickness, etc.
 
Definitely agree here.

I will say though, Id rather be on a Volkl RTM than any ON3P ski on those bulletproof days. Rocker profile and construction play the biggest role, however it’ll also be quicker edge to edge

14385041:animator said:
What I’m saying is that there is a very common misconception as to how waist width effects edge hold…. Shape and rocker profile have a much bigger impact on how well a ski holds an edge. When it’s icy no ski short of a slalom ski will actually dig in anyway. When it comes to normal groomers, I can carve a 106 just as easily as a 95. It’s definitely not “way too wide.”
Click to expand...
 
Worth a listen:https://blisterreview.com/podcasts/on3p-skis-22-23-lineup-with-scott-andrus-ep-177

Re: waist width and east/west/ice, width is only one element in ski design. Generally wider is harder to carve and get good edge bite but it is more of a generality than a hard rule. It also depends on technique and your style more than the ski. I'm just glad that we have our pick of wide/narrow/soft/stiff/rockered/camber. When many of us started skiing there were way fewer options.
 
Have you heard of the Midwest
14384869:animator said:
It’s definitely not too wide for the east coast. It’s too wide for east coast skiers who don’t know how to ski because they all think that you need to be skiing skis that are 75mm underfoot…. My daily in New Hampshire is 106 and the only time I ski anything narrower is if I’m skiing purely jumps one day. They still offer the Jeffrey 96 and the Mango 90 in customs anyway
Click to expand...
 
They probably don't sell any. Anybody "out west" who is looking into ON3P almost certainly wants something wider than 102, or minimum 102. Anybody on the east coast is probably a swerve lord and wants to ride pow skis all the time, or just wants to ride a wider ski.

My Line SFBs carve fine, not that I ski them on the east coast. I have Magnus and I don't really see any benefits in going wider. If I want serious carving performance I have slalom skis for that, which are like 68mm waist or something and actually have sharp edges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top