Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mustonen

Well, I suppose a FR110 is in my future. Trying to catch up here…are those available for delivery now? Or as a preorder? It isn’t time to buy skis, really. I need to buy a bike. BUT if I need to get in line…..

---

Hey man, thanks for the interest. To answer your question, yes pre-order is open, with 12/1 expected delivery.

To help give context, in order to lock in an earlier delivery date than this year's run, I have to make a 50% deposit next week on the order forecast. I can trim back the # of skis made from this forecast, but I won't be able to increase it. Final numbers (ie no more changes to qty) are due to the factory 4/1, so pre-order will close then. My constraints are (a) how much $$$ I can put down right now and (b) how many pre-orders there are on 4/1. There might be 1-2 extra pairs of a few models beyond pre-orders, but that is it for this run.

To help incentivize the pre-order, there is a free shipping code to the end of the month, if anyone wants to benefit from it: PreOrderFreeShip

Well done, Marshal.

I have three pairs of LP105 (2x192 and 1x 184), a pair of Monster 98, and and I still want the FL105.

I think I want the bc90 as a all purpose touring ski


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I really like the look of the FR110. I'm wondering if this ski is longer than I'll want though. I'm 5'11, 175-180lbs. My DD is a Wildcat 108 or Wildcat both in 184 - they measure 182cm though. I don't really have any trouble there, but not sure I want to go longer.

Obviously 4cm isn't much, but I'm wondering how the FR110 might feel in comparison with maneuverability. My only other reverse camber experience is Lotus 138s (which are 192cm) and they're super easy to pivot, it sounds like the FR110 is similar but less extreme.

The 110 FR

Interesting. Looking at the rocker profile it’s kinda normal tip and tail splay. But from a bit underfoot it starts to slightly splay. Just a bit. Intriguing.

I’ve never ridden a sickle. Not even with a pickle. On my motorsickle.

But comparing that profile to the 132 (or 138 which I have ridden) those seem full banana. And 138 is crazy slarvy. But hard to ride inbounds. Unless you like fruit booting ski boards.

Otoh. The RP had decent slarve. The RPC could charge but kinda lost the slarve.

Looking at the profile. And the FR construction I’m hoping it’s a pow slarvable inbounds ski
Am I wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinned

I really like the look of the FR110. I'm wondering if this ski is longer than I'll want though. I'm 5'11, 175-180lbs. My DD is a Wildcat 108 or Wildcat both in 184 - they measure 182cm though. I don't really have any trouble there, but not sure I want to go longer.

Obviously 4cm isn't much, but I'm wondering how the FR110 might feel in comparison with maneuverability. My only other reverse camber experience is Lotus 138s (which are 192cm) and they're super easy to pivot, it sounds like the FR110 is similar but less extreme.

---

I think you'll be fine. With full reverse camber you can go a bit longer - they're pretty easy to noodle around on.

I had 190 wildcat 108's, which were fine but a bit of work in tighter spots. But I also had 191 whitedot dictators, which are stiffer than the wildcats but have a similar rocker profile to the FR 110's. The whitedots were quite a bit easier than the wildcats in tight trees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

I think you'll be fine. With full reverse camber you can go a bit longer - they're pretty easy to noodle around on.

I had 190 wildcat 108's, which were fine but a bit of work in tighter spots. But I also had 191 whitedot dictators, which are stiffer than the wildcats but have a similar rocker profile to the FR 110's. The whitedots were quite a bit easier than the wildcats in tight trees.

---

Look at effective edge as well. The FR110 is falling right in the middle of a 179 and 184 wildcat 108. That combined with the full reverse camber should make it quite easy release/pivot/smear, etc. compared to the 184 108.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meter-man

Thanks Marsh, very useful. That's what I had gleaned too. Planning to go BC110.

Sorry to be a pain, but at least to my eyeballs, the image of the BC110 sure looks like it has a rounded tail, at least as compared to the obviously squared-off tail of the C113.

---

Since the top sheet test prints just came through, here is a closeup on the tail for skin attachment. Hope it give a better idea on how it’ll look :)

kudos to Arild for nicely tucking it nicely into the shape!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

I think you'll be fine. With full reverse camber you can go a bit longer - they're pretty easy to noodle around on.

I had 190 wildcat 108's, which were fine but a bit of work in tighter spots. But I also had 191 whitedot dictators, which are stiffer than the wildcats but have a similar rocker profile to the FR 110's. The whitedots were quite a bit easier than the wildcats in tight trees.

---

Thank you, this is what I needed to hear - think I'm gonna go for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

Look at effective edge as well. The FR110 is falling right in the middle of a 179 and 184 wildcat 108. That combined with the full reverse camber should make it quite easy release/pivot/smear, etc. compared to the 184 108.

---

Good call - the shorter effective edge is probably good in this case.

Marshal, what’s the stiffness on the BC 90 going to be like?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

Marshal, what’s the stiffness on the BC 90 going to be like?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

I am targeting “extra medium”

mainly, I want them to be very fun and surfy, with enough backbone to cut through wind skin and such. unltimately, I think they will be comparable both stiffness and pattern-wise to the BMT stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

I am targeting “extra medium”

mainly, I want them to be very fun and surfy, with enough backbone to cut through wind skin and such. unltimately, I think they will be comparable both stiffness and pattern-wise to the BMT stuff.

---

That sounds great


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

That sounds great


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

one additional thought here is a “tip biased” flex pattern that this ski will have.

Traditional GS-derived all mountain skis have a tail-biased flex, where the tip is a bit softer and the tail is a bit stiffer. This is great for inbounds conditions and pure pow, but gets challenging in wild backcountry snow, as the snow can get more funky, and you just generally aren’t going as fast.

the biggest reason for making the BC90 in particular is because of how wrong the stiffness/flex pattern of most mid width touring skis are.

IMO, the #1 reason the BMT94 is legendary is because it nailed the flex pattern with a tip that slices (opposed to bending and pushing) into setup snow, and a tail that works really well with the reduced cuff leverage of touring boots (as compared to an alpine boot).

I am super excited about this ski, personally, to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

one additional thought here is a “tip biased” flex pattern that this ski will have.

Traditional GS-derived all mountain skis have a tail-biased flex, where the tip is a bit softer and the tail is a bit stiffer. This is great for inbounds conditions and pure pow, but gets challenging in wild backcountry snow, as the snow can get more funky, and you just generally aren’t going as fast.

the biggest reason for making the BC90 in particular is because of how wrong the stiffness/flex pattern of most mid width touring skis are.

IMO, the #1 reason the BMT94 is legendary is because it nailed the flex pattern with a tip that slices (opposed to bending and pushing) into setup snow, and a tail that works really well with the reduced cuff leverage of touring boots (as compared to an alpine boot).

I am super excited about this ski, personally, to be honest.

---

Is “extra medium” stiff about like the AM R99?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

FR110- trigger pulled.

WRG turned me on to reverse/Devastator Kool aid. I'm a dev devotee now. Daily driver. Picked up older heavy devs for backup. Have brand new lighter devs mouting dynafit.

The fr110 will be the daily when base is in, current devs will be early season skis.

Will be neat to see how the fr110 skis based on my solely skiing older devs.

More than happy to support this project. Ive been on this ski forum for almost 20 years. It's my only social media.

Rock fucking on peeps. FKNA.

Reports from early adopters have me quite excited to get on my incoming C132’s….sounds like the shape and flex are hitting the mark for most folks. Outstanding project!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

BC90 ordered! The BMT94 lives up to the hype, I'm sure these will be great.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Do you think that the BC90 will hold up to a tele mount? I am not usually one who rips bindings out of skis, I have a smooth, more upright style, but I also don't mount tele bindings to 1250g touring skis. In adverse spring conditions you kinda have to be more aggressive and do jump turns etc so just wondering what your thoughts are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeleBeaver

Do you think that the BC90 will hold up to a tele mount? I am not usually one who rips bindings out of skis, I have a smooth, more upright style, but I also don't mount tele bindings to 1250g touring skis. In adverse spring conditions you kinda have to be more aggressive and do jump turns etc so just wondering what your thoughts are.

---

Yeah, I think it should be just fine. What binding?

This project is just so damn cool.
I think I’ll transition over time to a HL 3 ski quiver, prob…
1) FR110 soft snow mid winter ski… heavy, subtle RC, punch way above size for pow days
2) R99 AM daily driver / quiver killed 50/50… also great resort-bc mix travel ski
3) BC 90 dedicated BC… light fast
For me, that pretty much nails it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

Is “extra medium” stiff about like the AM R99?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Good question! I would say that in terms of skier input, probably equivalent. But the flex pattern itself is the opposite. The Raceroom skis are tail biased for very clean carving and pop out of the turn. The BC skis are tip biased, to slice into setup / mank and to have a supportive but not unmanageable tail.

So...I'd say they would compliment each other for each's intended use, but aren't apples-to-apples per se.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

Good question! I would say that in terms of skier input, probably equivalent. But the flex pattern itself is the opposite. The Raceroom skis are tail biased for very clean carving and pop out of the turn. The BC skis are tip biased, to slice into setup / mank and to have a supportive but not unmanageable tail.

So...I'd say they would compliment each other for each's intended use, but aren't apples-to-apples per se.

---

Sounds great. I do like my am r99s in funky/garbage snow. The bc90 sounds like it would be better in more consistent funky snow like untracked grabby and punchy wind affected snow. Looser and surfier in powder too. Does that sound right?




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

Yeah, I think it should be just fine. What binding?

---

Meidjo 3.0

If you give it the vote of confidence I'm gonna have to place a preorder here in a few weeks. I have some Praxis BCs with Meidjos as my lightest touring setup right now, but at 1700g a ski they aren't really that light. I think the BC90 would round out a three ski quiver with my Lotus 120s and the Praxis BCs.

Any plans on custom +1/-1cm skis ever being available. I think you hinted at it for the future but just wondering if it's coming for next year?

Still hoping for a +1cm fl113 as there really isn't anything quite like that on the market in a resort layup.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

regarding questions, of course email me any time, but it’s always great to talk em through publicly too, as many folks have similar q’s, so helpful as well!

---

Hey man!

When u have a spare minute, would you mind pls discussing the planned differences in flex between the 194 FL113 (which I am familiar with) and 192 FL105? Saw the FL105 has a wee more tail splay; assuming there’s a well thought out reason, and think I need the FL113 layup in a narrower cousin, just wanna confirm. I am prepared to be schooled. TIA!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeleBeaver

Meidjo 3.0

If you give it the vote of confidence I'm gonna have to place a preorder here in a few weeks. I have some Praxis BCs with Meidjos as my lightest touring setup right now, but at 1700g a ski they aren't really that light. I think the BC90 would round out a three ski quiver with my Lotus 120s and the Praxis BCs.

---

Yeah man, I think the Meijdo as a touring ski would be awesome! And if you had any problems with it, I’ll stand behind this green light and take care of it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

Sounds great. I do like my am r99s in funky/garbage snow. The bc90 sounds like it would be better in more consistent funky snow like untracked grabby and punchy wind affected snow. Looser and surfier in powder too. Does that sound right?




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

yes, I think you nailed it. Exactly right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob stokes

Any plans on custom +1/-1cm skis ever being available. I think you hinted at it for the future but just wondering if it's coming for next year?

Still hoping for a +1cm fl113 as there really isn't anything quite like that on the market in a resort layup.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

---

yes! So the FL105 (discussed with Sylvan below) is basically the -1 version. A few tweaks to match the width, but same skier and mindset.

regarding the +1, I am trying to wrap my ahead around it. Mainly, the 113 is so dang surfy (for what it is), I’m struggling to figure out when I’d ever want a wider one… and if I did want a bigger ski, I’d go straight to the 132.

with that said, we are working on an FR122, with a more modern/progressive design. But I’m totally open to the +1… tell me more about what you want from it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

yes! So the FL105 (discussed with Sylvan below) is basically the -1 version. A few tweaks to match the width, but same skier and mindset.

regarding the +1, I am trying to wrap my ahead around it. Mainly, the 113 is so dang surfy (for what it is), I’m struggling to figure out when I’d ever want a wider one… and if I did want a bigger ski, I’d go straight to the 132.

with that said, we are working on an FR122, with a more modern/progressive design. But I’m totally open to the +1… tell me more about what you want from it!

---

Drawings for the +1 absolutely exist in many, many iterations. You could also say it was made many years ago by igneous, with my design.

With Marshal, though. Not at all certain there's need for it given the step to the 132, but again, the drawings exist.

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

with that said, we are working on an FR122, with a more modern/progressive design. But I’m totally open to the +1… tell me more about what you want from it!

---

Is the FR122 going to be closer to the 132 or the 110 in shaping? There are a lot of days, this season at least, I would love to be on the Lotus 138 but I know it will get tracked out really fast. So I end up on Wildcats, which are awesome skis, but I'm very curious about reverse camber in other sizes.

FR110 and FR122...seems like I need both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinned

Is the FR122 going to be closer to the 132 or the 110 in shaping? There are a lot of days, this season at least, I would love to be on the Lotus 138 but I know it will get tracked out really fast. So I end up on Wildcats, which are awesome skis, but I'm very curious about reverse camber in other sizes.

FR110 and FR122...seems like I need both.

---

I asked some questions about the FR 110 upthread.
Not answered.

110 is a daily driver size.
Reverse is a hoot
FR construction if it’s stiff and damp would be insane.
Is this a good resort powder day ski?

Slarve the trees but survive the chunder?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

I asked some questions about the FR 110 upthread.
Not answered.

110 is a daily driver size.
Reverse is a hoot
FR construction if it’s stiff and damp would be insane.
Is this a good resort powder day ski?

Slarve the trees but survive the chunder?

---

Yes, and yes.

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

I asked some questions about the FR 110 upthread.
Not answered.

110 is a daily driver size.
Reverse is a hoot
FR construction if it’s stiff and damp would be insane.
Is this a good resort powder day ski?

Slarve the trees but survive the chunder?

---

sorry! I thought those were rhetorical. more than happy to expand on your thoughts… but they are exactly right, lol.


So yes indeed, that is 100% what the FR110 is going for. Surfy, pivoty, and slashy all over the mountain, everyday, while still being smooth, controlled, and able to edge cleanly too :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylvan

Hey man!

When u have a spare minute, would you mind pls discussing the planned differences in flex between the 194 FL113 (which I am familiar with) and 192 FL105? Saw the FL105 has a wee more tail splay; assuming there’s a well thought out reason, and think I need the FL113 layup in a narrower cousin, just wanna confirm. I am prepared to be schooled. TIA!

---

OK… nuance alert.

Firstly, the core profile will extend a little further into the ends of the ski, so while the stiffness is engineered as “7%” softer, in practice, the FL105 will feel about the same on snow, just a little rounder to better match a small amount of camber, slightly longer EE, and medium-ish radii.

the FL113 is really designed to be excllent in soft snow and HiVis. Super fast, super smooth, quite good on edge, but a nice pivot and drift too. the FL105 is designed more as an every day ski. Carves very well, quick and responsive, lively enough to entertain one’s self in sketchy fast traverses, loose enough to charge windbuff, and legit fun (ie not a bottom dweller) soft snow well too.

so with all that in mind, and because the FL105 has a camber pocket, we increased the tip (a little) and tail (a good bit) to help with float and get the tail out of the way in bumps, tight trees, while still giving good support at full speed and landing.

I would call the FL105 and FL113 are great one-two punch for a strong fast skier. Same mindset and approach, just going about it in a little different way. They are different enough to clearly have their own slots in a quiver, but have just enough overlap that if you get surprised by conditions, you are stoked on whatever ski you have with ya.

personally, I’ll rock a 185 FL105 (smaller radius, more responsive) and a 194 FL113 (bigger radius, more stable), but I think for a big open mountain, the 192 will be stupid fun when the snow is firmer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinned

Is the FR122 going to be closer to the 132 or the 110 in shaping? There are a lot of days, this season at least, I would love to be on the Lotus 138 but I know it will get tracked out really fast. So I end up on Wildcats, which are awesome skis, but I'm very curious about reverse camber in other sizes.

FR110 and FR122...seems like I need both.

---

generally speaking, I’d think about the FR122 as a fatter FR110! final details are still 6-9mo out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arild

Yes, and yes.

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

sorry! I thought those were rhetorical. more than happy to expand on your thoughts… but they are exactly right, lol.


So yes indeed, that is 100% what the FR110 is going for. Surfy, pivoty, and slashy all over the mountain, everyday, while still being smooth, controlled, and able to edge cleanly too :)

---

Holy shit. I need to place an order.

Can a RR ski with some side cut really carve if it’s stiff enough?
I’m not talking trenches with a cambered race ski. Just chunder to the lift.

Obviously it’s going to need more edge angle and weighting. But 138 was just snowblades going back to the lift.

You didn’t say carve. Technically you said “edge cleanly”. Which to me means using at least 3/4 of your ski length if you lay into it on firm snow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Holy shit. I need to place an order.

Can a RR ski with some side cut really carve if it’s stiff enough?
I’m not talking trenches with a cambered race ski. Just chunder to the lift.

Obviously it’s going to need more edge angle and weighting. But 138 was just snowblades going back to the lift.

You didn’t say carve. Technically you said “edge cleanly”. Which to me means using at least 3/4 of your ski length if you lay into it on firm snow

---

I'm always surprised at how well the Kusalas ski firm snow (even groomers).
They are very stiff, lightly reverse camber and 124mm underfoot.

Many moons ago I asked: what behaves like a 110 waisted Kusalas, FR110 could be it
Basically the same tip and tail dimensions(14mm narrower in the waist) similar rocker profile (FR110 looks to have more tail splay).

Mount point looks further forward on the FR 110.
Also hoping for a stiff layup.

^^^ damp/heavy/stiff RR skis with sidecut can absolutely carve rails. I have skis in this category and they kill pow/chop up high on the mtn, but make skiing the groomers back to the base fun as fuck.

Will be placing my FR110 order asap. Already have my older heavy Volkl/OG Devestator fanboy friends on the FR110 tip. We will have a gang on those next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Holy shit. I need to place an order.

Can a RR ski with some side cut really carve if it’s stiff enough?
I’m not talking trenches with a cambered race ski. Just chunder to the lift.

Obviously it’s going to need more edge angle and weighting. But 138 was just snowblades going back to the lift.

You didn’t say carve. Technically you said “edge cleanly”. Which to me means using at least 3/4 of your ski length if you lay into it on firm snow

---

So yeah, exactly. In my head "carve" would be like laying trenches (monster 98 for example). I would say the FR110 ski will arc VERY nice turns, hold an edge really well, and engage most of the way to the tips/tails so you are not flapping all over the place. For sure able to rip turns back to the lift.

I'd also say the FL113 (different ski, similar design principals), edges WAY better than that ski has a right to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister

I'm always surprised at how well the Kusalas ski firm snow (even groomers).
They are very stiff, lightly reverse camber and 124mm underfoot.

Many moons ago I asked: what behaves like a 110 waisted Kusalas, FR110 could be it
Basically the same tip and tail dimensions(14mm narrower in the waist) similar rocker profile (FR110 looks to have more tail splay).

Mount point looks further forward on the FR 110.
Also hoping for a stiff layup.

---

Yes. Yes. Yes! Haha. Exactly right on all counts.