Sent you a rather long message to your website. Super intrigued by a few of these shapes...
Printable View
Sent you a rather long message to your website. Super intrigued by a few of these shapes...
Query about the R99 and its character.
Having never skied a Legend or Monster, I'm interested in the R99s. In this ~100 slot, I've skied Moment PBJs (my current 100 ski and fave), Mantra 102s, several iterations of Cochise (original Cochise was another fave), and Bonafides.
PBJ has been my fave because it skis so well on groomed and off-piste, is stiff, but is also really playful and fun to pop and jump all over the mountain. I sold the 191 M102s because (they were too long?), they were not playful (too long??). Much preferred the PBJs.
So, I'm wondering if the R99 would be a good complement to the PBJs. Good for railing groomers and slaying chalk?
Is that what the R99 is for? Will it be any fun to drop cliffs and pop little off-piste rocks and jumps and such? Or is it a groundbound slay machine more like the M102? I ski a maritime snowpack (Tahoe, CA) if that matters.
Thanks for the amazing project, MO!
long response email coming at ya!Quote:
Originally Posted by comish
ahoy! So good questions here.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
with respect to the pbj, the r99 is going to be much heavier, longer effective edge, and much more directional.
with respect to the m102, which I found to be a bit rough and boardy in ride, but lots of people really
dig it. the r99 should be smoother, drift cleaner off edge on wind buff, and be more lively overall.
I would say that the pbj is a pretty different ski, so if you are looking to compliment, something like the r99 makes sense.
hope that helps!
Ground bound slay machine. Fine for straight airs, but more power than pop with these constructions. You could probably get a decent idea from this review of a French ski which seems very similar to the R99- the Aluflex Ephemere (use google translate)Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
I'm a big fan of skis with this shape and construction. They really open the mountain up in shit snow and during dry spells when other people don't like to ski off piste. Think Tahoe when its dry but the corn cycle isn't really going- or the alps most of this season :redface:
I'd love a R87 (maybe also in a 188) and R99 to complement my collection of long guns which are overkill on days at the smaller hills. Maybe next year along with a FR120 for when my billy goats die.
Attachment 403954Attachment 403955
Hoss quiver. Respect!Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Don't Surf
The other cool thing Marshall has done with the R series is a real hardwood core.
Kastle, stockli, head, dynastar have all moved to poplar, beech, and paulownia even in their metal laminate (freeride) skis. I'm not sure how different these woods actually ski flex, pop, and stiffness wise but I do feel it changes the lifetime of the ski (provided the bases are kept clean).
I tested some current vintage stormriders this week. They rip. But I don't think I could drop a 1000 on a paulownia ski. Save that for the touring sticks where the overall lifetime vertical is a fraction of an inbounds ski.
Marshall, would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Sent from my M2101K6G using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Don't Surf
Oh man. I love this topic. But I have to run to get my kids from school right now... Spaced reserved.
Punchline: The wood selected really matters.
I just keep reading the R120 description and wishing I was still skiing the Bird 3-4 days a week.
Me too! I thought of all the models offered the R99 would see the most use. Pulled the trigger at the last minute yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2FUNKY
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
He so loves this topic, looking forward to the reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
I couldn’t dream up a better synergy of ski design/ production/ small run badassery than Heritage Lab.
Apparently I need to move somewhere to be able to use anything other than the R87
Good on ya mate
Sent from the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
It's only a 185, you should do it!Quote:
Originally Posted by snowaddict91
Charlie don't surf, the r99 is replacing my thrashed superbros, seems like a good way to avoid remounting for your new bsl. [emoji16]
It's more the 120 waist that I don't need. It just doesn't snow here that much. Plus I have 2 pairs of OG bodacious in the garage still [emoji57]Quote:
Originally Posted by abraham
Ok.... so... wood and laminates.Quote:
Originally Posted by ticketchecker
First off, a few basics:
- Stiffness is a measure of a materials return to original form
- Strength measures how much stress it can take before it deforms permanently or breaks
- Hardness measures a material’s resistance to surface deformation / penetration
Wood is made up of Cellulose (Fiber) as well as Lignin and Pentosan polymers. Softwoods, in general, have higher cellulose, higher lignin, and lower pentosan compared to hardwoods.
In a ski, the laminate actually accounts for most of the ski's "stiffness", or rather, the gap between the laminates does. Especially in carbon skis, the core is really a spacer between laminates more than a structural member itself. The further the laminates are apart, the stiffer the structure (if the same materials). This is why some full carbon skis are so thin... they would be unbendable if they were thicker.
Hardwoods, and their higher levels of Pentosan, are why they are better at screw retention. Same logic as trying to drive a screw into a piece of Oak vs a piece of Pine. The harder wood can take more force over the surface of a screw without the thread stripping. This is why an old Igneous ski could take 7 mounts and still be fine, but some new skis can only take a couple.
Another key factor in ski ride and snow feel is how good the ski is at absorbing vibration. The harder the wood, the broader the frequency range it can absorb (same logic applies to VDS rubber, which can essentially absorb all frequency ranges), compared to a soft wood like Paulownia that cannot absorb very many frequencies at all, since it has high cellulose (fiber) content that transmits the vibration. Bamboo is a grass not a wood, but Bamboo in the core is essentially fiber and resin mixed together, and the resins used also create a really great vibration sink.
This same logic applies to laminates, where Carbon does not absorb much vibration, but the right kinds of fiberglass can absorb a ton. The interesting contrast is Metal, which longitudinally (tip to tail) isn't stiff, and it... well... is metal, so it vibrates, so it's not a natural energy sink. But what metal does is add a ton of weight that serves to slow vibrations down, while actually adding rebound, and increase torsional rigidity. So metal skis are damp because they (should) weight a bunch, but a metal ski should be (more) lively than a similar weight fiberglass ski, because you are essentially putting a leaf spring into the ski. Newtonian physics matter. Weight matters. F=MA. Heavy skis kill chop.
With respect to skis losing stiffness (rebound) over time, that is generally when they are either (a) fairly soft to start (b) made from too light of a laminate or (c) specced with too soft of a wood that breaks down. The reality is the famous offenders combine all three of these factors.
Specifically, I think Maple is an amazing core material for super damp charing skis, but really require metal to add some life, or they can just feel like sleds. But there are other great core options too. Poplar is a really good choice if it is paired to a heavy duty (ie 27oz+) fiberglass and/or paired with a 50% bamboo core, or is just insanely stiff (like a Faction Thirteen), since it will feel more lively, especially on wide freeride skis that are more rockered and shorted effective edges. Unfortunately most skis that spec poplar go for too light of a fiberglass (<24oz), and neuter the things. Paulownia, IMO, is really only to be mixed 50/50 with Poplar, and only for Carbon skis designed for untracked snow.
It is actually pretty easy to make a Maple/Metal ski too stiff and feel boardy, but it is almost impossible to make a Poplar ski too stiff, but really easy to Poplar skis too soft. In particular, when using Poplar, one must use a much heavier fiberglass than is common. There are lots of other woods (Fir, Ash, etc) that all have their own flavors, but are pretty uncommon since sourcing them can be challenging and expensive. Pretty rambling, happy to answer specific questions, but hopefully entertaining for some :D
Interesting and enlightening.
^^^
Awesome explanation of ski materials and how it affects ski feel.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Interesting. I'm a bit surprised it's challenging to get/use other types of wood. Maybe I have an poor understanding of the amount of wood used to build skis. Or where the costs and multipliers come into the question. Are skis every made at scale with larch? It's such a common tree in Europe, I've wondered about that before.
Yeah, I know Moment uses Ash, DPS uses Aspen, Kastle uses Silver Fir, etc, which are all in the range between Poplar and maple in density. Beech is commonly specced as a stringer to beef up lighter woods as well (its almost twice as dense as Aspen). Maple sits right in between the density of Beech and lighter woods like aspen and poplar.Quote:
Originally Posted by abraham
There is also an element of sustainability, that that is where wood like Aspen and Poplar win... they are just fast growing compared to many other woods...
Edit- my main point was to share thinking about core and laminate as a system. Lighter cores mix well with bamboo and like heavier fiberglass. Metal skis like maple.
"The BMX105HP is like a skinny lotus 120 with kastle construction. It’s a super cool and unique ski, and I have plans for it in the future, but it isn’t referenced yet"
Marshall... whats the story on this?
On Kastle fx116 having gone thinner that the BMX 128... which was just a truck of a ski. If I lived somewhere with more alpine I'd still have it.
Really interested in the idea. Coming in 190/200?
Sent from my SM-A530W using Tapatalk
Marshal hasn't steered me wrong with RPCs and Spoons - order in just before the bell for 200cm C120s and 188cm 99s!
I think Keith at Praxis uses Maple and Ash in his heavy hitter cores
Then Maple Ash and Aspen in the Enduro core
And Maple Ash with Paulownia for his ultra light cores
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I’m excited for my R87 and C138’s
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
So awesome to read that! Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
The discourse on ski materials was super interesting, thanks for that Marshal!
One follow up - the 2010s vintage Kastles stand out in my mind for being uniquely damp and planted. I can’t A/B a new example of those against other new skis, so perhaps there is a bit of fog of time influencing that judgment, but I think you said you still seem to like the BMX 105 HP so maybe at least we share the same delusion.
Is there something about the BMX105 HP or Kastle MX line that should give them a hard to replicate feel? Basically, what if anything, are they doing differently from the R99? How would either compare to a Dynastar Legend Pro? Is it the VDS rubber or something?
Thanks for confirming! I couldn't remember his layout. Makes sense, those are nice specs!Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarhey
Cheers man! Definately much more to come, but my main focus right now is getting this first offering delivered! Once it is fully on track and over the line I will start looking at the next offerings!Quote:
Originally Posted by UkBCyeti
Freeride and Falline skis to come.