Soft Snow Gymkhana - The Heritage Lab FR110

I'm just a data point for thought processes, so take this all with a grain of salt. I also haven't skied my 187 R110s yet. So there's that. Which is a huge "that."

Anyway, I'm close to your size at 5'8" 160, on Lange RS130 generally. My 2013 HALS Owl Renegade is 186. I ordered the 187 R110 for my daily driver in JP. And I have sold my 184 M102 to the hunch that I'll never ski it again.

I'm also considering a AM100 and/or an RC85 for a groomer-zoomer. Two very different skis, but we'll see how well this R110 actually performs on firmer groomers. I'm guessing it hooks up as well as the M102 did. Hence, I might as well drop down to the RC85 for my next quiver ski.

So to sum that up-- I'm of the un-educated belief that an R110 can handle DD duties of JP soft snow resorts better than any other ski that has deserved my pre-order.

And every ski I buy is always the second-longest of the lineup based on my size, weight, skill. If I were 6'+, and as fit as I am, I'd be on the longest ski. But I'm not. The only reason I'd ever choose the 3rd longest skis would be because I'm teaching and I don't want to think, or try.

People our size are second longest ski skiers. Meaning-- we should be buying whatever is the second longest ski of whatever factory run you're looking at.

(PS, this is why Dynastar 192 and 182 has been so painful to people my size. The second longest size has always been too short.) Thank God HL sees this and has a 186/7 for riders like me.

180 in a reverse-cambered ski? I can muster a few needs for it. For an R110, I don't theorize I'd lose any top-end that I wouldn't need anyway. It'd probably just be more playful on the groomers and more accessible in the forest, while giving up some GS properties. (that would arguably be better suited towards an actual GS groomer zoomer.)

I am 6’1, 180. I ski the 186 fr110. It is dead easy.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Edit: wtf is happening with my posts

Im 5’7 165 on the 186 FR 110s. They are big and heavy, but are very easy to ski and I wouldn’t want to go shorter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scumpup

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.

---

Could you elaborate a bit more on the BO118 being a bit much at low speeds? Just trying to understand scenarios that might indicate physical length vs the BO118's relatively high camber, etc.

The FR110 is 100g lighter and definately more maneuverable due to profile at slow speeds. But the 186 is actually also about 2.5cm longer straight tape that the 186 BO118 (which is a tick over 184cm in actuality), so the 180 is only a little more than 3cm shorter than the B0118.

At a -5.5cm mount on the 180cm, you will have comparable length of the shovel to the 186 BO118 at -4cm and then just a little less tail up off the snow at the end.

Point being, i'd lean toward the 180cm FR110 given what you have said thus far.

Eagerly awaiting some R110 unveiling and glamour shots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CascadeLuke

Eagerly awaiting some R110 unveiling and glamour shots

---

Sooner than you think :)

I have the FR in 186cm and opted for the R in 181cm. (5'10, 180lbs, mediocre skier)

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...7bb190a091.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...7bb190a091.jpg

---

I like what I see! Any possibility of banding in the middle only?

I'm pretty head down in QC, tuning, and shipping rn, but here is the FR and R side by side.

Long story short, everything i've seen and played with so far is exactly as intended. So fired up. Now to get back to getting them into everyone's hands!

I'll take proper pics clamped at mount point and such once I come up from air... and some excited folks will undoubtably being posting their own pics here soon too, I am sure!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CascadeLuke

I like what I see! Any possibility of banding in the middle only?

---

Yes. Yes you can.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...17c8308fd6.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll

Yes. Yes you can.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...17c8308fd6.jpg

---

Im feeling it!! [emoji1373]
Since you’re being so helpful- if you have a topsheet shot please bless us. [emoji1374]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5bb09ac126.jpg
Why not!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll

Yes. Yes you can.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...17c8308fd6.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Yup!

Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk

Holy fucking shit. That topsheet art!

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

Could you elaborate a bit more on the BO118 being a bit much at low speeds? Just trying to understand scenarios that might indicate physical length vs the BO118's relatively high camber, etc.

The FR110 is 100g lighter and definately more maneuverable due to profile at slow speeds. But the 186 is actually also about 2.5cm longer straight tape that the 186 BO118 (which is a tick over 184cm in actuality), so the 180 is only a little more than 3cm shorter than the B0118.

At a -5.5cm mount on the 180cm, you will have comparable length of the shovel to the 186 BO118 at -4cm and then just a little less tail up off the snow at the end.

Point being, i'd lean toward the 180cm FR110 given what you have said thus far.

---

When I'm in tight trees, I get hooked in the back a lot, partially I think both due to length and camber. With a heavy detune it's manageable but it becomes really difficult to finish a turn if I have no edge.

I'm wondering how much top end I really lose by going down a length. I ski very lazily and smeary, I don't like to pick up my feet a lot (on heavy skis), and it makes bumps and trees slightly more annoying. I already find that the big camber is a little unintuitive, because if you slightly lift your weight, the ski decambers and it starts to hook, so you REALLY need to pick the ski off the ground. I have never skied a full rocker ski but I'm hoping it gives me that nuanced gradient feel as I shift my weight around. I have no issue putting the ski on a high edge with my flexible ankles and loading it into a reasonable turn shape, it's really just getting caught on edges and having my tails slap each other.

What speed limit difference would you give between a 180 and 186? I'm already confident that the rubber will compensate for a lot of the vibration, (I love that thick slap sound rubber skis make, way better than that horrible rattling wood/metal skis make). I just don't want to lose that super smooth monstertruck-esque ride. If it's somewhere between a 182 Dynastar Mfree 108 and a Rossignol BO118 (my two favorite modern mainstream skis), that would be ideal. I always liked the length of the 182 Mfree's I just didn't like that the ski wasn't as strong the 192 Mfree 108 (Blackops 118 was a compromise in that sense because it was a little shorter than the 192 MFree108 but was more ski)


I'm probably leaning more towards the FR than the R due to my smeary preferences (If I wanted a more locked in sensation I'd be on an FL105 or something).

There is nothing smearier than the FR110. I mean, there probably is, but… these things are butter.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bw_wp_hedonism

There is nothing smearier than the FR110. I mean, there probably is, but… these things are butter.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

yea man that shape screams double sided butter knife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scumpup

yea man that shape screams double sided butter knife.

---

I love Blackops 118s, I have a backup pair for when my first pair dies. I put 5 good laps on the 193 FR110s last season and had to have them. The FR110s have a similar "hero ski" feel for me, maybe more so (need more time), but have those full rocker characteristics and more of an all mtn feel, as you could expect.

I'm 6'2" 200+, and I didn't think the 193 FR110 was any more difficult to ski than 186 Blackops, due to the rocker.

I'd go 186 FR110 if I were you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scumpup

When I'm in tight trees, I get hooked in the back a lot, partially I think both due to length and camber. With a heavy detune it's manageable but it becomes really difficult to finish a turn if I have no edge.

I'm wondering how much top end I really lose by going down a length. I ski very lazily and smeary, I don't like to pick up my feet a lot (on heavy skis), and it makes bumps and trees slightly more annoying. I already find that the big camber is a little unintuitive, because if you slightly lift your weight, the ski decambers and it starts to hook, so you REALLY need to pick the ski off the ground. I have never skied a full rocker ski but I'm hoping it gives me that nuanced gradient feel as I shift my weight around. I have no issue putting the ski on a high edge with my flexible ankles and loading it into a reasonable turn shape, it's really just getting caught on edges and having my tails slap each other.

What speed limit difference would you give between a 180 and 186? I'm already confident that the rubber will compensate for a lot of the vibration, (I love that thick slap sound rubber skis make, way better than that horrible rattling wood/metal skis make). I just don't want to lose that super smooth monstertruck-esque ride. If it's somewhere between a 182 Dynastar Mfree 108 and a Rossignol BO118 (my two favorite modern mainstream skis), that would be ideal. I always liked the length of the 182 Mfree's I just didn't like that the ski wasn't as strong the 192 Mfree 108 (Blackops 118 was a compromise in that sense because it was a little shorter than the 192 MFree108 but was more ski)


I'm probably leaning more towards the FR than the R due to my smeary preferences (If I wanted a more locked in sensation I'd be on an FL105 or something).

---

Great stuff here.

With reserve camber skis, the stability/speed limit is more rider specific (core/balance/etc) than a cambered ski. But the main drivers one might notice: mass (a 180 is about 100g lighter than a 186), the overall amount of snow the ski is in contact with, and the amout of splay at the tail. I'd say, if you want that super smooth monstertruck ride, that is surfy and loose, and arent chasing a poppy "feet in the air" ride, then I'd say go for either the 186 FR110 or 180 R110.

The 180 R110 is going to be similarly stable in a straight line as a 186 FR110 for instance, since the tail is lower and therefore a little more supportive vs the same size FR110. As a refernce, the 180cm R110 is basically the same weight as the Mfree 108 182, has a slightly longer effective edge, but is about 2cm shorter since there is a bit less taper "off the snow".

The R110 is going to feel a little more familiar on edge if you are exclusively coming from cambered skis, and the FR110 is more video-game feeling than that. Honestly, based on all that you have said... I think you want the full blown video game feeling.

Pm me if you are interested, I think I have 1 last pair of 186cm FR110 that will be able to ship in about a month.

KJT,
Where do I pick up an Alta map like that? Pretty sweet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scumpup

I'm wondering how much top end I really lose by going down a length.

---

FWIW I find most days my speed on the FR110 is about 10mph lower than on my FL105 or M102. I never feel limited by its top end when I take out the FR110 because I ski totally differently and don’t even notice or care about speed. (The ski encourages a different style that is really fun. It’s not a point them downhill and smash everything in the way charger.)

It’s also the easiest ski to smear, pivot and generally turn when needed but you can also roll it up on edge and carve if you are on firmer stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LCC

KJT,
Where do I pick up an Alta map like that? Pretty sweet.

---

Got it as an Xmas gift a while back. I will see where they got it from!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkiJitsu

FWIW I find most days my speed on the FR110 is about 10mph lower than on my FL105 or M102. I never feel limited by its top end when I take out the FR110 because I ski totally differently and don’t even notice or care about speed. (The ski encourages a different style that is really fun. It’s not a point them downhill and smash everything in the way charger.)

It’s also the easiest ski to smear, pivot and generally turn when needed but you can also roll it up on edge and carve if you are on firmer stuff.

---

Yea I generally only open up when it's groomed or a straight line, otherwise I basically spin down moguls (go around one forwards, take one around backwards, very lazy and spinny) or I'll be going for flatground tricks. I fear hitting a pedestrian too much hahaha.