I use blue silicone gasket. Doesn’t expand, stays flexible throughout a high temp band, adheres well but can be removed with a little bit of elbow grease. Yeti turned me on to it.
It will never come out of clothes, though. Or the living room rug.
Printable View
I use blue silicone gasket. Doesn’t expand, stays flexible throughout a high temp band, adheres well but can be removed with a little bit of elbow grease. Yeti turned me on to it.
It will never come out of clothes, though. Or the living room rug.
Ooh, 193s?Quote:
Originally Posted by forumskier
I’m with this feedback too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustonen
the 100% silicon won’t expand, has really nice adhesive quality, and “peels off” when you pull bindings, just like if you pulling a bead of sealant off grout/tile or countertop/drywall.
It can Stickk your bindings to the ski quite well, even after the screws are out, but the binding will pop right off with a metal scraper. And excess silicon pulls right off the top of skis or bottom of binding.
Yes sir. Hopefully mounting them tonight. Such a fun ski, Bry let me put 5 good runs on his pair last winter and I instantly knew I needed to have a pair.Quote:
Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister
I was worried when the previous order was sold out. This used pair popped up in the HL outlet on my birthday, and I thought it was a “sign” so I jumped on them same day. Thankfully for others MO opened up another order recently. I actually thought a little bit about buying a fresh pair, but probably will wait til next season since this used pair is in excellent shape. Hopefully this model sticks around for a while.
Almost jumped on those big dog FL113s in the outlet yesterday, but they gone! Thought about R99s as well, good score!
just always check the temp ranges. Some don’t handle freezing temps as well. Most have a super wide range but some weird options are either for very cold or very hot only.Quote:
Originally Posted by forumskier
My go to has been outside rated wood glue, basically some sort of polyurethane. Works great!
Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk
Nice to see the 193 FR110 in the 2025 Blister Gear Guide. Cool to see their write up and how it got top marks for suspension and damping in its category. Nice to see a few other HL skis make the guide, too.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I thought I knew what suspension was.... Then I skied an HL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Second this, which is why I’ll have 5 pairs of HL this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll
What should be my second pair of HLs? Hmmmm
Marshal, were you testing those full rocker Mantras that you are selling?
I love M4 Mantra in 191, so good in giant, firm and cruddy moguls and other tight spots. Wondering if you were testing for some current or future R model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by forumskier
You're set in the middle.
What do you need?
Skinny or fat?
All the Heritage Lab skis that I have been on (4 to date), have been best in class.
I've been telling people to have confidence in buying blind.
Go back in time and buy r99 comps.Quote:
Originally Posted by forumskier
Can you expand on this? For my mental games?Quote:
Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll
I call my R110s "Potato Smashers".Quote:
Originally Posted by gaijin
Stay forward a bit in the sweet spot and the skis smooth things out but still give excellent feedback regarding surface conditions.
I do not consider myself to be an great skier but I am physically strong at 6'1 220lbs. My second day of mostly 8-12 inch chop on the R110 beta a skiing buddy looked at me and said "you are skiing faster than I have seen you ski". Funny enough is I could feel myself going faster but I was confident in the ski under my foot like I hadn't been before. I'm sure a lot of that comes from me never skiing a true traditional charger. I tend to stick with more progressive mounts and that ends up putting me on skis that are a touch lighter (2050-2150g). My idea of peak suspension was a full 190 Wildcat. While the kitty is a chop destroyer the ski can sometimes feel a bit harsh, almost like the stiff flex pings instead of absorbs. The weight of my R110 (2375g) actually had me a bit scared at first but after a few runs I found that the ski wasn't tiring me out at all. It did such a great job at muting everything out while still having the ability to ski a bit neutral and not being something I couldn't dial back when I needed/wanted. The cocktail of elements that MO puts in his skis just make skiing fast easier, they do such an amazing job of absorbing harsh conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaijin
+1. I’m an advanced skier. Pretty rare, if ever, that a ski “makes me a better skier” right away. But the FR110 surely did. Between the suspension and the ability to turn on a dime, i was skiing faster everywhere. But i did get a heat check and went tits over tea kettleQuote:
Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Marshal, question on this Fall's batch of BC110s (which I'm stoked about), is the rocker profile of that ski closer to that of the R beta (2cm tail), R beta2 (3cm tail), or R production (4cm tail)? I'm assuming it's not that of the FR110 but correct me if I'm wrong.
I asked Marshal the same q via email a while back; here’s his answer:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pins and Skins
The BC110 is a lower/flatter version of the FR110. So it will have 1/2 the splay at the wide points as compared, and therefore more skin purchase. I have not had a single complaint about skinning performance on any of the reverse camber skis thus far, with everyone passing reviews back that mention skinning sharing how pleasantly surprised they were about it
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks waxloaf. I knew it wasn't going to be the exact rocker profile of the FRs (given skinning requirements) but just trying to see which version of the R it most closely resembles since to my knowledge, there are now 3 R versions floating around
Quote:
Originally Posted by waxloaf
Yes, just to confirm, the BC110 (and BC120) will get the same rocker profile as the production/latest version of the R110/R120 skis.
Marshall-
Thinking about the 187cm R110 as a ski to do the below:
1. Soft snow tree ski
2. Cheat code for moguls
3. Navigate tight terrain (think the chutes in Supreme Bowl) but still charge at the bottom
4. Charge back to the lift in crud
Currently ski a Van Deer 98 @187cm (its a bad ass ski) or Wildcat 196cm, but the Van Deer is a bit too hooky due to its camber (strong tail is amazing though) and the Wildcat is a bit long for some tighter spots. I've skied a Corvus and appreciated its flat camber, and used to DD a stormrider 105 (liked its flatish camber, hated how light it was). For charging, my Pro Rider comes out, but I just can't manuver that in tighter spots.
Think the R110 is the answer for the above? Or should I look at the FR110 or R105?
Hey man!
Helpful context. I see a good mix of traditional and progressive skis in your background, so I would suggest starting with the R110.
It brings the versatility it sounds like you are looking for and will solve for basically all the shortcomings you have identified with other skis and compliment the skis you own, without introducing new shortcomings to the equation either (IMO).
In comparison, the R105 is more of a fall line oriented ski (ie a more maneuverable LPR105) and the FR110 is more soft-snow biased (ie more loose) than any of the skis you referenced skiing previously.
Hope this helps!
-m
After spending waaaaay too much time reading thru this thread repeatedly and some major lusting.....I couldn't refrain any longer. Just pulled the trigger on the 186 FR110 to serve as my resort pow ski and slot between a 186 Enforcer 104 (DD) and 192 Protest. Will probably pair with a CAST setup for slackcountry involving little vert....I like having options. Directional skier, so thinking of mounting at -1cm. The only ski I've had to mount forward of recommended is the V-Werk Katana which I loved at -11.5 versus it's 'absurd' factory line at -13.5cm.
Had the Rossi Sickles a decade ago that I really enjoyed, but we parted ways when I couldn't find room for another mount with a 'tourable' binding. Looking forward to these pivoty, surfy, slash-masters putting those regrets in the rear view! Stoke is high Marshal!
Some nice 186 FR110s popped up in the HL outlet
I ski a 186 Rossignol BO118. Do I go with the 180/181 FR/R 110 or the 186/187 FR/R 110? I'm 5'10 160 lbs and I want an "easier" ski to maneuver but I still want that high level of "damping" and speed potential. Also not sure what mount point to go with. I like a -4 from center mount usually so I can turn the skis sideways easily, but if it's all rocker then that probably shouldn't be an issue?
I don't really know where those AM100's fit either. Fearing there might be too much overlap between the BO118 and the FR110? I currently ski the BO118 as my daily driver but it's also too much ski for low speeds.