Ski: 2019-2020 ON3P Woodsman 108, 187 cm
Available Lengths: 177, 182, 187, 192 cm
Blister’s Measured Tip-to-Tail Length: 187.3 cm
Blister’s Measured Weight per Ski: 2232 & 2244 grams
Stated Dimensions: 137-108-127 mm
Blister’s Measured Dimensions: 138.0-108.9-127.3 mm
Stated Sidecut Radius (187 cm): 23.8 meters
Measured Tip & Tail Splay (ski decambered): 78 mm / 40 mm
Measured Traditional Camber Underfoot: ~5 mm
Core: Bamboo + Carbon Stringers + Fiberglass Laminate
Base: 1.8 mm Sintered Durasurf 4001
Factory Recommended Mount Point: -6.35 cm from center; 87.3 cm from tail
Boots / Bindings: HEAD Raptor 140 RS; Dalbello Lupo Pro HD / Tyrolia AAAttack2 13
Test Locations: Deplar Farm, Iceland; Front Range, CO
Days Skied: 8
Intro
The new ON3P Woodsman series has received a lot of buzz, and with good reason.
Previously, there were was a big decision and debate whether to go with a ski from ON3P’s very directional Wrenegade series, or to opt for something from their much more freestyle-oriented Kartel / Jeffrey series. (For the 19/20 season, the Kartel series is reverting back to its original “Jeffrey” name, but the skis are unchanged.)
And lo, there was hand wringing galore from concerned skiers about whether they should mount Wrenegades forward of their recommended lines, or Kartel / Jeffrey skis behind the recommended line. There were also folks who weren’t sure about the long sidecut radii of the Wrenegade series, or the fully twinned tips and tails of the Jeffrey skis.
What was an ON3P fan to do?
There was clearly room for something between the Wrens and the Jeffreys, and that led to the creation of the Woodsman series.
(You can check out our conversation with ON3P’s founder and CEO, Scott Andrus, about the new Woodsman lineup on our GEAR:30 podcast.)
I just got back from Deplar Farm in Iceland where I was able to get a few first days on the Woodsman 108, and Blister members can read my Flash Review to get my initial impressions. But we’ll take a closer look here at the Woodsman 108, see how it compares to ON3P’s other 108mm-wide skis, and how it compares to the rest of the market.
What ON3P says about the Woodsman 108
“New for 2020 and two years in the making, we’re proud to introduce our newest line: the Woodsman Series. Featuring three waist widths, Bi-Radius sidecut, and modified Freeride Rocker, they are a modern directional semi-twin that remain stable at speed while allowing increased tail release to aid maneuverability in tight, technical terrain. Built to take a beating, all of our skis feature full length carbon fiber stringers, 100% bamboo cores, and UHMW sidewalls alongside the thickest bases & edges money can buy.
The Woodsman 108 is an aggressive yet agile offering that is the perfect blend for directional skiers who want equal parts muscle, float, and quickness in their all mountain pursuits. As comfortable in a pow slash as it is a high speed slalom turn, it is a one ski quiver that is as agreeable as it is apt – real skis, for real skiing, on real mountains.”
First, shoutout to Tanner Hall for that last line.
Second, my initial advice is that I wouldn’t read too much into that part about making “true slalom turns” on the Woodsman 108 — though I guess that could just be seen as a challenge?
But all in all, ON3P’s description seems sensible and smart. The Woodsman 108 is supposedly a “directional semi-twin,” which, judging by its shape and rocker profile, it seems to be. It’s also supposedly “aggressive yet agile” and “equal parts muscle, float, and quickness,” which, based on its flex pattern, weight, rocker profile, and mount point, it also seems to be. And it’s also supposed to serve as a 1-ski quiver for firm and soft snow, which is a claim made about many other 108mm-wide skis.
Shape / Rocker Profile
As you’d expect, the shape of the Woodsman 108 looks a bit like a hybrid between the Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108. The Woodsman 108 has a bit more tip and tail taper than the Wrenegade 108 (it’s more noticeable in the tail than the tip), and maybe a touch less tip and tail taper than the Jeffrey 108.
Compared to the rest of the market, the Woodsman 108’s shape seems pretty moderate — it doesn’t stand out much in terms of having a ton or too little taper.
The Woodsman 108’s rocker profile also looks like a mix of the Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108. It has what could be considered as ON3P’s signature tip rocker line — a very deep rocker line with a lot of tip splay. The Woodsman 108’s tip rocker line looks almost identical to both the Wren 108 and Jeffrey 108 and, like those skis, it stands out in the market in terms of how deep and how splayed out its tip is.
The tail of the Woodsman 108 is where it stands out from ON3P’s other 108mm-wide skis. The Woodsman 108’s tail rocker line is a tiny bit deeper than the Wren 108’s, and the Woodsman 108’s tail rises up more abruptly / quickly than the Wren 108’s tail rocker line, which is lower and more subtle. Compared to the Jeffrey 108, the Woodsman 108’s tail rocker line is shallower and has way less tail splay.
For reference, here are our measured tip and tail splay numbers for the three skis:
- ON3P Woodsman 108, 187 cm: 78 mm / 40 mm
- ON3P Wrenegade 108, 189 cm: 83 mm / 31 mm
- ON3P Jeffrey 108, 186 cm: 80 mm / 68 mm
Flex Pattern
Here’s how we’d characterize the flex pattern of the Woodsman 108:
Tips: 8
Shovels: 8-9
In Front of Toe Piece: 9-10
Underfoot: 10
Behind the Heel Piece: 10-9.5
Tails: 9-8
Hand-flexing the 187 cm Woodsman 108 against the 184 cm and 189 cm Wrenegade 108, all three skis feel extremely similar. They’re all quite strong overall, with tips and tails that are a bit softer than the middle, but still pretty strong compared to many other skis in this class. The Woodsman 108 feels maybe a touch softer at the very ends of the tails, but the difference is very subtle.
Compared to most skis in its class, the Woodsman 108 is a bit stiffer in the tips and tails, though it’s not quite as burly as a few skis, like the Prior Husume, Fischer Ranger 107Ti, and Folsom Hammer.
Sidecut Radius
As ON3P founder / CEO, Scott Andrus, mentioned, this is one of the key differences between the Woodsman 108, Wrenegade 108, and Jeffrey 108.
For reference, here are the stated sidecut radii numbers for those skis:
- ON3P Woodsman 108, 187 cm: 23.8 meters
- ON3P Wrenegade 108, 189 cm: 27.5 meters
- ON3P Wrenegade 108, 184 cm: 26.8 meters
- ON3P Jeffrey 108, 186 cm: 22.2 meters
We don’t put much stock into stated sidecut radii numbers, but it is worth highlighting that the Woodsman 108 does fall between the Wren 108 and Jeffrey 108 when it comes to its sidecut radius. It’s also worth noting that, like the Wren 108, the Woodsman 108 has a bi-radius sidecut (one radius in front, one in back). The Jeffrey 108 uses what ON3P calls a “Hybrid” sidecut, which means it uses an elliptical sidecut in the front (straighter in the middle and tighter as you move to the tip) and a standard radius in the back.
The Woodsman 108’s sidecut radius is still a bit longer than average, but its sidecut radius doesn’t stand out as much as the Wren 108’s, which is quite long.
Mount Point
With a recommended mount point of around -6.5 cm from center, the Woodsman 108 falls between more freestyle-oriented skis like the Jeffrey 108, Prior Northwest 110, and Armada ARV 106Ti, and more directional skis like the Wrenegade 108, Prior Husume, Blizzard Cochise, etc.
Many of our reviewers — directional and more playful skiers alike — have come to like many skis with mount points around -6 cm, and this mount point makes good sense given the Woodsman’s position between the very playful Jeffrey 108 and the very directional Wrenegade 108.
Weight
At around 2240 grams per ski for the 187 cm length, the Woodsman 108 is pretty heavy. Not outrageously heavy, but heavier than most.
It comes as little surprise that the Woodsman 108 comes in at a very similar weight compared to the Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108, given that they share the same construction and similar dimensions.
For reference, here are a number of our measured weights (per ski in grams) for some notable skis. Keep in mind the length differences to try to keep things apples-to-apples.
1605 & 1630 Line Vision 108, 183 cm (19/20)
1642 & 1651 Renoun Citadel 106, 185 cm, (18/19)
1806 & 1862 Armada Tracer 108, 180 cm (19/20)
1828 & 1842 Elan Ripstick 106 Black Edition, 188 cm (19/20)
1848 & 1903 Line Sick Day 104, 186 cm (17/18–19/20)
1849 & 1922 Elan Ripstick 106, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
1875 & 1881 Line Sir Francis Bacon, 184 cm (19/20)
1913 & 1943 Sego Condor Ti, 187 cm (18/19)
1941 & 1994 Faction Candide 3.0, 186 cm (18/19)
1950 & 1977 Blizzard Rustler 10, 188 cm (17/18–18/19)
1980 & 2019 Moment Deathwish, 184 cm (15/16–19/20)
1996 & 2012 Dynastar Legend X106, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2005 & 2035 Liberty Origin 106, 187 cm (19/20)
2010 & 2018 J Skis Vacation, 186 cm (18/19)
2013 & 2013 Moment Commander 108, 188 cm (18/19)
2018 & 2045 RMU North Shore 108, 185 cm (18/19–19/20)
2022 & 2047 Faction Dictator 3.0, 186 cm (17/18–18/19)
2026 & 2056 Black Diamond Boundary Pro 107, 184 cm (17/18–18/19)
2030 & 2039 Rossignol Soul 7 HD, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2036 & 2064 Salomon QST 106, 188 cm (18/19)
2042 & 2105 Line Mordecai, 186 cm (16/17–18/19)
2046 & 2120 Black Crows Corvus, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2080 & 2089 Sego Big Horn 106, 187 cm (16/17–18/19)
2096 & 2100 Salomon QST 106, 181 cm (19/20)
2097 & 2113 DPS Alchemist Wailer 106, 189 cm (19/20)
2112 & 2125 4FRNT MSP 107, 187 cm (18/19–19/20)
2113 & 2121 Moment Meridian 107, 187 cm (16/17–19/20)
2113 & 2140 Armada ARV 106, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2133 & 2134 Faction Prodigy 3.0, 183 cm (18/19–19/20)
2143 & 2194 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 184 cm (18/19)
2144 & 2153 K2 Marksman, 184 cm (16/17–19/20)
2165 & 2211 K2 Mindbender 108Ti, 186 cm (19/20)
2165 & 2219 Icelantic Nomad 105, 191 cm (19/20)
2182 & 2218 Nordica Enforcer 110, 185 cm (17/18–19/20)
2188 & 2190 Prior Northwest 110, 190 cm (19/20)
2190 & 2268 Armada ARV 106Ti LTD, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2221 & 2245 ON3P Jeffrey 108, 186 cm (18/19)
2232 & 2244 ON3P Woodsman 108, 187 cm (19/20)
2233 & 2255 Nordica Enforcer 104 Free, 186 cm (19/20)
2241 & 2295 4FRNT Devastator, 184 cm (14/15–18/19)
2250 & 2307 Argent Badger, 184 cm (19/20)
2283 & 2290 ON3P Wrenegade 108, 189 cm (18/19)
2312 & 2386 Prior Husume, 188 cm (17/18–19/20)
2318 & 2341 J Skis The Metal, 186 cm (16/17–18/19)
2371 & 2374 Folsom Primary — Hammer Edition, 188 cm (18/19–19/20)
2376 & 2393 Blizzard Cochise, 185 cm (15/16–19/20)
Bottom Line (For Now)
As you can see, the specs, at least, on the ON3P Woodsman 108 split the difference between their Jeffrey 108 and Wrenegade 108 in pretty much every regard. It’s not as directional and straight as the Wren 108, nor as symmetrical and freestyle-oriented as the Jeffrey 108.
But the big question now is whether the on-snow performance and handling of the Woodsman 108 also feels like a direct split between the Wren 108 and the Jeffrey 108, or whether it skews more toward one of those skis than the other.
Blister Members can check out our Flash Review linked below for our initial impressions, and then stay tuned for our full review.
Flash Review
Blister Members can now check out our Flash Review of the Woodsman 108 for our initial impressions. Become a Blister member now to check out this and all of our Flash Reviews, plus get exclusive deals and discounts on skis, and personalized gear recommendations from us.
FULL REVIEW
Variable Spring Snow
Luke Koppa (5’8”, 155 lbs): Unlike Jonathan, I did not go heli-skiing in Iceland with the Woodsman 108 — his invite to me must’ve gotten lost in the mail….
But I did get to ski the Woodsman 108 in a lot of varied spring conditions, and I still had a ton of fun on it.
From the get go, the Woodsman 108 felt like an ON3P ski. Now, I don’t typically say things like that about most brands, but in ON3P’s case, I think it’s fair. All their skis use a similar construction, and as we discussed in our First Look, the Woodsman 108’s design slots in nicely between two other ON3P skis we’ve spent time on, the Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108.
Like those other ON3P skis, the Woodsman 108 feels substantial, damp, and solid. Skiing fast down wide-open terrain with conditions varying from super deep slush to a mix of soft and hard snow, the Woodsman 108 remained predictable and did a great job of blasting through the more set-up snow and over the deeper, looser slush.
So overall, I’d call the Woodsman 108 quite stable. But unlike the Wrenegade 108, the Woodsman 108 felt easier to slide and pivot when needed, and unlike the Jeffrey 108, I could drive the Woodsman 108 pretty hard through the shovels.
In what will become a theme here, the Woodsman 108 feels very much like a (very nice) middle ground between the Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108. And this is basically exactly what I wanted.
I could drive the Woodsman 108 hard through the shovels when skiing very fast, but I could also ski it centered when making smaller turns or setting up for an air (this is something Sam Shaheen and I both agreed on, and very much appreciated). I could make big, long turns on edge, but could also easily throw it sideways when needed.
There are definitely some more stable skis out there (particularly for really firm, icy conditions where a longer effective edge is useful), but most of those skis are not as easy or playful as the Woodsman 108. And for me, that’s important. I like to go fast and I like skis that feel comfortable doing so, but I also like to mess around at slower speeds and throw in the occasional spin. The Woodsman 108 seems like a pretty ideal ski for my style.
Jonathan Ellsworth (5’10”, 175 lbs): I agree with Luke’s take, and I primarily want to clarify one thing: in terms of stability, I’m not quite ready to locate the 187 cm Woodsman 108 between the 189 cm Wrenegade 108 and the 186 Jeffrey 108. Rather, I think the 187 Woodsman and 189 Wrenegade 108 are quite similar in terms of stability — and the most noticeable differences between those two skis is their tails and their mount points. (We’ll say more about this as we go, and also in our Deep Dive Comparisons.)
And if you ask me how many skis I’d rather be on than the 187 cm Woodsman 108 in variable spring conditions … it’s a very short list. That said, there are quite a few skis that I quite like in softer, slushier, mixed conditions, but the Woodsman 108’s blend of stability, maneuverability, playfulness, and versatility hit quite a sweet spot for me.
Groomers
Luke: By now it’s fairly well documented that I didn’t love carving the Jeffrey / Kartel 108 on super firm snow (start at 43:25 of GEAR:30 episode #58). I loved that ski everywhere else, but it felt unpredictable to me on extremely firm and smooth snow / ice.
After taking the Woodsman 108 out on some very firm, early-morning groomers, I can confidently say that the Woodsman 108 offers better edge hold and is more predictable on firm snow than the Jeffrey 108, while being a bit more versatile than the Wrenegade 108 when it comes to turn sizes. I still haven’t been able to lay down true slalom turns on the 187 cm Woodsman 108 as ON3P challenged me to in their description of the ski, but everything from GS to Super-G turns felt natural.
Now, this ski has a ton of rocker and it’s 108 mm underfoot, so it’s not an amazing carver. Those who prioritize on-piste performance from their 108mm-wide ski should probably look to skis with less rocker and taper. But if you’ve skied the Wren or Jeffrey and are familiar with how ON3P’s heavily rockered skis carve on groomers, I think you’ll be happy with the Woodsman 108. And when the snow is fairly soft and you put in the work to bend the Woodsman 108, it produces lots of energy, which I appreciate.
Jonathan Ellsworth: All I know is that I had one of the best times of my life on the 187 cm Woodsman 108 skiing literally perfect, 100% all-natural groomers down the massive aprons of northern Iceland. And no, this is not some slalom ski (Scott Andrus, did you put that in the description??). And though I haven’t skied this on any bulletproof groomers yet, (1) the only 108mm-wide ski I’d want to ski bulletproof groomers on is the discontinued 184 cm HEAD Monster 108, and (2) why do you care how a ski like this carves on bulletproof ice? I just don’t believe that anybody who is actually seriously thinking of purchasing this ski will care.
My hunch: this ski will be fine. It won’t blow your mind. You will get back to the lift safely and soundly.
And what I can already say for sure is that, on slightly soft groomers — even slightly soft roughed-up / beat-up / end-of-day groomers, these are quite fun to carve.
Moguls, Trees, and Tight Terrain
Luke: The Woodsman 108 isn’t quite as surfy and loose as the Jeffrey 108, but I think I still prefer the Woodsman 108 in tight terrain over both the Wren 108 and Jeffrey 108.
If I maintained a somewhat forward stance, the Woodsman 108 was fairly easy to work through moguls and trees. In really tight bumps with deep troughs, it definitely felt like a big ski. If you really want a ski that’s super quick and easy to flick around, there are loads of better options out there than the 187 cm Woodsman 108.
But if you’re mostly liking the sound of how solid and stable the Woodsman 108 feels, and you are fine dealing with the weight that’s a big element behind that stability, the Woodsman 108 is pretty manageable in tight terrain. It’s easier to slide and pivot than many skis that are this heavy, it produces lots of rebound when pushed hard, and I don’t think physically strong skiers will have much of a problem with it.
I wouldn’t recommend the Woodsman 108 to beginners (it’s heavy, stiff, and doesn’t have a super forgiving tail). But I think physically strong intermediates could get along well with it (probably in a shorter length), and advanced to expert skiers shouldn’t have a problem adapting to its heavier weight.
Jonathan Ellsworth: Yep, I agree with all of the above. The biggest factor in tight spaces is going to be how much physical input is required to work this ski around at higher speeds. There are a zillion lighter, quicker skis out there that will require less input. And there are a bunch of skis out there that will require more. So check out our Deep Dive section if you want to locate this ski among them.
Playfulness (and Other Attributes)
Luke: As always, there are several factors that go into the overall “playfulness” of a ski. The Woodsman 108, like many skis, is playful in some regards, and less playful in others.
First, the Woodsman 108 is pretty loose; you can ski it pretty centered; and it’s very energetic when you ski it hard. All of those traits help make it feel like a pretty playful ski, though I think less aggressive and / or less strong skiers will find it less playful as you have to work a bit harder to move it around and get energy out of it than you do with softer, lighter skis.
And then there’s the Woodsman 108’s swing weight. This is not a particularly quick ski, just like the Wren 108 and Jeffrey 108. But like those other skis, I quickly adapted to the Woodsman 108’s weight after a few runs, and I had no issues getting used to that weight during shifties and spins. And the -6.35 cm mount point offers a nice middle ground between letting you drive it and keeping the ski fairly balanced in the air.
So for directional skiers who are coming from similarly heavy skis with more traditional mount points (e.g., Wren 108), I think the Woodsman 108 will feel quite playful. For those who are coming from more freestyle-oriented skis with lots of rocker and forward mount points (e.g., Jeffrey 108), the Woodsman 108 will feel a bit less playful in terms of swing weight and looseness. But when considering the entire 108mm-wide ski market, I’d still put the Woodsman 108 on the more playful end of the spectrum.
Jonathan: Somewhat surprisingly, if I had to rank some of the traits of the Woodsman 108, I’d order them like this: (1) stable (2) versatile (3) maneuverable (4) playful.
The 187 cm Woodsman 108 is not some lightweight jib stick. It is substantial and stable, a lot like the Wrenegade 108.
And yet, it still works fairly well at low / slow speeds — and much better than more directional chargers that have flatter tails. (I.e., it’s fairly maneuverable.)
And given the relative heft of this stable ski that is still fairly maneuverable, there aren’t too many types of conditions where I would really regret being out on this ski. I love it in slush. It’s pretty well-mannered in refrozen garbage. There would be few clearly better options for super thick, gluey, coastal snowpacks. And I would not hesitate to ski this thing in a couple feet of super-light, blower pow. And while there are easier, more forgiving skis in moguls, those with good technique and pretty good strength (i.e., you don’t tend to opt for lightweight skis in order to be able to ski the whole day) should do okay in moguls — and especially if you’re going with the Woodsman 108 in a shorter length.
Who’s It For?
Luke: I had in my notes that a lot of people who previously bought a Wrenegade 108 or Jeffrey 108 should probably be on the Woodsman 108. If you already loved the Wren 108 or Jeffrey 108, then you obviously don’t need to go out and buy a Woodsman 108. But the Woodsman 108 makes a lot of sense for people who were split between the two. It’s more playful, looser, and arguably less one-dimensional than the Wren 108, but a bit more stable, a bit more versatile, and more capable of being skied with a forward, traditional stance than the Jeffrey 108.
Outside of the ON3P bubble, I think the Woodsman 108 makes a lot of sense for skiers who value both playfulness and stability. Don’t want to go with some super burly, super traditional charger but also don’t want some flimsy, ultra playful, and not-that-stable freestyle ski? The Woodsman 108 could be your ski.
I think the Woodsman 108 excels in soft snow, but it’s totally manageable on firm snow. I’m also confident that it’ll float really well for its width in deep snow. So it could easily serve as the widest ski in the quiver for people who don’t see a ton of 2’+ pow days, or as a 1-ski quiver in areas that see a lot of snowfall.
As I noted above, the Woodsman 108 wouldn’t be my top pick for beginners, and if your top priorities are quickness and forgiveness, there are plenty of lighter, softer options. But I think physically strong intermediate skiers and advanced / expert skiers will get along with it, particularly if you want a ski that’s pretty loose, energetic, and maneuverable while still offering very good damping and stability.
Jonathan: Physically strong / strong-ish skiers (you do not need to be the physically strongest skier on the mountain) who are looking for a less one-dimensional / more versatile ride than their stiff, flatter-tailed skis that have a fairly far back mount point should take note, because the Woodsman 108 is going to be one of our top recommendations for them.
Bottom Line
The ON3P Wrenegade 108 and Jeffrey 108 are both very, very good. But their respective demographics are narrower than that of the Woodsman 108. The Woodsman 108 is quite stable, pretty playful, versatile across a lot of conditions and terrain, and accepts a wide variety of skiing styles. That’s a combo that we think a lot of skiers will like — especially if you value stability over a super light, super nimble feel.
Deep Dive Comparisons
Become a Blister Member or Deep Dive subscriber to check out our Deep Dive of the Woodsman 108 to see how it stacks up against the ON3P Jeffrey 108, ON3P Wrenegade 108, K2 Mindbender 108Ti, Nordica Enforcer 104 Free, Salomon QST 106, Armada ARV 106Ti LTD, Liberty Origin 106, Rossignol Soul 7 HD, Line Sick Day 104, Elan Ripstick 106, 4FRNT MSP 107, Black Crows Corvus, Moment Commander 108, J Skis Metal, Prior Husume, and Blizzard Cochise.
This reminds me of the Faty-pus P-dubya which is my current go to. If it’s anything like that then this is going to be an amazing ski!
I have last years Kartel 108. I love it, but it catches me slippin’ when i still try to drive the tips, a habit i keep reverting to. I keep thinking that setting the bindings back a bit would make the ski more my style; but the again that would not be how the ski was designed. Sounds like the Woodman would be more of the ski for me.
Mind posting a quick review of it? Actual length?
I’m wondering how these compare to the Nordica enforcer 104s. Pretty close to pulling the trigger on the 104s.
Evan, which did you end up going with? The last 2 skis on my list are the Woodsman and the Enforcer 104’s
Woodsman 108 vs. Wildcat 108. Super excited about both of these skis.
Seconded!
Will Luke be getting on the 182cm for us smaller riders?
How did the lupo HDs ski?
Luke talks about it here: https://blisterreview.com/podcasts/gear-30-podcast/new-ski-climbing-gear-random-reviews-ep-59
Another vote for Woodsmen v Wildcat 108. Give the people what they want!
are you planning to include the j skis Metal in the deep dive list ? thanks, steve.
These look really similar in some ways to the black crows atris. maybe woodsman vs atris?
Really curious to hear a comparison of the Woodsman 116 to the Billy Goat.
Also extremely curious why the Billy Goat is so conspicuously absent from your public-facing reviews.
What’s up with that?
IIRC, someone asked this on a forum, and Scott replied that ON3P just hasn’t sent a Billy Goat to Blister for a review in a while.
When is the full review coming
It’s here. Look up. :)
Read the full review, thanks for your reviews, as always very thorough.
I’m trying to decide between 182 Woodman 108 and 184 Billy Goat. Last season I acquired my Renoun Z90’s and pretty much skied them all over the mountain (mostly StevensPass). They’re perfect for ski instructing, and I’ve been able to take them everywhere else, so they became a one-ski-quiver last season. I know I want something with an easier tail to release that works better in bumps and crud and the Woodsman sounds like the ticket. However, I do not have a powder ski (holding head low in shame) and had been planning to get the Billy Goat; of all the skis I’ve demoed they were the most fun and stable in powder (or what passes for powder in the PNW), and I’ve enjoyed them in crud and mixed conditions, and even bumps. With the Z90 and Billy Goat, there’s a clear distinction of which tool to use on a given day.
I didn’t have a chance to try Woodsman. I’d probably get the 96 if I didn’t already have the Z90. Regardless the 108 seems to be the reference ski for this model, would that work well enough as a powder ski in your opinion? Ideally the Woodsman 108 (or even the 96) would be a middle-of-quiver ski and get the Billy Goat as well, but sadly I’m not made of money, and difficult choices must be made.
Couple thoughts:
I generally believe pretty strongly that if there’s a ski out there that you have been on and that you already know you really click with … get that exact ski. That said…
I think it really comes down to how many big pow days you will realistically be getting. For me, the Z90 is primarily a groomer ski (and a very very good one). So I would opt for a 2-ski quiver of the Z90 and the Woodsman 108, and I’d be out on the Woodsman 108 every day that I wasn’t just ripping groomers.
But if you are comfortable on the Z90 as more of an all-mountain ski … then the question is how many pow days — and big pow days — you expect to get. There’s no question that the Billy Goat will handle deep snow better than the Woodsman 108, and be more fun. But that difference will get more noticeable the deeper things get — in 6″ either will be fine. In 12″, it will depend if you like a looser tail (Billy Goat). In 18″, the Woodsman will still be fine, I think, but we’re now in the territory where the Billy Goat will offer that surfier ride. And the more you tend to see 24″+ pow days, the more I’d want to have a Billy Goat in my quiver.
Does that all make sense?
Thanks, Jonathan, that’s just the intel/insight I was looking for. While I’m comfortable enough with the Z90 as an all-mountain ski and I can make it work, it’s not ideal as anything but a wide carver (where it does indeed rip). I do like the Billy Goat’s surfy ride, which still I find to be better as an all-mountain ski than, say, a couple years old Armada JJ (which I liked in Utah powder) or a older Rossi S7 (which I didn’t like for PNW snow). Your initial comment about getting the ski that you really click with sticks in my overcrowded mind.
That said, as far as big pow days, those are actually pretty unusual in my experience. That might’ve been different last year if I had been anywhere other than the PNW, but I digress….. I think I’ve been in 2 foot+ powder once, and sadly it was an instructor clinic day and the amount of free ski time was limited and mostly cut up crud by the time I got to play around. So while people (myself included) aspire to be slaying the pow, the truth is the conditions we actually encounter more are skied out, cut up variable crud, and I’m happy enough playing there with the tool that handles that the best.
So, I’m leaning to the Woodsman 108. I think the 182 will work for me given the front early rise. I’m 57 (old guy here) 5’-10”, 150lbs, probably more finesse than power.
Suppose I could add a Billy Goat at a later time……
Thanks.
For what it’s worth, I have last year’s Kartel 108 (191) – which I adore – and wanted to add a wider ski for this coming season. Was leaning towards the Billy Goat. Or, maybe a custom extra-stiff Kartel/Jeffery 116. I sent ON3P an e-mail and Jeff Andrus himself called me and we discussed options for 15-20 minutes. If you have questions, do not be afraid to reach out to these guys. Stellar company.
He talked me into the Woodsman 116/192 btw. Already gottem.
Anybody have any thoughts about how these would perform in the backcountry? They seem like they might be a little too heavy for touring. I live in Hokkaido Japan and am looking for a new pair of skiis that can rip it in waist deep pow, charge, and yet be playful. It seems like the woodsman 108 or 116 would be good, but my worry is that it might be too heavy for several hour treks into the backcountry
Data point for the 182 Woodsman 108: My pair weigh 2190 and 2202 grams. I’ve had them on packed wet snow to 40cm of interior BC powder and find them to be great for my advancing intermediate ability. 5’9.5”, 205#. Compared to my old orange 181 QST 106, I find the 108 to be more stable, a little looser in the tails, solid, yet plenty maneuverable. Super happy.
The sizing leaves me wondering for the Woodsman. As far as your reviews, I believe you tested the 184 Wildcat (which is about the exact size as a 182 Woodsman) instead of the 190 (closer in size to the 187 Woodsman). This makes it harder to interpret the reviews between the two skis.
Me: 5’10” 170lbs. I ski a 184 Billy Goat that is just about perfect but has never felt too big (or too small tbh). If there’s any fresh snow that’s what is coming out (aside from dust on crust). I’m looking at the Woodsman 108 as a daily. I also have an old 184 Bibby Pro that always felt a bit short on dump days, but ok as an all mountain ski. My current “daily” is a 183 QLab that fell in to my quiver on an emergency basis. It’s a short ski and also pretty progressive mounted so the tips look short, but it doesn’t really feel “too short.” My initial instinct was 187 as I usually lean towards a “mid 180”. But based on my current skis and the fact I’m wanting something more playful (looser tail) than the QLab but still stable and ready to charge and that ON3P is longer than most, I’m starting to wonder if the 182 is the way to go. 2cms really isn’t much, but if there was a 184 and 189 Woodsman like the BG and Wren the 184 would be a no brainer I think.
Looks as if your concerns about the Woodsman cannibalising sales of the Jeffrey and Wren proved to be correct Jonathan. No more Wren this season – apart from reserve :( Would love to see reviews of the Woodsman 102 and BG118. You could run a 102 width shootout with quite a few interesting skis at that width these days!
Have you been able to get on the new Woodsman or Jeffery 110s? Any preliminary thoughts?
Am always intrigued by the second photo in this review with the 4 of you standing on the lip. Looks as if someone was dropped a glove or a phone and it’s the classic “well you dropped it, you get it”
Ha. I love that photo. And what was actually happening is that I had just very politley asked our group if they would mind letting me go first here – a request that I had not made very frequently at all on this trip. The line was very steep, and incredibly beautiful. But I had also just asked our guide what he thought about the stability. If that face ripped, I was going over a cliff (you can see the top of it in the bottom left of the photo), and that would be 100% game over. Our guide, Ian Havlick, felt good about the stability, but he turned around, grabbed a fairly big rock, and threw it down the slope to see if anything would move. Look closely, and you can see the rock tumbling down the line.
After that, I dropped in, put one big, sweeping left-footed turn in on that perfectly blank, steep white canvas above that cliff… and the whole line turned out to be great. I still think about that line quite a bit.