Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs

[Rob Stokes]

yes! So the FL105 (discussed with Sylvan below) is basically the -1 version. A few tweaks to match the width, but same skier and mindset.

regarding the +1, I am trying to wrap my ahead around it. Mainly, the 113 is so dang surfy (for what it is), I’m struggling to figure out when I’d ever want a wider one… and if I did want a bigger ski, I’d go straight to the 132.

with that said, we are working on an FR122, with a more modern/progressive design. But I’m totally open to the +1… tell me more about what you want from it!

I'm basically after a Renegade with a trad mount or a resort layup BMT 122.

I work on Blackcomb as a patroller and looking to fill my biggest spot in the quiver (above a 191 v-w katana mounted +2cm which is maybe slightly too long but I love). I don't want to go RR as it's going to be used primarily at work and I could find myself towing a toboggan or in some steep hardpack at the drop of a hat.

The Katana is a great pow ski until stuff gets really deep. Really deep here usually comes with moisture. It's hard to get a tip out and planing when it's dived under 45cm of wet schmoo, especially on flatter terrain.

I love the ability to drift or carve with the Katana and it responds well to both a trad style or a more modern piviot-y style, especially when mounted at ~10cm instead of the mental -13.

The ski needs to be predictable on hard snow and hold an edge, but I am primarily looking for good tip float (I don't like anything more centered than about -10 in deep pow) but coupled with the loose ride a full rocker ski provides. Stuff gets cut up fast here so crossing tracks and mid day chop is real.

I would also probably try the biggest Faction Machine if it wasn't a light construction.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[Marshal Olson]

I'm basically after a Renegade with a trad mount or a resort layup BMT 122.

I work on Blackcomb as a patroller and looking to fill my biggest spot in the quiver (above a 191 v-w katana mounted +2cm which is maybe slightly too long but I love). I don't want to go RR as it's going to be used primarily at work and I could find myself towing a toboggan or in some steep hardpack at the drop of a hat.

The Katana is a great pow ski until stuff gets really deep. Really deep here usually comes with moisture. It's hard to get a tip out and planing when it's dived under 45cm of wet schmoo, especially on flatter terrain.

I love the ability to drift or carve with the Katana and it responds well to both a trad style or a more modern piviot-y style, especially when mounted at ~10cm instead of the mental -13.

The ski needs to be predictable on hard snow and hold an edge, but I am primarily looking for good tip float (I don't like anything more centered than about -10 in deep pow) but coupled with the loose ride a full rocker ski provides. Stuff gets cut up fast here so crossing tracks and mid day chop is real.

I would also probably try the biggest Faction Machine if it wasn't a light construction.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

Ok this is sick. Let me noodle on it a little bit, but I think we are really close.

When you say resort construction, are you more after something like the OG rens (2500+g) or modern rens (<2300g)?

Also, what is your happy length? 187ish straight tape?

[Sylvan]

I'd also say the FL113 (different ski, similar design principals), edges WAY better than that ski has a right to.

Agreed. Y’all hit the nail on the fucking head with that thing. As you said above, fucking rad for high vis soft alpine days, video game like, gave me a little too much confidence, haha; and as I said in the other thread, also surprisingly easy/manageable in low vis steeps and trees cause of that beauty of a tail (coming from metal lam chargers anyway). Super cool design.
And thanks for the detailed response on FL105s. That shit sounds right up my alley as a DD, sound fun as fuck. Will have an order in shortly for some 192s, just awaiting approval. Y’all please just keep designing skis for you, and I should be set for a while. Cheers.

[Lord Thomas]

Ok this is sick. Let me noodle on it a little bit, but I think we are really close.

When you say resort construction, are you more after something like the OG rens (2500+g) or modern rens (<2300g)?

Also, what is your happy length? 187ish straight tape?

I'm going to butt into this conversation on the "resort layup BMT 122". For me, 2,300g and 189-190cm straight pull. Stiff AF, 30+m radius.

[Rob Stokes]

Ok this is sick. Let me noodle on it a little bit, but I think we are really close.

When you say resort construction, are you more after something like the OG rens (2500+g) or modern rens (<2300g)?

Also, what is your happy length? 187ish straight tape?

Glad it is of interest. Anything around a true 187 is an ideal length for me personally, and as far as weight I guess it would be in the upper range of that eh. What are the 187cm fl113's at, about 2500g?

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[gaijin]

I'll try to keep this tight... but I tend to type forever.

An OG HALS Ren is what I consider to be the pinnacle of design for Japan forests. Wall-to-wall maple core. Stiff as fuck. Cold, dead hand skis.

When 4FRNT added more rocker and sidecut, and then cut the weight and the length, I balked. I was like "those are three attributes I would not have changed."

If anything, a 186 '14 Ren, which as a sidecut/reverse camber of 35m, is too short. I wouldn't mind a 40m instigating that line. It seems in March, when the forest opens up, and my legs are in gear, that I actually want a longer radius.

I wouldn't be surprised that a longer radius also slarved better. All of this tells me that a longer radius Ren, maybe even longer in length, is what I crave.

All that said... I do think I have a perfect ski under my feet right now. Seriously. The 2014 Ren is dope as fuck.

Idea- delete all updates to the Ren shape after 2014, and add one update-- make it longer in radius/camber/length. I think 4FRNT was on to something with reflect-tech and and they cut it too short to appease the masses. This is a niche ski. It's not supposed to be playful. They added more camber, more sidecut, and made it shorter to make it more applicable to a wider crowd. And, that's why I have not bought a Ren since HALS.

If I buy an HL FR122, it will receive a binding I don't currently have and will be major overlap over what I currently own.

NTTAWWT.

[Lord Thomas]

If I buy an HL FR122, it will receive a binding I don't currently have and will be major overlap over what I currently own.

NTTAWWT.

Ummm, what's your point? This is TGR, overlap is what we do, and do it well

[gaijin]

That’s my point. My point is make it. This Is TRg. And now I have to have two skis that overlap so much, I need a different binding to separate them further.

That’s rad.

My Ren/STH can sit in my closet while my HL 122FR/cast accompany me in Hakuba.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Core Shot]

Any thoughts on a longer FR110?

How many pair does it take to justify another mold?

[Marshal Olson]

Any thoughts on a longer FR110?

How many pair does it take to justify another mold?

So, my thinking is the 194 Devastator (actually 191.5) was generally viewed as "too long" and a billion of drilled once used pairs are out there for <$200. The 184 Devastator (actually ~181.5) was generally viewed as "too short". The 186 Sickle (actually ~185 IIRC) was viewed as "just right" for a ski with this type of shape.

So I'm definitely not against making a longer one, and personally would be keen to ski it, but the first length was selected off all of the info and such I have seen. I very much see 180, 174, 168 lengths added on this shape too, based on all the "shorter ski" requests I am seeing come across on the FR110 shape in particular.

If a few more folks are up for a ~191 version, we can certainly prep that. Please email me or post here if so! I'd be interested in ideal turn radius for a longer one too. I'd imagine 27-29m being a good target (?). We would need 8-10 confirmed pairs to green light.

edit to add… I do see the long shiro cult, but that is more a pow ski than DD, width-wise. Hmm.

[ASmileyFace]

I could see a 191 straight pull FR110 being an interesting ski for a lot of bigger folks. I'm happy with the 186cm version personally but could see the justifcation for a longer version.

EDIT:

So, my thinking is the 194 Devastator (actually 191.5) was generally viewed as "too long" and a billion of drilled once used pairs are out there for <$200. The 184 Devastator (actually ~181.5) was generally viewed as "too short". The 186 Sickle (actually ~185 IIRC) was viewed as "just right" for a ski with this type of shape.

FYI the 186cm Sickle straight pulls to like 184/183.5 It's pretty damn short. But doesn't feel that short when you lay it on edge imo.

[Marshal Olson]

10-4 thanks.

I guess my gut keeps telling me, if someone is big enough and skiing fast enough to need a ski that is more stable than the 186 FR110, they should probably be on the FL113 anyhow... Not saying that is right... just where my head is.

[altacoup]

Holy shit. I need to place an order.

Can a RR ski with some side cut really carve if it’s stiff enough?
I’m not talking trenches with a cambered race ski. Just chunder to the lift.

Obviously it’s going to need more edge angle and weighting. But 138 was just snowblades going back to the lift.

You didn’t say carve. Technically you said “edge cleanly”. Which to me means using at least 3/4 of your ski length if you lay into it on firm snow

My 4frnt devestators will absolutely rail trenches in a somewhat soft groomer. They also ski with a ton of energy on groomers.

[waxloaf]

Yup, devs absolutely rail on softish groomers. Not sure if it’s accurate or not, but I always guessed that their groomer performance was due in some part to the matching sidecut and rocker profiles. They roll really smoothly onto edge and have a lot of EE for stability. Bases flat they are unsurprisingly a little squirrelly (spelling?), but it’s never bothered me.

I’m not sure I’d call them energetic, but I enjoy them a lot on groomers. In my view, they are far better carvers than simply something that can predictably get you down a groomer to the chair. Of course with the full rocker they can shut it down on a dime when you want.

[J. Barron DeJong]

I could see a 191 straight pull FR110 being an interesting ski for a lot of bigger folks. I'm happy with the 186cm version personally but could see the justifcation for a longer version.

EDIT:

FYI the 186cm Sickle straight pulls to like 184/183.5 It's pretty damn short. But doesn't feel that short when you lay it on edge imo.

I’m finding it amusing that full grown men are like, ooh I need a 5cm longer size to give me 40mm more effective edge, but I just swapped my 8 year olds skis for the next size up and they are doing 10cm size increments.

I’d think something more like an 8cm jump would be suitable here to get something more than a marginal difference in feel between sizes.

[Self Jupiter]

10-4 thanks.

I guess my gut keeps telling me, if someone is big enough and skiing fast enough to need a ski that is more stable than the 186 FR110, they should probably be on the FL113 anyhow... Not saying that is right... just where my head is.

Or just get a pair of 194 Devs for $bacon

[Marshal Olson]

I always guessed that their groomer performance was due in some part to the matching sidecut and rocker profiles. They roll really smoothly onto edge and have a lot of EE for stability. Bases flat they are unsurprisingly a little squirrelly (spelling?), but it’s never bothered me.

Yes, 100%
I would just expand on this a little:

(1) For all mountain reverse skis, they do best (IMO) with a proper radius to the reverse profile
(2) The radius should be no smaller than the radius of the sidecut
(3) Opening the radius further than the sidecut radius actually helps engage all the way through the tip/tail widepoints a little better
(4) It's really important for a reverse all mountain ski to be heavy enough, as they bounce around alot more than a cambered ski when light

It's also really important for a reverse all mountain ski to be stiff enough (since its bent into a shape already) but not too stiff (since there isn't camber to suspend the ends of the ski). And this is where having a reverse radius that is actually a little bigger than the sidecut radius is helpful, to tune the flex pattern and give a little more suspension when you need it, but still keep the carve/drift/slash feeling.

[Core Shot]

Never heard of the devastator.
Read the blister review of the 194.
Heavy ski.
But also the profile picks show a ton of tail rocker before the rise. I guess that makes them easier to break loose.

I’m big. So like long skis. But I’m slowing down. FL113 might be too much. I know I can ski it. But can I relax ski it. Things change. Kids. Age. A few gray hairs. Etc.

The standard 110 would be fine. But in a relatively narrow waist a little more tip would be nice.

[kid-kapow]

or a resort layup BMT 122.

As an outspoken lover of all BMTs and the BMT122 especially this is something I support 100%.

[Shorty_J]

As an outspoken lover of all BMTs and the BMT122 especially this is something I support 100%.

Ooooh... yeah me too.

But I personally would appreciate a low 180s

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[Marshal Olson]

Never heard of the devastator.
Read the blister review of the 194.
Heavy ski.
But also the profile picks show a ton of tail rocker before the rise. I guess that makes them easier to break loose.

I’m big. So like long skis. But I’m slowing down. FL113 might be too much. I know I can ski it. But can I relax ski it. Things change. Kids. Age. A few gray hairs. Etc.

The standard 110 would be fine. But in a relatively narrow waist a little more tip would be nice.

ok this is great. Thanks.
let me do this…

the rest FR110 are coming to me fairly soon. I plan to mount my pair back of the line. Approx -2cm from waist; so -8cm overall, for the exact reasons you describe.

and I’ll just share my honest opinion! And of course anyone in SLC who go wants to borrow the skis

[chewski]

I’m big. So like long skis. But I’m slowing down. FL113 might be too much. I know I can ski it. But can I relax ski it. Things change. Kids. Age. A few gray hairs. Etc.

I got out on 187 fl113 over the weekend and have been crazy busy to get a proper review out but to me, no i could not relax on them. I recently tried the sender squads after reading skibrd's description "These are just absolutely smash mouth blow shit up well shotgunning PBRs in jorts and pit vipers at Mach loony type of ski," and couldn't click with the mount point. Once I embraced this mentality with the fl113 it clicked for me

[chewski]

I'd also say the FL113 (different ski, similar design principals), edges WAY better than that ski has a right to.

After skiing these for 1.5 days on a mix of mid-winter soft/no new snow and fully thawed/refrozen sections of mammoth i agree. I had messaged marshal before buying about windstripped entrances that are inevitable where i ski even on good snow days, and he was right that edge hold is totally adequate

[Lord Thomas]

Ooooh... yeah me too.

But I personally would appreciate a low 180s

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

Perfect. You get the low 180's and I'll take the very high 180's, or 190. Makes everyone happy

[arild]

I got out on 187 fl113 over the weekend and have been crazy busy to get a proper review out but to me, no i could not relax on them. I recently tried the sender squads after reading skibrd's description "These are just absolutely smash mouth blow shit up well shotgunning PBRs in jorts and pit vipers at Mach loony type of ski," and couldn't click with the mount point. Once I embraced this mentality with the fl113 it clicked for me

Super glad you like them. As do I!

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