2015-2016 ON3P Jeffrey 114

Alex Adams and Jonathan Ellsworth review the ON3P Jeffrey 114 for Blister Gear Review
ON3P Jeffrey 114

Ski: 2015-2016 ON3P Jeffrey 114, 186cm

Stated Dimensions: 141-114-133

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 141-114-133

Actual Tip-to-Tail Length (straight tape pull): 186.8cm

Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 2211 & 2208 grams

Stated Sidecut Radius: 24.9 meters

Tip / Tail Splay (ski decambered): ~79mm / ~67mm

Factory Recommended Line: -4.6cm from center; ~88.8cm from tail

Mount Location: Recommended Line

Boots / Bindings: Fischer RC4 130 / Marker Jester (DIN at 11)

Test Location: Taos Ski Valley

We’ve been getting a ton of requests to review the ON3P Jeffrey 114, and it turns out that there were some very good reasons for people to be so curious.

We didn’t get the ski till late in the season, but two of us with very different skiing styles got time on the Jeffrey 114, and both of us came away impressed.

(I’m a decidedly directional skier, while new Blister reviewer, Alex Adams, is one hell of a directional skier who also loves tricking natural features, hitting jumps and rails in the park, and jibbing around the mountain.)

We look forward to getting more time on this ski, but we’ve already managed to get a very good sense of what it’s about.

ON3P says the Jeffrey is designed “for the freeride-minded skier who wants his soft snow skis to have a backbone, who understands that stability is an ally, and can’t worry about their skis failing along the way.”

As we noted in our preview of the Jeffrey 114, its weight (~2210 grams per ski in the 186cm length) and full bamboo core certainly suggested that it could be a strong contender in the “playful charger” category of all-mountain / powder skis … and it is.

Alex Adams and Jonathan Ellsworth review the ON3P Jeffrey 114 for Blister Gear Review
Alex Adams on the ON3P Jeffrey 114, Taos Ski Valley. (#checkmeowt)

Flex Pattern

Jonathan: When handflexing the ski, the Jeffrey 114 feels quite symmetrical, and very similar to the 186cm Blizzard Gunsmoke (a ski that we’ll be referencing quite a bit).

Both skis have medium/soft tails that ramp up in stiffness toward the center of the ski. The Gunsmoke ramps up slightly stiffer than the Jeffrey from the tail toward the center of the ski, but the difference isn’t huge by any means.

Having said that, handflexing the Jeffrey doesn’t tell the whole story…

Alex: As a matter of habit, I usually get off the chairlift first run of the day and flex my skis back and forth. I do this often, not just when I’m trying out a new pair.

I flexed into a nose press on the Jeffreys without a problem. Then I flexed into a tail press, and had the sensation that I was about to fall over backwards. As I found out during the rest of my afternoon on the skis, the flex—specifically in the tail of the skis—takes a little getting used to. There is a soft tail back there, but you only activate it by flexing past the stiff underfoot section. It’s like there is a “tipping point” in that you’re putting your weight back and not much happens because you are flexing the stiff part of the ski, and then you move back just a little bit more (past that tipping point) and boom, the ski bends with ease.

Jonathan and I both agree that this is easy to adjust to, but it just caught me a little off guard when I first got on the skis.


Jonathan: To Alex’s point, it took me all of two runs to get comfortable on this ski. And the more I skied it, the more I liked it.

Prior to getting on the Jeffrey 114, I’d been skiing a ton of relatively stiff, decidedly directional skis. And the Jeffrey 114 really does want you to play. So there was a bit of an adjustment to be made.

(I’ve said it before: this experience drove home to me all over again how useless it is to do 1 or 2 run ski reviews, which is still how many publications conduct their reviews. In fact, one of our reviewers was recently riding a chairlift with a couple of reviewers from some other review publication, who said that the magazine pairs up each reviewer with another reviewer that has the same boot size, so that they can switch skis half way down and review two skis every lap. What a remarkably efficient, incredibly useless way to review skis.)

The Jeffrey 114 is a good carver. It is not, however, a ski that encourages you to get out all over the shovel. Again, coming off of the stiffer, directional skis that I’d been skiing, this required a bit of an adjustment. But once I made the adjustment, I had a lot of fun carving these around softer spring groomers.

So no, the Jeffrey 114 won’t let you drive it like a traditional ski, it wants you to carve the ski from a centered stance, using the stiffer portion of the ski underfoot. So rather than drive the shovels hard, I could throw the skis far out to the side and still hit high edge angles, I just needed to deliberately work the ski side to side, and the ski would respond with solid edge hold. It required a bit of an adjustment, but the result was a really good time on soft groomers.

Alex: I agree with Jonathan here. The Jeffrey 114 has a very fun feel to it. You can flex it more easily into a carve at slower speeds than you can on a true charging ski (e.g., the Liberty Variant 113), and it really does hold an edge quite well. I never felt my skis try to drift or slip out, and I was able to keep them comfortably in control the whole time.

Furthermore, I was impressed by how easy it was to throw on the brakes when things got sketchy.

Hot Pow / Spring Slush

Alex: In these conditions, the Jeffrey 114 was really solid, all around the mountain. I’ve yet to ski an ON3P ski that wasn’t quite good in variable conditions, and the Jeffrey 114 is no exception. Point ‘em or throw some slushy carves in there, the Jeffrey felt at home.

I was curious to see if I would notice much tip flopping or folding while straight-lining chopped up snow (trying to get a comparison to floppy K2 Hellbents), and I hardly noticed. Sure, the tips give more than a true charging ski, but the effect felt negligible.

Jonathan: To be clear, ON3P doesn’t position the Jeffrey 114 as some badass charger—they just say that it’s a pow ski with a backbone. And that’s true. This is not a demanding ski, but from a centered-stance, you can push it quite hard, and the ski feels quick and substantial, without feeling demanding.


Jonathan: In soft, spring bumps, the Jeffrey 114 is a lot of fun—it’s easy to pivot, and like most more center-mounted skis, they are quick. In icy bumps, I doubt the width of these skis would be doing you any favors, but in anything soft, I was happy skiing these.

Alex: I felt the same. For a ski this size, it was actually pretty easy to pivot and turn quickly.

I did find that a positive, forward stance made a huge difference with this ski in the bumps. After getting sent to the back seat from hitting an awkward mogul, I had a couple unpleasant turns. Consciously moving my stance forward again, I regained full control and was able to cruise through the rest of the bumps in the run. This is just to say this ski really benefits from a positive stance when the terrain gets rough.

Jonathan: Yep, as we’ve pointed out—and unlike the Blister / Bibby Pro—the Jeffrey 114 isn’t going to be too accommodating if you get back on the tails. Those tails (and tips) are relatively soft, and they’re relatively soft for a reason…

NEXT: In the Air, Landings, and Comparisons (Blizzard Gunsmoke & Moment Blister Pro)

18 comments on “2015-2016 ON3P Jeffrey 114”

    • Thanks, Eric – we talk about the mount point throughout the review, but in short: I really liked the recommended line, and don’t have much interest in getting more forward. -4.6cm of center is more forward than where I have my 190 Bibbys mounted, and is much further forward than the ‘directional chargers’ I spend a lot of time riding.

      Alex, however, would go at least +1 and maybe +2 of the line, and suggests doing so if you’re going to be skiing switch or spinning much.

  1. Hey Guys,

    Great review. Could either of you comment on the differences between this ski and the Mr. Pollards Opus? Would it be a fair to say the Jeffery might be the middle ground between the Opus and the Blister/Bibby Pro?


    • I haven’t skied the Opus, but according to Jason Hutchins (see his review), the 185 Opus is a very soft ski. So between the Opus and the Bibby, I am confident that the Jeffrey would sit closer to the Bibby than the Opus. There is no ‘charger’ in the Opus – it’s pure play. That isn’t to say that some people can’t ski the Opus very hard, but if you can rally the Opus through variable snow, that says more about your balance and skiing ability than what the Opus was optimized to do – trick and spin.

      As ON3P says, the Jeffrey has a backbone. So for pure play, I imagine the Opus wins. But as we say, if you’re looking for a ski that will allow you to trick AND go ski hard all around the mountain – and in variable snow – so far, the Jeffrey hits that mix incredibly well.

  2. Sounds like the Jeffrey sits closer to the Deathwish than the Blister Pro.
    How do the Jeffrey and the Deathwish compare?
    Still looking for the 108 under foot PB&J, Blister Pro…
    As the Bibby Pro is back can´t you talk Moment into building this Ski as the new Blister Pro?
    Do You think the Kartel 106 would do the trick?

    • Maybe, Hias – but the problem is that I’ve yet to ski the 190 Deathwish, only the 184. (And yes, this is stupid – there were about 15 days this past season that were going to be the day I finally took out the 190s. But we have a lot of skis we’re trying to get on…)

      Having said that, the 184 Deathwish and the 186 Jeffrey are definitely not more similar than the Jeffrey and the 190 Bibby – read Will Brown’s comments in his review of the 190 Deathwish re: the 184 vs. the 190.

      So what I can safely say is that if you’re considering the Jeffrey or the Deathwish, you ought to be considering the 186 Jeffrey and the 190 Deathwish.

      And still, the fatter tips and tails of the Jeffrey are closer to those of the Bibby than the Deathwish – the Jeffrey & Bibby feel more like pow skis that work really well as all-mountain skis, while the Deathwish feels like an all-mountain ski that doesn’t particularly shine in pow.

      As for a PBJ-meets-Bibby at 108mm underfoot, it seems to me that Moment is already basically building that ski, but it’s a couple millimeters wider, and it’s called the Deathwish.

      As for the Kartel 106, that might be the ski you’re looking for, but we’ve still yet to ski it, evidently because God (or Scott Andrus?) hates Will Brown. Dunno. Maybe someday…

  3. Hi Jonathan
    It’s been a while since I’ve seen a review by Jason Hutchins, which is a shame because I generally like his takes as a less directional, more jibby skier, and I would have been interested to know what he thinks about a number of new skis from this year (new Bent Chetler, Magnum Opus, a couple of Faction skis he had written he’d test). Is he still writing for Blister? Any chance he’ll post about the skis he’s skied this winter?

    • Hi, Henri – Jason’s still writing for us, but unfortunately, his graduate school work has really been getting in the way this season. So we’ve lightened his review load a bit out of necessity. (Stupid higher education.) Plus, as Jason kept apologizing for / complaining about, it was a pretty bad snow year in the Wasatch, and if your schedule didn’t permit you to catch just the right days, you were pretty out of luck. So Jason has had the Magnum Opus, but I’m not sure how much time he’s been able to put on it. (Come to think of it, I owe Jason a phone call…) But I promise, this isn’t the last you’ll have heard from Jason.

      But in other eerie / funny news, Alex Adams (who did this co-review with me) is basically Jason’s doppleganger. It’s unbelievable, and it probably warrants it’s own article on Blister. But Alex’s favorite ski of all time is the Sickle, and he LOVES the OG K2 Hellbent — same as Jason. Watching them ski (or ride bikes), the consensus comment is that it’s the closest thing to watching Jason ski or ride that we’ve seen. All that to say, it sounds like you should pay close attention to Alex’s comments on this stuff, too.

  4. Great review again and really helpful comparison to the Gunsmoke which I thought was a great ski and one a great many peeps can relate to … Two quick ones. I know you may have ended up with the wrong flex / tune on the Praxis MVP but have you got any summary thoughts on how these two compare? Fall line charging vs. jibbiness … Trying to size myself in the Jeffrey and interested what size you think these ski vs. a 184 Blister/Bibby Pro or 185 Helldorado. Review reads like I may be able to go either 181 or 186cm but curious whether you think they ski short given rocker profile or pretty bang on? I’m 5’9 / 180lbs

    • Thanks, Tom. As for MVP / Jeffrey comparisons … not really. After the quick adjustments that both Alex and I made on the Jeffrey, that ski just felt intuitive everywhere. And “intuitive” was never a word that came to mind for me when skiing our particular iteration of the MVP.

      But as for sizing, I don’t have any reluctance in recommending the 186 at your weight, though I don’t know how/where you ski. But the 186 Jeffrey is not a handful. I actually toured yesterday on the 184cm Blister Pro (I don’t think I’ve skied a 184cm Bibby since 2011), and while I still think the 190 Bibby is probably the better comparison to the 186 Jeffrey, I don’t believe that anybody that is comfortably skiing the 184 Bibby or the 185 Helldorado will feel out of place on the 186 Jeffrey, or ought to move down to the 181 Jeffrey. The Jeffrey has a lot of tip & tail rocker – i.e., short effective edge – and it isn’t a heavy ski in the category.

  5. Would Alex do second take on the 181 Sickle even though the ski is out of production? Lots of viewers were confused about the 181 vs 186 Sickle. Good to hear Jason is still in the fold. Will Utah have better snow when he graduates?

  6. Great review as always. These are topping my list for next season along with the J ski friend, 4frnt YLE, and gunsmoke. Any chance you’re going to get some runs on the J’s or the YLE’s this year? Would love to see comparisons or those too.

  7. Jonathan,

    My season ended in April with a horrific fall that was an angels breath from fatal but now that I can feel again I keep checking my mail for the tickets I’m sure you sent me to hook up in Portillo with a quiver of ON3P’s finest. I’ve got to get back on the horse at some point and Roca Jack looks like it’s hitting. I’m sending you a stamp in case you spent all your money on my tickets so I’ll check the mail again soon and see you there.

    Big K

  8. Hi Blister,

    Really enjoyed the review! I was wondering if you were going to get a chance to ski the Jeffrey 122 in the same length or if you already have experience on it? I really like the sound of how the Jeffrey 114 performs and ON3P Skis in general but am looking for a more pow oriented ski to fill my quiver. Would you be able to provide any performance comparisons of the two Jeffrey skis? Any help would be great!



  9. Good reviews here you guys. I just recently moved to So Oregon from the Tahoe scene and am finding the skis I have are just too big for Mt Ashland (for example: Praxis BPS, LibTech Pow). I’m to the bottom in seconds. These Jeffrey 114 seem like the ticket though to being able to enjoy the mountain a little more. I love the “jibby all over the place” attitude these things seem to be wanting to give out… Just curious what is the height/weight of the reviewer? I am a fit 6’4″ 200lbr and am making the debate between the 186 and the 191. It seems like this area doesn’t really get many huge dumps and when it does it’s thick enough to cruise around on and not “in” if you get my meaning. Also, PNW style, it is pushed into piles / bumps pretty quick…

    Any thoughts on the 191 vs 186 for the smaller mountain (1000 vert) and my size combined? Would the 191 loose any of the 186 playfulness? Will it be more loose due to that softer tip and tail further out there?

    I generally ski fast (fwd/swch), hit cliffs, steeps, booters, natural features and play around on the hill like it’s my kids favorite play structure. Will I be diving over the front of the 186? I dig a center mount ski and want something to be like the Spatula was (center skied), but without the full on waterski effect (i’ve got some Praxis Pow boards for that…).

    Anyhow… shooting the breeze now. Thanks for any thoughts.

  10. The ON3P Jeffrey has me in intrigued. Was about to pull the trigger on Line SFB. I’m a big Nordica Soul Rider fan and wanted something wider with the same charactericstics. Any thoughts? I’m 5’10” about 155lbs, lightweight.

Leave a Comment