Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs

[altacoup]

I ski a lot of progressive mount skis. Ren, ehp, hoji, qst 118. Most skis with more traditional mount I move forward, qst 106 +2 made ski way better on recommendation from alka. My rc112 are +3 and I’d remount them +5 if I could. Fl113 probably isn’t for me, but it looks like a sweet design. Keep up the good work.

[Marshal Olson]

Interesting you mention the QST118. I always wanted to get time on a Q Lab to look at it as a "modern" charger. Does the QST 118 compare, at least in terms of shape? Curious your take @altacoup (and others).

[comish]

Don't know about QST, but have a Q Lab and like it a lot. Keep in mind it's the midget 18x size.

It has a fair amount of tip rocker relative to a Dynastar LP105. I think it has quite a bit more sidecut in the tail. Generally I have loved the ski. There have been 2 days where something, I think it's the tail, and the combination of really thick, possibly slightly crusty snow, made them super challenging to ski. Crazy hooky.

Rail groomers, although when firm that amount of tip rocker makes them feel a lot shorter than the equivalent midget LP105. In the end I prefer the LP105 for most situations. Don't know if that is useful at all?

[altacoup]

QST 118 is a really good pow ski. Flex and shape weren’t anything I was excited about. But I got a pair for ridiculously cheap. IMO the 192 is awesome, slarvy yet can charge but not demanding. Mount point is something like -4.5 from true center. I think Salomon has updated it and is bringing it back next year. As for the qst 106. It’s a pretty typical Jack of all trades ski. Surprisingly good in fresh for 106. But kind of bland all around. Didn’t really like it at all mounted on the line. Alka said he rides his +2 so I remounted there and now they’re a pretty good DD, but I prefer my 4frnt devastators.

[singlecross]

Interesting you mention the QST118. I always wanted to get time on a Q Lab to look at it as a "modern" charger. Does the QST 118 compare, at least in terms of shape? Curious your take @altacoup (and others).

I just got a 190 Q-lab and although I only have two days on it, I think I’m in love. I wanted a stronger Movement Goliath with a tighter radius to arc firm groomers and that is just what it is. A raceroom GS ski Goliath. Or a Head Monster 108 with lots of early rise tip rocker and lighter tips so it pivots better when you want it to, but still rails strong arcs when you drive it.

You NEED to ski a 190 Q-lab… right up your alley and it is exactly what I would expect a Heritage Lab R109 to be if you were going to make that waist width. I would be stoked if my R99 on order skied as well as the Q-lab.

Mine is mounted with an Attack2 demo… Let me know if you want me to send it your way for you to check out and put through its paces for product development. Happy to help if it would be useful to you.

[2FUNKY]

I just got a 190 Q-lab and although I only have two days on it, I think I’m in love. I wanted a stronger Movement Goliath with a tighter radius to arc firm groomers and that is just what it is. A raceroom GS ski Goliath. Or a Head Monster 108 with lots of early rise tip rocker and lighter tips so it pivots better when you want it to, but still rails strong arcs when you drive it.

You NEED to ski a 190 Q-lab… right up your alley and it is exactly what I would expect a Heritage Lab R109 to be if you were going to make that waist width. I would be stoked if my R99 on order skied as well as the Q-lab.

Mine is mounted with an Attack2 demo… Let me know if you want me to send it your way for you to check out and put through its paces for product development. Happy to help if it would be useful to you.

I’ve heard some chatter about the Q labs and they have always piqued my interest but now I’m really interested after your description.
Also hopeful the R99 is the shite.

[phatty]

I’ve heard some chatter about the Q labs and they have always piqued my interest but now I’m really interested after your description.
Also hopeful the R99 is the shite.

I have and love the QLab 190 here at Alpental. I don't ski it every day (only once this year) but it's one I likely won't sell. I love the stiff, supportive tail. Can carve a great turn and really turn on the gas when you want. No speed limit that I've found. Just got my LP105s mounted and they need a fresh tune. Some similarities but the QLab has a much softer tip.

[Marshal Olson]

Have those of you on Q Labs also spent time on the 112mm Garbones? Specifically curious about the mount point and mount of taper tip/tail for this class of ski. I know the devastator well as the third entry in this area.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I just got a 190 Q-lab and although I only have two days on it, I think I’m in love. I wanted a stronger Movement Goliath with a tighter radius to arc firm groomers and that is just what it is. A raceroom GS ski Goliath. Or a Head Monster 108 with lots of early rise tip rocker and lighter tips so it pivots better when you want it to, but still rails strong arcs when you drive it.

You NEED to ski a 190 Q-lab… right up your alley and it is exactly what I would expect a Heritage Lab R109 to be if you were going to make that waist width. I would be stoked if my R99 on order skied as well as the Q-lab.

Mine is mounted with an Attack2 demo… Let me know if you want me to send it your way for you to check out and put through its paces for product development. Happy to help if it would be useful to you.

A 190 Q Lab isn’t anything like a race room ski. It not like a Monster 108 at all. If you want to arc on hard groomers why would you choose a ski that fat? The 190 Q Lab is a weird ski, too much side cut, too much tip rocker and the tips are too soft. If the R99 skis like a Q Lab I’m going to be pissed


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Marshal Olson]

don't worry man! that won't be the case.
I know the traditional chargers well, I was just curious about the more new school / center-ish mounted chargers.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

One of my favorite, and often overlooked, chargers from recent years was the original Armada Invictus/Invictus 108 ti. Such a great versatile ski, remarkably good in deep snow and stiff and damp enough with a 26m radius. I’m hoping the R99 is more like that than the QLab


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Marshal Olson]

One of my favorite, and often overlooked, chargers from recent years was the original Armada Invictus/Invictus 108 ti. Such a great versatile ski, remarkably good in deep snow and stiff and damp enough with a 26m radius. I’m hoping the R99 is more like that than the QLab
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Interesting, thanks. I will add that to the list to review.
They look a bit light, but the shape, as I can see if on Blister, looks pretty solid. I can see why you liked it.

[ticketchecker]

Any comparo between an R99 and a SuperBro in terms of flex? I believe the SB I have came out of the Blossom factory. As impressive as that ski is I’m psyched for that build in a more modern shape


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Interesting, thanks. I will add that to the list to review.
They look a bit light, but the shape, as I can see if on Blister, looks pretty solid. I can see why you liked it.

They were lightened up/neutered after the first two years


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Marshal Olson]

They were lightened up/neutered after the first two years


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

…sigh…
mod course that happened.

[altacoup]

A 190 Q Lab isn’t anything like a race room ski. It not like a Monster 108 at all. If you want to arc on hard groomers why would you choose a ski that fat? The 190 Q Lab is a weird ski, too much side cut, too much tip rocker and the tips are too soft. If the R99 skis like a Q Lab I’m going to be pissed


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

One of my favorite, and often overlooked, chargers from recent years was the original Armada Invictus/Invictus 108 ti. Such a great versatile ski, remarkably good in deep snow and stiff and damp enough with a 26m radius. I’m hoping the R99 is more like that than the QLab


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Both great points.
Q lab, despite having a progressive mount point, was a ski I hated. Only wanted to make one type of turn the exact turn of its radius, much like chams. Also like Chams the tip had a habit of hooking up and wanting to be on edge.
Invictus 108ti is a great and underrated ski. Underrated mainly because it’s target skier wasn’t a skier who was looking at Armada. I did mount the ski +1, and I think it’s super versatile. Floats well, but also charges, carves and slarves.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[arild]

Shopping cart all set, though Marshal's site won't let me order, as per his message. Oh well.

C113 187s, FL113 194s, C132 200s.

I typically have no trouble driving longer skis, but after a few tree entanglements at speed this winter with my 202 downs,I'm almost starting to think 190s might be better for me, given that it can stay pretty dry in the trees for a long time around here.

Also pondering whether the FR132 might be better, given the unlikelihood of me ever touring them.

So:
5'9",92 kg, no touring, obviously like longer skis most of the time:
C132, 200cm

Or

FR132, 190cm.

Cheers,people.



Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk

[Marshal Olson]

That is the same as mine… except 200 c132 for “not lifts” and 190 Fr132 for “lifts” is where I landed.

[arild]

Gotcha! Easy to adjust, then. Not buying a 200cm+ ski when one is available does feel weird, admittedly.

Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk

[singlecross]

I can understand how folks could love or hate the Q-lab… especially depending on the mount point they skied it on. The first year Q-labs were recommended at 87.5cm from the tail, later ones moved back to 85.6cm. I went back another -0.5cm. I’m sure the Q-lab could get hooky if I moved forward on the sidecut and closer to the tips. Mounted back where I have it, I have enjoyed my limited time on it. Progressive mounted directional charger doesn’t make sense for me, my old school ways, and my simple mind… But, that’s just like my opinion, Man.

I’m sure Marshal will deliver a dialed in R99 and I look forward to skiing it!

[SkiLyft]

That is the same as mine… except 200 c132 for “not lifts” and 190 Fr132 for “lifts” is where I landed.

How big are Marshal? Your post has me thinking I should reconsider the 190 FR132 as it will primarily be used when riding cable. With the hope of a few cat/heli trips once I can justify that.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Marshal Olson]

How big are Marshal? Your post has me thinking I should reconsider the 190 FR132 as it will primarily be used when riding cable. With the hope of a few cat/heli trips once I can justify that.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I am 6'2'' and 215lbs, ski at snowbird for inounds mostly.

[Marshal Olson]

Any comparo between an R99 and a SuperBro in terms of flex? I believe the SB I have came out of the Blossom factory. As impressive as that ski is I’m psyched for that build in a more modern shape


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

missed this. I will check on this… both to see if they still have the molds (!!), and to compare spec (since I don’t know/remember the super bro/fuelie boss well enough). Interesting thought, indeed

[hoarhey]

The superbro was an Aldo produced ski, right, like the AK bros in 174 abs 183? Did Aldo make skis at Blossom?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[abraham]

missed this. I will check on this… both to see if they still have the molds (!!), and to compare spec (since I don’t know/remember the super bro/fuelie boss well enough). Interesting thought, indeed

I kinda assumed the connection was there, that helped sell me on the 99 since my superbros are pretty trashed.

I remember an AK connection for the superbros, but I'm pretty certain they came from the blossom factory. Could be wrong there. Wasn't the superbro a scaled up AK King Salmon? (An interesting connection to the Garbones discussion up thread)