Printable View
There was actually a two year run on the ren x bc co-lab. 12/13 and 13/14. 12/13 is pictured in your link. You can tell the difference between the two years from pics by the logo in the die cut base - 13/14's have the 4FRNT logo in white, 12/13's have the logo in the yellowish color. If you have a choice, get the 13/14's (briefly, more dialed).Quote:
Originally Posted by shafty85
If I understand correctly, you're saying to not seal (ie. use linseed oil or similar product)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ggreenie
I think maybe you're misunderstanding greenie, though I'm asking for clarification. Agree with your method of application, though - and it makes sense to me to seal the edges.Quote:
Originally Posted by RockinB
Already purchased a while ago and found the certificate last night - made in Sept 2012, so the 2012/2013 version is what I have. In what respect was the 13/14 version more dialed?Quote:
Originally Posted by meesta
^^^ Basically, more dialed in the sense that since the og release, the white room got better and better at building them each subsequent year. Got the decambering issues (or cambering in this instance) under control, rocker/reflect tech got more dialed, etc. Also, 13/14 was the first year they went semi cap hals over the full wood sidewall - still pretty much full wood sidewall but they hold up better.
I had zero problems with my 11/12's mind you, but my 13/14's are a better built ski. They all kick ass though, enjoy.
Makes sense - especially the cambering/decambering issue. It's noticeable on mine as the sidecut and rocker are not really matching, but I wouldn't really expect them to after any amount of use - the radius is almost never going to change, and I would expect rocker to vary slightly based simply on moisture content of the ski/environment.
Well that was the word from 4FRNT when I bought mine (13/14). I've left mine alone and they've held up perfectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by shafty85
Interesting. Did you contact them about it, or did they have it on their site somewhere?
It's been covered extensively in this thread. Most likely by me when I was the official Mag of 4FRNT on TGRQuote:
Originally Posted by shafty85
It might have been in this thread too, but I saw that on one of the 4FRNT videos talking about the Rens. They say it helps keep the ski stiff if it constantly gets wet and then dried.Quote:
Originally Posted by shafty85
Huh. From my limited knowledge of wood, I would have thought that repeated moisture exposure would, over time, weaken and/or deteriorate the structural properties of the wood, not help maintain its stiffness. Live and learn, I suppose...
Is that position now available?Quote:
Originally Posted by Phildo_Baggins
Where can I send an application?
🎿
You can send cash straight to me for consideration, but no guarantees.Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
Sounds reasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phildo_Baggins
Just picked up 196s. To reiterate the general consensus from this thread and hopefully save someone time:
186 = 87 from tail
196 = 92 from tail
Anyone want to refute 92 for 196? Seems about right for me at 6', 180, directional, fast, generally like 4FRNT recommended (187 hojis dynafits touring & 193 EHPs pivots everyday resort).
I wouldn't change the mount point on mine (92 from tail). 5'9", 165, directional, fast.
Do it. Mounted my 186s at 87 and loved them. I wish my 196s were mounted at 92; the previous owner had them drilled to the farther forward mount line. I hate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Temagami
Appreciate it, gents.
Throwing this out there; I'd love to find a gently molested pair of 196s, preferably with mounts I can re-use for a 316-ish BSL at 92. Extra mega bonus points for Owl or Raven 2.0 topsheets.
As I mentioned in my posted above, my current pair are mounted at 90ish and I kind of don't like it. I'm not a skittle jibber kid who skis with his arms at his waist. I drive my skis.
Holler if you have a pair of 196s.
Shit, I just sold mine on eBay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig
Selling my 196 rens. Owls. Fks for 317. Mounted @92.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...d.php?t=281030
If that was the pair I saw Speedfreak, it was painful seeing them go so cheap.
I'm a little confused. You are talking about not being a jibber and driving skis but asking for a mount that is 2 cm forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig
I'm in the market for RENs and just trying to do my research and was confused by your post.
I was so pissed I forgot to bid when I saw the final price!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedfreak
The money mount if you don't like a center mount is 92. Mine are at 94, I think? It's a center mount which I don't like.Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
My OG Rens from 2010 might be up for retirement this season, basis/edges still in good shape but feeling a bit dead after that amount of use they've had. Gonna have to keep an eye out for a new pair of 186 to replace them. Not even considering other skis at the moment... unless folks have suggestions. Will be mounted with Guardians, other skis I own are Hojis w/ Radicals and Cochise with 916s.
I am sure some people out there would love the feel a softer, deader Ren. Don't retire it---definitely sell it with full disclosure about the wear.Quote:
Originally Posted by gramboh
.