ON3P Billy Goat vs Wrenegade

shin-bangI prefer men

shin-bangDude for the ultimate big Mtn experience I prefer the 2012 line abangs mounted at -4.20

.lenconFirst off I'm sorry I made a thread about just billy goats but I didn't have this dilemma then.

So here's the deal. I'm gonna be doing some big mtn, side country this year and also some IFSA comps. I love my kartels, but I could probably use something more chargy and stable in the tail. And since I love ON3P, I want to stick with them.

So I'm 5'8 and 140. Pretty advanced skier, but not the best. I'm looking at either BG in a 176 or a wren 112 in a 176.

Obviously the wren makes more sense right? But after a lot of review reading I'm not sure. It sounds like the Wrenegade is a super advanced ski and if you don't charge hard all over you will be screwed over. I'm a little worried the wren might be a bit too much for me after reading some reviews. So I still want the BGs still. I'm not sure how they are in variable conditions, but most people say they are good. Also I've heard they are almost just as chargy and stable, but more pivoty and slashy as well.

So do you think I could handle the wren? Or should I get the BG? It seems like it could be a better fit but I'm just not sure. Don't want to spend a lot of money and not like the ski for what I'm using it for.

I would demo but I don't have the chance to, thanks guys.

SessionBG's crush variable, but are super maneuverable in tight places. I have never had trouble blasting through ski'd out,set up, PNW dogshit on BG's.

.lenconDo you think they could make a for a good ski to compete on? I'd probably compete at like snowbird, targhee, Jackson, and maybe big sky.

SessionA lot of the guys on the Freeride World Tour are skiing more modern shapes, and not just straight guns like in the past. BG will kill.

jcaI wouldn't count out the wrens. I'm 5'8", 165lbs on a pair of 2013 191s. While I haven't skied the BGs I find that the Wrens are actually pretty playful considering their dimensions and profile, the longish sidecut lets them smear turns when you want and rail an edge through crud going fast. I ski them fast and hard in really tight trees and in all conditions, pretty much only ride my Caylors when there's more than 5" of fresh or if I'm touring.

I think the 186's would be good for ya but I prefer longer skis and

NigelSteinIm similar size to you 5'8 and 130 and I love my BGs. Had them over in Japan last week and they are the single best ski I've ever been on. Killed everything I went in, tight trees to open fields they're great. I have the 186s and if I was you I'd maybe go longer than 176 (isn't it a 174 now?) and do 179/184. Maybe talk to Scott first he'll know best.

.lenconYeah I was on the 179 and it was a good size. Only thing tho is the mount. They were fun but they just felt really mounted back idk. The k116 felt nice but totally different skis

SessionNot meant to be forward mounted whatsoever. You will literally die.

The referenced post has been removed.

The referenced post has been removed.

RudyGarmischAs one who helped test and set the mount mark for that ski, believe me when I say it gets weird and funky when you mount a BG too far forward. If you have a set of BG's with demo bindings nearby (shop or demo tour), see if they can offset the demo's to move you forward. Dont say I didnt warn you.

.lenconBump cause I got on the BG and Wren today. Both killed it, but wren isn't for me. BG is freaking awesome tho. If anyone is considering them, just get them. I was so surprised. Real fun ski and I might just have to get them.