Heritage Lab AM 100

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

I guess my brain says a 17-18m more turns than the 100 but not turning into a Mirus Cor or Blade. My favorite thing about the am100 it’s its ability to shut down speed and never feel hooky while going mach looney. Would love a sprinkle of that in a “carver” type ski.

[shroom]

I think the RC ninety five is the most engaging ski I’ve been on. I’ve skied it in a foot plus of bottomless fine too. what’s wrong with that ski? i guess the mach looney?

to me there is more distinction between grabbing that ski or FL one oh five to run hot or skinnier for ice or fatter to float

[Benneke10]

Can anyone compare/contrast the AM100 with the Dynastar M-Free 99 or the Volkl M4 Mantra (the full rocker one)? My ideal ski would be an M-Free 99 that carves a little better, or a slightly more playful and forgiving M4 Mantra, seems like the AM100 could be the ticket...

[Marshal Olson]

Space reserved for irip's review on the AM100.

This is easily Marshal’s best shape to date and the finest ski I’ve been on in three years. It reminds me of the redesign to the Kendo. It arcs w bite and ease of a very intuitive design and still can charge/smear w 2 feet. Edge to edge way faster than a 100 should- feels like I’m bouncing side to side on a trampoline coming down the hill. Pure heaven.

But the TLDR is "yes".

[Shredeagle]

This sounds like high praise from a guy that knows his skis. Can you bump my order up to ship tomorrow? (joking). Pumped for these sticks!

I like that trampoline part of the description. I’ve been having fun trying to ski that super dynamic Marcus Caston style. Loading up the skis and getting some air between the turns. Sounds like these could be just the weapon I need!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ASmileyFace]

Agree with the above. Only demoed a shorty Mantra for a few runs and fondled the MFree 99, but the AM100 is your unicorn here. It does everything your looking for plus more.

Have a few days on the BC100 now too... Quiver killer is my first thought. Paired with my BC120s I am trying to figure out if I even need something in between or lighter in my touring quiver. I have gotten along really well with the AM version (obviously) and the BC version is the same versatile ski only lighter and perfect for backcountry conditions. I also absolutely smoked a slightly buried shark doing 25+ skiing corn and thought I had broken the edge for sure... nope just a good core shot and slightly pushed in base, a little base weld and I was good to go.

[singlesline]

I saw Marshall sent out an email about tunes to people who have open orders in.

I admit I'm a little conflicted on the AM100. From the above description, I really don't think I want the butter tune (unless you tell me irip is on the butter tune). While the word "surfy" always sounds fun, by the time I'm reaching for the 100s, I'm not sure I want that much detuning. Also I have a pile of files and stones, and it is a lot easier for me to detune myself than to get them back to sharp.

On the flip side...I'm not really looking for a "razor tune" to lock things in more like I might on a narrower ski.

But also I assume Marshall knows what he is doing.

[K1mJ0ngTr1ll]

The butter tune is what you seek. I run it on all of my HLs. Only ski I don’t think I will put it on is my RC 85.

[Marshal Olson]

@singlesline - so the big thing to note is that the amount of detune is model specific too, so the butter tune on the AM100 isn't the same as the butter tune on an FR110/120 for example - as those skis are shooting for max drifitness.

Razor tune is just that ... highly polished and prepped outside the widepoints, but full sharp under foot and very lighly detuned (extra gummi only) at the ends. This is an aggressive tune. Its a "either you know you want this, or you dont want this scenario.

The Butter detune on the AM100 is relaxed where I am mostly detuning the base edge on the ski to make it more friendly off edge / off piste and then full pass extra gummi along the ee. Its still a performance carver for sure, but less on/off feeling.

Once we get to the fall, the butter tune is slated to be the only option for the AM100, as I think its the right tune for about 95% of skiers on this shape.

[mr_pretzel]

Smiley what length Bc100 you on?

[ASmileyFace]

187cm in both. Mounted -6.5 on AM w/pivots and -7 on BC (due to hole conflict and binding ramp changes). If a 184cm BC version existed, I would have probably gone with it, but after chatting with MO and skiing the AM a bunch I realized I wanted these to be the same length to make swapping back and forth easy

[ASmileyFace]

God damn this forum is so shit right now. I have typed up like two longer reviews on the BC100 and every time lose them to some issue. Reposting this from another thread for posterity.

Having owned both the BC90 before and BC100 now I feel like I can write up a good quick review here. Other skis I have owned or skied in the same category: 184 Camox Freebird, 189 ON3P Steeple 102 (this one is a bit heavier, but was my favorite touring ski of all time), 184 Dynafit Free 97 (couple of tours and inbounds laps on rental rotations), and few short inbounds laps on a friends Wayback 98s, and a single tour on the new TX94.

Originally, I had the 184cm BC90 intending on using it for lowtide early season, mid-winter drought and full spring time. That ski was incredible with a consolidated base (one of the best corn skis ever) and in weird crusty strangeness as Marshal mentioned. I think as a dedicated spring ski I would have kept it. Considering I needed something a little more versatile for the mid-winter-facet-fuckery that happens in the san juans I moved it on and bought the 100.

The BC100 is surfy in anything soft, nearly as damp in variable as my 2000g+ Steeples were, floats far better than any other ~100mm ski I have been on in deeper pow, and is dead easy on smooth but firm conditions. In the horrible unconsolidated mank we have seen down low this spring, it floats well and turns quick enough to keep me from catching under trees and hitting buried stumps with is all I really can want out of a spring time ski in these conditions. I have yet to get it into uber firm jump turn terrain, but have skied my AM100s in that terrain and felt good about edge hold and stability. The tails on my BC100s get a little hung up in the variable wind skin and weird crusts that the 90 felt easy in, but that is expected and still way better than either of the Camox or Free 97 felt in the same conditions.

The BC100 just does everything so well for a ~1600g ski. With my binding setup they came out to ~1875g each, which is more than light enough for long tours but I can still drive it hard at 25 mph+ in corn and not worry I will die if I hit a variable section or catch a hidden rock. I would not hesitate to take it out in anything other than a deep mid-winter storm cycle, which is why I have a 120mm ski too. Going lighter means you are giving up variable snow performance for the up, going narrower (<95mm) is getting to specialist territory, and wider (>105mm) is not generalist enough for a this catagory imo. So the BC100 fits perfectly in the low end of my personal touring quiver.

[zion zig zag]

AM100 vs Countach 104? Anyone been on both? I’m still lookin for a low-tide replacement for my QST 106. I don’t really have any complaints about the QST 106 other than I think it’s just meh everywhere.

[Marshal Olson]

You are welcome to borrow my AM100 demos some time!

[zion zig zag]

<p>

You are welcome to borrow my AM100 demos some time!

</p>
<p>
&nbsp;</p>
<p>
That would be badass, but not sure I want to wait till winter! I&#39;m looking for a low-tide ski for hunting around the mountain and skiing groomers. At 5&#39;10&quot; and 165 I&#39;d lean towards 180, that sound right?</p>

[Marshal Olson]

Yeah man; numbers are whacked, but if I read em right 5ft 10in and 165lb then the 180cm sounds right to me too