Printable View
Just dropping by to say Marshal is The Man- helped me out above and beyond, and I have done [emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]out of the last [emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]] days touring on my BC[emoji637][emoji639][emoji638]’s, really can’t imagine not owning this ski.
Thanks Marshal!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
SEs. Thigh deep. Holy crap, they're fun.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4e1be587fe.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...56fea42225.jpg
Sent fra min Pixel 8 Pro via Tapatalk
Rad pic man! The black vest over brown shell is class too.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiLyft
So the SEs reminded me a lot of the R105s on groomz, same predictability when laying them over, like someone said, there's a real backbone there. Crazy pivotability. Very much a fatter hybrid of the R105 and FR110. Obviously floats a lot better than the 105s, jury still out vs the fr110s. Not as much of a charger as the 105s, as the reverse is more pronounced, but fuck it. They mash though chop like breakfast. Super, super fun skis.
Gonna ski them all day tomorrow, too.
Sent fra min Pixel 8 Pro via Tapatalk
Completely agree. I don’t chirp about them often because they’re unobtainium but the R ninety nine comps fuck like pornstars. Together with the Rdimes I feel ready for most anything. My fav complimentary ski combo to date.Quote:
Originally Posted by GBB;[emoji[emoji6[emoji640
Like button-> SkiLyft pic
This ski testing stuff is serious business
Prefer the science I was practicing today on the SEs. Plan to move back a cm on the RCs me thinks..
Where did you mount the SE?Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiLyft
-nine and a half if I recall correctly
Same boat. I went -eight and will go to 9 on the RC.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiLyft
Just did some measuring. Mounted eighty five from the tail. Which would be - ten…
Maybe I don’t move them, I was in pretty warm pow today when landing off the ten to twenty foot pillows could feel them hinge and plow just a bit.
Granted I’m probably two twenty with my avy kit… so might just be a bit more weight on the ski than it was intended for?
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
RC stifness plus light camber will correct what you felt at recco line. They will have a much more supportive tip.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Ya. I think the camber will be money.
[QUOTE/]Ya. I think the camber will be money.[/QUOTE]
It’s good dude. The ZF’s are super rad so the RC will be sick as well. The lightly softer flex will be more approachable. If the SE came out with the RC or even better the ZF flex it would be so sick!
I figured the RC would fix what I felt!! Stoked MrFunky!!!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I'm at -8 on my SEs, actually. Today was awesome, super deep in places, just going balls to the wall in the woods.
Sent fra min Pixel 8 Pro via Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ddbc7eca47.jpg
These. These are great fun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look sick Kim!Quote:
Originally Posted by arild
What made you decide to go -8 Arild? I'm at -10.5 on my SE's and was thinking today that moving forward might be beneficial to make the ski feel more balanced with the softer tail.
Anyone dying for a pair of SE's? If someone wants them I'd rather move them along instead of drilling another set of holes. The R110 calls my name anytime I'm on anything else anyway
I've skied the SE116 at -10.5, -8, and currently mounted -9.25Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
IMO they skied great at all of those locations, but I am really digging -9.25 myself. Super balanced, crazy quick, but opens up awesomely in soft snow. I do think the R110 and SE116 are more similar than different as a ski / use -- or really the SE116 is kind of a tweener w/ the 193 swallowtail and 187 R110 IMO.
I'm skiing the HB122 every low vis socked in storm day and grab the SE116 once the alpine opens / sun comes out as a data point. The -9.25 mount gives me the same amout of shovel (104cm) as the HB122 at -6.5 FWIW, which makes them pretty easy to swap between actually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
Yo S,Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
Yeah, wanted to make them chargier,fatter FR110s, which they do with aplomb. I'm actually surprised you went -10, dude, given your preferences otherwise. I might remount at -9,25 as MO suggests. Just a touch less tail.
Having not skied R110s, I can't comment on that, but I always imagined these would be similar. Sidecut radius is longer, but should be about the same effective edge as the 18x r/fr 110s, and they feel like it.
Cheers lads.
Sent fra min Pixel 8 Pro via Tapatalk
The supernovas look pretty rad, Marshal must have known I’d committed to not buying new skis next year but that promise didn’t extend to wife gear. Looks like layup is same as the rest of the HL inbounds line, is this just the AM100/R110 geometry with a camber pocket and shorty sizing, or is there other tinkering going on?
YO!! Yessir. I am doing 50% fiberglass 50% carbon on the layup to shave a little weight for a lighter skier, and then of course optimizing the flex for the length. but generally, I feel like the ladies after these are keen for full power skis. I can do a carbon run for touring at some point if folks want too.Quote:
Originally Posted by shank
Regarding the shape itself, I am baciaslly blending the AM100 and R110 shapes inside the camber pocket vs outside the rocker profile shapes. I am SUPER hyped on how it turned out. Like... yeah. so fired up.
Showed my wife the supernovas and she requested I start selling some of her quiver.. well done MO
Same core as the midweight 50/50 skis you are testing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk
Now I'm curious, the supernovas are going to have a camber/rocker profile similar to the AM100 but with the lighter core. Same rocker/camber profile for the 100 and 110?