Big Mountain Powder Chargers - Heritage Lab C113 and FL113 - Dedicated Thread

[jackattack]

Is this the ski that checks both of those boxes?

IMO, no. This is not the goat you’re looking for.

[chewski]

Has anyone been able to ski these in 4-6” of PNW hot pow? The super wet, grabby snow that makes skis feel locked in?

My current best ski for this is a v-werks katana (I assume because of the rocker) but I want something with a heavier build to smash through the crud that builds up by noon. I also have the ON3P Wrenegade pro that is great at busting crud, but feels too locked in when hitting the untracked hot pow (cream cheese) in the morning.

Is this the ski that checks both of those boxes?

I agree with jackattack that you might want something more rockered and/or tapered (or... res?). I would get the upcoming FR110 over the FL113 for this specific use case. Marshall just announced the 192 length since it sounds like you can handle some serious ski. I honestly didn't love the FL113 in deep chop (i like more float than they offer), but found them best in mixed refrozen/spring schmoo. They can definitely handle sticky snow if you can run fast or straight, but it sounds like you are talking about tighter terrain, hence the FR110. That or a billygoat

[Marshal Olson]

Has anyone been able to ski these in 4-6” of PNW hot pow? The super wet, grabby snow that makes skis feel locked in?

My current best ski for this is a v-werks katana (I assume because of the rocker) but I want something with a heavier build to smash through the crud that builds up by noon. I also have the ON3P Wrenegade pro that is great at busting crud, but feels too locked in when hitting the untracked hot pow (cream cheese) in the morning.

Is this the ski that checks both of those boxes?

Ya dude, I think you want the FR110 as well. Just FWIW!

[chewski]

To clarify i have had the FL113 in DEEP corn (shortly before wet slides became a real issue), mashed potatoes and some shallow hot pow and they don't suck here at all. They just aren't pivot machines. I doubt you would notice much improvement over wrens in that regard.

[chewski]

Did something i've been meaning to do all season: skied 187 FL113 one day and 186 OG bodacious the next day. Conditions were similar both days with DEEP spring/summer conditions in full effect by 11am. Thunderstorms started rolling in around noon each day cooling things a bit before lightning closures around 1pm. Snow is setting up overnight, but mini wet slides are being triggered pretty early in the day and runouts were quite grabby.

I confirmed what I suspected all along: the bodacious is a bit easier to ski due to more rocker and softer shovels. The deeper/softer/grabbier the snow is the more i prefer the bodacious. It floats better in general and pivots easier if it's truly manky. The rotten snow that's sitting between weekend lift openings and not getting skied mon-fri (part of the mountain only opens for weekend access) was a real test of their subtle differences, because they are definitely more similar than different.

My initial emails with marshal at the beginning of the season went like, "i want n+1 but what would be different than my bodacious, because they look awfully similar." Basically marshal said the freeride construction would give me some more pop and rebound than the bodacious, and i agree. They are similarly chargy and damp, with the slight nod to dampness AND pop somehow going to the FL113 in both categories. Where I actually preferred the FL 113 was when spring was still early and the thaw/refreeze cycles were complete every day. They hold a slightly better edge due to lower rocker and being narrower, are slightly more damp on refrozen due to more rubber, and still pivot plenty well for corn that isn't full blown rotten pow/mank/wet sliding mess. But now that it's nearing june and it's DEEP spring, the bodacious' extra pivot and no penalty for decreased edge hold let me ski slightly faster and with more confidence. I felt similarly mid winter when i used the fl113 on a day with deep soft chop when i felt the float was less inspiring than bodacious or billygoats. But in any softer conditions that aren't really deep or manky, or any conditions that involve a mix of soft and refrozen/windswept, the fl113 really shines. They also seem slightly more durable than the blizzards, which have been fine but don't shed chips and scratches crazy well like the heritage labs.

It is honestly only n+1 that could justify owning both. I contemplated selling one or the other all season. I think i'll keep them both as skis that are only fractionally different, but slightly more fun depending on the exact amount of deep or hard conditions you will encounter. I would still grab these skis on the same type of day and something altogether floatier or carvier on either end.

[Sylvan]

I felt similarly mid winter when i used the fl113 on a day with deep soft chop when i felt the float was less inspiring than bodacious or billygoats. But in any softer conditions that aren't really deep or manky, or any conditions that involve a mix of soft and refrozen/windswept, the fl113 really shines.

This resonates. IMO they're a wide variable conditions charger for sure, which is perfect for all the variable we ski at BComb, soft 2D right up to resort pow days. Like a CMD 118, the first run or two of deep untracked, they do fine, but they crush the rest of the first day, and continue to until the freezing level rises, or the mountain is beat to shit. Agree that they're not the best at making shapes other than 11s in hot pow, but I haven't found a true charger that is. Can't wait to get on FL105s.

[bry]

It is honestly only n+1 that could justify owning both.

Try harder, though that is a purpose built equation

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[chewski]

So a bit of n+2 or maybe even n+3 occurred recently. I had FOMO with the wrenegades going away and snagged a 189 wren 102 ti that arrived last week and got skied hard all day today. I will ski it one more day before posting my thoughts on that ski in the appropriate on3p thread, but it illuminated a bit more about the FL113 that i had been using almost the entire spring up until now.

I think I prefer the FL113 in this mixed firm/soft role of spring skiing. It's actually cooler this weekend than last, and it's fully refreezing and not getting sloppy messy until about 1pm. The two skis have similar levels of performance, but they differ in:

1.) the wren has a sidecut in the low 20's whereas the FL113's (in 187) are in the very high 30's (basically 40m). This was the most obvious difference and it was super evident as the wren 102 ti's preferred medium to slightly largish turns and could be brought across the fall line much more than the FL113, which only want big to huge carves down the fall line

2.) the wrens have camber and more abrupt tip rocker, whereas the FL113 has flat/subtle reverse camber with mellow tip rocker. This was the next most evident difference, because the FL113 drifts in and out of turns and engages/disengages edge more seamlessly in rough or grabby snow (the wren doesn't suck at this by any means, but subtle reverse is kinda king at this game). However the wren generates more pop off of features if you deliberately jump off stuff or plan to use bumps to air into transitions.

3.) this probably relates to #2, but the FL113 is easier to ski really fast on rough snow due to the straighter sidecut, stiffer tip, and lower/more gradual rise tip. This isn't to say the wren 102 ti has a speed limit lower than the FL113, but due to the camber and more abrupt tip rocker you can really get launched if you encounter bumps off balance. You need to ski more actively on the wren and plan ahead much more to steer around or air off rough terrain to get the same speed limit as the FL113 without getting launched. But if you commit and stay on your shins and use the terrain to air your transitions then you can really rage on the wren 102 ti

4.) i already mentioned that the wren is poppier, but the FL113 is damper and smoother due to more vds rubber. I would call the wren's suspension very good, but if you have been spoiled by the HL freeride construction then you start to notice everything else. On coral reef and slush bumps that had refrozen with all the previous days tracks in them, the wren was not fun. These conditions super suck in general, but the FL113 was quieter and easier to pivot in these conditions, making them semi-ok

5.) HL and on3p measure much truer than other brands, so these are long 187/189's respectively. But the 189 wren felt materially a little too long for me despite not being a ton longer than the 187 FL113. I actually don't know the wren mount, but i would guess it's -8cm or -9cm vs the FL113's -11cm. For some reason I struggle with longer tails on burly skis. I got super owned by 194 sender squads mounted at -6.25cm. The wren's are much, much easier for me in bumps than the squads, but still noticeably harder than the FL113. I appreciate the 189 wren length 80% of the time, but I notice it 20% of the time (even if i can kinda manage it)

Honestly I think my huckleberry would have been the 184 wren 108 ti, but i only have one day on these so far and it is definitely promising. Whereas the bodacious was very, very much like the FL113, i think the wren ti line is more like a different flavor in the same category of skis as the FL113.

[arild]

Yo Chewski, was going to reply to this some time back, but forgot.

For anyone interested, Marshal has a pair of new outlet FL113s in 194, smidge of camber, at a steal($595us). Might help with some pop for anyone sceptical of the super low reverse camber with the standards.

Re:Wren108ti - I think they'd be more easily compared to the FL105, more traditional rocker/camber profile, similar sidecut and waist width, though the FLs are probably a bit more tapered. As such, the Wrens will likely compliment the FL113s really well in a quiver (as would the FL105s, for that matter).

Really stoked you found your niche use for the 113s!

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

[pfluffenmeister]

Yo Chewski, was going to reply to this some time back, but forgot.

For anyone interested, Marshal has a pair of new outlet FL113s in 194, smidge of camber, at a steal($595us). Might help with some pop for anyone sceptical of the super low reverse camber with the standards.

Re:Wren108ti - I think they'd be more easily compared to the FL105, more traditional rocker/camber profile, similar sidecut and waist width, though the FLs are probably a bit more tapered. As such, the Wrens will likely compliment the FL113s really well in a quiver (as would the FL105s, for that matter).

Really stoked you found your niche use for the 113s!

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

Gaahh!!
I wish those were 187s.

That profile looks sweet!

[gregorys]

Yo Chewski, was going to reply to this some time back, but forgot.

For anyone interested, Marshal has a pair of new outlet FL113s in 194, smidge of camber, at a steal($595us). Might help with some pop for anyone sceptical of the super low reverse camber with the standards.

Re:Wren108ti - I think they'd be more easily compared to the FL105, more traditional rocker/camber profile, similar sidecut and waist width, though the FLs are probably a bit more tapered. As such, the Wrens will likely compliment the FL113s really well in a quiver (as would the FL105s, for that matter).

Really stoked you found your niche use for the 113s!

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

Yeah, I'm doing my best to resist, myself.
I've got Bodes in 196, FFS. I really don't *need* those. But it's, oh, so tempting!
<gack>

[Velomayniac]

I've been looking at those too. I also have 196 Bodes, among others that overlap. Is the slight camber a mistake, or by design? They look rad to be honest.

[arild]

I've been looking at those too. I also have 196 Bodes, among others that overlap. Is the slight camber a mistake, or by design? They look rad to be honest.

They were blems, as the CAD drawings always intended the skis to be flat underfoot with low reverse camber in the tip and tail. They do look hot, though.

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

[Marshal Olson]

Yes, exactly. The first couple pair of this run came out with just a kiss of camber. Honestly I think they will ski rad this way. These outlet pair are a great way to give em a go.

[bw_wp_hedonism]

Yes, exactly. The first couple pair of this run came out with just a kiss of camber. Honestly I think they will ski rad this way. These outlet pair are a great way to give em a go.

Less drifty, moar grippy?

[arild]

Less drifty, moar grippy?

That's the idea!

support the raddest project going: http://heritagelabskis.com

[Marshal Olson]

Yessir; though I might characterize as potentially a touch smoother on rough snow vs a little less pivoty, as I think given stiffness and radius, they will probably carve about the same in round numbers

[waveshello]

A couple more C113 observations:
The C113 skis really well centered, meaning that the weight distribution over the course of the turn can be more over the center of the ski. It carves well with a centered stance and has significant purchase under the heel out to the tail.

When edged with a little force, the C113 really grips and chomps into the turn. Trenchable. It still slarves OK when you give it edge roll, but when you want to slam and hold, it comes through.

Again, it's a nice crudbuster, doesn't get thrown around by chopped potatoes. More directional than my other pow skis.

Your description puts words to amorphous thoughts I have about the OG bodacious--I will not be disappointed if there are plenty of similarities. I just picked up the 187 C113 in the HL outlet and I am really looking forward to tromping around the Cascades with them this winter.

[fool]

I can't tell how much to attribute to each of these factors, but early in the season i was bailing on techy chutes and billy goating lines due to lack of confidence in my control of them. Now i will ski just about any line i am capable of skiing on these without a second thought. I also find them fun in slush bumps. Basically this long post is just to give an update so people don't think these are EXTREMELY demanding or 100% game on all the time skis. They are not easy, but i no longer find them that hard

Thanks, chewski. What changed to go from lack of confidence in them to being comfortable on any line without a second thought (and no longer finding them hard to ski)?

Edit: was it something more than time and experience in different conditions?

I'm re-sorting my quiver and considering FL113s.

[Lord Thomas]

Lot's of chatter here about FL113's so how about some more beta data on the C113's. I've got a pair of 187's that will get here sometime but we don't have shit for snow. Inquiring minds want to know.

[Upinsmoke]

You answered your own question. We need more snow

[waveshello]

I finally skied my C113s for the first time today, in cold, settled pow with some wind affect and a little bit of sun, shady trees holding the goods. Not enough data for a full review but--

Nice manners on the skin track.

Reminds me of a blizzard bodacious in powder--loose, fast, smooth. Easy to drift in to/out of a turn, but stable/directional. Maybe there's some confirmation bias going on here, because that's what I was expecting and hoping for.

Maneuverable a low speeds, but seemed to come alive at ~20mph.

Felt a little unwieldy on a steeper scraped off section, I guess I forgot it was 113mm underfoot for a minute.

Looking forward to skiing them more, and on bigger lines with room to let em run--I'm digging them so far.

EDIT:
Forgot to mention mine are slightly different than the production rocker profile... With a "kiss of camber" underfoot.

[DeathVan]

These ballistic missiles are armed with a 50 megaton nuclear warhead, set to nuke the whole damn mountain!

[mr_pretzel]

Who’s got a C113 they want to part ways with? I’ll pay you enough that you can almost get those fancy new BC120s

[Jaxson]

Mr P,

I have a 194 C113 that I am letting go, keeping my 187s. I got them from Marshal last year and was a demo pair so now has two mounts and a couple shallow ptex fills.
Tecton @330bsl on the line and I managed a solly STH or older 997 style (325 toe, 315 heel 330-310 travel) at -11.5 (85.5 cm from tail) line is -11 or 86cm
Asking $300 plus any shipping from WA state. BC could be tricky...