Check Out Our Shop
Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 LastLast
Results 426 to 450 of 470
  1. #426
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,881
    Quote Originally Posted by forumskier View Post
    Raptor 140, 325mm
    Definitely right call to go -12.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  2. #427
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by arild View Post
    Definitely right call to go -12.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk
    100%

  3. #428
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    4,713
    Quote Originally Posted by iriponsnow View Post
    Yes, I was at the rec mount @ 296, so you should be 5mm back. FWIW, I thought they could go back!
    Not to split hairs - or maybe to and this is TGR after all - but i am reading standard mount is 78.4cm from tail +/- 1cm so rearward suggested mount point 77.4cm from tail. I am measuring my boot center line @76.3cm after shifting the heel piece back to accommodate 306mm. Hence my “1cm back” comment.
    Uno mas

  4. #429
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremite View Post
    Not to split hairs - or maybe to and this is TGR after all - but i am reading standard mount is 78.4cm from tail +/- 1cm so rearward suggested mount point 77.4cm from tail. I am measuring my boot center line @76.3cm after shifting the heel piece back to accommodate 306mm. Hence my “1cm back” comment.
    yup, so reusing the holes would put you at about -12.5

    classic chargy feel. May be a good match, depending on your style.

    I’d say after you get them on snow for a day or two, if needed; it would be easy enough to pop an extra set of toe holes, keep re-using the heels, and go +1 to +1.5 from where you are now.

  5. #430
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremite View Post
    Not to split hairs - or maybe to and this is TGR after all - but i am reading standard mount is 78.4cm from tail +/- 1cm so rearward suggested mount point 77.4cm from tail. I am measuring my boot center line @76.3cm after shifting the heel piece back to accommodate 306mm. Hence my “1cm back” comment.
    Give 'em a try but I'd be quick to re-mount those bad dogs. The way I'm reading this is; the recommended line is at 78.4 and your BSL midsole is at 76.3? If so, that's closer to 1" rather than 1cm. Marshal's plan for 1.5 sets of holes is a good idea.

  6. #431
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    4,713

    Chasing My Dream Daily Driver - The Heritage Lab FL105

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    yup, so reusing the holes would put you at about -12.5

    classic chargy feel. May be a good match, depending on your style.

    I’d say after you get them on snow for a day or two, if needed; it would be easy enough to pop an extra set of toe holes, keep re-using the heels, and go +1 to +1.5 from where you are now.
    Agreed. I am not hand wringing over this. I was more so just reacting to the notion I may only be .5cm back whereas I am reading it that I am more like 1cm from your rearward -1 rec.

    I typically prefer a more directional feel. Planning ~82cm from the tail on my 180 AM 100s

    Quote Originally Posted by One (+) Sentence View Post
    Give 'em a try but I'd be quick to re-mount those bad dogs. The way I'm reading this is; the recommended line is at 78.4 and your BSL midsole is at 76.3? If so, that's closer to 1" rather than 1cm. Marshal's plan for 1.5 sets of holes is a good idea.
    No qualms about dropping new toe holes 1.5-2cm forward bringing me to ~78. I definitely plan to try them first - hopefully without over thinking it.
    Uno mas

  7. #432
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the shadow of the white rocks
    Posts
    3,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremite View Post
    Agreed. I am not hand wringing over this. I was more so just reacting to the notion I may only be .5cm back whereas I am reading it that I am more like 1cm from your rearward -1 rec.

    I typically prefer a more directional feel. Planning ~82cm from the tail on my 180 AM 100s



    No qualms about dropping new toe holes 1.5-2cm forward bringing me to ~78. I definitely plan to try them first - hopefully without over thinking it.
    So confused, I mounted em as instructed bump.

  8. #433
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    4,713

    Chasing My Dream Daily Driver - The Heritage Lab FL105

    Quote Originally Posted by iriponsnow View Post
    So confused, I mounted em as instructed bump.
    If you mounted at 77.4 from tail which would be within the recommended range and I had to move the heel back a full cm to go from a 296 to 306bsl, this all makes sense. Or I suck at measuring stuff but I tend to be particular about such things.

    We are all cool as far as I’m concerned. The most important thing here is that I have 178cm HL FL105s, a ski I was just slightly too cheap to buy at “retail” given the 181cm Kastle BMX 105 HP already in the stable. Outlet pricing = resistance proved futile.

    We should try to ski together irip, but I think you may be too far south. Mainly Smugglers (bash badge+) and Burke (family passes) for me, occasionally Jay (4 packs). Too cheap to buy day passes elsewhere and my fam obligations leave me small windows but I typically have mid week flex.
    Uno mas

  9. #434
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the shadow of the white rocks
    Posts
    3,458
    ^ absolutely! Lets making happen!

  10. #435
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    close enough
    Posts
    1,372
    I think we need to do a HL family VT/NE summit. All 5 of us maybe.
    Harvest the ride.

  11. #436
    Join Date
    Apr 2024
    Posts
    234
    I might even go -12.5

  12. #437
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,881
    Quote Originally Posted by forumskier View Post
    I might even go -12.5
    You could, but I strongly recommend -12.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  13. #438
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,517
    Same as Arild. Given the flex pattern, I’d go -12 as the set back traditional mount with a head raptor boot.

  14. #439
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,881
    Just for reference, I'm 203lbs, 177cm, ski 304mm bsl WCR 140s in their most upright position, and ski those at -11. I did ski them at -12 for a while, when my boots were set up more aggressively, but I had more luck adjusting to my other skis when the boots were a touch more relaxed (no spoilers, minimum forward lean, etc).





    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  15. #440
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Driving2VT
    Posts
    4,713

    Chasing My Dream Daily Driver - The Heritage Lab FL105

    Quote Originally Posted by iriponsnow View Post
    ^ absolutely! Lets making happen!
    Quote Originally Posted by L8APX View Post
    I think we need to do a HL family VT/NE summit. All 5 of us maybe.
    Let’s keep in touch, especially reach out if you’ve ever heading up to Jay or Smuggs (I realize no one goes out to their way to ski Burke, terrain in underrated but their snow totals are f’kn lame. True king of ec spring though if you dig bombing big steep EMPTY groomers )
    Uno mas

  16. #441
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    49
    Hi Marshal how many people would you need down to run a special long run of a 105 wide ski? 198-200cm? Has to be enough of us that would buy them.

    I like the R99 Comp and they are still basically new after being skied 80% of the time last year but wouldn't want to go slightly wider but lose the metal.

    Went for a dedicated short radius race ski this offseason but I think that is what my wish list for next offseason would be.

  17. #442
    Join Date
    Mar 2024
    Posts
    112
    Having 192 fl105s, I'd be curious to know how many of those there are in the wild

  18. #443
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,517
    Oh man. My first reaction was… pessimistic , haha.

    But then, you got my wheels turning on what I’d personally want that ski to look like. And now I want to ski em myself.

    the economics of such a thing are terrible of course.

    But also, YOLO.

    so pm me your email address some time

  19. #444
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    10,157
    200cm FL105 in appropriate flex, giddy the frick up! Esp since my 192’s are unflappable at mach chicken. That’s a serious euro ski!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  20. #445
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    7,212
    That would be a serious ski.
    I'm on the 185, thinking about downsizing to 178?
    5'10" 150#
    I only have a handful of days on my 185s.
    Nimble when driven, even zipper bumps, but maybe felt like too much tip.
    Anyone been on both lengths and care to opine?
    I'll have both in hand shortly as Marshal offers unheard of customer support.
    These skis seem to run "long" as the 185 are almost as long as some 189s.
    I've got 186 R110s and those are long for 186s as well.

    Keep in mind I'm a long skis truck kind of guy and have probably been on skis that are "too" long all of my ski life.
    Freshman year in HS my Dad bought me a pair of 190 Blue star Kniessels and said those should last you through HS.
    Taught me to bend a ski.

  21. #446
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,517
    As a data point, the 185 FL105 has the same length shovel as a 194 R110 when both are mounted on the line. The R110 just has more tail up and off the snow.

  22. #447
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    10,157
    Quote Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister View Post
    That would be a serious ski.
    I'm on the 185, thinking about downsizing to 178?
    5'10" 150#
    I only have a handful of days on my 185s.
    Nimble when driven, even zipper bumps, but maybe felt like too much tip.
    Anyone been on both lengths and care to opine?
    I'll have both in hand shortly as Marshal offers unheard of customer support.
    These skis seem to run "long" as the 185 are almost as long as some 189s.
    I've got 186 R110s and those are long for 186s as well.

    Keep in mind I'm a long skis truck kind of guy and have probably been on skis that are "too" long all of my ski life.
    Freshman year in HS my Dad bought me a pair of 190 Blue star Kniessels and said those should last you through HS.
    Taught me to bend a ski.
    Why not bump the mount up a cm?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  23. #448
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    Oh man. My first reaction was… pessimistic , haha.

    But then, you got my wheels turning on what I’d personally want that ski to look like. And now I want to ski em myself.

    the economics of such a thing are terrible of course.

    But also, YOLO.

    so pm me your email address some time
    I have the drawings, of course.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  24. #449
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    10,157
    Quote Originally Posted by arild View Post
    I have the drawings, of course.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk
    Shocked i tell ya… lol


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  25. #450
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,881
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    Shocked i tell ya… lol


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    It has a bit more tail taper than the shorty 192/185s, so sidecut is about the same as the 192 (37m). I mean, I'd ski the shit out of them. Worldwide sales of maybe 4....?

    Material length of about 199cm.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

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