4FRNT Renegade ~ Hand built in SLC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DudeLebowSKI

Haha. I am pretty sure you spewed more douche in your one post than he will in his lifetime. Better thicken up than skin young Skywalker.

---

Sigh...I hardly understand how I did so. This is "welcome to TGR" I guess. I've heard all about it! Bottom line, still better than NS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supercharge

Sigh...I hardly understand how I did so. This is "welcome to TGR" I guess. I've heard all about it! Bottom line, still better than NS.

---

Eh... You got off pretty light.

At your size I'd say you def don't need 196. But I'm approx your weight and after skiing the 186 for 2 seasons I wouldn't mind having the 196 in a quiver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mustonen

Eh... You got off pretty light.

At your size I'd say you def don't need 196. But I'm approx your weight and after skiing the 186 for 2 seasons I wouldn't mind having the 196 in a quiver.

---

Yea I guess it's just the internet after all! Haha.

Anyways, I got the 186! I demo'd some first in the choppiest snow ever. I deliberately scouted for the worst snow I could find, and pushed as hard and fast as I could. I tried ripping all different pitches and making lots of turns as well as straight-lining just for kicks and giggles. Woo wooooo...freight trains coming through. I never get a brake-slam feeling from either or both of the skis at once...they just truck. I'm blown away. These are not toys, they're weapons. I found that any time I got lazy and stopped pressing my shins hard forward, I would nearly get my ass kicked from the reverse camber. Keeps me aggressive and in the moment! Unlike floppy pow skis, these get seemingly MORE stable the faster they go. I couldn't find a speed limit where I would normally begin to feel sketchy, now i can charge to the max with the utmost confidence. They are a gnarly breed for sure and intense to ski. You barely have to think about the snow underneath, just go. Good job on the design!!

Renegade 196 is the fastest pow Ski i ever skied. I used mine during my AK trip and was shit scared...Went there with a torn MCL so I cant really give a good review but you really need to have some good leg power to ride those Beasts properly.

I hope I can have more fun with them next year..

Please tell Misti thanks for helping me today! Awesome customer service.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJChit

Please tell Misti thanks for helping me today! Awesome customer service.

---

Glad she could help you out! I'll let her know. Misti is one of our unsung heroes around here.

I am drooling over mine waiting another 3 months until I head down to South America for a month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by |K_M|

Finally got my 196s in working order, currently with plums but mounted with inserts @ sports creel in spokane (thank you so much micah. so so much, you put a ton of work into these and it shows. THANKS!). fucking beautiful skis.

http://i.imgur.com/5wVcL.png

http://i.imgur.com/k44Td.png

---

How are your rens working w/ the tech binders? Any complaints/issues.

I have the same problem with the tune that some of you guys have had, how did it work out for you? Did a new tune according to 4frnts specs fix the problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by himmelsdyk

I have the same problem with the tune that some of you guys have had, how did it work out for you? Did a new tune according to 4frnts specs fix the problem?

---

New tune with lighter base structure and 1 degree base bevel = fixed. The new tune was done on a Montana as opposed to the hand tune using grinders I had done at the 'other' shop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DudeLebowSKI

New tune with lighter base structure and 1 degree base bevel = fixed. The new tune was done on a Montana as opposed to the hand tune using grinders I had done at the 'other' shop.

---

Ok that sounds very good and thank you for the super fast answer :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DudeLebowSKI

New tune with lighter base structure and 1 degree base bevel = fixed. The new tune was done on a Montana as opposed to the hand tune using grinders I had done at the 'other' shop.

---

Just looking for a little clarification here, not sure what "hand tune using grinders" means
Were your skis ground on a stone grinder at the 'other' shop?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuco

Just looking for a little clarification here, not sure what "hand tune using grinders" means
Were your skis ground on a stone grinder at the 'other' shop?

---

The other shop doesn't have any machines IE. Montana, Wintersteiger, etc. I didn't know this when I took the skis in. They have all stationary hand guided tools. I'm not a shop rat so I dont know the names of everything but to me it looked like a highschool industrial ed shop with belt sanders, grinders and various other pieces of spinning hand guided tuning equipment. Very reputable shop though which is weird.

The weekend's spoils:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7125/7...30f5e3d6_z.jpg

After a few days of drooling I've got a question, how exact is the sidecut to rocker match? The rocker on my ren's is 5mm shy of matching the sidecut...is this normal? I do, however, have the normal 2.5" floor to ptex tip splay.

Otherwise, stoked on these skis. Thinking 88 mount, with solly's. I will have to suffice with my GS's next week, but I will be dreaming about ripping lines like hoji...

EDIT: has anyone used anything other than the factory style tune? I usually give soft snow skis a 1* base bevel, and 2* or 3* side bevel, any suggestions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tupp-

After a few days of drooling I've got a question, how exact is the sidecut to rocker match? The rocker on my ren's is 5mm shy of matching the sidecut...is this normal? I do, however, have the normal 2.5" floor to ptex tip splay.

---

My skis are exactly the same as yours. One of the first things I did was check that to see, and the rocker isn't quite deep enough to match the sidecut exactly. They ski great though, and I never gave it another thought.

Quote:

---

has anyone used anything other than the factory style tune? I usually give soft snow skis a 1* base bevel, and 2* or 3* side bevel, any suggestions?

---

You can see the discussion on the previous page, but people generally like the factory tune and dislike how they ski after a shop tunes them to the non-factory spec. I love how they ski now, and will definitely get them tuned with 4FRNTs suggestions (1*/1* with minimal base structure). I didn't like my Lhasa Fats at 1*/1*, they skied better at the factory 1*/2*, but I definitely don't want to change anything about how the Rens ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tupp-

The weekend's spoils:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7125/7...30f5e3d6_z.jpg

After a few days of drooling I've got a question, how exact is the sidecut to rocker match? The rocker on my ren's is 5mm shy of matching the sidecut...is this normal? I do, however, have the normal 2.5" floor to ptex tip splay.

---

that is what I have on mine. Mine are supposed to be from this past year but I dont have the tip splay that some others seem to have.

Not sure how the performance will be different.

Anybody been on both variations of the rocker profile?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bird Blaster

that is what I have on mine. Mine are supposed to be from this past year but I dont have the tip splay that some others seem to have.

Not sure how the performance will be different.

Anybody been on both variations of the rocker profile?

---

If you ski them both back to back in certain conditions you may notice it a little, but it won't change the way they ski significantly in the day-to-day. It was a change at the margins for sure.

Also, after you ski them a few days, the splay will open up some as the camber relaxes a bit. At least they did with mine.

This year we have done a bunch of tuning to the press (mostly math and science things I don't understand), and they are coming out even better than before.

I'm just gonna toss this out there: anybody who regretted buying a pair of 196s should shoot me a PM. I'm sorta kinda looking for a pair, but prefer last year's graphics (and price tag).

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

You can see the discussion on the previous page, but people generally like the factory tune and dislike how they ski after the shop tunes them. I love how they ski now, and will definitely get them tuned with 4FRNTs suggestions (1*/1* with minimal base structure). I didn't like my Lhasa Fats at 1*/1*, they skied better at the factory 1*/2*, but I definitely don't want to change anything about how the Rens ski.

---

I guess I will just let the shops tune these ones.. I've don't have a 1* side bevel... I will ask for little or no base structure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bird Blaster

that is what I have on mine. Mine are supposed to be from this past year but I dont have the tip splay that some others seem to have.

Not sure how the performance will be different.

Anybody been on both variations of the rocker profile?

---

These are supposed to be the 2012 version, they have the orange bases, like yours BB. Is 5" of tip splay not the norm? I was gunning for the newer tip height, it seemed like a good tweak. I'll be pretty bummed if these turn out to be the old shape. At least I've got the orange top-sheets, there is something off about the new owl graphics...

I have both 11s and 12's. They both have the same splay, the 12 just has a bit more pronounced curve and the dampening strip a bit longer. Still think an additional half inch would be an improvement. And yeah, the original topsheets are a touch cooler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tupp-

I guess I will just let the shops tune these ones.. I've don't have a 1* side bevel... I will ask for little or no base structure.



These are supposed to be the 2012 version, they have the orange bases, like yours BB. Is 5" of tip splay not the norm? I was gunning for the newer tip height, it seemed like a good tweak. I'll be pretty bummed if these turn out to be the old shape. At least I've got the orange top-sheets, there is something off about the new owl graphics...

---

I thought I had the "newer" rocker profile as well. Maybe it isn't a big difference between the two. My rocker doesn't seem to look like others in photos. (pretty imprecise I know).

Regardless pretty stoked to get out on them this year. Wish I was going south. Maybe next year

South America could be an option next summer... But thats for another thread.

Can't wait to get on these. I'm now contemplating selling my FatBros, I love them but will they get any use with the renegades on board? Decisions, decisions...

When will the Hojis hit the stores in Europe?

New Year New Gear!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZekeWolf

When will the Hojis hit the stores in Europe?

New Year New Gear!

---

Our skis are on their way over from Europe right now, slated to be here in a couple of weeks. I think our European distributors will have them around the same time, and ship their shops once they have them. You can always find your distributor on our dealer page and contact them directly.

Or shoot me a PM if you can't get ahold of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D(C)

Just a note about mounting point - it's HUGE. Here's my history with my 186 Renegades:

2010/12 - Original mount: Dukes at 88
2011/02 - Then mounted 916s at 87
2011/03 - Switched back to Dukes at 88 because I found they lost responsiveness
2011/08 - Then switched back to 916s at 87 because I had other plans for the Dukes
2012/02 - Mounted Sollyfits at 88

The ski feels DRASTICALLY different at 88 and 87 cm from the tail.

88 - slarvy, likes long and short radius turns, very responsive and manageable, gets thrown a touch more on rough snow, more in the sweet spot on groomers

87 - locked in aircraft carrier type feeling, much harder in tight spaces, feels more like a traditional charging ski, need to drive the tips or they wander

I actually liked them in both mount positions depending what I intended to do. I prefer 88 because it feels more versatile, but those of you looking for a burly charger should mount at 87.

Now my skis have 3 sets of holes, but I can use my beloved 916s and have the Rens under my feet when standing at the top of big lines in the backcountry. I'm stoked!

---

Mounthing these soon along with some Hoji's and I'm not sure on the mount point. I'm think 88 for the FKS and 87 for Dynafits (going the quiver killer route on these). With the RX130 at a more upright stance I think I'll be more at home with 88. I enjoy the quick slarvey nature of this ski and would definitely be using this at the resort with this mount 100%. As for the Dynafit, the TLT5 is quite traditional in the forward lean department and a mount at 87 via Hoji's recommendations seems like a good idea.

For the Hoji I'm think the same thing. Mount the FKS at factory and go back -1cm from the factory mount for the Dynafits.

Any thoughts 4FRNT?