Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Peaking in Chads Window
    Posts
    673

    Hoji/Renagade Mounting article

    Found this while searching for Guided Ski tours.

    And since I have 2 new sets of HOJI's I thought it was a interesting read,

    http://mtnguiding.com/media/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps
    Posts
    568
    Nice, thanks.

    just so people will be able to find it years from now, here's the link to the specific blog post:
    http://mtnguiding.com/media/2017/1/4...adesravens-too

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,332
    Debating to whether or not to push the mount back on my 196 '15 Rens, I'm at recommended right now, 295 bsl if that makes a difference.

    I have used the skis a handful of times so far -- only lucky enough to get a few days in a row on them once. I experienced tip dive when going straight through mellow terrain in heavy pow (squaw), the type of terrain you try and carry as much speed as possible through but inevitably end up eventually going slow.

    I am very happy with the way it skis down steeper stuff, but I don't think pushing it back a 1-2cm would change that. 5'7'' 195. Hopeful this could just bring the tips up in deep, heavy snow in flatter terrain a little bit more, this is my fattest/biggest ski in the quiver. FWIW I don't recall ever having this problem with my 186 EHP

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Jupiter View Post
    deep, heavy snow in flatter terrain
    unfortunately, this is not what the Ren was built for. It really shines at speed.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,332
    [QUOTE=Phildo_Baggins;5089536]unfortunately, this is not what the Ren was built for. It really shines at speed.[/

    if that's just not what it is good at then I can live with that

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    tetons
    Posts
    6,961
    I need to chk my mounts bc I have regular hoji's then also picked up a pair of the lady hoji's and the mount points are a touch different and I can always notice it between the 2
    skid luxury

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Cascades
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by b-bear View Post
    I need to chk my mounts bc I have regular hoji's then also picked up a pair of the lady hoji's and the mount points are a touch different and I can always notice it between the 2
    Interested to know if the lady Hoji has a more forward mount point than the regular hoji, because 4FRNT anticipated a shorter BSL (in keeping with Hoji's commentary about where you should mount your Hojis/Rens depending on BSL). I almost bought lady Hojis because I found a great deal on them, but now I'm glad I didn't because I wouldn't want to go any further forward with my mount (on the line).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Banff
    Posts
    20,729
    also note: hoji usually does his measurement from the tail, so a different suggestions (or top sheet screw ups) dont matter?

    I'm 295mm and usually ski -1 on hojis


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Canadaland
    Posts
    3
    I was given a pair of 196 Rens that had 3 questionable mounts so I put my fks' in the middle mount and skied a few days on them last season. Turns out that mount is -8cm from hoji's recommended spot... They were skiable but I don't suggest mounting them there. This article is exactly what I needed.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,252
    I wonder if I mounted my Hojis in a different spot, would I have liked them enough to keep them. I always thought the 187s were too short, but maybe it was a mount issue.

    Anyone feel like they were running over the tips, unless they got way back on them?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,332
    Quote Originally Posted by whoisKIT View Post
    I was given a pair of 196 Rens that had 3 questionable mounts so I put my fks' in the middle mount and skied a few days on them last season. Turns out that mount is -8cm from hoji's recommended spot... They were skiable but I don't suggest mounting them there. This article is exactly what I needed.
    I lol'd

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by skibrd View Post
    Anyone feel like they were running over the tips, unless they got way back on them?
    Like most skis, no issues in light pow, but anything set up or semi funky I initially had to adjust my stance to be slightly more rearward. I have a race background, so I likely am typically biased forward, but have skied EHPs and Rens and don't remember having to adjust as much. I skied them in pow 3 wks ago and didn't have to mentally adjust, but did stuff a tip once, which is uncommon for me.

    I'm quite a bit taller than Hoji, but not much heavier. My BSL is only 10mm bigger. By his rec's I should be about .5mm back. If I were mounting fresh I'd probably go 1cm back to try it out. Edit: I wish they made this ski in a 191 and not the 195.
    Last edited by North; 09-05-2017 at 03:54 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,252
    I'm 8in taller and got 45lbs on Hoji, with my Dynafits being a 287bsl, I maybe should of been back .5cm, maybe 1cm. -1 cm is where I thought I should of been.

    I did spend a day on my Hojis with the heels of my Kingpins all the way back, and my race boots (CAST toes I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS) jammed in, which have a BSL of 305, and that would of put me back at -1. The skis felt easy, fun, and able to smear everything. I thought it was mainly the boots, RS140s compared to TLT6Ps, but possibly the mount was incorrect too.

    If you have listened to the first Blister Podcast with Hoji, he tours on the 187 cm Hojis and Rens. There might be something about sizing up too.

    Hum... now I'm rethinking my ski choice. I really like the idea of one model for inbounds and a shorter version of the same model for touring. The Hojis have always been able to fit that description since they come in a long enough length for an inbounds ski (195), and not too short of a length touring ski (187). Well I'm committed to 203/193 Shiros for this winter. Maybe next winter I'll try the 195/187 Hoji combo, or once Neil decided to sell both his pair I'll buy them as a set

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,186
    Quote Originally Posted by b-bear View Post
    I need to chk my mounts bc I have regular hoji's then also picked up a pair of the lady hoji's and the mount points are a touch different and I can always notice it between the 2
    hey b-bear, do you prefer the Hoji or the Hoji W? Potentially interested in these as a pow-touring rig for my girl in a 171 since she skis the Dakota in the 171 inbounds and they're kinda similar on paper. Those, 171 ZeroG 108, and the 169 RX seem like top contenders.

    PS. Did you change your screenname cuz people kept calling you "baby" for short?
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    tetons
    Posts
    6,961
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    hey b-bear, do you prefer the Hoji or the Hoji W? Potentially interested in these as a pow-touring rig for my girl in a 171 since she skis the Dakota in the 171 inbounds and they're kinda similar on paper. Those, 171 ZeroG 108, and the 169 RX seem like top contenders.

    PS. Did you change your screenname cuz people kept calling you "baby" for short?
    I think I like my standard/men's hoji's better but I think it's more the mount pt than the construction
    the website says it's same dimensions except that they shift the core about 5cm rearward and then the mount points are slightly different- we were guessing the W's Hoji mount pt was ~7mm fwd of the standard Hoji

    I had my W's Hoji's mounted on their recommended line to check out the differences and they ski fine but I think if I remount them I'll go more for the Men's ski mount pt.
    My M's hoji's always feel super stable, point them, stop at the drop of a dime/ good edging on steeps etc and so I noticed the difference- I think it was more due to the mount pt than the core shift rearward, but I'm not totally sure.
    I did end up with a sweet reoccurring bruise on the inside of my knee from my ski edge slipping out (it was around for so long we named it Bruce) so I do think I was somehow not securing the sweet spot like I did on my standard/M's version
    so maybe if you get a pair of the W's hoji maybe adjust the mount pt rearward or do more of the geeking out formula he recommends to find the right mount spot
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4069.jpg 
Views:	94 
Size:	883.3 KB 
ID:	211646
    skid luxury

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,186
    Quote Originally Posted by b-bear View Post
    I think I like my standard/men's hoji's better but I think it's more the mount pt than the construction
    the website says it's same dimensions except that they shift the core about 5cm rearward and then the mount points are slightly different- we were guessing the W's Hoji mount pt was ~7mm fwd of the standard Hoji

    I had my W's Hoji's mounted on their recommended line to check out the differences and they ski fine but I think if I remount them I'll go more for the Men's ski mount pt.
    My M's hoji's always feel super stable, point them, stop at the drop of a dime/ good edging on steeps etc and so I noticed the difference- I think it was more due to the mount pt than the core shift rearward, but I'm not totally sure.
    I did end up with a sweet reoccurring bruise on the inside of my knee from my ski edge slipping out (it was around for so long we named it Bruce) so I do think I was somehow not securing the sweet spot like I did on my standard/M's version
    so maybe if you get a pair of the W's hoji maybe adjust the mount pt rearward or do more of the geeking out formula he recommends to find the right mount spot
    Great into, thanks. You have them both mounted with alpine binders?

    I knew the marketing copy said the core was 5 mm back, but I didn't realize the mount point was forward on the W. The mount on the Hoji (and Ren) is pretty progressive as it is—I doubt she'd want to go any more forward than -6 cm since she gets along just fine with traditional mounts.

    I posted in another thread, but I don't really understand Hoji's logic regarding bsl movement. It seems like it's mainly based on larger people having larger feet. My Vulcans are 13 mm smaller than my alpine boots, and I don't see how it makes sense to mount my alpine boots ~7 mm back just because they're larger externally (internal volume is about the same). With the same mount point, the ball of my foot is in (approximately) the same location on the ski in either boot.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,332
    Would pushing the mount back 1-2 CM on my 196 Rens noticeably improve float while keeping the overall characteristic of the ski? They're my fattest/biggest ski so deep pow performance is important, I've got 4 other pairs from 109-116. Most of the time I'll be using these out west but I'm based out of the east, if that makes a difference. 5'7'' 195.

    Maybe my 193 EHP will float better (going to mount on the line) and be my deeper pow ski on flatter terrain per my responses above. I haven't tried the EHP 193 yet, just got a pair

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    tetons
    Posts
    6,961
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    You have them both mounted with alpine binders?
    the white/orange ones have no binding on them currently but it previously had the same Look binding on it as I have on the W' hoji now- just moved over to another ski
    But I will probably move the Look bindings back to the white/orange Hoji's and maybe put dukes on the purple lady hojis (then I have other hojis mounted with dynafits yes I know I have a problem)

    Jupiter- I really really liked my men's hoji's mounted on the rec'd line
    I love that ski so much and after my experience of adjusting the mount and being disappointed I'd stick with the rec'd mount (on the men's ski) but then again I haven't tried mounting further back so can't speak to that directly.
    and I'm also on the 179 so maybe a different beast (im 5'7" 150lbs, girl)
    skid luxury

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    3,332
    Quote Originally Posted by b-bear View Post
    the white/orange ones have no binding on them currently but it previously had the same Look binding on it as I have on the W' hoji now- just moved over to another ski
    But I will probably move the Look bindings back to the white/orange Hoji's and maybe put dukes on the purple lady hojis (then I have other hojis mounted with dynafits yes I know I have a problem)

    Jupiter- I really really liked my men's hoji's mounted on the rec'd line
    I love that ski so much and after my experience of adjusting the mount and being disappointed I'd stick with the rec'd mount (on the men's ski) but then again I haven't tried mounting further back so can't speak to that directly.
    and I'm also on the 179 so maybe a different beast (im 5'7" 150lbs, girl)
    Thanks Bear! I'm definitely not going to go forward. I'm built like a petrified stump.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    5,737
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Great into, thanks. You have them both mounted with alpine binders?

    I knew the marketing copy said the core was 5 mm back, but I didn't realize the mount point was forward on the W. The mount on the Hoji (and Ren) is pretty progressive as it isI doubt she'd want to go any more forward than -6 cm since she gets along just fine with traditional mounts.

    I posted in another thread, but I don't really understand Hoji's logic regarding bsl movement. It seems like it's mainly based on larger people having larger feet. My Vulcans are 13 mm smaller than my alpine boots, and I don't see how it makes sense to mount my alpine boots ~7 mm back just because they're larger externally (internal volume is about the same). With the same mount point, the ball of my foot is in (approximately) the same location on the ski in either boot.

    If you mounted both your Vulcans and your alpine boots on the same line based on Center of boot, your ball of foot moves forward of the line with the larger BSL. In your case (13mm/2 diff for C.O.B.)) we're talking only ~3mm change (given b.o.f. to be close to the middle of boot toe and center of boot) so it's really negligible. But for someone with say a 320mm bsl, the B.O.F. will be more like 1 cm+ in front of the line so mounting -2cm for center of boot will bring B.O.F. back to the line. Hoji's really talking about moving center of boot sole rearward to basically keep B.O.F. in the same place and therefore the balance point equal for people with bigger feets. (and because there isn't a B.O.F. mark on any boot I know of?)
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    If you mounted both your Vulcans and your alpine boots on the same line based on Center of boot, your ball of foot moves forward of the line with the larger BSL. In your case (13mm/2 diff for C.O.B.)) we're talking only ~3mm change (given b.o.f. to be close to the middle of boot toe and center of boot) so it's really negligible. But for someone with say a 320mm bsl, the B.O.F. will be more like 1 cm+ in front of the line so mounting -2cm for center of boot will bring B.O.F. back to the line. Hoji's really talking about moving center of boot sole rearward to basically keep B.O.F. in the same place and therefore the balance point equal for people with bigger feets. (and because there isn't a B.O.F. mark on any boot I know of?)
    Hmm. *thinking hard* ....

    But assuming the only change is the external dimensions of the boot (for the addition of a toe and heel welt) and not the internal dimensions, I don't see why BOF would shift forward on the ski in the larger boot for the same foot. Perhaps I'm being an idiot here, but I genuinely don't understand why BOF would move forward in this situation.

    If the foot grew proportionally with the bsl, then sure, BOF would move forward, which I suspect is what Hoji is recommending. Though it still seems like it should move about half of Hoji's recommendation.
    Last edited by auvgeek; 09-06-2017 at 01:33 PM.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,252
    After listening to the Blister Podcast and reading Hojis formula, I think he is trying to get everyone to mount the ball of your foot at a recommended spot, not the center of your boot. Hence the larger boot crowd moving your mount point back. I think Hoji wants you in the 'ready position' on the ball of your feet on a set spot on the ski.

    Hojis, for me, acted like Reaction Slash and pounce skis, (like Hoji skis) not arch beautiful race turn skis, and because of the different philosophy, a different approach to mounting is needed.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Peaking in Chads Window
    Posts
    673
    I need to listen to it again. Watching him ski it looks he mounts them so he has as much tip as he does tail. I'm a big oaf and want a little more tip just to avoid tip dive since I tend to be on the front of my boots. Can't wait to ski on them.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    2,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Jupiter View Post
    Would pushing the mount back 1-2 CM on my 196 Rens noticeably improve float while keeping the overall characteristic of the ski?...
    Yes, remounting 1-2cm back will get you a more floaty tip. But even after that move, the ski will still not be appropriate for driving the significantly rockered tip with a big forward lean stance. You really should try a somewhat upright stance on this ski, no matter where you end up mounting it. By remounting 1-2cm back, not only will you get a more floaty tip, you will also get more supportive self-righting recovery if you ever do start to feel the "over the bars" dragging feeling in that slow flatter snow, and you will feel less angular deflection (i.e. more angular inertia & angular stability, less clanking of tips together in rough snow), and the front half of the edges will feel more stable on chewed up bumpy groomers---but it will become less frisky, pivoty, and agile (not a problem, because reverse camber is easy pivoting no matter how far back you mount it). Also, by remounting back 1-2cm, the tail becomes shorter, but even though the tail is rockered (i.e. less supportive than trad camber), it does not have an upturned twintip at the very end, so I think that shorter tail will still support you just fine. I guess overall, I'd say your remount will gain you more tip, but you're throwing away some pivotability (and high pivotability is obviously what Hoji intended in his design).

    FULL DISCLOSURE: I have not A/B Tested multiple positions on Renegades. I ski the 196cm Rens at -5.5cm (on the manufacturers recommended mark). Feels very good to me, no tip dive for me, but almost TOO pivoty for my taste, so yes I think I'd like the feel even more at -6.5cm (-1.0cm from the mark), and I am confident I'd still retain plenty of easy pivoty-ness at that position. But not a big enough improvement for me to bother drilling more holes. Above, my more precise beliefs about the consequences of remounting a 196cm Ren 1-2cm back are based on my extensive A/B Testing of multiple mount positions on a 196cm Volkl Two, which is not the same ski, but has very similar reverse camber profile, length, and width.

    .
    Last edited by Vitamin I; 09-06-2017 at 06:01 PM.
    - TRADE your heavy PROTESTS for my lightweight version at this thread

    "My biggest goal in life has always been to pursue passion and to make dreams a reality. I love my daughter, but if I had to quit my passions for her, then I would be setting the wrong example for her, and I would not be myself anymore. " -Shane

    "I'm gonna go SO OFF that NO ONE's ever gonna see what I'm gonna do!" -Saucerboy

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,738
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    ... If the foot grew proportionally with the bsl, then sure, BOF would move forward, which I suspect is what Hoji is recommending. Though it still seems like it should move about half of Hoji's recommendation.
    I suspect that Hoji was misquoted as well, 'coz I can't make sense of it. Maybe someone can explain.

    This concept of recommended mounting based on aligning the middle of the boot to a mark on the ski seems to me, to stem from skiers who ski with a modern/upright stance - those who pressure their ski from the middle of their arch. Mounting based on center of boot on a particular line would in theory, pressure the same point on the ski for people with different boot lengths.

    On the other hand, it seems to me that a skier who drives the front of their ski might mount a longer boot farther back, to the locate the ball of the foot at the same spot as that of a smaller sized boot.

    In the old daze (before modern ski designs), the esoteric mounting techniques were based on the ball of the foot: ball foot at center of sidecut or at the center of the running surface. Of course, tapping the boot to find the ball of your foot was subject to quite a bit of measuring inconsistency (ask me how I know), so in this sense, working off the middle of the boot and a mid-sole reference line would have been a close approximation.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 09-06-2017 at 09:23 PM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •