Big Mountain Powder Chargers - Heritage Lab C113 and FL113 - Dedicated Thread

Attachment 444080
Attachment 444081

I was very lucky to ski the 187 C113 today. I generally prefer skis with minimal sidecut and little/no camber, so these were already right up my alley. You can go straight if you want, shut it down easily, and ski with your weight forwards or backwards. They are the longest skis I have ever used, and I am a wuss who normally skis <175cm skis but these did not feel uncomfortably long, even though I was using 1200g Skorpius boots. I've only spent a day on the BMT 109s but they are the most similar skis I have used to these. My main ski right now is the newer Dynafit Beast 108 and these are just so much better. As others have said in other threads, the Beast has a seesaw/rockinghorse type feeling that I take as an acceptable tradeoff for their excellent agility and predictability in different snow types, but these have all the positive qualities of the Beast while also feeling super planted and not seesaw-like at all. The snow was excellent today so not the best testing conditions but I wanted to share because I imagine not many others have had the privilege to try these yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

yeah man, that ski, along with the monster 98, are the exact skis I am going after with the comp build R99!

---

I think the AM is pretty close to my 187 OG LPRs.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benneke10

I've only spent a day on the BMT 109s but they are the most similar skis I have used to these.

---

High praise indeed - BMT109s are fantastic imho.

I guess these could be a future option then, especially if you guys decide to make 182 or so version. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benneke10

Attachment 444080
Attachment 444081

I was very lucky to ski the 187 C113 today. I generally prefer skis with minimal sidecut and little/no camber, so these were already right up my alley. You can go straight if you want, shut it down easily, and ski with your weight forwards or backwards. They are the longest skis I have ever used, and I am a wuss who normally skis <175cm skis but these did not feel uncomfortably long, even though I was using 1200g Skorpius boots. I've only spent a day on the BMT 109s but they are the most similar skis I have used to these. My main ski right now is the newer Dynafit Beast 108 and these are just so much better. As others have said in other threads, the Beast has a seesaw/rockinghorse type feeling that I take as an acceptable tradeoff for their excellent agility and predictability in different snow types, but these have all the positive qualities of the Beast while also feeling super planted and not seesaw-like at all. The snow was excellent today so not the best testing conditions but I wanted to share because I imagine not many others have had the privilege to try these yet.

---

Dude, this warms my heart! They even look as badass as we wanted them to be, and that's saying quite a bit!

MO told me my skis are being shipped today. I'm kinda psyched.



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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

High praise indeed - BMT109s are fantastic imho.

I guess these could be a future option then, especially if you guys decide to make 182 or so version. :)

---

I am in the same camp. I love the design, but I think the 187cm would be too long for me. I skied the BMT 109 in the 186cm length and sold it because it was too long for me. If the C113 has a similar flex pattern as the BMT 109, I would likely buy a ~177cm version of the C113.

I'm most interested in them as a replacement for my 186 BMT 109's. REALLY REALLY want to hear comparisons to that exact ski. I went back and fourth about buying C113 or C132's this year and went 132 because I've got my 109's which will be extremely hard to dethrone since they work so well in so many conditions. But, the gear whore in me always leaves that possibility open. So all you guys who get a pair of these C113's need to post as much detailed info as possible, as soon as possible.

How stiff did the FL113's end up coming out? Compared to, say, an XXL.

Also, just in case I decide I need to punish my wallet a little bit, are there any 187's left?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toast2266

How stiff did the FL113's end up coming out? Compared to, say, an XXL.

Also, just in case I decide I need to punish my wallet a little bit, are there any 187's left?

---

I'd say they are right about as stiff as an XXL/LPR/Monster 108, but the flex pattern is a bit more like the Monster (slightly stiffer shovel, slightly softer tail), where the Dynastar stuff ihas a slightly softer shovel and stiffer tail comparatively speaking.

They are quite similar flex/stiffness to my 1st gen 196 Renegades (which are now headed to Mr Pretzel).

There are a couple pair of 187 FL113 left . The 194s are sold out till next fall tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Thomas

I'm most interested in them as a replacement for my 186 BMT 109's. REALLY REALLY want to hear comparisons to that exact ski. I went back and fourth about buying C113 or C132's this year and went 132 because I've got my 109's which will be extremely hard to dethrone since they work so well in so many conditions. But, the gear whore in me always leaves that possibility open. So all you guys who get a pair of these C113's need to post as much detailed info as possible, as soon as possible.

---

I don't know if I am qualified to answer this, as I have owned the BMT122, VWK, and BMT94 but never skied the 109.

But here is my .02

1). Compared to the VWK I think skiers will find the C113 a little more lively, responsive, surfier, and close to 150g lighter. Lengthwise, they are very much a tweener between the 184 and 191 VWK. The Volkl, due to its weight, may feel slightly damper in chop inbounds.

2). Compared to the BMT94/122 I think skiers will find the C113 to have a slightly more fall line personality, a touch more support in the tail, and to skin a bit better on tricky skin tracks. The Volkls may be a touch more forgiving at slower speed.

Very curious to hear what others think, as the C113 gets on snow!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

I'd say they are right about as stiff as an XXL/LPR/Monster 108, but the flex pattern is a bit more like the Monster (slightly stiffer shovel, slightly softer tail), where the Dynastar stuff ihas a slightly softer shovel and stiffer tail comparatively speaking.

They are quite similar flex/stiffness to my 1st gen 196 Renegades (which are now headed to Mr Pretzel).

There are a couple pair of 187 FL113 left . The 194s are sold out till next fall tho.

---

Dammit. I was kinda hoping you'd say something that would make me not want them. I don't really need another set of skis on the rack right now, but those sound fun as hell.

[Sigh]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Thomas

I'm most interested in them as a replacement for my 186 BMT 109's. REALLY REALLY want to hear comparisons to that exact ski. I went back and fourth about buying C113 or C132's this year and went 132 because I've got my 109's which will be extremely hard to dethrone since they work so well in so many conditions. But, the gear whore in me always leaves that possibility open. So all you guys who get a pair of these C113's need to post as much detailed info as possible, as soon as possible.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Olson

I don't know if I am qualified to answer this, as I have owned the BMT122, VWK, and BMT94 but never skied the 109.

But here is my .02

1). Compared to the VWK I think skiers will find the C113 a little more lively, responsive, surfier, and close to 150g lighter. Lengthwise, they are very much a tweener between the 184 and 191 VWK. The Volkl, due to its weight, may feel slightly damper in chop inbounds.

2). Compared to the BMT94/122 I think skiers will find the C113 to have a slightly more fall line personality, a touch more support in the tail, and to skin a bit better on tricky skin tracks. The Volkls may be a touch more forgiving at slower speed.

Very curious to hear what others think, as the C113 gets on snow!

---

I liked the BMT109 a lot but not as much as the BMT94 or carbonic Katana... or BG108t, which dethroned the 109 for me personally.

The 94 and KVW are dang close in their rocker lines, long and low. I thought the 109 had more rocker than necessary which made the tail seem vague and less supportable than I wanted.

The 113 is a pretty compelling shape and I'm keen to hear some reports soon, too.

Planks arrived today and all the big dick energy from inside the box blew the carboard right open for me. Everything looks so good. 194s FL113s coming in around the same weight as my LP105s, woof so pumped.

Thanks for it all Marshal!

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Umm, bry, full 3D pic set is required

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

Planks arrived today and all the big dick energy from inside the box blew the carboard right open for me. Everything looks so good. 194s FL113s coming in around the same weight as my LP105s, woof so pumped.

Thanks for it all Marshal!

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

---

Please mount with gold pivots, post pics so I can live vicariously through you until feb 7. If UPS don't lose them over the Atlantic somehow.

Carry on.

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

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ea9c62eda8.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4d5cc417ca.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...22968cf117.jpg

oh baby

Thank you.

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

I’m pretty sure that’s the raddest set of profile pics of all time.


One gripe, that makes zero sense, but is stated to kill all further gripes. They’re strapped together.

Now, all of you internet nerds can fuck off— and understand that when weighted with a penis, things go reverse.

That FL113 is the shizzle.
[emoji144][emoji144][emoji144]

The profile pics are great, but I’d like to see what else is residing in that garage.

That's a lot more splay than I was expecting on the FL113. Is that a true representation or is it accentuated by the strap placement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong

The profile pics are great, but I’d like to see what else is residing in that garage.

---

I can assure you there's nothing spectacular going on, happy to share to some garage thread.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bry

I can assure you there's nothing spectacular going on, happy to share to some garage thread.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

---

Dang. Fancy door and floor got me all excited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackattack

That's a lot more splay than I was expecting on the FL113. Is that a true representation or is it accentuated by the strap placement?

---

Spec is for 65mm tip height, so fairly significant amount.

No straps no camberhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...e5679dbcc8.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...e458b98517.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Those look really awesome man