Push the Envelope: Heritage Labs RC85 and RC95

[bry]

I'm pretty sure Arild’s heart just skipped a beat.

He and I have penciled a shape like this in with a few iterations over the years.

I'm down with this 191 R90

[carlh]

I would be curious on a longer rc85 as well but probably would be happy on the 183s.

I was just pondering a 191 r90 with the same shape as the bc90. If you’re going to say it’s a narrow pow ski it’s going to need to have longer lengths for some. The RC85 sounds a lot like the original MX83, I’d want longer but I’m an outlier on the size scale at 6’5” 245#.

Something along the lines of a Nobis Inspired/Legend 8800 in 188 and HL lay up and modern shaping.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[banzai]

The 182 length is a deliberate choice to allow to ski in ways you can’t on your long skis.

EE is likely longer than your Brahma, and the stability definitely will be.

Feels like this is subconsciously directed at me while staring at that hypnotic topsheet.

[2FUNKY]

Dear ski people who know more than this jong,

R99/R87 had metal, but I don’t see it mentioned in these. How’s that gonna be different?

To coin the phrase from Marshal, they are the most metal non metal ski I’ve been on.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I'm pretty sure Arild’s heart just skipped a beat.

He and I have penciled a shape like this in with a few iterations over the years.

The RC shapes look good but I prefer a less abrupt tip splay, low and a little longer. Flat camber. I’d buy that ski as a daily here at Mission.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Marshal Olson]

Holy cow, I had no idea.

I'm honestly trying to do my part: FL105 (178), FR110 (180), R110 (181) preorder, R120 ST (180) preorder.

This info makes that RC85 183cm more tempting.

you are good tho! I’m super fired up to get you on them!

[Marshal Olson]

I would be curious on a longer rc85 as well but probably would be happy on the 183s.

one other thought I wanted to offer on length, is the the edge geo/ee/radius are all directly inspired from previous gen FIS GS skis, so longer/shorter versions do start to introduce compromise from the design intent on this specific collection.

a “modern” gs spec 193/30m special edition could certainly be good fun one day - but not certain where that is the right tool for the job. I’d just buy some retired race skis for $100 with bindings for maching WORD, myself! Happy to explore in more detail over email if you ever wanted to.

[Marshal Olson]

To coin the phrase from Marshal, they are the most metal non metal ski I’ve been on.

On the METAL topic, in that you own both r99 comp and 192 FL105, can you confirm or push back on this characterization? Or Pluffen and the few others with both?

the R99 comp is in rarefied air, in that it has a little extra sizzle and composure at full gas 60mph than the FL build, but the FL is still comparable to most of the best metal skis out there, while the FL also has a bit broader speed/performance window and is more versatile in woods/moguls/junk refrozen etc?

Is it also fair to say that the FL build is at least as smooth and responsive and clean edge grip as any of the best mass market metal skis?

anyhow, this is what I think (obvious bias of course, but also chasing perfection for my own selfish reasons, lol). And it’s why I say the FL build is the most metal non-metal skis out there.

[TAFKALVS]

Metal adds mass, dampening, and sometimes stiffness.

But I’d rather have a good heavy layup without metal than a light layup with.

Fiberglass, the resin used, rubber layup, core materials, base thickness, etc all play a factor too.

[arild]

Feels like this is subconsciously directed at me while staring at that hypnotic topsheet.

You need to step away from the blizz,M!

I'm down with this 191 R90

Marshal's right. That sentence just brought a smile to my face. Hells, that ski would be awesome.

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

[turnfarmer]

The RC shapes look good but I prefer a less abrupt tip splay, low and a little longer. Flat camber. I’d buy that ski as a daily here at Mission.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

That abrupt tip splay may just be a cad thing. Can you expand Marshal?
Agree less camber the better.

[Marshal Olson]

That abrupt tip splay may just be a cad thing. Can you expand Marshal?
Agree less camber the better.

click...click...click... "enhance"

Yes, the contact point is designed to be 10cm inboard of the wide point (aka 25cm from the end of the ski). The "belly" of the tip's rise is at the wide point (which is at 15cm from the end). This is for the 95 btw. The 85 draws everything in 2cm, since there is less taper, but the same basic geometry is applied.

2-3mm camber is VERY low for this kind of ski, for sure! Enough to give nice edge purchase/rebound/suspension, but the skis will feel super clean when releasing and feathering turns too.

[carlh]

Marshall with the shorter ski push is probably good for us. Will these stick around longer than the race room ski? The Fl105s in the mail were supposed to be next years ski purchase but the rc85 seems like the perfect complement as a 2d snow ski to replace my bones.
Count me in the hard snow skis need camber camp, I would want these to have some pop out of a carve.

one other thought I wanted to offer on length, is the the edge geo/ee/radius are all directly inspired from previous gen FIS GS skis, so longer/shorter versions do start to introduce compromise from the design intent on this specific collection.

a “modern” gs spec 193/30m special edition could certainly be good fun one day - but not certain where that is the right tool for the job. I’d just buy some retired race skis for $100 with bindings for maching WORD, myself! Happy to explore in more detail over email if you ever wanted to.

[Marshal Olson]

I can't wait for you to give a solid go on the FL105.

I am all about 190-195+ skis in the right conditions, but also all about 18x skis in their correct conditions too. One side does not fit all use-cases IMO!

Assuming folks dig them, the RC85/95 are slated to be main line skis, certainly!

[mr_pretzel]

I can't wait for you to give a solid go on the FL105.

I am all about 190-195+ skis in the right conditions, but also all about 18x skis in their correct conditions too. One side does not fit all use-cases IMO!

Assuming folks dig them, the RC85/95 are slated to be main line skis, certainly!

Just want to add to this, there is a relationship between length and width that is somewhat proportional in modern skis. I love a long powder/chop ski, but every narrower ski in long lengths feels somewhat off compared to their shorter lengths. (I might just be off since I’m too young to be from the skinny 220cm ski era)

[arild]

Just want to add to this, there is a relationship between length and width that is somewhat proportional in modern skis. I love a long powder/chop ski, but every narrower ski in long lengths feels somewhat off compared to their shorter lengths. (I might just be off since I’m too young to be from the skinny 220cm ski era)

You need the 192 r105s my friend.

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

[turnfarmer]

For myself I don’t really care about the pop from camber. Prefer the deep under foot flex low soft camber designs like modern Volkl free ride skis provide. Bending the ski deep under foot into carves makes me happy.
Also less camber IME makes the tips and tails less grabby at lower edge angles in irregular snow and terrain.
YMMV

[Marshal Olson]

Also less camber IME makes the tips and tails less grabby at lower edge angles in irregular snow and terrain.
YMMV

while I totally hear you and very much agree with what you are saying, I would say this part specifically is a tune thing actually. Its wild how smooth you can make cambered skis off-edge on weird snow by feathering the base edge bevel between the contact points through the wide points and into the ends of the skis.

[mr_pretzel]

You need the 192 r105s my friend.

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

You dont think I already have them

I’m talking sub 100mm hehe

[arild]

You dont think I already have them

I’m talking sub 100mm hehe

Aha, then I sort of agree. For the sub 100mm thing, look at old 191 Mantras and 192 og LPs. Beautiful,long, long radius, narrow ish skis. They have their place!

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

[MagnificentUnicorn]

R90 in 177/184/191 Do it!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

R90 in 177/184/191 Do it!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Shhhhh I’m trying to get an R100 that mirrors my R110.

[TAFKALVS]

Shhhhh I’m trying to get an R100 that mirrors my R110.

For the record I told Marshal we should build that ski. But it’s fairly well covered with offerings from big and small brands.

Can you get 20 pre-orders drummed up?

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

For the record I told Marshal we should build that ski. But it’s fairly well covered with offerings from big and small brands.

Can you get 20 pre-orders drummed up?

People of TGR

ASSEMBLE!

I agree it’s covered. However none are the feel of an HL.

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

I think once the people next year get on their R110s they will want a skinner version with a touch a camber. The R110 is just so good. But I’ll probably end up giving these a run in the meantime.