Whats up with Lithic Skis?

[riff]

You bet folks! I’ll talk to ‘em today


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[riff]

Sorry for the delay- I’ve been on the road picking up a camper and then back to work. Anyway, I talked with Paul a bit ago and here’s a few thoughts.

Mount Points-
they’re going to work on getting numbers into a spreadsheet for 180ish lengths so ya’ll can get a better feel for the skis. I’ll put it up here when I have it. Web design takes time, the skis are the focus this time of year at the shop. I just talked to Paul at 8:20 pm and he’s at the shop working on sidewalls.

Camber and rocker-
The guys are sticking with the camber and rocker pictures to give folks a feel for that.

Weights-
They’ve got a pretty good feel for weight on the inbounds core, but the new tour core hasn’t been built in all the sizes and shapes yet. A spreadsheet will be assembled of known weights.




Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Lord Thomas]

Thanks riff, this will be helpful

[eskido]

Thanks riff, this will be helpful

^^^ X2^^^
thanks Riff [emoji1591][emoji1591]

[Lord Thomas]

Any forward motion on making specs available? We'll start going down to Mission after the 1st so would like to have some ideas ahead of time about demos

[peshastin_proud]

What sort of specs were you looking for? An email to info@lithicskis.com will probably get you some information faster than this forum will. We’re making a bunch of skis and skiing a whole lot at the moment and haven’t had much time to check in with the TGR crowd. Also, the Mission demo fleet is getting tuned out as we speak but I doubt they’ll have them out when you are skiing, unfortunately. I’m here currently and it’s pretty sharky but still super fun!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[riff]

I just got off the phone with Paul, he’s got a starter spreadsheet on the way to me. I’ll get it up shortly- it’s going to be measured specs on mostly longer lengths, mostly standard inbounds core. Again, some short er lengths haven’t been ordered and built with a touring core yet, so if you have a smaller size in mind and want the specifics on those possibilities then an email to the address above will be the move to make. Stand by!


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[riff]

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Lord Thomas]

riff, et. al.,

Thanks for the spreadsheet. Gives us a good reference point to make educated guesses for other builds/lengths. I must say that given this new bit of information the Townes 117 is starting to give me some of those extra special feelings

[peshastin_proud]

riff, et. al.,

Thanks for the spreadsheet. Gives us a good reference point to make educated guesses for other builds/lengths. I must say that given this new bit of information the Townes 117 is starting to give me some of those extra special feelings

Just out of curiosity, what about those specs makes you lean toward the Townes? Because it's more of a traditional mount point? Because of the website description? I'm genuinely wondering...

[kid-kapow]

4800! Holy shit, that explains why 192 Arlos and their straight shapes kill baby seals a continent over according to the reviews.

Cohen's were always interesting, even more so now. Mount point and weight on point!

[peshastin_proud]

4800! Holy shit, that explains why 192 Arlos and their straight shapes kill baby seals a continent over according to the reviews.

Cohen's were always interesting, even more so now. Mount point and weight on point!

It took us a minute to gather the numbers but riff has been an awesome forum ambassador. Essentially, the snow is really good right now and we should just all enjoy it! We’re super happy with how the skis are coming out and you should try them.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Lord Thomas]

Just out of curiosity, what about those specs makes you lean toward the Townes? Because it's more of a traditional mount point? Because of the website description? I'm genuinely wondering...

Let's see. The intermediate mount, not -12 and not -4, is appealing as is a 191 length. The weight is a little low for a self-described killing ski but it I'm speculating that it would be easy enough to add some if desired, or subtract for tour or 50/50 configuration. The rocker profile and tip/tail taper look like the ski could float reasonably well but the tail would still be pretty loose, and the >30m radius is ESPECIALLY appealing. None of the specs provided tell me anything about the flex profile (can't really follow the core thickness on the web pic) but do tell me a lot more about this design. I'm looking for something to fit into that category that used to be filled by Lhasas and Lhasa Fats. The biggest problem that I can see is that I'm a dirtbag that likes to tour = not much moneez. But, the wife and I will stop by the shop one of these days for a visit. We started saving up last year for another Japan trip next winter and both of us want to visit with you about some ski ideas.

[peshastin_proud]

Let's see. The intermediate mount, not -12 and not -4, is appealing as is a 191 length. The weight is a little low for a self-described killing ski but it I'm speculating that it would be easy enough to add some if desired, or subtract for tour or 50/50 configuration. The rocker profile and tip/tail taper look like the ski could float reasonably well but the tail would still be pretty loose, and the >30m radius is ESPECIALLY appealing. None of the specs provided tell me anything about the flex profile (can't really follow the core thickness on the web pic) but do tell me a lot more about this design. I'm looking for something to fit into that category that used to be filled by Lhasas and Lhasa Fats. The biggest problem that I can see is that I'm a dirtbag that likes to tour = not much moneez. But, the wife and I will stop by the shop one of these days for a visit. We started saving up last year for another Japan trip next winter and both of us want to visit with you about some ski ideas.

That’s super insightful, thanks for that! It’s fairly difficult to compare flex patterns to other companies but that may be a good approach, perhaps. We’d be stoked to have you and the wife come by the shop and see how things work and getting a better understanding of what we’re doing. Personally, I was on a townes 117 yesterday at mission and had a really good time. I think for my next pair, I’d stiffen them up a bit to really let them ride but I built them as my touring setup and knew I didn’t need a full on charger for what i generally do in the backcountry, which mostly consists of hippy turns and low angle, safe pow. I try to leave the rowdy skiing for lift access skiing, which we’ve unfortunately had very little of at Steve’s pass this year. Either way, reach out through the website to set up a meet at the shop and I’ll make it happen. Happy New Years!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Lord Thomas]

Had an interesting opportunity a couple of weeks ago to test a pair of Lithic prototypes. The skis were a 187 Townes (117mm under foot, 30.7m radius) pressed with significant reverse camber and inbounds core. Best I could measure it the mount was at about -7. Top end finish quality throughout.

First day was at a small, local, one lift hill that had 4” of new over about 10” of refrozen chop, compressible/breakable crust - nothing groomed. Was actually kinda nasty conditions to be truthful. Anyhow, skis were pretty damp and surprisingly composed when I opened them down the fall line but lightning quick to pivot and burn speed. I could feel the chop but the tips really didn’t get deflected much at all. Skis tracked well and didn’t get hung up in the breakable. Had to stay on my toes but generally felt pretty comfortable just going out and skiing. Carve, smear, or pivot on demand, nice!

Second day was at Mission Ridge with low tide and firm groomers with occasional bulletproof patches. Not what they were designed for but…fuck it. No problems on the firm groomers. Could make big or fairly small turns at will and pivot like a top. When I really put the hammer down I could start to feel the fairly short edge contact length and didn’t feel quite as confident and backed off a little. (I believe the standard version of the Townes would be significantly more secure at speed on hard surfaces.) So, I would say there is a speed limit on hard snow though it’s generally plenty fast to get back to the lift. These things were also pretty damp for not having metal. Even on the the nasty hard stuff they muted the vibrations well. All fillings intact. Also ended up unintentionally testing their resistance to core shots [Mission Ridge] and nothing more than scratches. One of those hits probably would have gone through to the bindings on most skis and almost tipped me over. (Hope Ty doesn’t read this)

All in all they were super cool boards. Even though I really didn’t get a chance to try them in their intended environ they generally exceeded expectations. Could drive from the middle or with reasonable tongue pressure, and with a good mix of pivot fun yet being able to kill on demand. Could see these being a badass deep day to a few days after board or DD’s in places that get snow. Hope to try them more in the future. I picked these up at the factory and Ty showed me the operation and all the ways they can readily do all kinds of tweaks on a 1-off basis. Super good dude. Going to be talking to him soon about my version of an ultimate Japan touring ski soon!

[riff]

Here’s an update on spring prototyping season.

The guys at Lithic have been working pretty long hours building runs of skis this winter, but thankfully they’ve had time to do some prototyping too. I went by the shop yesterday to pick up a prototype shape that’s been in the works for the majority of the season. This one’s meant to be a long range lightweight touring/mountaineering ski- for spring traverses, volcanoes, steep skiing, corn, really any alpine outing with a lot of human powered travel. This is not a skimo ski, but meant to be a mountain travel tool that can descend with conviction.
Another ski in the lineup that sounds similar is the Joplin 88. How’s it different? The Joplin was built for crushing groomers, and has a smaller radius, shorter tip taper, and different rocker profile, among a few other things.
This isn’t a catalog ski yet, but we’ll be getting lots(hopefully!) of days on these this spring, and maybe they’ll make it in the catalog once the adjustments to the shape and build are dialed.

Disclaimer: I’m involved with lurking around the shop and bothering Paul and Ty with questions, and as of picking up this pair, every ski I have is a Lithic with the exception of ‘94 Dayglosivs which you can pry from my cold dead hands.

Details on the shape:
Longish radius, 30m in a 179.
Long effective edge for stability on steep lines.
Rocker lines to compliment the long radius and effective edge- emphasis on predictable behavior on potentially crummy snow above treeline.
90mm underfoot; a compromise of enough surface area to be fun in moderate depths of pow, (or mank), while still having the edge hold and nimbleness for steep firm snow.
A super demanding ski is fun when you are really driving; but with light boots, heavy packs, and super variable snow we wanted a predictable, user friendly shape that could still come to life and rip when you get on it.

Details on the build:
The core is the finger jointed backcountry core that Lithic started offering in the catalog last year; Maple and Ash underfoot for binding mount and plenty of backbone, then paulownia for tip and tail. I’ve put 50 days on my Townes 117 with this core, and I’m pretty sold.
Two new build details on these, in the name of science-
Topsheet was left off, and replaced with a flood coat epoxy.
Full length core, no tip or tail spacer.
No carbon, in keeping with Lithic philosophy. Even light skis gotta be planted, not chattery.
Weight came out at 1360 grams each.

I’ll be test driving these most of the remaining days of the season and I’ll post up with thoughts.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Norseman]

word, sounds cool

[jackattack]

Sounds like a LD90

[tgapp]

Sounds like a LD90

Like an LD90 but without the carbon, and a hundred+ grams heavier.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be super stoked on another long radius, narrow ski. But the layup could prove to make it a VERY different ski than the LD90.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Benneke10]

More like 60g heavier than a LD90. My only complaint with the LD90 is the tails take some work to release (compared to true full rocker skis). Give me a LD90 with a looser tail and I'm sold.

[riff]

I forgot a picture…
And yeah, similar intended use target to a LD90, which is a great ski in this category, which some of you know I’ve owned and skied the last few years. The layup is for sure different- no carbon, more tail taper and rocker, less camber, different core profile, full sidewalls.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mr_pretzel]

These sound sick riff! Thanks for keeping us in the loop

[jackattack]

I’m intrigued. how about a profile?

[riff]

I can take a picture for you, we haven’t got a digital image yet as these are pretty fresh….

Poor lighting at work, I’ll try for a better one later


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[tgapp]

I can take a picture for you, we haven’t got a digital image yet as these are pretty fresh….

Poor lighting at work, I’ll try for a better one later


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Okay, now I'm super interested.

Where can I sign up??

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk