Check Out Our Shop
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916

    Heritage Lab BC90

    I didn’t see a thread for this ski from HLS. With a little time on these now I’ve got some feedback. I mounted these with Xenics w/ the tallest B&D shim at 82 cm from the tail for a 320 bsl. I aggressively detuned the splayed/tapered part of the edges with a file and ran a gummy the length of the sidecut.

    They are really intuitive and very smooth in variable conditions. 2-4” of graupel and snow over a roughly textured very hard crust they handled with ease. Wind scoured spots on the same crust were fine, no catchiness and they smoothed out the ride pretty well for a ski this light. Corn and over ripe corn/slush was a dream so smooth and surfy with a neutral stance or rail turns with higher edge angles and cross under turns, not really driving the cuffs but through the arch with a fully flexed compact stance. Super fun. I think these will be pretty good in wind affected new snow, there’s no catching at all with the deep low rocker.

    Skinning is fine with full width skins. On really firm snow a ski crampon will mitigate any slipping due to the full rocker.

    They are pretty forgiving if you stay on the sweet spot. The caveat is that the sweet spot is pretty small. This could be the length combined with the full rocker and my size, 6’4” 240.

    These are going to be great for late winter and spring tours with the possibility of powder, crust, corn etc.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SW, CO
    Posts
    1,626
    I am very BC90 curious. I have almost pulled the trigger on this ski a few times now, but with my injury I thought it was best to wait till I knew I would get good use out of it. I will 100% buy a pair before next fall.

    I see this as the perfect early season/no snow in 7+ days/spring season Colorado/Utah touring ski. I live in SW CO and we see all sorts of fucked up punchy crusts, wind affected snow, ect... For those longer missions and days where I know I will see a wide variety of conditions this ticks all my boxes. I am 6' 175lbs and usually like progressively skis in the mid 180s+ but am thinking of going with the 177cm version of the BC90. I do not expect to ski this fast and hard, outside of perfect corn so going a bit shorter to save weight/skin track compliance/ease of use makes sense in my head.

    My biggest worry with this ski is performance in tight chutes and steeper lines where a bit of camber and a stiff supportive tail are nice. We do not get to ski those kind of lines around here till spring usually, so I will have a lot of time to play around and see if this would be a ski I trust in those conditions.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    I think the 177 would be fine for you, the 184 would work if you wanted more beef. The flex is very similar to the Raven, it’s not a noodle and the dampness will surprise you.

    They’re fun noodling around but if you open them up they get even better, very much like a skinny Raven if you’re into that


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2022
    Location
    Carnorum Regio- Oltre Piave
    Posts
    106
    i am actually captivated by the concept/specs,such a cool and daring idea to try to combine "fun" elements into such a narrow ski while retaining some sort of balanced weight (not too light, not too heavy).

    MagnificentUnicorn, do you have any pictures of them/in action/out there "in the field"? so f'in curious.

    Where are they mounted? what boots are you using them with?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,813
    Sweet! Baby gets it's own thread!

    Fun fact; when we drew these, they were supposed to be baby FL113s for early and late season touring.

    Imho, they deliver. Shape just works. I'm kinda sorry i never skied the Völkl BMT 94s, but pretty stoked on these on their own merit.

    My fat ass skis the 184 on the line. Love them!


    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    When you say on the line, what do you mean? I’m at 82 from the tail so -10cm from ski center. I’m not sure that I would go more forward with my BSL and size. Skiing with a Roxa R3 TI. I would like to get some RX Tours and try those.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Timely thread, finally got out on mine last weekend in a few inches of dust on crust with the occasional deeper turn. Took the BMT94s out later to compare.

    They feel different from the BMT94s but have that same easy to release feeling. I like how they manage to be a little lighter but still don't feel chattery or get knocked around, perfect weight. They never got hung up in the crusty snow underneath and floated remarkably well in deeper pockets.

    Skinning was pretty easy despite the rocker (much easier than on my C132s). I got some ski trab skins with the tip rip attachments for these and I'm loving them.

    I worry that I may have mounted them a little too far back, it feels like a ton of ski out front compared with the BMT. This was a recommended mount point from one of marshals mailings but it looks like the rec line got moved forward at some point?

    I definitely need more time to decide if I like them as much or better than the BMTs. They are similar but still have a really different character. Hoping for a lot of spring skiing on them in the coming weeks in the Sierra.

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    How far from the tail is your midsole?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    600

    Heritage Lab BC90

    Quote Originally Posted by fleaches View Post
    Timely thread, finally got out on mine last weekend in a few inches of dust on crust with the occasional deeper turn. Took the BMT94s out later to compare.

    They feel different from the BMT94s but have that same easy to release feeling. I like how they manage to be a little lighter but still don't feel chattery or get knocked around, perfect weight. They never got hung up in the crusty snow underneath and floated remarkably well in deeper pockets.

    Skinning was pretty easy despite the rocker (much easier than on my C132s). I got some ski trab skins with the tip rip attachments for these and I'm loving them.

    I worry that I may have mounted them a little too far back, it feels like a ton of ski out front compared with the BMT. This was a recommended mount point from one of marshals mailings but it looks like the rec line got moved forward at some point?

    I definitely need more time to decide if I like them as much or better than the BMTs. They are similar but still have a really different character. Hoping for a lot of spring skiing on them in the coming weeks in the Sierra.

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
    How would you describe the differences in character? I got a pair of well-used BMT94s this season and am liking them so far for touring in funky conditions. I was considering the BC90 as a likely replacement if I ever needed down the road, so curious to hear the comparison.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    How far from the tail is your midsole?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    79.5 on the 184

    Based on the current mount chart on the website I should probably be +2 cm forward

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    Quote Originally Posted by fleaches View Post
    79.5 on the 184

    Based on the current mount chart on the website I should probably be +2 cm forward

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
    Yeah, I went 82 on the 184. An inch more aft would be no bueno. The sweet spot is pretty small. I’d remount. What’s your bsl?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    Yeah, I went 82 on the 184. An inch more aft would be no bueno. The sweet spot is pretty small. I’d remount. What’s your bsl?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Shortish bsl too at 300, which I think usually means go forward even more.

    Yeah may have to remount. It still skis pretty well but just feels too far back. I might be able to reuse some holes.

    If Marshal sees this I'm curious to hear his thoughts too

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,341
    Great convo on mount position. I am curious to hear boot/binding setups with mount too, as there can be a way bigger range on that stuff on touring gear vs alpine.

    I recently went from 18* forward lean touring boots to 12* boots and ended up needing to go +2 on my mount as a result.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    Great convo on mount position. I am curious to hear boot/binding setups with mount too, as there can be a way bigger range on that stuff on touring gear vs alpine.

    I recently went from 18* forward lean touring boots to 12* boots and ended up needing to go +2 on my mount as a result.
    This is zero g peaks for boots and atk haute routes for what it's worth.

    I ski the BMTs with the same boots but they are mounted with alpinists (I believe these are your old BMTs)

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,341
    word, that's right!

    I believe that midsole on the BMT94 is -11cm from straight tape center of the ski. I believe that you are around -12.5cm on the BC90 right now.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Middle of Norway.
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    When you say on the line, what do you mean? I’m at 82 from the tail so -10cm from ski center. I’m not sure that I would go more forward with my BSL and size. Skiing with a Roxa R3 TI. I would like to get some RX Tours and try those.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Oh, same as you. -10 is pretty much the designed zero. Had a hell of a time tuning in the backland XTDs, but ended up sticking them at the most upright and turned out great. Atk FR14s with the factory toe shim,btw. 307 bsl.

    Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    word, that's right!

    I believe that midsole on the BMT94 is -11cm from straight tape center of the ski. I believe that you are around -12.5cm on the BC90 right now.
    Thanks, I'll try moving the mount forward 1.5-2cm and see how that feels. I like where the BMTs are that feels really balanced for my style.


    Quote Originally Posted by 3pin View Post
    How would you describe the differences in character? I got a pair of well-used BMT94s this season and am liking them so far for touring in funky conditions. I was considering the BC90 as a likely replacement if I ever needed down the road, so curious to hear the comparison.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Some of it may be due to having the mount a little too far back. One thing I like about the BMT94 is that you can ski it from the tips or kind of noodle it around right under foot, the BC90 doesn't quite have that feeling but I think that will change if I remount it.

    The other difference is in the rocker. BC90 came out with a pretty gradual rocker but it's much more pronounced than the perfectly flat BMT94 and it feels more like a rocked ski. Not that it's unbalanced or anything, just kind of like less of the ski is engaged or something? On the BMT I feel like I don't notice that it is flat/reverse except that it is super easy to turn and throw sideways.

    They are both easy and loose (like the opposite of a 0g 95). Need to get some more time on the BC90 though to really nail down the differences.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    ^I think if you move forward 2cm you’ll feel the difference


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916

    Heritage Lab BC90

    These skis make terrible snow tolerable. So easy in shit snow. I skinned up through the ski area today to get some higher elevation corn in adjacent backcountry. They’re great and really predictable in wild crust and slay corn. Skiing back through the ski area was older groomers from the weekend that had been skied out when slushy, think refrozen sastrugi. Pivot, pivot, pivot.

    I forgot to mention, I bought some Pomoca Climb Pro S skins for these. Mohair/nylon. The grip and glide is incredible. No issues skinning on hard surfaces, even convex areas. I had been a little concerned that I’d have to use ski crampons more than I would like to but it’s not an issue


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Last edited by MagnificentUnicorn; 04-19-2024 at 07:00 AM.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2022
    Location
    Carnorum Regio- Oltre Piave
    Posts
    106
    makes sense to use the (light blue right?) climb pro S with these since i think they're the grippiest ones (i also own and use climb 2.0s regularly). I used them a lot with my old heavy bent120 back when i ran touring bindings with those skis and they did help me a lot on shitty Alps skintracks.

    i've been praising and enjoying heavily rockered skis (albeit with camber) with moderate tip profiles on all kinds of shitty snow for years, i am so stoked on these skis. Just to daydream a bit, what size shoud i be looking at? i'm 5'11, 150ish pounds, i live and die by forward mounts in the BC (approx. 3 to 5 cm from true center is my sweetspot but it depends of course), hawx ultra xtd 130.
    Last edited by oltrepiave; 04-22-2024 at 04:38 PM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916

    Heritage Lab BC90

    Definitely the 177. Curiosity got the better of me and I moved the bindings to -8. I’ll report back tomorrow on how it changes the feel. I ski my Renegades and Ravens at -8 and love them there. It on the extreme end of Hoji’s recommendation but I’m tall and heavier.

    I ski pretty neutral and upright mostly. The 90s have a bias toward tip stiffness and at my size I feel the tail is a tad short and less supportive and I like more support in deeper corn especially when wearing a pack.

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SW, CO
    Posts
    1,626
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    Definitely the 177. Curiosity got the better of me and I moved the bindings to -8. I’ll report back tomorrow on how it changes the feel. I ski my Renegades and Ravens at -8 and love them there. It on the extreme end of Hoji’s recommendation but I’m tall and heavier.

    I ski pretty neutral and upright mostly. The 90s have a bias toward tip stiffness and at my size I feel the tail is a tad short and less supportive and I like more support in deeper corn especially when wearing a pack.

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Curious to hear your thoughts on the -8 mount point. I was leaning towards going -10-9.5 on the 177cms, but I bet the 184s might be money for me at -8

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    778
    Yes please report back, going to remount mine this week and need to make a decision

    Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,916
    -8 is the sweet spot for me, fixed the things I wished were different. Dead easy to stand in a neutral stance and carve or pivot now. At -10 I had to consciously change my stance to pivot in a neutral stance or get forward to carve. The extra tail is nice. I wouldn’t hesitate to experiment with a more progressive mount on these, I think-6 to -8 would be fine if you want a more progressive feel.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,341
    ok wow, very interesting data!

    I personally couldn't mount the BC90 more forward than -10. And -10.5 (with my new boots) is my happy place.

    But as your testing points out, lots of different stances and riding styles!

    VERY COOL MAN. thanks for giving this a go

Posting Permissions

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