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

[themutt]

@themutt - I’d say split the difference at -10.5 and call it a day!

Roger that!

[sf]

For those of you with some time on them; how do they compare to other skis? Especially the FL187s

Tails of Rustlers and flex of Bodes being mentioned so far. Faction 13s et. Other comparisons to skis with one or more similar design charateristics?

Any similarities to 193 EHPs, Bodes etc

[chewski]

For those of you with some time on them; how do they compare to other skis? Especially the FL187s

Tails of Rustlers and flex of Bodes being mentioned so far. Faction 13s et. Other comparisons to skis with one or more similar design charateristics?

Any similarities to 193 EHPs, Bodes etc

I spent 1.5 days on 187 fl113's this weekend and was working on a proper write up but got slammed with other stuff. It's still coming but to answer this question:

A lot more ski than 184 fx104, 186 bodacious, and 189 billygoats. Probably most similar to 187 xxl's, but different because of rocker and dynastar trends slightly softer tip and stiffer tail, whereas marshal went stiffer tip slightly softer tail. Those are all the comparable skis i currently own and have tons of time on over the last 5-15 years.

A ton of skis came and went, so skis that felt easier (from distant memory): 185 motherships, 186 supernatural 108, and 185 og cochise. Skis that felt similarish: 192 lp105 (definitely easier on groomed but maybe more difficult due to length and camber in tight spaces? Don't remember... but didn't think these were much different than 187 xxl's either). Skis that felt like more ski: 192 big dumps, 194 sender squads (it could just be mount point for me), 195 superbros, and for some reason 188 invictus (the original. I can't for the life of me understand why this one was so hard to ski based on hand flexing them)

The preview of my review: these suck on groomers (good edge hold, though) and firm moguls, but are a riot everywhere else. As i wrote in the original HL skis thread, if you embrace skibrd's words about the sender squad that "These are just absolutely smash mouth blow shit up well shotgunning PBRs in jorts and pit vipers at Mach loony type of ski" then they somehow get easier to ski

[Sylvan]

Great thoughts Chewski; looking forward to the expanded version.
Skied 7 of 8 on mine, gonna sit on the sidelines, read other mags thoughts, so as not to come across like a fanatic, but my 194 FL113s are a pretty special ski for my preferences, to the point that, if FL105s weren’t coming to market, Id probably bump the mount forward to -10 and DD em at Blackcomb. Definitely not for the masses. Turns out when I thought I was supporting Marshal, it in fact is the other way around. Alright, I’ll shut my mouth now.

[Marshal Olson]

Cheers y'all, good thoughts. Really appreciate the kind words, and glad folks are digging these skis. Arild and I are thrilled they exist!

Regarding the FL113, I put in 25 tram laps the past week to ski my legs back into shape (my ski season basically started mid-Jan due to injury), but here are my thoughts. These are just my honest opinions from the runs, and very curious to hear other's impressions on them as well. I am mostly benchmarking against Monster 108 and Faction Thirteens as those are the two skis I have spent the most amount of time on (100's of days each) in this class.

(1) Provided you have the speed and leverage, they carve extremely well. I rate them nearly as high as my old Monster 108s and at least as good as any other ski in the class. The 187 FL113 is a little less lively/responsive at slower speeds than the 184 M108, and nearly as composed at speed as the 191 M108. Thirteens can be carved, but nothing like this.

(2) The flex profile and stiffness is exactly what I was hoping for - the shovels gobble up chop and the tails are very supportive, but never beat you up. It is basically modelled after the M108, and I would say they feel very similar with speed in broken snow. Just mow it down like its not even there. The Faction Thirteen definitely have a tail that could punish you (as did squads, RC112, LPR, etc) if you got out of your flow the smallest amount or you changed turnshape in the wrong snow conditions. The FL113 is much more friendly, without giving up top end.

(3) The skis handle windbuff and windboard very well, but do need speed and skier input to work right, due to the near reverse rocker profile and stiffness underfoot. They are not quite as smooth as the M108 at modest speeds (which is the best ski ever in this environment), and maybe even a touch rough slow speed lazy skiing in really grabby/scrappy snow, but once you open the throttle, they are in the same conversation. Much smoother than the Thirteen.

(4) The are telepathic in pow. So much more surfy and quick to pivot than I expected. Honestly, they ski more like an EHP in boot top+ than a comp ski. Thirteens used to be my #1 here, but these handily beat them. The M108 is maybe the worst pow ski ever, haha. Way more of a bottom feeder tip diver than even a Cochise.

(5) Overall, I am so stoked. They are (unsurprisingly) a bit less responsive than a 184 M108 in moguls and a touch less smooth at modest speeds on dust-over-crust. But that isn't what a 113mm fully rockered ski is for, its what the upcoming FL105 is for. They don't punish me when I get lazy, but they remind me when I find myself being passive. I find the FL113 extremely confidence inspiring, approaching unflappable, and certainly liking speed and skier input, but never really beating me up. They are everything I had dreamed of and more.

I hope a few more people like the sounds of that so we can do another production run or two... but if not... no stress! They are absolutely niche skis, so I have my pairs + backups to cover the next 8 years!

Standard acknowledgement of inherent bias apply

[shroom]

thanks for that marshal, don’t hold back.

moar pow inputs plz.

[chewski]

So last weekend i spent 1.5 days on the 187 fl113's mounted -11cm up at mammoth. I'm 6', 180lbs. My skiing style is outriggered and i love base bevel. similar category skis i own and have used extensively over the last 5-15 years are 187 xxl's, 189 pre-asym billygoats, 186 bodacious, 184 devastators, and 184 fx104. Conditions were thaw/refreeze on the lower mountain, soft midwinter conditions on the mid and upper mountain, and some wind groomed areas of shallow chalk. But mostly no new snow in a while, heavily skied, and tons of wind.

I bought these because xxl's were a milestone ski for me and I always read the home rocker thread, but was too afraid to try it. These reminded me of that dream 10+ years ago. Some years all i want to do is test different skis back to back. Some years i bring 1 ski and run what i brung. This is the first time in 5 years i have bought a single piece of ski equipment, so i am enjoying sussing out differences in skis again. So on to how they ski.

On the lower mountain things were very firm and edge hold was totally adequate. I dropped under chair 25 and skied the southwest facing aspects that were fully refrozen shitfuck snow. You know... for science. I know these are powder chargers and chop destroyers but THESE ARE FULL STOP THE BEST SKIS I HAVE EVER USED FOR STEAMROLLING DEATH COOKIES AND LOPPING OFF CHICKEN HEADS. All caps for emphasis, obviously. The big radius and mellow rocker let me pivot easily, the stiffness held an edge on refrozen, and the rubber mellowed out the harsh like i cannot describe. This was a hugely pleasant surprise. Nobody was skiing this area on purpose, but these made the conditions *almost* fun. The freeride line's construction is money, and now i am pretty sure i am getting the fr110 too.

Next i did a few steeper, firm groomers off chair 25 just to see what speed these need to hook up and come alive. Fast? Really fast? Ludicrous speed? Well for ME they pretty much DON'T... Lol. Marshal likes them for carving, but obviously he's bigger than me and a much better skier. With speed they definitely do hook up, but I could not get them to do a whole lot more than their 40+m radius turns. I've skied xxl's and bodacious and bg's on groomers... these are more vague and slower into the turn (and yes i skied them with marshal's factory tune). However, there is something wholly unholy fun about ripping roughed up end of day groomers at mach schnell without feeling a thing coming through your footbeds (ominous foreshadowing...).

Next i moved over to chair 5 where conditions were decidedly still soft and mostly wind groomed. On chalk these were obviously awesome, but there are always varying degrees of moguls on the face of 5 too. On the small and medium bumps i could just motor over the tops with reckless abandon like on xxl's (but even better due to the tip rocker). The phrase "no speed limit" gets thrown around waaay too often (even my 184 mantra 102's have a speed limit that's pretty easy to find), but these truly had no speed limit for me. The combinations of stiff tips/midsection with slightly forgiving tail, long effective edge with easy pivot, super damp construction with some rebound energy as well all add up to ski that WANTS to accelerate and start running straight. But they also feel more in control when you do, allowing slashes and drifts once up to speed.

On larger, firmer moguls like on chair 3's west bowl, i definitely struggled. These skis have a tendency to accelerate VERY QUICKLY the INSTANT they enter the fall line. This really caught me out a few times. They started to run away as if driven by some magnetic force. Now i recently got worked pretty hard by 194 sender squads (albeit in very firm conditions) and know when I'm getting skied by the ski. This felt different. I doubt i will ever be able to zipper line tight bump lines with these, but obviously nobody ever claimed these were meant to. Once i accepted that i had to slow down and double or triple up bumps before finding a line that would allow a near straightline runout i had a much better time of it.

I spent the rest of day 1 mostly lapping the top off chair 23. These did admirably on our brutally windfucked entrances, but i still don't trust myself on super techy terrain with these yet. At times i found the inside and outside ski needed very precise weighting or they would track on different sized arcs. Sylvan said these can handle both forward or neutral stance well, and i agree, but inside/outside weighting seem extremely important for me, more so than on other skis. On groomers where the skis kinda wanted to do the splits before you reach the (high) minimum speed limit when the skis hook up, it seemed to me that both feet needed very even weighting inside/outside. Once up to speed it was kinda business as usual again. But on steep terrain, the outside ski would track a smaller arc and my skis would sometimes knock together. Very heavily biasing my weight on my downhill ski was needed to correct this issue. I will chalk it up to learning curve, but I paused on rocky entrances a few times before going in. I really think i was starting to get the hang of it by the end of the first day, and by the second day it felt pretty natural to me.

On the soft middle sections of dropout and wipeout chutes these were, once again, very intuitive. But the standout performance really came in the bumped up lower third on the way back to chair 23. People looked at me incredulously as I carved and drifted giant turns through this section like it was a smooth groomer. Runouts are seriously like turning on video game mode on these skis and it's hilariously addicting.

I can imagine how good these will be in soft chop and deeper crud, and could actually see them being a fairly easy ski in these conditions. But my takeaway from skiing these in less ideal conditions is that if you drive them like you stole them, then you will be rewarded with smooth stability and surprising maneuverability. When you slow it down, though, they start to bark back. Just give it more gas and trust everything will somehow work itself out, because it usually does...

Until my last run down a chopped up groomer. I caught some air during a transition into an unexpectedly bumpy section while going really fast. I caught an edge and had my biggest crash in years. I've been saying to my friends that i am slowing down and should probably turn my din down from 11 to 10 (when swapping skis, i still regularly enter the double eject send portal at 8 or 9). But I didn't and i actually sprained my ACL. I'm pretty sure it will be good to go in a few weeks, but this was my first knee injury and a little scary. Lots of things contributed to me crashing, BUT marshal asked earlier if anyone would consider running these with more base bevel. Now obviously it would garner heavy eye rolling if i immediately said "yes," so i tried these at factory tune first. Given that I could not get these going on groomers that well at 1* base bevel anyways, i will definitely be upping it to 1.5* base bevel for added pivot and less catching. I really think there is more to gain than to lose by doing so. When my knee heals up i will report back.

Sorry for the super long post, but I ordered these, switched my order, messaged arild and marshal a bunch, then reordered these. I was just looking for some information before taking the plunge, so I wanted to contribute as much as i could. Overall these make me WANT to ski differently than i have been, and i am excited to get out on them again.

[Marshal Olson]

i actually sprained my ACL. I'm pretty sure it will be good to go in a few weeks, but this was my first knee injury and a little scary.

DUDE! ! rest up and hope you are back on snow pronto.
Thanks for all the thoughts and feedback.
Very interested to hear your thoughts as you personalize the tune too.
I'm super happy with where I have landed with mine, and happy to chat a few techniques too, if useful.

[chewski]

DUDE! ! rest up and hope you are back on snow pronto.
Thanks for all the thoughts and feedback.
Very interested to hear your thoughts as you personalize the tune too.
I'm super happy with where I have landed with mine, and happy to chat a few techniques too, if useful.

Thanks it's not too bad (no pain or swelling). Just feels a little "off" at full extension. Actually crashed up top and after the pain subsided from the crash I actually skied down with no pain at all in my knee. Still very strong if i keep my knee from full lock, so planning to get back out relatively soon. Yeah lets chat on tune and technique some more

[Marshal Olson]

Thanks it's not too bad (no pain or swelling). Just feels a little "off" at full extension. Actually crashed up top and after the pain subsided from the cras I actually skied down with no pain at all in my knee. Still very strong if i keep my knee from full lock, so planning to get back out soon. Yeah lets chat on tune and technique some more

Oh man, great to hear! Been there. a chill week or two and good as new, in my experience. I am very curious if you felt like the hooked edge on the crash was tip/tail/underfoot? May be tough to know as it probably happened quickly.

I skied my Monster 108 and 2/2 and added extra bevel freehand at the ends. I didn't want to start there w/ the FL113, since The FL113 is essentially reverse once broken in, and the Monster is a lightly cambered ski, that needs more help to drift. Additonally, I would be surprised if folks needed/wanted to detune the ends.

With all that in mind, I went 1.5 on my FL113. I also didn't want to round the edges, since I like to carve, so what I actually did was take a diamond stone, held just in my hand, at approx 10deg base edge bevel, and essentially free-tuned the base edge through the length of the ski, concentrating 4-6" fore/aft of the binding. Passes with both 400 and then 1000 stones. This, for me, gave them a "skied-in" feel, knocked the edge down ever so slightly, without giving up the edge bite. Going forward, I will just prepare all 113 this way, since it is how I am skiing them (unless others disagree!!).

Curious what you do, and how it performs!

[Lord Thomas]

Need more beta on the C113 too. Is this the replacement for my beloved BMT 109's???

[sf]

Excellent info on the FL113. Unfortunately it sounds like it would be like buying a Porsche and only driving it to the grocery store for me.

Too bad, as the shape is very interesting. Will follow beta on the C vs BMT closely

[arild]

Need more beta on the C113 too. Is this the replacement for my beloved BMT 109's???

I'll try to ski mine soon, but jury's still out on when it's going to stop raining over here.

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

[arild]

Re: tune

I might go to 1.5 degs, not sure yet. Today, drove across the Swedish border to get out of the rain, encountered pretty much the shittiest conditions imaginable.

Refreeze, with half an inch of wind affected fresh on top. Groomers were all icy, so interesting place to bring 194 thunder skis.

Funny thing with the stock tune is that it grips really well on icy groomers, and when I dared letting loose in the trees, got to downright terrifying speeds before realizing these are supposed to drop speed super quickly.

Low vis, shit snow, skis did well. R87s might've been better, but who cares.




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

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

I did some additional base bevel and it seems to have given more slash/drift to the ski which I really like. Plan to get out today on some untracked/chop. Still fiddling with boot issues so I'm not the best reviewer. Still thinking back to a few ski days ago where something "unlocked". Boots felt stiff enough and the snow was just right and I absolutely skied the best I had in years.

[Sylvan]

When I read Marshal's post from the other day, I thought to myself, 'That pretty much sums up my week...except for the groomer part. Probably my shitty technique.' Challenge accepted.

Used a little more brain matter on the way back to the lifts, and they indeed hook up great. Not auto carvers like a shorter radius ski (B97, K108), and clearly a learning curve for me to carve a 45mR ski, but once I had the confidence to lean em over far enough to engage the entire EE, they rail. Bueno.

[themutt]

Need more beta on the C113 too. Is this the replacement for my beloved BMT 109's???

Still forming my full impressions but the TLDR for now is: These skis fucking rip. They're some of the best soft snow touring sticks I've used.

Whether you want the 113s or the 105s depends on your use case and location. I’m in the PNW and I suspect these will win the winter/new snow touring spot in my quiver, though I am very curious about the 105s to see how they perform in a maritime snowpack. The 113 width is about as wide as I’d want to go for a regular touring stick out here.

I have two days on them so far. One skiing very chopped up pow with a firm base underneath in the resort to get acquainted. The other was a tour that involved untracked blower, some chopped up pow, slightly wind affected snow, and a shitty suncrust.

These things are versatile in soft snow and an absolute riot to ski. I’m very impressed with this ski’s ability to be surfy, but simultaneously cater to a directional skiing style. I find them to be manageable in tight stuff, though I will say that they prefer to boogie and not noodle through trees. The 187 length feels right for me at 6’0’’ and 190 lbs – especially since we have a lot of tight bushwacky terrain/skinners where I tour on a regular basis and I don’t feel like more length is necessary for top end speed on the downs.

The beauty of this ski in my opinion is that you can shift gears easily. Want to floor it in open terrain? Fuck yeah let’s go. Want to pivot quickly and shut it down before an air? Cool, the C113s got you. Need to maneuver a tight spot? In the 187 length that’s totally doable. I’ve skied sticks that are better in 1^st or 2^nd gear, but very few things that are this light where 5^th gear is as easy to ski as 1^st gear.

To state the obvious, this is not a firm snow ski. The C113s can carve a turn on firm snow and get you back to the lift, but to me they feel a little bit like the old 35M GS skis with a 113m waist in character. They’re not the right tool for laying trenches on firm snow unless it is very smooth or soft. In the resort, they did get knocked around a little when moving between setup piles and the firmer bottom, but that is to be expected given the weight and touring setup

However, if you change your style in choppy, set up, snow to bounce from pile to pile, these skis come alive and are super fun. Just don’t expect to use them to blast through chop at the resort (sounds like a job for the FLs).

I’ve had very few instances where a ski puts a smile on my face instantly after the first run AND have that smile get bigger and bigger after each run. as I get acquainted with the ski. The C113s did that and very much exceeded my expectations.

Great work on this one guys.

[arild]

Still forming my full impressions but the TLDR for now is: These skis fucking rip. They're some of the best soft snow touring sticks I've used.

Whether you want the 113s or the 105s depends on your use case and location. I’m in the PNW and I suspect these will win the winter/new snow touring spot in my quiver, though I am very curious about the 105s to see how they perform in a maritime snowpack. The 113 width is about as wide as I’d want to go for a regular touring stick out here.

I have two days on them so far. One skiing very chopped up pow with a firm base underneath in the resort to get acquainted. The other was a tour that involved untracked blower, some chopped up pow, slightly wind affected snow, and a shitty suncrust.

These things are versatile in soft snow and an absolute riot to ski. I’m very impressed with this ski’s ability to be surfy, but simultaneously cater to a directional skiing style. I find them to be manageable in tight stuff, though I will say that they prefer to boogie and not noodle through trees. The 187 length feels right for me at 6’0’’ and 190 lbs – especially since we have a lot of tight bushwacky terrain/skinners where I tour on a regular basis and I don’t feel like more length is necessary for top end speed on the downs.

The beauty of this ski in my opinion is that you can shift gears easily. Want to floor it in open terrain? Fuck yeah let’s go. Want to pivot quickly and shut it down before an air? Cool, the C113s got you. Need to maneuver a tight spot? In the 187 length that’s totally doable. I’ve skied sticks that are better in 1^st or 2^nd gear, but very few things that are this light where 5^th gear is as easy to ski as 1^st gear.

To state the obvious, this is not a firm snow ski. The C113s can carve a turn on firm snow and get you back to the lift, but to me they feel a little bit like the old 35M GS skis with a 113m waist in character. They’re not the right tool for laying trenches on firm snow unless it is very smooth or soft. In the resort, they did get knocked around a little when moving between setup piles and the firmer bottom, but that is to be expected given the weight and touring setup

However, if you change your style in choppy, set up, snow to bounce from pile to pile, these skis come alive and are super fun. Just don’t expect to use them to blast through chop at the resort (sounds like a job for the FLs).

I’ve had very few instances where a ski puts a smile on my face instantly after the first run AND have that smile get bigger and bigger after each run. as I get acquainted with the ski. The C113s did that and very much exceeded my expectations.

Great work on this one guys.

Wow, thanks for that glowing endorsement!

Hope they continue to serve you well, but I'm counting on it.

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

[Lord Thomas]

Still forming my full impressions but the TLDR for now is: These skis fucking rip. They're some of the best soft snow touring sticks I've used.

Whether you want the 113s or the 105s depends on your use case and location. I’m in the PNW and I suspect these will win the winter/new snow touring spot in my quiver, though I am very curious about the 105s to see how they perform in a maritime snowpack. The 113 width is about as wide as I’d want to go for a regular touring stick out here.

I have two days on them so far. One skiing very chopped up pow with a firm base underneath in the resort to get acquainted. The other was a tour that involved untracked blower, some chopped up pow, slightly wind affected snow, and a shitty suncrust.

These things are versatile in soft snow and an absolute riot to ski. I’m very impressed with this ski’s ability to be surfy, but simultaneously cater to a directional skiing style. I find them to be manageable in tight stuff, though I will say that they prefer to boogie and not noodle through trees. The 187 length feels right for me at 6’0’’ and 190 lbs – especially since we have a lot of tight bushwacky terrain/skinners where I tour on a regular basis and I don’t feel like more length is necessary for top end speed on the downs.

The beauty of this ski in my opinion is that you can shift gears easily. Want to floor it in open terrain? Fuck yeah let’s go. Want to pivot quickly and shut it down before an air? Cool, the C113s got you. Need to maneuver a tight spot? In the 187 length that’s totally doable. I’ve skied sticks that are better in 1^st or 2^nd gear, but very few things that are this light where 5^th gear is as easy to ski as 1^st gear.

To state the obvious, this is not a firm snow ski. The C113s can carve a turn on firm snow and get you back to the lift, but to me they feel a little bit like the old 35M GS skis with a 113m waist in character. They’re not the right tool for laying trenches on firm snow unless it is very smooth or soft. In the resort, they did get knocked around a little when moving between setup piles and the firmer bottom, but that is to be expected given the weight and touring setup

However, if you change your style in choppy, set up, snow to bounce from pile to pile, these skis come alive and are super fun. Just don’t expect to use them to blast through chop at the resort (sounds like a job for the FLs).

I’ve had very few instances where a ski puts a smile on my face instantly after the first run AND have that smile get bigger and bigger after each run. as I get acquainted with the ski. The C113s did that and very much exceeded my expectations.

Great work on this one guys.

Goddammit, that's what I did and didn't want to hear. I love the BMT109 because it cycles between 1st and 3rd or 4th gear easily and never really shits the bed in just about any kind of backcountry snow. They always work. However, I miss the 5th gear that my old Lhasa 191's had when I was feeling a little aggro. Sounds like these C113's might be my spirit animal for a touring DD. All the necessary gears. Need to hear more beta, however.

[Marshal Olson]

Still forming my full impressions but the TLDR for now is: These skis fucking rip. They're some of the best soft snow touring sticks I've used.

Whether you want the 113s or the 105s depends on your use case and location. I’m in the PNW and I suspect these will win the winter/new snow touring spot in my quiver, though I am very curious about the 105s to see how they perform in a maritime snowpack. The 113 width is about as wide as I’d want to go for a regular touring stick out here.

I have two days on them so far. One skiing very chopped up pow with a firm base underneath in the resort to get acquainted. The other was a tour that involved untracked blower, some chopped up pow, slightly wind affected snow, and a shitty suncrust.

These things are versatile in soft snow and an absolute riot to ski. I’m very impressed with this ski’s ability to be surfy, but simultaneously cater to a directional skiing style. I find them to be manageable in tight stuff, though I will say that they prefer to boogie and not noodle through trees. The 187 length feels right for me at 6’0’’ and 190 lbs – especially since we have a lot of tight bushwacky terrain/skinners where I tour on a regular basis and I don’t feel like more length is necessary for top end speed on the downs.

The beauty of this ski in my opinion is that you can shift gears easily. Want to floor it in open terrain? Fuck yeah let’s go. Want to pivot quickly and shut it down before an air? Cool, the C113s got you. Need to maneuver a tight spot? In the 187 length that’s totally doable. I’ve skied sticks that are better in 1^st or 2^nd gear, but very few things that are this light where 5^th gear is as easy to ski as 1^st gear.

To state the obvious, this is not a firm snow ski. The C113s can carve a turn on firm snow and get you back to the lift, but to me they feel a little bit like the old 35M GS skis with a 113m waist in character. They’re not the right tool for laying trenches on firm snow unless it is very smooth or soft. In the resort, they did get knocked around a little when moving between setup piles and the firmer bottom, but that is to be expected given the weight and touring setup

However, if you change your style in choppy, set up, snow to bounce from pile to pile, these skis come alive and are super fun. Just don’t expect to use them to blast through chop at the resort (sounds like a job for the FLs).

I’ve had very few instances where a ski puts a smile on my face instantly after the first run AND have that smile get bigger and bigger after each run. as I get acquainted with the ski. The C113s did that and very much exceeded my expectations.

Great work on this one guys.

Great to read this! I have similar thoughts, and will put them together this evening and tomorrow. Glad you are digging them so much.

[Marshal Olson]

OK! C113 thoughts. Again, acknowledging inherent bias, but trying to just post my honest and objective opinions.

I have about 30,000 vert on my pair so far. Mounted with Alpinist bindings at -11. Skied about half with big boots (>1500g LaSpo Vanguard) and about half with nerd boots (<1000g LaSpo Raceborg w/ F1 LT liners). My reference skis coming into this are BMT 94, BMT 122, 184 VWK, and Praxis GPO UL.

(1) Smooth and Consistent Buffed Snow - The most comparable ski is the 184 VWK. The C113 measures about 5cm longer straight tape vs. the 184 VWK, that extra length is mostly at the ends (in the taper). The VWK EE is about the same. Both are just really effortless and so fun. Any turn, everywhere, don't have to think about it. The C113 has a little more supportive tail than the VWK or BM94, but generally. As long as the snow was smooth and predictable, I could drive both with the nerd boots just fine.

(2) Legit Pow - To me, the BMT 122 and GPO UL felt a little more surfy than the C113, but the C113 felt noticeably more lively and surfy than the VWK. I would say the C113 is closer to the the 122 and GPO UL than the VWK to me. The GPO UL felt more turny and less happy to track as compared to the BMT122, VWK, or C113, bit the GPO cetainly surfs well within its preferred radius. The C113 can track big turns as a default, but quite easy to slash quick turns too. The nerd boots are a little more work to make the C113 feel slashy compared to the BMT 122, but IMO the C113 was a bit more responsive than the VWK with the little boots. Power drifts were unlocked no trouble with the bigger boots.

(3) Slabby, Grabby, Variable Snow - All are very good in funky snow compared to the rest of the world. I would give it the the VWK as king of tough snow. I would say the extra mass off the VWK and GPO UL worked in their favor here, but the GPO's more turny nature and wider tip cost a bit of performance. the BMT 94 (skinny + reverse to easily cut into crust) and C113 (medium mass and large radius) are both close but slotting into second place. The BMT122 (due to overall width and slightly softer) and GPO UL (wider tip) in third. I have actively avoided skiing the little boots in any kind of variable snow. They just can't be trusted the way my bigger boots can.

(4) Skin Track - From a skiing perspective, I am all about reverse. But in human powered scenarios, true reverse, for me, really suffers on steep, blown out, or sidehill/off camber tracks. Significantly slower and more work. I would actually rate the VWK and BMT122 akin to skinning with the C132. Both the GPO UL and C113 easily cruising up tracks that would be somewhere between very hard and more work than its worth on the reverse stuff. The C113 is 200g per ski lighter than the GPO UL, and the C113 feels more compatible with little boots than the GPO UL as well, so the C112 wins the skin track for me, by a good amount.

(5) Quickness, Pivoting, Sketchy Exits - So, as long as it was soft, the BMT122 is crazy quick. The BMT94 felt like the biggest ski of the bunch to me. The GPO wanted to carve more than drift. The VWK Slots in the middle. Very quick compared to the world, but mid pack amongst some of the quickest skis. Less drifty than the 122 and ~5cm shorter physical length than the BMT94. I'd rate the C113 between the BMT122 and VWK, though maybe closer/tied with the VWK. To me at least, it felt a little more surfy and pivoty compared to the BMT94.

(6) Bad Snow and Dampness - Firstly, there is something magical about the BMT94. It just rides so much more smoothly than a 1550g ski has any right to. The VWK (1850g) and GPO UL (1900g) both are quite smooth. The BMT122 (1800g) is a bit softer/10mm wider than the VWK and bounces around a bit --> but it's also a backcountry pow ski that surfs like mad, so who cares. The C113 I would say has a livelier ride than the VWK, GPO UL, or BMT94, so the feel is different, but in terms of bip-feedback, I would say it is closer to these skis than the BMT122. Tough to quantify here.

(7) Overall - I really wanted the C113 to be ~90% the 122 in pow, 90% the VWK in variable/slabby snow, significantly better than each in the skintrack, and have more turns in its arsenal than the GPO UL. I honestly that was achieved. I look forward to more reviews either telling me I am nuts, or what... But I'm super stoked on my personal C113s!

Also, very excited to get the test C105 this spring as well. that ski will have the same mini-camber / long low rocker profile as the C113, in a slightly softer package. I have never skied the BMT109, but I think where the C113 is most similar to the VWK, the C105 will be a direct competitor with the BMT109. Same applies for the BC90 vs BMT94. More to come on this in the near future!

[CaliBrit]

Worth waiting for thanks Marshal!

[Lord Thomas]

OK! C113 thoughts. Again, acknowledging inherent bias, but trying to just post my honest and objective opinions.

I have about 30,000 vert on my pair so far. Mounted with Alpinist bindings at -11. Skied about half with big boots (>1500g LaSpo Vanguard) and about half with nerd boots (<1000g LaSpo Raceborg w/ F1 LT liners). My reference skis coming into this are BMT 94, BMT 122, 184 VWK, and Praxis GPO UL.

(1) Smooth and Consistent Buffed Snow - The most comparable ski is the 184 VWK. The C113 measures about 5cm longer straight tape vs. the 184 VWK, that extra length is mostly at the ends (in the taper). The VWK EE is about the same. Both are just really effortless and so fun. Any turn, everywhere, don't have to think about it. The C113 has a little more supportive tail than the VWK or BM94, but generally. As long as the snow was smooth and predictable, I could drive both with the nerd boots just fine.

(2) Legit Pow - To me, the BMT 122 and GPO UL felt a little more surfy than the C113, but the C113 felt noticeably more lively and surfy than the VWK. I would say the C113 is closer to the the 122 and GPO UL than the VWK to me. The GPO UL felt more turny and less happy to track as compared to the BMT122, VWK, or C113, bit the GPO cetainly surfs well within its preferred radius. The C113 can track big turns as a default, but quite easy to slash quick turns too. The nerd boots are a little more work to make the C113 feel slashy compared to the BMT 122, but IMO the C113 was a bit more responsive than the VWK with the little boots. Power drifts were unlocked no trouble with the bigger boots.

(3) Slabby, Grabby, Variable Snow - All are very good in funky snow compared to the rest of the world. I would give it the the VWK as king of tough snow. I would say the extra mass off the VWK and GPO UL worked in their favor here, but the GPO's more turny nature and wider tip cost a bit of performance. the BMT 94 (skinny + reverse to easily cut into crust) and C113 (medium mass and large radius) are both close but slotting into second place. The BMT122 (due to overall width and slightly softer) and GPO UL (wider tip) in third. I have actively avoided skiing the little boots in any kind of variable snow. They just can't be trusted the way my bigger boots can.

(4) Skin Track - From a skiing perspective, I am all about reverse. But in human powered scenarios, true reverse, for me, really suffers on steep, blown out, or sidehill/off camber tracks. Significantly slower and more work. I would actually rate the VWK and BMT122 akin to skinning with the C132. Both the GPO UL and C113 easily cruising up tracks that would be somewhere between very hard and more work than its worth on the reverse stuff. The C113 is 200g per ski lighter than the GPO UL, and the C113 feels more compatible with little boots than the GPO UL as well, so the C112 wins the skin track for me, by a good amount.

(5) Quickness, Pivoting, Sketchy Exits - So, as long as it was soft, the BMT122 is crazy quick. The BMT94 felt like the biggest ski of the bunch to me. The GPO wanted to carve more than drift. The VWK Slots in the middle. Very quick compared to the world, but mid pack amongst some of the quickest skis. Less drifty than the 122 and ~5cm shorter physical length than the BMT94. I'd rate the C113 between the BMT122 and VWK, though maybe closer/tied with the VWK. To me at least, it felt a little more surfy and pivoty compared to the BMT94.

(6) Bad Snow and Dampness - Firstly, there is something magical about the BMT94. It just rides so much more smoothly than a 1550g ski has any right to. The VWK (1850g) and GPO UL (1900g) both are quite smooth. The BMT122 (1800g) is a bit softer/10mm wider than the VWK and bounces around a bit --> but it's also a backcountry pow ski that surfs like mad, so who cares. The C113 I would say has a livelier ride than the VWK, GPO UL, or BMT94, so the feel is different, but in terms of bip-feedback, I would say it is closer to these skis than the BMT122. Tough to quantify here.

(7) Overall - I really wanted the C113 to be ~90% the 122 in pow, 90% the VWK in variable/slabby snow, significantly better than each in the skintrack, and have more turns in its arsenal than the GPO UL. I honestly that was achieved. I look forward to more reviews either telling me I am nuts, or what... But I'm super stoked on my personal C113s!

Also, very excited to get the test C105 this spring as well. that ski will have the same mini-camber / long low rocker profile as the C113, in a slightly softer package. I have never skied the BMT109, but I think where the C113 is most similar to the VWK, the C105 will be a direct competitor with the BMT109. Same applies for the BC90 vs BMT94. More to come on this in the near future!

Dammmn, that is some useful information. Even more so considering you are directly comparing to pretty much my whole past and present touring quiver - GPO excepted.
Free beer and chicken wings for MO tonight! Let me know if you need a 109 for testing the 105.

[Whiteroom_Guardian]

Slightly corrected my boot woes by putting older thicker insoles in the intuitions today. Also -10 degrees ambient temp and the boots were skiing stiff af. Once again loved the FL113 but for my personal taste a bit too much tip at -11.5 mount. Gonna have to remount I think for my new smaller boots so gonna go -10.5 or maybe even -10.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[Sylvan]

Slightly corrected my boot woes by putting older thicker insoles in the intuitions today. Also -10 degrees ambient temp and the boots were skiing stiff af. Once again loved the FL113 but for my personal taste a bit too much tip at -11.5 mount. Gonna have to remount I think for my new smaller boots so gonna go -10.5 or maybe even -10.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

Interested to hear how it goes. With FL105s inbound to DD, gonna leave mine at -11, but feel pretty confident that they’d be great at -10 too.