Heritage Lab Swallowtails (R, FR, & BC)

[Power_Sauce]

This has gotta be one of you up at Hyak today. These the Rs or FRs? How'd they handle the lovely mank??

Sent from my SM-F741U1 using Tapatalk

Those are mine! - FRs, and they were actually pretty fun today! I’ve got a trip to Japan in two weeks and hadn’t been on them this season. Figured it would be a good day to remember how to ski them while rallying around with my kids. Were you on the 110s? Saw someone on them in line on Rampart. These skis really are the proverbial playful charger. Similar to the 110FR but more backbone and they want you to put the gas pedal down a little more vs more slashy. Super pumped on this ski, can’t wait to get it out in proper conditions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lrn2swim]

Those are mine! - FRs, and they were actually pretty fun today! I’ve got a trip to Japan in two weeks and hadn’t been on them this season. Figured it would be a good day to remember how to ski them while rallying around with my kids. Were you on the 110s? Saw someone on them in line on Rampart. These skis really are the proverbial playful charger. Similar to the 110FR but more backbone and they want you to put the gas pedal down a little more vs more slashy. Super pumped on this ski, can’t wait to get it out in proper conditions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wasn't me, I was on these beauties (189 Asym BGs). Pretty much perfect for today's conditions

Sent from my SM-F741U1 using Tapatalk

[kid-kapow]

First day out on FR120ST 186s today. I went into it thinking that I should've ordered R120STs after parting ways with my FR110s, went out thinking these could work.

We did not get a ton of soft snow today, so the conditions were more variable with light/dry snow atop variable more often than not with intermitten stretches of untracked good snow. They skied the conditions well. They do not feel not terribly stiff - especially up front where the tails feel more supportive - but handled the conditions well and are nicely supportive overall. They feel predictable on groomers mounted at rec.

The feedback summed up is that they made me reconsider my decision to sell my FR110s. They feel like a nice blend of ON3Ps (jeff118, BG and C&Ds) and BO118s. They feel as loose as BO118, but more just looser not floaty loose if that makes sense ( a stiffer mid section providing pivotability due to extremeties providing said float (and suspension)).

I skied them back to back with AM100s for that HL consistency

[shank]

I’ve had a lot of chairlift interest in my R110s and folks always like the idea of bringing back/updating/improving old designs. For most of the HL line I can come up with a pretty good comparison ski or inspiration, but the 120ST are harder to explain - I know Marshal has mentioned DB tabla rasa as the design inspiration for the cut tail, but the shape/profile are really different. Is there a good comparison point or inspiration for the design of the R120ST/FR120ST?

[Upinsmoke]

There is no one ski the 120 swallowtail is modeled after but both the Volkl Sanouk and DB Tabla Rasa play a role.

[SnowMachine]

I got on my FR120's this weekend, also. Cold pow (12") over rock hard ice. Lifts spun early and it was pretty choppy by the time I got on the mountain at 9am. Crazy holiday pow hounds!!

The ski is kinda what I expected. Not remarkably different from the current Renegade with the exception of monster truck suspension. Basically they're exactly what I wanted in a resort pow ski. The crazy slashy, frictionless reverse camber feel, but they don't abuse you for skiing fast in chop. The weight is a bit more obvious in really tight trees, but it's a fair trade off.

They're good enough that my Ren's are getting their bindings dialed to my touring boots. I think they're mostly retired from resort duty. My only complaint with them was how stiff AND light they are. I couldn't mob chop on them with paying a price.

I'm going to order the R110 to complement them. I think it'll be the perfect soft snow daily driver for me. I may have to make a monument to my beloved Deathwishes.

[John_B]

Is anyone getting out on the 120BCs? I've been skiing a set of Lotus 124s in the Tour1 cap construction for a good # of years and am starting to get worried about what comes next when I rail these into one too many tree stumps.

Hopefully I'd mount these with a set of light tech bindings and some Pomoca skins.

[pfluffenmeister]

Deep day at Jackson Hole's Headwall.
Proper timing on my second hike got me first tracks into Casper down into the amphitheatre.

The R120STs are so good.
Like GOAT kind of good.

[GoSlowGoFar]

Is anyone getting out on the 120BCs? I've been skiing a set of Lotus 124s in the Tour1 cap construction for a good # of years and am starting to get worried about what comes next when I rail these into one too many tree stumps.

Hopefully I'd mount these with a set of light tech bindings and some Pomoca skins.

Yup, do it. Haven’t skied the 124 Tour1 but have skied the Wailers in Tour1. Will say the BC120 will handle 3D snow much better just due to it having some extra grams and the flex pattern.

[roQer]

Sorry guys but I don't really get the hype about the HL skis. They are so damn heavy. Might be beneficial for mixed conditions but as a dedicated powder ski? Out of interest I looked up the ST 120 and the weight for 187 cm is listed with 2450 g. So my question is WTF for do you need this hefty weight for skiing powder? I understand the benefits of a heavy ski for choppy conditions but when I'm taking out a 120 mm waisted ski I don't expect to ski chop very much and like to have a lighter and surfy ski which is OKish on the few runs of the day on hard pack. I was skiing Blizzard Bodacious for several years and those were in 186 cm with 2 full sheets of metal even lighter as ST 120, as far as I remember. So please enlighten me, what is the magic of such a heavy ski in powder?
I'm also asking myself if the same level of dampness could be achieved using a lighter construction and tailored titanal frames a la Völkl Mantra 102 or Katana 108.

[pfluffenmeister]

They definitely feel heavy on the shoulder or back when hiking.
But pretty light on the feet; poppy and energetic.
One can load them up spring, very playful.
But smooth out cut up chop and mixed conditions beautifully.

I will not be skiing them at Silverton or up at Aspen Highlands when doing big hikes.
And for dedicated pure pow skis there are likely better choices (I'm looking at you, 202 138,; big Kussla).
But for resort skiing where conditions can degrade quickly, one can extremely happily ski the R120ST all day.

Best in class.


People on the lift often treat my gushing enthusiasm about HL skis with skepticism.
I've even been accused of having equity in the company.

Nah, dog, I'm just trying to make your life better.


PS roQer you should check the Factory Demo program. You don't like it, you get your money back

[mr_pretzel]

Sorry guys but I don't really get the hype about the HL skis. They are so damn heavy. Might be beneficial for mixed conditions but as a dedicated powder ski? Out of interest I looked up the ST 120 and the weight for 187 cm is listed with 2450 g. So my question is WTF for do you need this hefty weight for skiing powder? I understand the benefits of a heavy ski for choppy conditions but when I'm taking out a 120 mm waisted ski I don't expect to ski chop very much and like to have a lighter and surfy ski which is OKish on the few runs of the day on hard pack. I was skiing Blizzard Bodacious for several years and those were in 186 cm with 2 full sheets of metal even lighter as ST 120, as far as I remember. So please enlighten me, what is the magic of such a heavy ski in powder?
I'm also asking myself if the same level of dampness could be achieved using a lighter construction and tailored titanal frames a la Völkl Mantra 102 or Katana 108.

The 186 bodacious weighs 2530g per ski and HL skis feel just as damp as any metal lam ski of previous.
I agree for pure powder skiing weight isn’t beneficial, but after lap 2-3 at north american resorts soft chop mashing is where the weight comes in to play.

[Marshal Olson]

Sorry guys but I don't really get the hype about the HL skis. They are so damn heavy. Might be beneficial for mixed conditions but as a dedicated powder ski? Out of interest I looked up the ST 120 and the weight for 187 cm is listed with 2450 g. So my question is WTF for do you need this hefty weight for skiing powder? I understand the benefits of a heavy ski for choppy conditions but when I'm taking out a 120 mm waisted ski I don't expect to ski chop very much and like to have a lighter and surfy ski which is OKish on the few runs of the day on hard pack. I was skiing Blizzard Bodacious for several years and those were in 186 cm with 2 full sheets of metal even lighter as ST 120, as far as I remember. So please enlighten me, what is the magic of such a heavy ski in powder?
I'm also asking myself if the same level of dampness could be achieved using a lighter construction and tailored titanal frames a la Völkl Mantra 102 or Katana 108.

Hey Roqer - Really appreciate your taking a look and value your feedback.

One thing that left me scratching my head was that the modern 184 Katana 108 comes in at basically the same weight (~2350g) as my similarly sized/wide/flex 185 FL105, with the Mantra 102 (~2250g) right in there weight wise too.

Generally, all things being equal, you add ~10g of mass per mm wider of a ski, so the wider stuff will end up being heavier and the skinnier stuff, lighter... I guess my point is... not totally tracking what your concern is, but totally down to explore in more detail.

[roQer]

The 186 bodacious weighs 2530g per ski and HL skis feel just as damp as any metal lam ski of previous.
I agree for pure powder skiing weight isn’t beneficial, but after lap 2-3 at north american resorts soft chop mashing is where the weight comes in to play.

The green Bodacious which I had (MY 2014/2025) were 2438 & 2455 grams according to Blister

[GoSlowGoFar]

The green Bodacious which I had (MY 2014/2025) were 2438 & 2455 grams according to Blister

So the same weight as the FR/R120s then?

And what resort do you ski at that doesn’t get tracked out in a few hours? I’d like to visit.

[Westcoaster]

The green Bodacious which I had (MY 2014/2025) were 2438 & 2455 grams according to Blister

If you don't like em don't buy em.

Mass has nothing to do with float when skiing powder. do you really think 300g is the difference between planing and tip dive?!

3D snow skiing performance is all about flex and rocker/camber profile.

[roQer]

Hey Roqer - Really appreciate your taking a look and value your feedback.

One thing that left me scratching my head was that the modern 184 Katana 108 comes in at basically the same weight (~2350g) as my similarly sized/wide/flex 185 FL105, with the Mantra 102 (~2250g) right in there weight wise too.

Generally, all things being equal, you add ~10g of mass per mm wider of a ski, so the wider stuff will end up being heavier and the skinnier stuff, lighter... I guess my point is... not totally tracking what your concern is, but totally down to explore in more detail.

I appreciate your comment on the opinion of some random guy. I like your approach of building up a ski brand for the hard core skiers. The shapes and the graphics are looking really good. I just don't get the policy of making wider skis proportionally as heavy and damp as skis in the 100-110 mm class. I use something around 188-192 cm length and 112-122 mm waist as my powder oriented ski and wouldn't like it to be more than 2400 g. It could be an Euro thing but on an usual powder day we do quite a lot of traversing, boot packing und short skinning ups to get to mostly untracked lines. The most of us are on quite heavy hybrid bindings like Duke PT or CAST. The young guns don't like too heavy skis in BC because they are spinning und flipping the shit out of every natural feature and appreciate a low swing weight. The elder guys like me can quit at noon trying to keep up on a ~2500 g ski with CAST.
I know you have the BC line but something in between for the wider models would cater probably better to the needs of Euro powderheads.

[carlh]

Keep them heavy, if anything the 185 fl105s would be better if they were closer to 2500g.

Hey Roqer - Really appreciate your taking a look and value your feedback.

One thing that left me scratching my head was that the modern 184 Katana 108 comes in at basically the same weight (~2350g) as my similarly sized/wide/flex 185 FL105, with the Mantra 102 (~2250g) right in there weight wise too.

Generally, all things being equal, you add ~10g of mass per mm wider of a ski, so the wider stuff will end up being heavier and the skinnier stuff, lighter... I guess my point is... not totally tracking what your concern is, but totally down to explore in more detail.

[2FUNKY]

Carl, maybe step to the one nine two if looking for more mass?

[Marshal Olson]

I appreciate your comment on the opinion of some random guy. I like your approach of building up a ski brand for the hard core skiers. The shapes and the graphics are looking really good. I just don't get the policy of making wider skis proportionally as heavy and damp as skis in the 100-110 mm class. I use something around 188-192 cm length and 112-122 mm waist as my powder oriented ski and wouldn't like it to be more than 2400 g. It could be an Euro thing but on an usual powder day we do quite a lot of traversing, boot packing und short skinning ups to get to mostly untracked lines. The most of us are on quite heavy hybrid bindings like Duke PT or CAST. The young guns don't like too heavy skis in BC because they are spinning und flipping the shit out of every natural feature and appreciate a low swing weight. The elder guys like me can quit at noon trying to keep up on a ~2500 g ski with CAST.
I know you have the BC line but something in between for the wider models would cater probably better to the needs of Euro powderheads.

thanks man, appreciate it. And all good. I am literally on the chair lift writing this with mid-weight test skis on my feet

[roQer]

thanks man, appreciate it. And all good. I am literally on the chair lift writing this with mid-weight test skis on my feet

Wow, sounds great, sign me in for a mid-weight ST 120 then

[GBB]

I have a pair of new 187 FR120 Swallowtails I'm going to list in gear swap. Figured I'd give the addicts in here a shot first.

I've been skiing my R99s almost daily and realize I want to maintain more directional mount points across the slots in the quiver.

[Marshal Olson]

I have a pair of new 187 FR120 Swallowtails I'm going to list in gear swap. Figured I'd give the addicts in here a shot first.

I've been skiing my R99s almost daily and realize I want to maintain more directional mount points across the slots in the quiver.

LMK if you want to swap them for a set of the RC116 190cm that are coming this spring

[ASmileyFace]

I will not be skiing them at Silverton or up at Aspen Highlands when doing big hikes.

Might be worth it if you did



I shouldered these beasts around Silverton on Sunday with a grin on my face. My shoulder is a little sore today, but it was worth it for that RR magic.

[ASmileyFace]

Whoops, didn't realize this was the ST thread. I will include my mini one day review of the BC 120s too.

Mounted with FR15s, paired with ZGTP/GFTs. They felt plenty light on the way up, surprising considering I have mostly toured on my BC90s this season. Typical considerable danger early January San Juan snowpack kept us following lower angle ridgelines and tighter glades rather than gut punching the open tree lanes and gullies. Super supportive and quick to slash even on our nearly bottomless feeling soft slab on top of 50cm of facet setup. I can tell these skis would be happiest opening it up down the fall line, but slow wiggles were easy and fun. Super excited to get on these more in the coming weeks!