Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs

[NW_SKIER]

Sick project, Marshall. Props to you for bringing some cool skis back. Not necessarily what I prefer, but I find it cool and wish you the best in this endeavor.


Also, Capt. Wax ring is a little troll. Fuck off back to ban land, Glademaster.

[1000-oaks]

How much longer do you think the 192 C138 will ski compared to the Rocker-1, given the flatter Rocker-2 style tail? I've only ever skied the Rocker-1 and have been curious about the 202 length, but maybe the 192 C138 is already a step up and the 202 C138 would be overkill for 170 lbs.

[Core Shot]

I’m Sure others have good input, but my guess is 190 plus pounds is where you want to go 202.

At 170 you can ride them in pow. But not needed. 138 is pretty dang floaty.
Also 202 is going flex 3.
Stiffer than the shorties.

[El Chupacabra]

I'm 6'0", 190-195#. The main difference on the 192 vs 202 L138s, to me, is stability at faster speeds. (And I don't think I'm that fast.) The 202 feels more stable as you go faster. Both float just fine. The only place I notice any drawback to the 202 is slow, tight terrain, where the simple fact of the ski being that long is a factor - for example, maneuvering slowly to go between some rocks or trees on the entrance into a chute.

If you are a fall line all the time type of charger (and I am not), go 202. Or honestly, you may prefer something not reverse/reverse. To me, the great thing about a L138 or Spatula is that you can turn anywhere, anytime, in pow - you can ski sideways, smear into anything, no concerns about hookiness or the ski not going where you want. I love that loose floaty drifty feel.

[Lord Thomas]

Decided to test the R/R theory in dirtbag fashion by picking up a cheap pair of original powder boards in 195 (sunset graphic). Went through all the old threads and there was a shit ton of discussion about mount point and I'm not sure there was a conclusion on the 195's. Any suggestions? Sounded like -105 +/- from the tip was getting close. Will be used for low angle meadow skipping in shitty snow

[Buster Highmen]

For me, the only drawback to the longer plank is in tight couloirs, like 10' wide type stuff. The swing weight of the C contsruction is so light, I have no trouble with trees of any skiable density.

Stability at speed is one advantage of the 200+ but so is the energy return on rebound out of the turn. Personally, that loft out of the turn is one of the ecstasies of skiing and why I prefer the longer ski.

And that's for the C120/L120.

[tgapp]

I'm regretting my choice to get it in the 192 length now...

I'm 6', 155lbs, and planning on using them as a touring ski exclusively. Type III skier, not interested in going mach ludicrous or in true charging.

Did I screw up?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Buster Highmen]

I'm a 5'11' and shrinking fat old man who skis n00dly stoner 70s turns.

Go big young bucks.

[Marshal Olson]

I'm regretting my choice to get it in the 192 length now...

I'm 6', 155lbs, and planning on using them as a touring ski exclusively. Type III skier, not interested in going mach ludicrous or in true charging.

Did I screw up?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

You want 192's for sure!

The 202 is amazing, and it's not harder to ski per-se, but it is physically longer, so that means PITA skinning (especially wasatch skinners) and it just needs enough speed to work right, since you are pushing into more snow. F=MA.

I can't imagine anyone stuffing tips on a 192 138. And if you are... it's not the ski, haha. Personally never felt like the 192 was "too short" and I have a few hundred days on them in my life.

The 202 is for max stability at high speed in open and lightly wooded terrain. the fore-aft atability is amazing. Its like skiing an aircraft carrier with porsche 911 handling. No interest skinning a 202 138 around here. At all. Too many bush exits, slippery skin tracks, and steep blown out switchbacks in the cottonwoods. I could see skinning them other places, for sure, but not in Utardia.

But The 192 is an everyday untracked ski and IMO ideal for touring. it's just much easier to get up the hill with.

Decided to test the R/R theory in dirtbag fashion by picking up a cheap pair of original powder boards in 195 (sunset graphic). Went through all the old threads and there was a shit ton of discussion about mount point and I'm not sure there was a conclusion on the 195's. Any suggestions? Sounded like -105 +/- from the tip was getting close. Will be used for low angle meadow skipping in shitty snow

That works out to about -7.5, which is about where the Spat was. Doesn't sound "Wrong" at all.

[Marshal Olson]

What was the verdict on buying from Euroland? If shipping too painful, can I road-trip to Italy to pick up?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Greetings! Happy to ship, the website will calculate the best price options. That said, I do want all skis to run through me for final QC and such.

Venture a guess into weight difference between C138 and FR138's?

I'm curious about 192 length.

They will be listed on the website tomorrow, but the FR138 will add 300g (192 138) to 350g (190 120).

[Shorty_J]

^^^ will the FR192s still be ~ flex 2.5?

[Marshal Olson]

Correct!

[Core Shot]

Freeride beasts are going to be sweet

https://heritagelabskis.com/collecti...ide-collection

Stoked

Carbon is fun and light and snappy.

And then there’s the real world of tracked out pow.

[Marshal Olson]

Freeride Construction

• This will be a Bamboo/Poplar wood core with Fiberglass and VDS Rubber laminate. Very very smooth, but still lively, like old Thirteens and EHPs.
• Offered in 190/200 120 and 192/202 138
• These will be much heavier than the carbon versions.
• You can learn more at this link
• Order Deadline is Feb 15th.

[Buster Highmen]

COLOR=#222222 blows. If you edit your post, you'll see the color and font tags. Likely some editor setting you have.


Freeride Construction

This will be a Bamboo/Poplar wood core with Fiberglass and VDS Rubber laminate. Very very smooth, but still lively, like old Thirteens and EHPs.
Offered in 190/200 120 and 192/202 138
These will be much heavier than the carbon versions.
You can learn more at this link
Order Deadline is Feb 15th.

You can learn more at this link

[Core Shot]

COLOR=#222222 blows.]

Cut the jong some slack

He’s doing ullr’s work

Hey buster, are you going for the Freeride 120 200cm?

I own two pair of the carbon versions. But this Freeride design makes me tingle. I’m in. Hoping it’s as creamy and dreamy as I think it will be.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Marshal, could you tell me a little about the flex on the R87?

Description says ‘Proper GS flex’, but am I correct to assume that since this is an all-mountain width ski, it will maintain a little all-mountain capability?

Groomer performance would be far and away the primary consideration for the ski, but I don’t want something I’ll dread if I want to take a short mogul section instead of the long way round, or what have you.

Is there a target ski you’re trying to mimic for the flex here?

[arild]

Cut the jong some slack

He’s doing ullr’s work

Hey buster, are you going for the Freeride 120 200cm?

I own two pair of the carbon versions. But this Freeride design makes me tingle. I’m in. Hoping it’s as creamy and dreamy as I think it will be.

I'm getting that one, Core Shot. Buster should, obviously, too.

Sent fra min LYA-L29 via Tapatalk

[hoarhey]

Marshal, could you tell me a little about the flex on the R87?

Description says ‘Proper GS flex’, but am I correct to assume that since this is an all-mountain width ski, it will maintain a little all-mountain capability?

Groomer performance would be far and away the primary consideration for the ski, but I don’t want something I’ll dread if I want to take a short mogul section instead of the long way round, or what have you.

Is there a target ski you’re trying to mimic for the flex here?

If you look in the early pages of the thread, there is some discussion About this. Head Monster 88 with Stoeckli asteroid flex. Partial answer only from me, just directing you to earlier in the thread


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[J. Barron DeJong]

If you look in the early pages of the thread, there is some discussion About this. Head Monster 88 with Stoeckli asteroid flex. Partial answer only from me, just directing you to earlier in the thread


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks. I did see where he described it as Monster length and radius, Asteroid flex, but unfortunately I haven’t skied either of those.

These would be replacing 2nd gen. (last year of full camber) Mantras, 184. If these are going to ski similar or better than that in bumps, I’m good. If it’s significantly worse, I need to consider if I want this R87 and an additional ski to replace the Mantra’s place.

Maybe just give me the projected Sooth Ski numbers?

[skifishbum]

tgrapp youll be fine
aint sure what my order # is but im in on this
i cant find no stickers on the webpage

[connersw]

Speaking of bringing back old love songs, what's the chance Heritage Lab Skis brings back z bend poles?

[Marshal Olson]

Thanks. I did see where he described it as Monster length and radius, Asteroid flex, but unfortunately I haven’t skied either of those.

These would be replacing 2nd gen. (last year of full camber) Mantras, 184. If these are going to ski similar or better than that in bumps, I’m good. If it’s significantly worse, I need to consider if I want this R87 and an additional ski to replace the Mantra’s place.

Maybe just give me the projected Sooth Ski numbers?

Great question and exactly right. The OG Mantra flex pattern and stiffness would be very similar

[Norseman]

Man I skied my Asteroids yesterday! Corn rippers, so damp.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Great question and exactly right. The OG Mantra flex pattern and stiffness would be very similar

R87 order is placed.

What color bindings go best with ‘cafe-au-lait fade’?