Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs

[bfree]

C113 or C132 for PNW winter touring? My 150lb ass doesn't need 132mm for floatation so I was intending to look more around the 110mm range and save some weight, but I'm intrigued by the pivotability of the C132. Most of the touring I do involves tight trees and chutes, so I'd like something that is nimble and handles varied snow conditions - I like to ski fast but don't need a straightline machine here.
I've never skied Lotus 138s, but my current inbounds pow ski is the OG 4frnt renegade and a lighter (and preferably slightly skinner) version of that would be good by me. Does that sound like the C113 at all?
I'm also inclined to go 113 rather than 132 since it has 3cm less tail for kickturns on long skis at 5'9"

[arild]

C113 or C132 for PNW winter touring? My 150lb ass doesn't need 132mm for floatation so I was intending to look more around the 110mm range and save some weight, but I'm intrigued by the pivotability of the C132. Most of the touring I do involves tight trees and chutes, so I'd like something that is nimble and handles varied snow conditions - I like to ski fast but don't need a straightline machine here.
I've never skied Lotus 138s, but my current inbounds pow ski is the OG 4frnt renegade and a lighter (and preferably slightly skinner) version of that would be good by me. Does that sound like the C113 at all?
I'm also inclined to go 113 rather than 132 since it has 3cm less tail for kickturns on long skis at 5'9"

Well, the C113 is plenty happy about going fast and straight, and given that you're comfortable with a long radius ski already, I don't foresee you having much difficulty having fun on those. The main thing that might skew you towards the 132s is their insane ability to pivot quickly, though imo they do require a touch deeper snow to be fun than the 113s. Mind you, the C113s are more than happy to pivot, you just have to be a little more decisive in telling them.

Also, the 113s require more of you to drive the tips, where the 132 is more than happy to let you stay more upright in your boots. Both are very good in variable, but obviously harder snow thrown into the mix would skew the decision more to the 113 side.

To throw a little curveball into the mix; have you taken a look at the BC110s?

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

[bfree]

Thanks. Hmm. Regarding the BC110, my current skis (G3 synapse 101) have 85.5cm of tail and I really don't want any more than that for skinning purposes. I'd have to go -2 on the mount just to match that, or get 180cm length, which might ski kinda short given all the rocker? I admit I'd be pretty tempted if I could get the limited edition R110 graphic on the BC model [emoji16]

[Marshal Olson]

Yeah man, I’m thinking the 113 might not be the best match, as it’s a pretty directional ride, and needs a good bit of input to get them to come alive in tighter lines. It would depend on you, and I don’t think it’s a bad choice, I’d just want to be clear that it’s a fairly big ski

In the 110, I wouldn’t be mad at a -2 mount at all on it.

but my mind immediately goes to the swallowtail 120 carbon build. I think at the extra width, you could get away with the 180 cm a bit better too. And it will get a lot of the slashy pivoty ride of a ren or 132 as well

happy to chat more detailed on dm/email any time too

[bfree]

What kind of tail clips will work best on the swallowtail? That looks like it could actually be a very nice skin retention feature with the right clip.

[Marshal Olson]

Pomoca nests perfect into them
Almost as if the tail clip was carefully measured and designed into the shape

[bfree]

Nice! I was thinking a skinny clip might nestle into the base of the swallow to shed a few grams and be protected from errant steps, but that looks good too. Beautiful craftsmanship.
Lots to ponder.

[TAFKALVS]

God that swallowtail is sexy AF

[CascadeLuke]

Sexy thigh gap indeed!! Even with some material in the middle

[ASmileyFace]

Any more insight into the Swallowtail shape Marshal? I can't say I know that much about the shape but understand the general theory behind it.

[Rob Stokes]

Any more insight into the Swallowtail shape Marshal? I can't say I know that much about the shape but understand the general theory behind it.

Yeah give us more that thing looks cool as fuck

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[pfluffenmeister]

He said it was a +10mm FR110 ( or R110 depending on your rocker choice) with a swallowtail.

But I too want more ...

[Shorty_J]

He said it was a +10mm FR110 ( or R110 depending on your rocker choice) with a swallowtail.

But I too want more ...

I'm no ski designer but in my head you get a longer effective edge when you want it, but the tail will sink in soft snow, reducing the chance of tip dive.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[ASmileyFace]

He said it was a +10mm FR110 ( or R110 depending on your rocker choice) with a swallowtail.

But I too want more ...

That's what sold me. The FR110 shape +1 with the BC construction and rocker sounded perfect for my softsnow touring needs.

[Marshal Olson]

Long winded “everything you’d ever want to know about swallowtails and more” deep dive coming before the weekend!

there is a lot to consider, width of cutout, depth into the ski, how it interfaces with taper area and effective edge, how it loosens the tail in 3D snow, and how much support vs sink the reduction in surface area gives.

really dang fun topic, with a lot of considerations, some very intentional choices, and I’m SUPER pumped on the result.

more to come, promise! But before I do, the first wave (aka FR) of beta release skis need to ship, wooohooo!