I surfed my way up the road this morning, does that count?Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
Printable View
I surfed my way up the road this morning, does that count?Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn
three significant figures, not four ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by arild
So...I still am unsure. Will there be a LP 194??
And a very, very significant half millimeter that would be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
I'm starting to realise that I might've missed out on something with the bmx105HPs. And lotii, for that matter. Miiight.
Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk
I have a pair at my parent's house, close to mint. Million dollars cool? I'd spend the money on useful stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki
Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk
Stoked, Marshal. FWIW, I don't think your face [I} needs[/I] to be on the videos. I think if you have good content (Powerpoint, Mural board, whatever), and talk through it, that is what people would be interested in. (At least that's what I'm interested in). Could also do a Zoom or live YouTube if you wanted live questions/discussions/heckling from the mags.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
If youre lucky it will be both those things at the same time. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
And if Id get my way the next heritage ski would be the EHP186s in the dps-bamboo-sidewall-carbon-build.
Ive almost raised the funds for a pair of 202 138s and with my luck I'll miss it when youre opening those up for orders again. Keep that in mind and be ready to sell me someone elses. I gotta have a pair.
Agree video will be great.Quote:
Originally Posted by fool
However, some facetime likely creates brand loyalty for you tube viewers by creating a more personal rapport. Not a lot of FaceTime needed though.
Definitely show some skiing action as examples of ski construction in use. If it is all graphs and you talking people will get bored. We need a little ski porn too.
Fwiw all my personal opinion of course and based on no facts or data whatsoever.
Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
That plane has sailedQuote:
Originally Posted by fool
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I hope to do a 19x version of the R87, R99, and R120 some day...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki
And thanks for the feedback and encouragement, all! I'll spool up a trial video or two for grins. Please eviscerate me once they are posted, LOL!
more to come... on both points!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit
Just make a Titan Pro and take my damn money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
oh man.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZomblibulaX
Just putting this here. I have not been sitting up all night refreshing. Really.
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/fl113
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/c113
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/fr132
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/c132
Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c3692d2829.jpg
What's goin on
I guess I'll just let my monies ride
If a carbon 120 shows up and needs test driving
I'll be here
Or out casting to pods of fishes
Sweet, can’t wait to hear more on the design updates behind the free ride collection.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Nice pivot!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Good stuff, especially "designed for skiing as fast as possible in any and all snow conditions."Quote:
Originally Posted by arild
And big ups to Marshall for keeping it six nine on the 132s
Attachment 408234
I can share some about the creative process behind the FL113s,hope it is of interest!
The basic design is derived from a 10 year old ski lineup I imagined would be sick. They were 90s with high 20m radii, 100s with high 30m radii, 110s with 40m ish, 120s with 50ish m radii (the latter got built, eventually, at igneous). These were the original Go Fast Boards, or GFBs.
How the whole line would materialize, I had no idea. 12 molds or so, no biggie? So, they got shelved, only to resurface with a few changes last winter, when I tried to make enough mags agree on one design. Turns out putting important design desicisions to a democratic vote is a pretty interesting endeavor, so the GFB line was again shelved.
Enter Heritage Labs and Marshal. I'm forgetting how, but we got into an e-mail discussion about the infamous chargers, which were honestly very good, which were planks, etc. We found a few common denominators, I started sketching again, we ended up exchanging a scary amount of e-mails,and even a very cool phonecall. Marshal created some tail taper on one of his skis, I one-upped him with creating tip taper on one of mine (with an angle grinder no less, after destroying a dremel), and after some pre-alpha testing of these taper profiles, decided what the Fall Line 113 was going to look like.
The design has drawn inspiration from at least seven different skis, but probably ended up looking more like one than the others.
I have absolutely no financial incentive here, but got to say it's been a pleasure drawing stuff with Marshal. Obviously going to buy a few pair. Hope you all like what ended up a very fast looking pair of skis!
Marshal will have to fill you in on the 132 and all other Heritage Labs business when he's got the time!
Ps:For me, a pair of 194s for everyday, c187s for touring, will be the ticket. 132s for days we don't get around here.
Pps:The 187s have about 42-43mR,by the way, should be plenty stable.
Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6212990aaa.jpg
Texted you!Quote:
Originally Posted by skifishbum
Damn, those 113 in carbon and glass both = Japan killers for touring and resort.
Will probably get the carbon for touring to prevent quiver overlap.
But damn.
Kinda wish I still rode kirkwood/mammoth on the regular for that glass ride. Or, the southern alps of NZ.
Solid move, Marshal.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Hey!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
There is naught nor ought there presumed to be any greater fanboy of the exalted og bamboo side walled FPS lotus 120 than I.
So how EHP esque will the fl113 be? I’m so jealous of your minty 186 EHPs Marshal!
Flat camber, with decent, though not extreme rockers, moderate tapering of tips and tails. Damp and stiff. I don't think you're gonna pretzel them. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk
Go buy some of Marshalls tool rolls.. Just got two and they look pretty trick!
So...I think I see what you did there. But given that the XXL's have two sheets of titanal how will these (the 113) be different? I'm assuming they will be (flex and torsional rigidity?), but in what way? And the extra 4mm at the waist? (I'm asking about differences aside from weight, which I don't generally care about.)Quote:
Originally Posted by arild
Heavy nerdery warning, Dexter:
(Marshal answered the flex/feel question a lot smoother, so I deleted my answer)
Ugly mockup warning!
The sidecut radius of the XXL 194s was 41m, that of the FL 113 194s will be 45.3m. The sidecut length of the XXLs should be about 171-172cm (a mag actually measured them for me), while the FL 113s will be about 10cm shorter, at 162cm. The 113mm waist width is to make them float better, along with the rocker profile (next paragraph). We both did some taper adjustment testing on our own skis, with 8 hour time differences, and found out we wanted some, but not a lot, of tip taper. Same with the tail. The tapers, combined with the rockers, are simply to make them release into slarves a bit easier, dump speed and make them more maneouverable in general.
So, XXLs (mocked up, but pretty close, I think) in red, 113s in green:
Attachment 408551
Camber/rocker profile comparison (the XXL actually did have that super abrupt tip shape, almost 10cm high if my recollection serves me right):
Attachment 408552
While the XXLs were fast, damp beasts, the tips served more as plows than any sort of floating mechanism. A subtle, not super deep rocker, both tip and tail, along with the wider waist, will allow the 113s to simply plane faster, float better, and therefore be faster. Again, not an engineer, but this isn't rocket science (is it??).
Hope that answers some of your questions, but as always, happy to discuss further!
I think the XXL tip was close to 13 cm. Just here to bow down to the awesomeness of this project.
And add that I just ordered a snowboard.
Hi All!
Posting here a bit more context and info. Hoping to answer most of the questions posted in the past week or two, but if I inadvertently miss one of yours, please do repost!
As background, I had a number of folks want to leave their deposit in place for the new offerings. Because the designs for the FL113 and FR132 were already prepared, I spoolled them up last week to ensure that these deposits were connected to a SKU to properly account for them. Because this is a crowdfunded project at present, it is super important for me to keep close accounting on every penny of deposit, since the manufacturing window for these skis is not locked quite yet.
With respect to the 132, and having skied many many many reverse reverse skis, I really wanted to make what I felt is the ultimate representation of this genre. Firstly, because of how quick and easy these things are to pivot and turn, I have always felt that many offerings were just too short, so I settled on 190cm and 200cm as my ideal lengths. For me, that means 190 for touring and 200 for heli/cat/inbound. I also feel like many of the 135-140mm wide versions were wide to the point of creating leverage against your body, the 125ish sizes were just too skinny, and the 130-132mm skis were perfect in waist width. As such, I landed on the 132mm wide footprint as my ideal width. Finally, I really believe that a small amount of flat spot really helps the R/R skis with stability, maneuvering runouts and sidestepping, as well as skinning. Just enough edge to control the drift, yet a fully rockered ski for maximum surf. You can see my designed taper, rocker, and flat spot dimensions on the infogrid on the 132's product page. The ratios and taper angles fore and aft on the ski are carefully chosen to slice cleanly into windskin and zipper crust for that frictionless feel. Please let me know if you have any questions.
It was super fun to collab with Arlid on the 113. He has done a great job explaining the shaping thought on the ski. I would like to share a bit more about the materials and flex pattern that will go into the C113 and FL113. To be certain, while the same shape, they will have a different feeling. The FL113 is designed to be regarded in the same breathe as the last-gen best-ever directional comp skis that ranged from 112-115mm wide. Stiff forebody to flatten chopped snow, stable tail, and a very damp and smooth ride. They will approach metal ski weight (though still save about 150g overall) and torsional rigidity (though drift turns a touch smoother), and retain enough energy to feel responsive and lively for a skilled and strong pilot (but not beat you up if you are on the right sized ski).
In contrast, the C113 flex pattern will compliment the build to be a bit more soft-snow biased, meaning the that the end of the tip will be a touch softer that the FL113, to give it a slightly surfier ride quality. The C113 will sku towards skiing untracked snow conditions with speed, where the FL113 is designed for chop and chunder. If you ski a place like Powder Mountain, for example, the C113 will still be a great inbounds ski. For me, in the cottonwoods, the C113 is my dream everyday touring ski.
Please note that the 113 and 132 skis are both designed around a -11.5 mount. There is a whole other class of freeride skis with a more modern mount point that I also am known to love (ie designed around a -6 mount), and those will be coming as it is possible. Finally, I hope to add raceroom skis in 194/187 @ ~105mm in addition to a 194cm R99 and 191 R87... and I think that is what you are looking for @dexter.
Finally, because I will not be able to lock production on the 113 and 132 until late spring / early summer, and as such, cannot accurately forecast delivery until then (other than late 2022 or 2023), my strong preference is to avoid deposits right now, and rather you to just PM me if you would like to get in line and put your name on a pair. Then I can make a draft order for you, so that early numbers all come together, and we can worry about deposits once I am able to lock forecast and estimate delivery.
Thank you all! Hoping this is helpful and please keep asking questions as they come up.
Cheers,
Marshal
The new topsheets are rad! I especially like the C113.
If I don't find the powder ski I loaned the mountain come spring time, I may want a pair.
“There is a whole other class of freeride skis with a more modern mount point that I also am known to love (ie designed around a -6 mount), and those will be coming as it is possible.”
Very cool. Looking forward to what you come up with for a more playful modern mount point twin.
105 underfoot @187 with slight camber, tip rocker with some tip and tail taper in a race room build, yes please!
cheers!Quote:
Originally Posted by ASP
!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by 2FUNKY
yes sir
You would like a Salomon Stance 102.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2FUNKY
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit
http://replygif.net/i/979.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
Just looked up that ski. Looks killer on paper! Nice mid 20’s TR, two sheets of metal, stiff, oh my! Surprised it hasn’t been talked about on the tgr’z. Seems like a ski that would be highly sought after here. 182 or 190 length. Going to have to try to find a 190 in my area as a 182 is to short.Quote:
Originally Posted by One (+) Sentence
https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...d.php?t=337574Quote:
Originally Posted by 2FUNKY
:fm:
https://c.tenor.com/cuVGmfmZk04AAAAM/mock-blah.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Norseman
My searchfu is lacking….
Fl113 looks sick. But I’ve spent so much time on hoji designed skis that the mount point seems really far back. Would it ski ok +3/4?
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums