Non Blister Faction La Machine takes

[Roberto]

Any mags actually been on this ski? Not much on snow info apart from the Blister review. Snagged a pair and interested on mount point recs/riding notes.

[Lord Thomas]

I'll be watching this thread closely, very interested in this ski. I remember Paul Forward making a comment on the mount point. He ended up experimenting and trying them WAY different than the recommended. That review should be showing up pretty soon I would hope. Looking at a pair of 178's for the wife

[Jim S]

Necro bump from a different place in the multiverse. Esp 3.0 Mega La Machine.

[hopelesslyadolescent]

I picked up the short model for bc and have been loving it in the Sierra. We've had a really nice run of powder skiiing (until last night and today when it rained up high) and I've skied the Machine every day since I got them mounted up. I mounted +3 and have been very happy. Quick and agile at slow speeds and stable with no surprises at speed. I was a little worried about the 178 length, but it was the right move for me. Light on the up, easy to kick turn and no tip dive even at +3. Last few days it warmed up and the south facing was torn up with ski and snowshoe tracks, but the Machines handled it beautifully as long as it had softened. I ski tele and really like reverse camber skis, so there's that.

[Robik]

The deal was too good to pass. Currently have Nocta 190 mounted with Tectons, plan on moving binders to La Machine and compare them in similar conditions. Nocta is longer and heavier, but the profile looks pretty similar besides the mount point.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[BeHuWe]

I'll be watching this thread closely, very interested in this ski. I remember Paul Forward making a comment on the mount point. He ended up experimenting and trying them WAY different than the recommended. That review should be showing up pretty soon I would hope. Looking at a pair of 178's for the wife

Just pulled the trigger on a set for my wife. 287bsl, you can be first in line if she doesn’t like them.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[altacoup]

Grabbed the last pair of 186s. $299 is a score. I love renegades and the blister review said they were similar. In the past I’ve absolutely hated light weight skis so we’ll see.

[Jim S]

Thank you all for the replies !

I picked up the short model for bc and have been loving it in the Sierra. We've had a really nice run of powder skiiing (until last night and today when it rained up high) and I've skied the Machine every day since I got them mounted up. I mounted +3 and have been very happy. Quick and agile at slow speeds and stable with no surprises at speed. I was a little worried about the 178 length, but it was the right move for me. Light on the up, easy to kick turn and no tip dive even at +3. Last few days it warmed up and the south facing was torn up with ski and snowshoe tracks, but the Machines handled it beautifully as long as it had softened. I ski tele and really like reverse camber skis, so there's that.

@178cm……what’s your height and weight? I’ll probably get 3.0 Mega 184 cm at 6’2” 192 lbs in my birthday suit.

I too ski the Sierras, mostly bc in north Lake Tahoe where I live (Incline Village).

[hopelesslyadolescent]

Thank you all for the replies !



@178cm……what’s your height and weight? I’ll probably get 3.0 Mega 184 cm at 6’2” 192 lbs in my birthday suit.

I too ski the Sierras, mostly bc in north Lake Tahoe where I live (Incline Village).

5'9" 160. I'm south of you on Hwy 4, ski mostly in the Bear Valley bc.

[Robik]

Picked up 186 today, they came at 1840g on my kitchen scale. The profile reminds me of Black Crows Nocta. Still haven't decided whether to mount ATK FR14 or Tectons.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[Jim S]

La Machine Mega 3.0 184cm incoming .
Me 6’2” 195 lbs

[Benneke10]

Has anyone gotten time on the new skinnier ones yet?

[Jim S]

I’ve had two days on the La Machine Mega mounted w Momentum Voyager XII.
The setup is delightfully light with each ski 1625 g totaling 2005g with binding and brake.

The skis are excellent. Big smiles here.
Mounted ~ -8 at the factory Progressive line (in between Classic and New School line).
the Mega are quick, forgiving, maneuverable and versatile; quite responsive to different techniques and weight emphasis. Easy to carve, slarve, and turn pressuring the back half of the ski and tails especially in tight trees. Driving a bit forward pressuring the shins engaged a more aggressive carved directional turn engaging the forebody and tips.

Because they are so light, I anticipated the skis getting deflected quite a bit by firm Sierra snow and bumps. This occurred far less than I anticipated, which is a good thing.

MOUNTING
I took them to Alpenglow and the tech did a super job. He was concerned because the bindings appear to be mounted directly to the paulownia wood in the middle of the ski, which he thought was unusual and concerned about the bindings possibly pulling out with aggressive skiing.
I contacted Faction and Matt replied with this:

“Hey Jim!
Thanks for reaching out. Your ski has a Phenol plate built into the mounting zone- and passes all the binding retention tests we can throw at it, so you should have no issue. The Phenol mount plate is very very strong (indeed, stronger than the equivalent titanal option) and we have never had an issue with it. “

[SnowMachine]

Anybody have feelings about sizing? I asked about the La Machine in a thread yesterday with no responses. I'm 6'0" 160 and I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the 186. Probably mount them toward the progressive line. Can't beet the current pricing fir a dedicated pow stick.

[SnowMachine]

Eff it.... ordered the 186 as only 1 pair was left. STH2 13 with 130 brakes for $170. Why not? My kids can pay for their own college. Under $600 with tax.

[Kreemcheese]

Has anyone gotten time on the new skinnier ones yet?

Skied quite a bit on the micro (91mm) this last spring, did a 5 pair boot-test with the same pair of skis over 2 months. About 40k vert all in all, zero lifts.

They are very light for the amount of float that they provide, however we are not spoiled with powder here in Sweden and in refrozen crust or just boiler plate they felt too unstable, nervous and jittery for me. I would see that ski working great for longer tours or dawn patrol in places where there is a higher chance of soft snow more often.

[hopelesslyadolescent]

I’ve had two days on the La Machine Mega mounted w Momentum Voyager XII.
The setup is delightfully light with each ski 1625 g totaling 2005g with binding and brake.

The skis are excellent. Big smiles here.
Mounted ~ -8 at the factory Progressive line (in between Classic and New School line).
the Mega are quick, forgiving, maneuverable and versatile; quite responsive to different techniques and weight emphasis. Easy to carve, slarve, and turn pressuring the back half of the ski and tails especially in tight trees. Driving a bit forward pressuring the shins engaged a more aggressive carved directional turn engaging the forebody and tips.

Because they are so light, I anticipated the skis getting deflected quite a bit by firm Sierra snow and bumps. This occurred far less than I anticipated, which is a good thing.

MOUNTING
I took them to Alpenglow and the tech did a super job. He was concerned because the bindings appear to be mounted directly to the paulownia wood in the middle of the ski, which he thought was unusual and concerned about the bindings possibly pulling out with aggressive skiing.
I contacted Faction and Matt replied with this:

“Hey Jim!
Thanks for reaching out. Your ski has a Phenol plate built into the mounting zone- and passes all the binding retention tests we can throw at it, so you should have no issue. The Phenol mount plate is very very strong (indeed, stronger than the equivalent titanal option) and we have never had an issue with it. “

Hey, Jim, are your Megas full reverse camber?
Something I saw on the Faction site made me wonder if they have a bit of camber. Thanks.

[altacoup]

I have some megas and they’re definitely full reverse


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Jim S]

Hey, Jim, are your Megas full reverse camber?
Something I saw on the Faction site made me wonder if they have a bit of camber. Thanks.

It looks like there’s a touch of camber to me.

[SnowMachine]

Mine should be here Thursday. I'll take a pic.

More snow coming next week. Hopefully I'll get a chance to ride them!!

[SnowMachine]

I have some megas and they’re definitely full reverse


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Yup. Mine are here. Zero camber. I’m getting them mounted and we should get some fresh snow Sunday. Hopefully I’ll have a report.

Now, where do I mount them??? I’m thinking progressive (+1.5 from classic) or new school (+3 from classic). Per my understanding, the entire Blister review is based on the new school mount point.

I'm thinking progressive since my other pow skis are Bent 120’s and they’re pretty “new school.” Not sure I need two sets of near center mounted pow skis.

[altacoup]

The new school mount on the factions is like 4cms further back than the bent 120. I wrote an email to faction and they said the furthest forward I could go is -6.5 from true center. I’m going to mount mine at -7 from true center, which is +4 from classic.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[SnowMachine]

I ended up mounting them +3 from classic (new school line) and rode them yesterday in 15-24" of fresh. End of the day we had the mountain to ourselves and free refills. I'm really happy with that mount point.

For me, they are a lot more ski than the 120 Bents in 184. Longer running surface, a lot more ski out front, heavier, etc.

I'll be darned if they dont want to turn down the hill and go. Once I realized how much pressure I could put up front, I had a blast. Even at +3 they are unsinkable. I didn't ski them in much chop, but cut up powder was no issue. Sit back and let those long noses power through. They broke loose easily and would go sideways without a problem. They even ski switch fairly well if it isn't too deep. I found myself going really fast a lot of they day. Making big turns on them at speed is too much fun.

They don't pivot around in trees like the Bents. I wouldn't really call that a complaint. It just takes more active skiing in the tight trees. They're still full rocker, so that's relative, but the Bents go where you want in trees no matter where you are on the ski. At one point I looked to the left of a tree at decent speed and I just wasn't going there. I dodged right and took a deep breath knowing that it could have gone bad quickly.

Anyway, I'm completely happy. These are the skis for a big back country day. If you can open it up on fresh snow you'll have a blast. They have enough flexibility that I know I'll ride them inbounds a few times per year. Most days it's probably more ski than I need but I could easily be happy on them.

[paroofka]

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

[old mexico]

Please- I am finally retiring an old pair of dynafit beast 98 and the minis look like a natural replacement if they didn’t add camber to the lineup


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums