Printable View
I wouldn't call them "dead" but they are more on the damp side of things than lively. If you bend them hard you can get some energy out of the turn, but it takes some effort to get there. Also possible that I'm just a jong and can't bend them enough, but that's been my experience.
Current AM100 owners, what tune package (if any) did you opt for?
If you’re on edge in three d snow and really load them they have a ton of rebound. I’m on the one nine three r one ten and I weigh two forty
I have the tune from Todd mentioned in the email.
1.5/2 with a light progressive detune. It’s very close to the butter tune MO has mentioned.
As for the energy. If you aren’t loading them they feel quite damp. However if you are really pushing it at speeds they return in spades. Trying to post my conversation with a friend that took mine up today. He loves them so far.
Any ski comparison for the energy/rebound? I’m trying to replace the old school Fischer Ranger 102 FR that was pretty damp but would give lots of rebound when pushed hard!
I’ve skied the blizzard Cochise and the Enforcer 104 which I found to be a bit “dead” even when pushed hard. My sender free 110 in a 190CM however is not and gives that nice “launch” feel when loaded up.
Anyways, this is what I’m agonizing over and is keep me from putting through my order!
I’m on the HL R One Ten which is the same build. It’s more damp than the Mantra One O Two and lays trenches in spring ice/slush just as well.
I don’t ski slow. So I’m not looking for a poppy build. But this layup hauls ass and delivers more energy exiting a turn than I had expected.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...183a3f77f2.jpg
Sounds like another order maybe getting placed on these.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
<p>
Radskier, Im ~160 lbs and am triangulating based on my 180 FR110 and 180 R99AM. I have no trouble bending my FR110 to generate noticeably more rebound on firm snow than my OG Cochise that was my DD for a few years. The OG Cochise felt pretty dead, while the FR110 feels fun. The AM100 (and AM110) has a little camber underfoot, so I have no doubt it will deliver even more rebound energy than the FR110. I cant wait to get my AM100s for next season.</p>
The 100 has been my DD this last month. Just buy it. This ski is perfect for low tide into slush bumps.
“Just buy it” is the right advice. It’s an incredible ski, and if for some reason you don’t love it MO will take it back
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very interested in HL threads..…You being a long time Volkl guy/ ….sounds like the HL skis are the real deal? Can I replace my beloved fourteen’ OG Katanas?Quote:
Originally Posted by gaijin;[emoji[emoji6[emoji640
AM110’s, while a damp ski, have significantly more rebound than any vintage of cochise. Just need to push a little to get the rebound. 90-95% as damp as cochise (really more damp in some ways, but a cochise’d whole character is damp/dead, and its stiffer, so its a more dominant feeling), but 200x as poppy once up to speed. Thats for the heavier beta. Production 100s would be even livelier
Anyone splitting time between the AM100 and the FL105? Trying to imagine use cases for each. Other than the obvious difference in mount point (are most folks otl with the AM, back, forward?) curious to hear more from folks with decent time on both.
I absolutely love my FL105, to go so far as it is probably my single favorite ski ever. So damn versatile, and everyday I am on it is a pleasure. Considering if an AM100 might be a useful addition.
I have a R105 and have an am 100 coming for next year. I also live in SW CO, so I end up using low tide skis way more than I’d like. I have R87 for truly firm days and picked the am100 to be a more playful addition for skiing with the kiddo. R105 is probably my favorite ski of all time but it’s more for when I’m skiing solo or with the boys
Yeah, I have an RC85 for those firm groomer days, so this would be something different. Is the AM100 just a relaxed FL105/R100? Seems I hear a lot about how fast they want to go!
Help! Want to mount my 180cm AM 100s today and I can no longer find the recommended mount point range on the HL site. Was there…. Now not??? I only see a general statement that the modern Freeride skis range from -4.5cm and -8cm. Huge range and unsure if it varies by model. Also to find center measure tail to tip straight pull or mark a line on bench vertically from tip and tail??? Loved the from tail data.
Now see a mount point of 83.0 from tail but recall a range and want to lean traditional v progressive.
Straight pull to find center.
I mounted at -8 cm with a 295 mm boot sole
I think I could go -7 cm
I prefer rearward mounts
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Recommended was -6 cm for progressive and - eight cm for traditional
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Shit, Hoarhey. Coming through with the quick reply. -7 seems the play. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarhey
Welcome all perspectives. Likely an (ec) afternoon project.
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/100
Minus 7 is recommended
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Got it! Tempted to go -7.5….. My have to get my untrained eye’s perspective once I roll up my sleeves.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarhey
Tend to work in inches then convert, going back 2 7/8 in. will land me at ~7.3cm. Likely my play unless someone talks me off the edge.
Thanks again, Hoarhey.
You are right in the sweetspot with that mount! give'r
Thanks for the confirm! Overdue to gets these on snow. With two young kids at home, shop time gets harder and harder to find. Been rocking the AM R99s a bunch which has contributed to my slow moving motivation. Do I really need both? Time will tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Olson
Which R 99 sldo you have?
Am/comp? Length?
I have the R eighty seven
Comps in one seven five and love them
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
180cm AM R99sQuote:
Originally Posted by hoarhey
Also have 175cm AM R87s and holy shit are they fun on edge.