Soft Snow Gymkhana - The Heritage Lab FR110

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Yeah, yesterday I was skiing the R one tens in some pretty dense, damp wind affected snow, about boot top or a little deeper. Short swing or longer GS turns were both stupid easy in what was rather challenging conditions. Most people were either straight lining to get back to the groomed runs or cratering. A neutral stance is rewarded with stability and easy direction changes.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[meepmoop24]

^


I had an order with Marshal for 186 FR110s. He was kind enough to give me a refund when kid-kapow told me he was selling his.

Send Marshal an email. If you're lucky, you may be able to snag 'mine'. They were about to be shipped real soon.

Thanks for the heads up, I snagged these. I had regret not getting in on the preorder for spring 2025 so I'm glad it worked out!

[2FUNKY]

Yeah, yesterday I was skiing the R one tens in some pretty dense, damp wind affected snow, about boot top or a little deeper. Short swing or longer GS turns were both stupid easy in what was rather challenging conditions. Most people were either straight lining to get back to the groomed runs or cratering. A neutral stance is rewarded with stability and easy direction changes.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Nice dood! They rule!!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[2FUNKY]

R110 at recommended vs -1 (or even -2): plz discuss.

Are most folks on the “line”? Seems like Sylvan is at -1 but not sure about everyone else?

I’m waffling about mount point pretty hard. Skied last years demos (beta profile?) and really got along with them at -1, but felt there was a bit too much tail for me in bumps at recommended. Now the Rec point has moved forward more, but profile has also changed?

Is -2 psycho for this ski? Don’t want to make it into something it’s not, but that is what Marshal recommended.

Context: I like to ski fast but have knee issues and am not hitting anything >10ft anymore. Steep chalky bumps are my love language. Strong technique but I suck by Alta standards.

Im at -8 on the 187 and wouldn’t move it for my style.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[shank]

Is -2 psycho for this ski? Don’t want to make it into something it’s not, but that is what Marshal recommended.

Context: I like to ski fast but have knee issues and am not hitting anything >10ft anymore. Steep chalky bumps are my love language. Strong technique but I suck by Alta standards.

I’m on the line, minus 0.25 cm skoodge factor to make the straight pull hit an even mm mark on the tape measure.

I don’t think -2 is psycho especially if your boot/binding ramp has you over the tip, and if Marshal pointed you that direction then I’d feel great giving it a shot there. BUT!

I planned to mount -1 to -1.5 but wound up OTL after some contemplation under the bodhi tree. The revised R profile has a long shallow rocker angle in the front of the ski until you hit the tip splay, the tail rocker is slightly shorter and steeper. Coming from skis with directional mounts (typically -9 to -11) I’ve been really impressed how the long tail disappears. I haven’t felt like I needed more ski in front of me either - I’m 6’ 190 and the 187 has all the float and support I need, would size up to 192 if I was regularly above treeline but that’s not really the program here at the local.

Going -2 would give you some more leeway to ski them with a forward stance, but you’re still on a full reverse ski with a tip-tail delta of 5ish mm - you can rip them hard through high angle carves on soft groomers, but the edge transition isn’t going to give the energy of a cambered ski - the feeling is a transition that floats instead of pops from carve to carve. I don’t think going back is going to change how they want to ski on piste much, and I also don’t find the tails to be a problem in steep bumps, the opposite really. They give a sense of balance and pivot ability on the line that feels confidence inspiring in tight terrain.

Ignore all that if you’re on a high ramp binding and in an aggressive boot. But I think if you’re a directional skier trying to branch out these are great skis for your first modern mount point experience. Like a peyote spirit guide for fans of old skool chargers.

[Marshal Olson]

R110 at recommended vs -1 (or even -2): plz discuss.

Are most folks on the “line”? Seems like Sylvan is at -1 but not sure about everyone else?

I’m waffling about mount point pretty hard. Skied last years demos (beta profile?) and really got along with them at -1, but felt there was a bit too much tail for me in bumps at recommended. Now the Rec point has moved forward more, but profile has also changed?

Is -2 psycho for this ski? Don’t want to make it into something it’s not, but that is what Marshal recommended.

Context: I like to ski fast but have knee issues and am not hitting anything >10ft anymore. Steep chalky bumps are my love language. Strong technique but I suck by Alta standards.

Yo man! Please remind me your height and BSL? I want to say like 6'4 to 6'5 and like a 335-345mm boot?

My thinking is this... on the R the risk of going too far back is less about tail support and more about position on the sidecut. The -1 on the beta is -9 overall (which you seemed to really like how it hooked up on edge), and is the same spot on the radius as -2 on the production skis -- this would make sense to me at your height on the ski lenght. this also would give you 102cm of shovel length to support in variable snow.

If you are less tall than i was thinking, or want a more neutral handling ski overall, lets for sure slide it forward a bit to the -1cm mount referenced above.

I think about it this way... suggested mount line is "center of the bell curve" & 68% of skiers. 1cm is one standard deviation & 95% of skiers. 2cm is second deviation & 99.7% of skiers.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

It’s a bit of a learning curve for us old farts but roll ankles then pressure if you like or ride them


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[asmvolatile]

7175376[/URL]]Yo man! Please remind me your height and BSL? I want to say like 6'4 to 6'5 and like a 335-345mm boot?

My thinking is this... on the R the risk of going too far back is less about tail support and more about position on the sidecut. The -1 on the beta is -9 overall (which you seemed to really like how it hooked up on edge), and is the same spot on the radius as -2 on the production skis -- this would make sense to me at your height on the ski lenght. this also would give you 102cm of shovel length to support in variable snow.

If you are less tall than i was thinking, or want a more neutral handling ski overall, lets for sure slide it forward a bit to the -1cm mount referenced above.

I think about it this way... suggested mount line is "center of the bell curve" & 68% of skiers. 1cm is one standard deviation & 95% of skiers. 2cm is second deviation & 99.7% of skiers.

Hey Marshal, yep you remember correct. I’m 6’6”, 215lbs, and 325 BSL. Tecnica Mach1 130, though I’d love to find a boot that is more upright for my next one. These will be mounted with look pivots.

Everything you said makes sense. Part of me wants to try it at recommended and see if I can get used to it there, as perhaps with more than a few hours of skiing I could adapt and unlock some magic that wouldn’t be there otherwise. Seems enough “traditional skiers” have already said they like it there, so since I usually can adapt fine to more progressive/neutral skis I’m tempted to just go for it despite my experience with the demos. I’m no stranger to more centered skis - I’ve been skiing deathwishes and wildcats forever, and get along great with both skis. Got on an M-free 108 last year and have been digging the slightly more traditional mount too though. And on hard pack days I love my mantras, so I’d say I can usually adapt to most skis.

Goal is to find the mount that lets these babys do their thing (damp, composed, charge) without being too punishing.

Thanks everyone else for your 0.02 also!

Can always mount twice I suppose, so shouldn’t be fretting too much. Just would love to hit the mark the first time.

[Marshal Olson]

Alright man, I am revising my rec to -8cm (the back line) rec!!!

[cmsummit]

Santa was very generous this holiday season. I’m super impressed with the build and finish quality on these FR110 beauties…..can’t wait to get them on snow. 186cm mounted up at -7cm.




Sent from my iPhone

[sf]

Santa was very generous this holiday season. I’m super impressed with the build and finish quality on these FR110 beauties…..can’t wait to get them on snow. 186cm mounted up at -7cm.




Sent from my iPhone

New graphics? Marshall mentioned both new models and graphics in a conversation a little while back

I swear, following HL threads is like going on a rollercoaster. Everytime you think you’re done, you go over a new roller and dive into a new hole of lust

[gaijin]

“…. dive into a new hole of lust.”

Fucking poetry.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

bold graphics is good! That being said - the original FR110 graphic looks pretty damn nice in person as well - way better than I thought they would look - so either graphic is #winning in my eyes.

And just to comment on the assertion that the FR110 is a poor choice as a daily around here - the ski fits really well for that if you are in the market for a full reverse ski. We get lots of snow - everything from dense coastal snow to dry/light powpow - and the terrain has a lot of billygoating built in. Aka perfect stomping grounds for FR110s from my perspective, again provided you want that reverse camber experience. I do not, but am glad that I tried them. I've only skied Revens, Hojis and BMT/katana vws in the past, and I would not want any of them as daily drivers as well.

So the reason I went for Jeff108s over FR110s is that I want them to be daily drivers not just around here, but in areas inland that get less snow and has firmer conditions - aka spots where camber usually comes in handy. They should be perfect for their new home to the north east from here

[Mustonen]

After a bit more time on the R110 mounted back 1.25 from rec AMOA (Against Marshal Olson’s Advice), I’m thinking I might move them back up closer to recommended. Last time out I felt like I was skiing just a bit behind the sidecut and the Corvus were leaps and bounds more pivoty, which they really shouldn’t be. I’ve said here before… I haven’t agreed with the mount point on most modern skis and have been happiest between 1 and 2.5 back. Here, I suspect I might have gotten it wrong.

I went back 1 because that felt obvious, and another 0.25 because I plan to get new boots before next season (atomic) that have a 5mm shorter BSL.

Caveat: I haven’t done any real skiing this year yet, just shitty crappy crap.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I think the thing that makes the Corvus so easy to pivot is the lack of splay coupled with the low continuous rocker. They also have a longer radius than what’s printed on the top sheet , Sooth Ski has a calculated radius of twenty six on the one ninety three.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[N1CK.]

I have another 3 days on my R110s and IIRC mounted -7.5 from center, recommended. I'm still loving these things. Most of the past two days spent in fresh snow, steepish trees and soft bumps, and they kill. I believe I could have been happy on these 180 or the 187, if for nothing that a touch more stability riding out groomers or hardpack.

[kc_7777]

These three HL skis (R120, FR110, AM100) do everything I need inbounds at Whistler/Blackcomb and Mt Baker. I don't need or even think about other skis anymore...well maybe lusting for an FR120.

Sent from somewhere.

[2FUNKY]

I honestly think the one eight seven R-Dimes is the best soft snow playful charger I have been on. Drifty? check. Chargey? check. Stompy? check. Pivoty? check. Full on fun? checkity check! Their only downside, it’s minimal and can be addressed with some attention, is very firm snow at high speed. You just have to be more engaged and aware of what’s going on under your feet.
This is THE playful soft snow charger i’ve been lusting after forever.
Thanks MO!!!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Mustonen]

After a bit more time on the R110 mounted back 1.25 from rec AMOA (Against Marshal Olson’s Advice), I’m thinking I might move them back up closer to recommended. Last time out I felt like I was skiing just a bit behind the sidecut and the Corvus were leaps and bounds more pivoty, which they really shouldn’t be. I’ve said here before… I haven’t agreed with the mount point on most modern skis and have been happiest between 1 and 2.5 back. Here, I suspect I might have gotten it wrong.

I went back 1 because that felt obvious, and another 0.25 because I plan to get new boots before next season (atomic) that have a 5mm shorter BSL.

Caveat: I haven’t done any real skiing this year yet, just shitty crappy crap.

Early indications are that this was the right call. Ended up 85.5 from the tail, which maths to -8 though these guys measure a touch long (187.5 on my tape?). Excited to get some real snow some day. At the tail end of a high pressure system that hopefully has some snow on the other side.

[2FUNKY]

Like I said earlier, I’m at - eight and love it. Stand centered or pressure the shin depending what lies ahead. Roll ankles into carves or press through chop. Good times!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

7.75 here. It’s the spot. The tip engages quicker than the beta so I think too far back could lead to an odd ride.

[waveshello]

The R110 really really looks like a refined 184 (OG) 4frnt Devastator (which I skied @ -8). The rocker profile is nearly identical, but there's a little more taper in the tips and tails, which should add some deep snow looseness that the dev was missing. The OG dev already had a pretty solid layup with the inclusion of the neoprene rubber and a lot of heavy glass... Damp and quiet. Really makes me want to try the R110. The devs could really hook up if you layed them over... curious if any of that is lost in the R110 because of the taper. Sounds like not much if any

Would be nice to hear from a Dev fan who's on these now.

[Shorty_J]

Man alive... These aren't just good on soft snow, the rail firm-ish groomers too!

New DD for most conditions for me, I think.

I questioned the mount point for a bit but I eventually mounted them where I was told to based on my specs and they have fealt like they have always been there on my feet from thw first turn.

Life is too short to not get along with your skis right away... Or something.



Sent from my Pixel 8 using Tapatalk

[2FUNKY]

Waveshello, I don’t want to quote you for fear of the emoji virus. I have a limited number of days on the old devastator’s and that was a long time ago. From what I vaguely remember the R-dimes are better everywhere. The ski kills it all over the mountain if soft.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ASmileyFace]

Nice tease lol. I didn't realize that topsheet would make an appearance this year.