Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 220
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,041
    That’s with your skis standing vertically on their tails, though right?

    Marshal’s are lying flat on their bases so the ski weight is flattening the ski a bit.

    A couple ounces of pressure and they’ll be completely flat.

    Looking ideal for what I would want out of a carver that can be shut down from high speeds.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by otto parts View Post
    Doremite and/or Marshal

    On3p run crazy long or?
    Straight pull on the few I've had has always been less then 1cm over stated length, so yes, long, but not K2 long.
    Quote Originally Posted by skideeppow View Post
    That grip walk shit is ridiculous.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by m5d5cb View Post
    I should have included that. I am 6' 155lb, and a 29.5 / 338BSL.

    I want nicer fast groomer ski so I am excited to try your R87 first.
    I measure 11.5mm camber with the skis together. I am not at all experienced enough to say whether I want more or less.
    At your height/boot size and given wanting a performance carver, I recommend 74cm from the tail, which is where the factory line should be, and works out to -12.5 from center. Cheers!

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    4,309

    Heritage Lab Skis - AM 50/50 Skis Have Arrived - Dedicated Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by otto parts View Post
    Doremite and/or Marshal

    On3p run crazy long or?



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    ON3P measure true to stated length after pressing to my understanding where other manufacturers measure at material length prior to pressing so obv curvature will absorb some cms. Or other approaches to measurement that create a variance between stamped length and straight pull. All my ON3Ps measure true to stated length (just tested this and the 179s Wrens pictures by the HL 99s above measure 179.4cm straight pull).
    Uno mas

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    At your height/boot size and given wanting a performance carver, I recommend 74cm from the tail, which is where the factory line should be, and works out to -12.5 from center. Cheers!
    Thanks, yes the line is just under 74cm from the tail. I'll go with a 74cm from tail (-12.5cm traditional).

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    At your height/boot size and given wanting a performance carver, I recommend 74cm from the tail, which is where the factory line should be, and works out to -12.5 from center. Cheers!
    Any reason not to go on the factory line for the 188s? I'm 5'11", 155lbs, 307 bsl if it matters, plan on using these as inbounds daily drivers for anytime there hasn't been new snow in the last 2 days.
    Three fundamentals of every extreme skier, total disregard for personal saftey, amphetamines, and lots and lots of malt liquor......-jack handy

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by soul_skier View Post
    Any reason not to go on the factory line for the 188s? I'm 5'11", 155lbs, 307 bsl if it matters, plan on using these as inbounds daily drivers for anytime there hasn't been new snow in the last 2 days.
    Knowing the skis you like, I’d say in the line, or no more than +5mm

    And sitting here after shoulder surgery, so increbly stoked the first batch is In peoples hands. So fired up for first impression on snow!!!!

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    "I personally cannot wait to mount my own R120 AM with 50/50 bindings and use them them often when it snows, not only in the wastach, but everywhere else too (Tahoe, Jackson, etc)."

    Marshal, very curious what your sentence here will be for the Comp R120?

    I've got the Comp 120 and 99 on order. My daily drivers are Head Monster 88 and 108. Love love love them. I weigh 190 at 5'8" and am really wondering if I should ask you to swap me over to the AM for the 120s?

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    DownEast
    Posts
    2,534
    Quote Originally Posted by puhisurfer View Post
    "I personally cannot wait to mount my own R120 AM with 50/50 bindings and use them them often when it snows, not only in the wastach, but everywhere else too (Tahoe, Jackson, etc)."

    Marshal, very curious what your sentence here will be for the Comp R120?

    I've got the Comp 120 and 99 on order. My daily drivers are Head Monster 88 and 108. Love love love them. I weigh 190 at 5'8" and am really wondering if I should ask you to swap me over to the AM for the 120s?
    Interested as well. I have Comp R99 on order but just emailed Marshal to swap me over to the R120 AM based on that description and upcoming trips to Japan and Gaspe’.
    Last edited by singlecross; 10-28-2022 at 07:55 PM.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Hey gents!

    For me and my own personal skiing, the comp build is for Snowbird. Open runs, chopped up snow, and racing trams.

    Regarding the R120 AM vs Comp, would think about the AM as something more like a directional, chargey pow ski. I would think about the comp build as a chop/crud destroyer. Given that you have monster 108’s already, the question is if you want a bigger version of that, or something a touch surfy and manueverable.

    @Singlecross, Ill ping ya back via email shortly and get that going!

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremite View Post
    … but they are currently being hidden from my wife .
    I love this place so much! It’s nice to know that I’m not alone in my depravity.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Hi all,

    Thought I would share that the 185 R120 AM is down to only 1 pair left, and the 180 R99 AM is down to only 2 pair left!

    If anyone is curious, there are 3ea of the R87 AM's and a few more 188 R99 AM.

    The snow is flying and so eager for the reviews to start coming in as well!

    Cheers!
    Last edited by Marshal Olson; 11-04-2022 at 11:35 AM.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,720
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4118 copy.jpg 
Views:	149 
Size:	1.31 MB 
ID:	434999
    Three fundamentals of every extreme skier, total disregard for personal saftey, amphetamines, and lots and lots of malt liquor......-jack handy

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Yeah man, looking shapr! Can't wait to hear your thoughts once you (and everyone) get them on snow.

    With respect to the R99 AM, one of my favorite skis I have ever owned was back in 2005/2006/2007: an all-white era 190cm Igneous FFL (98mm waist, 27m radius IIRC) and 235# stiffness. A bit softer and lighter than the other Igneous I had owned at the time, but one of the best too. It was a true 50/50 ski for me. Toured as much as I skied inbound, and it really did everything great.

    The R99 AM slots in the same use, mindspace, and design intent. So excited to get on my pair!!!

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    12,892
    How much more demanding do you think the AM vs the Comp build will be?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    I estimate it to be 15% stiffer and heavier.

    Relative to stiffness, one “notch” is 7%, and much less than that begins to get hard to clearly detect (at least for me as a ski tester). Most skiers might need a 10% jump if a-b’ing a ski to really truly notice.

    So the comp should be one to two “notches” more ski.

    I’d think of The Comps as more of a battle axe where you can just ski straight at rough questionable snow and throw your skis sideways and the ski will just smooth it out vs the AM skis as more of a precision tool.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    I estimate it to be 15% stiffer and heavier.
    Do you scale up each part of the ski by 15% or do you mostly make one section of the ski stiffer?
    SoothSki - Compare measured specs of thousands of skis!

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    12,892
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    I estimate it to be 15% stiffer and heavier.

    Relative to stiffness, one “notch” is 7%, and much less than that begins to get hard to clearly detect (at least for me as a ski tester). Most skiers might need a 10% jump if a-b’ing a ski to really truly notice.

    So the comp should be one to two “notches” more ski.

    I’d think of The Comps as more of a battle axe where you can just ski straight at rough questionable snow and throw your skis sideways and the ski will just smooth it out vs the AM skis as more of a precision tool.
    I think I’ll stick with comp build on my 99s. I’m large, 6’5” 240#. Doesn’t sound like they’re going to be too unwieldy.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    9,315
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    I think I’ll stick with comp build on my 99s. I’m large, 6’5” 240#. Doesn’t sound like they’re going to be too unwieldy.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    If this 195lb dude is going comp, you’ll be just fine.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    6,332
    Quote Originally Posted by soul_skier View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4118 copy.jpg 
Views:	149 
Size:	1.31 MB 
ID:	434999
    Rocker Porn! Rocker Porn!

    (Camber porn, but whatever).


  21. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by alude View Post
    Do you scale up each part of the ski by 15% or do you mostly make one section of the ski stiffer?
    you bet!

    in this particular case, the ski has thicker titanal and heavier fiberglass. The profile and thickness are not changed.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    I think I’ll stick with comp build on my 99s. I’m large, 6’5” 240#. Doesn’t sound like they’re going to be too unwieldy.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I think they will feel great for you… but if they don’t, let me know and I’ll just trade you out for a pair of AM’s.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    449
    180 50/50 R99s came in today! Can't wait to get these on snow. Will be putting some tyrolia attack demos on them to play with mount points, and so any interested mags can take them for a spin

    Build quality is top notch.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20221124_002125313.jpg 
Views:	120 
Size:	697.3 KB 
ID:	435221

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20221124_002345898.jpg 
Views:	139 
Size:	587.8 KB 
ID:	435222

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,556
    I too just received a pair of R99 50s ... these look DIALED.
    Initial thoughts are the quality is excellent and these should be a ripping no-fresh ski.

    As my intent is for these to replace my Enforcer 93s, I'll likely use those Attack2 binders.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Christmas came early - just found a pair of R120 AM on my doorstep.

    They are just beautiful. I am too stoked!

Posting Permissions

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