Non Blister Faction La Machine takes

[doublet]

btw, could someone summarize what BlisterGear review said? There's only a flash version and it's behind $80/year paywall ��

Edit to clarify that I'm talking about the La Machine Max, NOT the Mega.

Here is a free version of their review: https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...ion-la-machine

Also, listen to Paul's comments in this podcast: https://blisterreview.com/podcasts/r...forward-ep-144

Historically I've always enjoyed the same pow skis as Paul Forward and bought the Factions based on his comments. I spent many seasons as a Lotus 138 fanatic but my local resorts involve a bunch of icy traversing and long groomers for pow laps, and I'm more of a weekend warrior, so 138s were only getting used a few times/year (at best). 138s are also heavy/unwieldy for really long tours and/or tours that involve sections of junk snow.

My factions are mounted with Tectons at -8 from center. I ski Lange 130s inbounds, and for long tours switch to Scarpa F1s.

So far I've been really pleased with the Machines. Paul compared them favorably to the Renegade and that feels right to me (Ravens are my daily driver). They definitely have a speed limit in heavy, chopped pow, but less than I was expecting given their weight (and no worse than 138s). They're perfectly fine on groomers and icy traverses (big upgrade vs 138s) and they are damn good in untouched pow (although nothing will ever touch 138s when you aren't crossing tracks). Just yesterday I did a long tour with amazing pow for the first 2k and then a sketchy/icy luge track for the bottom 1k. The Factions did great in the exit where 138s would have been a handful.

There are better skis for cut-up pow (something heavier), and better skis for the deepest days (138s) but I think the Machine is the perfect pow touring ski and it is a pretty decent inbounds pow ski. For the price they are a no-brainer.

One day as budget allows I'll add a heavy inbounds chop-charger and and also add 138s back into the quiver, but for now I'm really stoked.

[kid-kapow]

great info!

One day as budget allows I'll add a heavy inbounds chop-charger and and also add 138s back into the quiver, but for now I'm really stoked.

introducing Heritage Labs skis

[doublet]

great info!



introducing Heritage Labs skis

Yes! Really stoked about that project as DPS will never get another dollar from me (and I actually think 6mm narrower at the waist would solve some of my complaints). One day I'll add C132 AND FR132 to complement the Factions.

[meter-man]

Thx for the review of the Mega Jim!

I swooped on the Evo.com sub-$300 La Machine thinking it was that one - turns out it is for the 126 underfoot (non-Mega). Looks like an awesome ski, but not the hole in the quiver I want to fill right now.

Holler if anyone sees any deal on the La Machine Mega in 186. $900 USD retail is pretty spendy...

[SnowMachine]

Thx for the review of the Mega Jim!

I swooped on the Evo.com sub-$300 La Machine thinking it was that one - turns out it is for the 126 underfoot (non-Mega). Looks like an awesome ski, but not the hole in the quiver I want to fill right now.

Holler if anyone sees any deal on the La Machine Mega in 186. $900 USD retail is pretty spendy...

That's the ski that I grabbed. It's the Max. Great ski. Ridiculous at that price. But yeah.... it's a lot of ski if it isn't soft out. I can't wait to ski it more.

[Benneke10]

Was at a ski shop the other day and looked at the La Machine Mini and Mega. Both had camber, Mini had a fair amount more. Looks like some Megas are full reverse, others not...

[altacoup]

Finally got around to mounting my la machine max. Mounted at -8 from true center, the marked line on mine wasn’t the -11 that blister states but rather -13 (maybe that’s why Sierra had them for so cheap). Skied them today, conditions were perfect so hopefully that’s not coloring my opinion, and they are awesome. Have that renegade feel of super easy to pivot, strong enough to ski at high speed and change directions at any time, but plane a little better than a renegade. They’re also lighter than the Hojis I was using for powder touring and over 10mm wider. I’ve toured on quite a few full reverse camber skis, so skin track grip isn’t an issue for me. But having such a massive ski also mean lots of skin in contact with the snow and ability to monster truck up and over short steep sections. Despite being light they tracked well and didn’t feel twitchy at all, suspension/dampness was very impressive for such a light ski. Very glad I picked these up they absolutely rip.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[skialpy]

Any opinions on preferred length of the La Machine Mega? I'm 6'0" 170 lbs looking for a daily driver pow touring ski in the PNW. Debating between 178 and 184.

[greenmachine]

The 186 measures as a 184 I believe


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[concierge]

I'm also super interested in buying the Mega. I am 5'7" 150 and prob getting the 184. I thin the 178 would be for sure too short for you skialpy. Anyone else have experience on the Mega? I'd love to hear how they do in slightly skied out pow.

[skialpy]

The 186 measures as a 184 I believe


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Think you are referring to the fatty la machine in 186. Mega seems to come in 178 and 184.

[duboix]

I'm about 5'9 / 155vnet weight, daily drivers - OG Bibby and Bibby Tour in 184. Trying to decide between 178 and 186 La Machine Max - the skis would probably live in Japan permanently. We're talking Niigata though, not Hokkaido - massive dumps, but often on a heavy-ish side, so 184 Bibby's can be vulnerable to tip diving in neutral stance at lower speeds. I'm worried about 186 because much bigger guys (Paul Forward included) were happy with the length and didn't feel like it's not enough, which suggests it could be too big for me to throw it around in the trees. And I'm worried about 178 being not that unsinkable (especially forward-mounted) and ending up being just marginally better than Bibby's.

Any thoughts from La Machine Max owners? How big are you, which length did you pick, how do you like it, do you wish you went shorter or longer? Have you by any chance skied 184 Bibby's? Cheers!

[SnowMachine]

Finally got around to mounting my la machine max. Mounted at -8 from true center, the marked line on mine wasn’t the -11 that blister states but rather -13 (maybe that’s why Sierra had them for so cheap). Skied them today, conditions were perfect so hopefully that’s not coloring my opinion, and they are awesome. Have that renegade feel of super easy to pivot, strong enough to ski at high speed and change directions at any time, but plane a little better than a renegade. They’re also lighter than the Hojis I was using for powder touring and over 10mm wider. I’ve toured on quite a few full reverse camber skis, so skin track grip isn’t an issue for me. But having such a massive ski also mean lots of skin in contact with the snow and ability to monster truck up and over short steep sections. Despite being light they tracked well and didn’t feel twitchy at all, suspension/dampness was very impressive for such a light ski. Very glad I picked these up they absolutely rip.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

I need to measure mine. I had them mounted on the "new school" line and they need to go further forward. I was thinking of bumping them +2.

[SnowMachine]

I'm about 5'9 / 155vnet weight, daily drivers - OG Bibby and Bibby Tour in 184. Trying to decide between 178 and 186 La Machine Max - the skis would probably live in Japan permanently. We're talking Niigata though, not Hokkaido - massive dumps, but often on a heavy-ish side, so 184 Bibby's can be vulnerable to tip diving in neutral stance at lower speeds. I'm worried about 186 because much bigger guys (Paul Forward included) were happy with the length and didn't feel like it's not enough, which suggests it could be too big for me to throw it around in the trees. And I'm worried about 178 being not that unsinkable (especially forward-mounted) and ending up being just marginally better than Bibby's.

Any thoughts from La Machine Max owners? How big are you, which length did you pick, how do you like it, do you wish you went shorter or longer? Have you by any chance skied 184 Bibby's? Cheers!

I'm 6' 155lbs and have the 186's.

I'd go 186 and mount way forward. See the Blister review and my prior comment. Skiing them further back has the tips wanting to point at the ski for me. They never sink. I'm going to move further forward of the "new school" line. I'm not sure what they were thinking with the mount points. It certainly wouldn't work for me on the "traditional" line.

At my weight, I disagree with Paul where he says they ski chop well. As soon as the snow gets chopped up I swap them for a heavier ski. I also think that would improve with a more forward mount. Right now instead of bashing through chop the tips want to deflect up and over.

Otherwise, they're surfy, fun and unsinkable. I skied them in a true 24" of light fresh snow last week. They were really fun.

[duboix]

I'd go 186 and mount way forward. See the Blister review and my prior comment. Skiing them further back has the tips wanting to point at the ski for me. They never sink. I'm going to move further forward of the "new school" line. I'm not sure what they were thinking with the mount points. It certainly wouldn't work for me on the "traditional" line.

That would definitely be more like what I'm used to ski. My only concern is that going further forward from what they recommend would move you way off the sidecut, flex, and rocker center points. I probably wouldn't care too much if I could get it for 300 bucks, but we're talking about just 20% off retail price, plus pricy shipping to NZ. Feels a bit steep for experimentation...

[dauwhe]

Anyone skied the Mini or the Micro?

[SnowMachine]

That would definitely be more like what I'm used to ski. My only concern is that going further forward from what they recommend would move you way off the sidecut, flex, and rocker center points. I probably wouldn't care too much if I could get it for 300 bucks, but we're talking about just 20% off retail price, plus pricy shipping to NZ. Feels a bit steep for experimentation...

It looks like -8 fromt true center is the consensus. I'll have to get a tape measure out to see where mine land at the "New School" line.

Where they sit now, they are pow surfers, for sure. As long as there are no tracks, I get along with them.

[GoSlowGoFar]

Anyone skied the Mini or the Micro?

Also curious about the Mini. Anyone been on it? Is it flat or fairly cambered? So frustrating that brands don’t show rocker profile shots of their skis…

[Benneke10]

Also curious about the Mini. Anyone been on it? Is it flat or fairly cambered? So frustrating that brands don’t show rocker profile shots of their skis…

The Mini and Micro have a little bit of camber. The skimo.co product pages have rocker pics

[GoSlowGoFar]

The Mini and Micro have a little bit of camber. The skimo.co product pages have rocker pics

Ah, thanks man. Didn't scroll down far enough to catch em. I wonder how the Mini would compare to something like the HL BC90, would the rocker and straighter ski handle soft snow better than the extra width?

[Andyski]

Only fondled the micro and mini, but their unique features in the category seem like just being a bit more progressively mounted and rockered than the usual (line vision another exception). And blacker. The mini would likely climb a bit better (camber) than the HL, but I’d rather have the 90 shape (longer radius, reverse) in soft snow if that’s your primary use case, especially in climates where you get funkier snow. Of course, I haven’t skied them and some smaller radius skis (Mfree 108) don’t ski like a small radius ski so this is all internet fapping. I really wish the HL had less rocker height/more flat under foot and the mini/micro had way less camber and slightly longer radius


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[GoSlowGoFar]

Was at a ski shop the other day and looked at the La Machine Mini and Mega. Both had camber, Mini had a fair amount more. Looks like some Megas are full reverse, others not...

Interesting that you mention some megas are full reverse and others are not…

I noticed that the ones I just mounted up seem like the camber profile is slightly wonky. Almost like there’s little micro camber pockets when the ski is decambered before going into the rocker.

Think this is “normal”?

[Dromond]

Does anyone know what the "classic" mount is on the 184 La Machine 3/Mega is? i.e. how far is it from the tail or the center of the ski?

[GoSlowGoFar]

Does anyone know what the "classic" mount is on the 184 La Machine 3/Mega is? i.e. how far is it from the tail or the center of the ski?

Just under 80cm from the tail

[Dromond]

Just under 80cm from the tail

Awesome. So that should be like 12cm back from center. Compared to a lot of modern skis that is quite far back - obviously it's the classic mount...