Subscribe

Review: Ogso Corbet’s SR UL

By

Brian Parker

A clean aesthetic for the Ogso Corbet's SR UL. You'll have plenty of float and pivot-on-a-dime performance without a hefty weight penalty. And in deep snow, the hefty tip rocker makes these a trail breaking workhorse. Photo: Brian Parker

A clean aesthetic for the Ogso Corbet's SR UL. You'll have plenty of float and pivot-on-a-dime performance without a hefty weight penalty. And in deep snow, the hefty tip rocker makes these a trail breaking workhorse. Photo: Brian Parker

  The Ogso Corbet’s SR UL holds up as a mighty fine double rockered powder ski. Buyer beware–in the right snow, big smiles will be had.   Intro “Dude, those lines are ridiculous. And probably violate more than a few obscenity laws in certain overzealous municipalities south of the Mason-Dixon, but shit-yeah, I’ll giver ‘er…

Responses

  1. Travis

    The Atomic Bent 110 would also be a great ski to compare to this. Remarkable how fun they are to ski.

  2. Beacon.shovel.bearspray

    Per the Osgo website/spec sheet, there are phenol binding reinforcements. Any sense of whether these would have enough retention (or void warranty) with a tele binding mount a la 22 designs Lynx?

    1. Brian Parker

      Hey b.s.b,
      Though I can’t point to it, I’m sure there’s some fine print somewhere on the Ogso site that would void the warranty if you mounted them with pins. That said, the mounting area isn’t excessively thin. I don’t know the Lynx, but assuming it uses 4 screws, similar to the Axl (which I do have experience with) this obviously will help retention. Also, I feel like one’s style, super-agressive vs. surfy, will influence this too. The thought of this ski as a fun surfy tele ski has definitely crossed my mine more than once! Apologies for the less than concrete beta.

  3. Whit

    Great review and glad it’s getting some press! It’s just like Brian says, makes powder skiing easier than even the DPS 112 which is its closest comparison. The rocker and splay is more extreme on the OGSO…the tip is similar but it has way more tail rocker and splay making it super easy to release the tails and pivot but also a bit difficult on the skin track – kick turns specifically. The finishwork and bases aren’t of the same quality as DPS though so just a heads up on that.

  4. Peter Vordenberg

    Love reviews of smaller brands and unique takes on what a ski can be. This thing looks like a hoot. I will say, the reverse camber can make climbing a bitch in slicker conditions. But sometimes its just worth it. Thanks for the review!

    1. Slim

      Just to clarify, they are not reverse camber. Normal camber underfoot, tip and tail rocker, like most (wider) skis

  5. Slim

    I just got a few more runs on this ski. I agree, it is perfect for tight tree powder surfing. I had no trouble turning anyware. It pivots beautifully, I don’t have to build speed and lean the ski over, instead, I can pivot at any moment.
    I do with the tail was a bit less twin tipped. Maintain the same length of tail rocker, but just less of an actual curve at the very end. I’m not planning to ski backwards.
    Also, on a dedicated touring ski, why is there no notch in the tail for a tail clip?

  6. Slim

    Brian, have you been out in them in any more warm snow?
    The forecast for next week is calling for consistent light/moderate snowfall over several days, but with temps hovering around freezing, so I am expecting every form of soft snow from moderate powder to slop.
    Avalanche danger will likely force me into a lot of tight trees and lower angled terrain, so maneuverability is top of the bill for me, and I’m fine staying below the skis speed limit.

    1. Brian Parker

      Hey Slim, apologies for the delay in response, I’ve been floating down desert canyons off the grid. I’m sure this response is too late, but wanted to circle back regardless. I did ski them on a warm weather day….once, and promptly learned my error. This was mash potatoes mank, and I got worked. Simply not stiff enough to handle high density snow. For me, these seem to be a purely winter warrior. Lemme know if you had a different experience….

      1. Slim

        Thanks for the reply. That will be good for future decisions.

        I ended up not taking them on my last trip. But I should have: way more snow than the original forecast, and it was powder every day. No slush.

        I I tested them on an inbounds run with a few inches of soft slush on top, and they were ok, but the short effective edge made them a bit less secure feeling. I do have to say, I have them in the same length as my other skis (Wayback 98 and QST 98), while Ogso recommend sizing up, so that would have helped.

  7. Slim

    In case anyone comes across a pair of these, I’ll add my updated impression here after more time on them.

    Used with my resort boots, they did surprisingly well in cut up snow, even in heavier, warmer powder. Skiing scraped up groomers was challenging, as the edges would grab on the scraped off icy bits, hooking you into a much tighter turn than you were riding in the soft stuff before. Maybe I just need to let my edges dull 😉
    I certainly wouldn’t pick them for resort skis, but on this trip, where I needed to pack just one pair, they did great in the soft stuff inbounds.

    In the backcountry, they performed as noted, making fun slashy, and pivot turns at any speed, fast or slow, even in deeper, heavier snow.

    Where they really shone was in some soft breakable crust. Thanks to the width, taper and rocker, I was able to get good “bounce”, to levitate up and out of the crust to turn, or simply ride the side cut on wide open low angle sections. No unexpected grabbyness occurred.

Leave a Reply

Latest Features