2017-2018 ON3P Wrenegade 108

Jonathan Ellsworth reviews the ON3P Wrenegade 108 for Blister Gear Review
2017-2018 ON3P Wrenegade 108

Ski: 2017-2018 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 184 cm

Available Lengths: 179, 184, 189 cm

Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 184.65 cm

Stated Weight per Ski: 2250 grams

Stated Dimensions: 138-108-126 mm

Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 138-109-125.5 mm

Stated Sidecut Radius: 27.5 meters

Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 81 mm / 29 mm

Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~2 mm

Core: 100% Bamboo

Base: 1.8 mm 4001 Durasurf Base

Factory Recommended Mount Point: -9.0 cm from center; ~83.35 cm from tail

Blister’s Recommended Mount Point: -9.0 from center

Boots / Bindings: 17/18 Lange RX 130 LV, Tyrolia Adrenalin Demos

Days Skied:

Paul Forward: 2

Jonathan Ellsworth: 5 (skied the past 2 spring trips at Bachelor)

Test Location: Mt Bachelor


About the Wrenegade 108, ON3P says, “The Wrenegade 108 remains the big gun with stability and speed as the name of the game, but our Freeride Rocker profile also provides the best float and maneuverability of any Wrenegade to date without overpowering the pilot. It’s truly in a class by itself.”

During our trip to Mt Bachelor this year I spent a couple of days riding the 17/18 ON3P Wrenegade in the 184 cm length. Jonathan Ellsworth also spent time on this ski a year ago in Bachelor, then got more time again on our recent trip. The Wrenegade 108 is unchanged for 17/18, so it’s time to weigh in with a full review.

Flex Pattern

We’d summarize the flex pattern of the Wrenegade 108 like this:

Tips: 6-7
Shovels: 7-8
Underfoot: 10
Behind the Heel piece: 9-8
Tails: 7-7

The tips of the Wrenegade are not stout. It’s a nice flex pattern, and pretty in line with skis like the Nordica Enforcer 110, or even the J Skis The Metal. So for those who still think “burly” when they think of the Wrenegade, that’s simply not true. Don’t think “burly,” think “nice.” And if you want truly stiff shovels, go check out our review of the HEAD Monster 108.

Initial impressions

My first impression of the Wrenegade 108 was that it looked a little short to me, and I was surprised by how much tip rocker it had for a ski of this width. But the ski has a nice flex pattern with a tail that feels supportive, so I was eager to get the ski out and around Bachelor.

Jonathan Ellsworth reviews the ON3P Wrenegade 108 for Blister Gear Review
Paul Forward on the ON3P Wrenegade 108, MT Bachelor, OR.

Refrozen, Bumpy Spring Conditions

Paul: One of the cool things about Mt Bachelor is that it offers pretty much 360 degrees of available skiing aspects, so during the spring diurnal cycle, you can work the aspects to get the best possible conditions throughout your ski day. On my first day on the Wrenegade 108 I messed up the timing a little, and ended up spinning a few laps on snow that hadn’t quite warmed up enough. While not the most fun skiing, it gave me the chance to feel out the Wrenegade 108 in firm, bumpy snow. I started a little tentatively, but quickly realized that the relatively long sidecut radius and supportive tail were quite forgiving, and allowed me to lay into some bumpy carved turns. When I needed to skid them sideways to control speed, the ski was intuitive and not the least bit hooky.

Several years ago, I skied on some ON3P skis where it felt like the flex and suspension of the ski didn’t seem to match the shape very well. Those days seem to be in the past now as the Wrenegade 108 felt quite smooth and composed in bumpy, firm stuff. In such conditions I’d say that the Wrenegade 108 still falls short of the Blizzard Cochise, and the Wrenegade doesn’t have the metal laminate feel of the Nordica Enforcer 110. But it still does quite well and remains composed even when I got a little reckless and let them run in places I probably shouldn’t have.

Jonathan: Yep, I’d agree with all of this. In difficult, firm conditions, the Wrenegade 108 never demonstrates any bad behavior. But if you’re interested in skiing very fast in such conditions, heavier skis with metal will remain more composed. But as soon as you get these skis into decent conditions or good conditions…

Optimal Spring Conditions

Paul: Once we figured out where and when to be on Mt Bachelor, we got into a bunch of super fun spring corn conditions, and the Wrenegade 108 allowed me to open up the speed and get into some more featured terrain. In these conditions, the Wrenegade 108 might have been the most fun ski of the trip for me (partly because almost every other ski I rode on this trip was 115+ underfoot, a little fat for these conditions), and allowed for dynamic carving, fun, slashy turns on rollovers, and decent pop for jumps and ollies. I had worried that the 184 cm version was too short for me, but the relatively stiff section behind the binding and the ~28 m sidecut radius made them feel longer than some other skis of this length when I needed a little extra support or got knocked into the backseat. (We’ll say more about length below.)

Jonathan: The 184 cm Wrenegade 108 is a very point-and-shoot type of ski for me, and a ski that just kind of works everywhere — especially when you get it into anything soft. While it’s a ski that is best suited for skiing at moderate or high speeds, it still works quite well at low speeds, for those times when you’re skiing in really tight trees or your legs are just shot at the end of the day. We’ll see how many times I can repeat myself throughout this review, but truly, this is one of the most versatile, most-forgiving “directional chargers” that we’ve skied.

NEXT: Groomers, Spring Slop / Hot Pow, Etc.

19 comments on “2017-2018 ON3P Wrenegade 108”

      • I stand corrected. Just thought there was a similarity in the way they ski: both float well (my 184 Dev pair have softened up a bit and float pretty dang well), ski super easy but can still charge to a certain speed. Different mount points of course. My guess is wren charges more in the traditional sense. 184 Dev ain’t much of a charger but is so manuverable it is pretty easy to ski relatively fast in soft conditions. So was thinking different ski , design but similar outcome on snow. Looking forward to your direct comparison. Appreciate the reply.

  1. Thanks for the insights guys. As an owner of a 179cm Wren 108 I’ve been waiting on this one for awhile now. However, I am intrigued by the Enforcer 110 and though I am sure you will touch on this comparison in your deep dive, would you mind shedding some light on how which one of these two skis (184cm Wren 108 & 185cm Enforcer 110) offers a more stable, damp ride with better suspension? Thanks!

  2. I’d be interested in a comparison to the Line Supernatural 108! Especially for people who are looking for a replacement for the SN 108, since it’s getting discontinued.

  3. I’ve noticed the terms ‘suspension’ and ‘chassis’ used in ski reviews lately. Can you define these please?

    • Hmmm, you’ve seen the term ‘chassis’ in one of our ski reviews? I can’t say that I can recall that (so please correct me if I’m wrong). But you’re certainly correct that “suspension” is a term that we are using more and more — and it’s a quality that has become increasingly important to me, personally, when evaluating skis.

      But rather than have this topic / question get buried in this particular comment section, I think this would serve as a good Topic of the Week / Ski 101, so we’ll put something together and try to post next week, if that’s okay.

      • Right. ‘chassis’ is term used in a review of the Wrenegade 98 on exoticskis.com. It seems like a subjective way to talk about the construction of the ski: “ON3P Wren chassis [is] best described as a quiet, controlled envelope around a springy, spunky core”

  4. Long story short, My wrens ended up mounted about .5cm or so ahead of recommended. I know ON3P is very particular about their mounting spots, so I’m wondering if I should be concerned. Anyone able to weigh in?

  5. Hey Jonathan, quick question on size…
    I know these guys are some of the ONLY ones in the game that are actually true to size, Im 5’8, 155 and an aggressive skier, do you think at my weight the 179 would be the better bet, or would the 184 still be doable for an every day ride? I see that both of the reviewers are upwards of 6ft and are riding the 184.


Leave a Comment