Ski Design - Is Wood Better?

For awhile, composite and foam-injected skis were the rage. Salomon, Rossi, K2 and others vigorously embraced synthetic-core production. Even Atomic, the race giant, jumped-in with their Beta design, utilizing "Densolite" milled foam.

There were good reasons for going with synthetics: Constancy of product, less critical supply issues (just mix the batch), and willing consumers.

Lately, it seems more designs have reverted back to laminated wood cores. Most of Volkl's "Sensorwood" (not sure they ever left), remain wood. Salomon's X-Wing series shifted from foam to wood. K2, Nordica, Blizzard and Kastle now make liberal use use wood. Even Atomic's Snoop Daddy, arguably their premiere ski of the year, has reverted back to wood.

No single aspect of design governs all. There's of lot in the soup, of which core material is one.

What's your view? Do you notice a difference in feel between wood and composites?

Do you like the swing back to wood?

Does it matter?

Here I am, shamelessly bumping my own thread.

Seriously, nobody else has noticed a change in ski design?

Or, is it so obvious it doesn't matter?

I would be really curious to see some answers from people on this issue too. I've always wondered as a female skiier if foam might be better in some instances.

I taught skiing for 10+ years or so and now just enjoy skiing for the past 8 years. The two stores that looked after my pro deals and skiing needs (and still do), would never put me on foam core skis, even when they were the rage. They felt I'd blow through them, make them flat way too soon, especially with the rigours of instructing in them. They were pretty happy most people have gone back to wood cores and sandwich construction.

Prior to teaching when i was learning to ski (80's) I was on a foam core k2. At some point, they moved me to Fischers and i was on a ficsher rc world cup slalom for a lot of years, and they always said, it's wood, you don't wanna be on foam. They also weren't/aren't too sure about cap construction. I just take what they recommend and if i like it go with it! Anyone in the ski construction know that can explain the differences for different skiing.....etc?

Sometimes.

Don't care.

No.

SJ

I notice the difference.

I've loved Atomics, and skied them for years. The "Beta" construction works.

But, wood feels different. It's smoother, and less "bouncy".

When combined with metal, it's lively, yet stable, and solid.

In addition, foam degrades. All those "B" series from Rossi didn't last long. Wood prevails.

From a production standpoint, foam is simpler. It's the same every time, and easy to source.

Sourcing wood, laminating it, and maintaining consistancy in a natural product, isn't easy. I've heard Volkl has groves of wood specifically planted generations ahead, for "Sensorwood". You can't pump it out of a tube.

At the end of the day, the hard way is better.

Naw, Volkl just uses poplar and beech. They get the wood, process it, and let it dry for a few years.

Wood has characteristics that man made products have yet to match in every aspect. This is what I read was the reasoning behind making new generation Corvette floor boards out of a wood laminate!! So I would gather if this reasoning is good for a car that costs upto $110k, then it certainly will be good enough for skis.

Absolutely true. They planted those trees decades before they even knew what "Sensorwood" was. In addition, for AC series skis, they use wood from south facing slopes that was watered by hand with filtered water. OTH, they use wood from the northern quadrant of trees grown on west facing slopes for the freeride skis. Naturally, they use different water for those.

SJ

In my business, high-end loudspeakers - imported from Denmark - its the same story.

Wood-pulp, or resin-impregnated paper, drivers were the norm years ago. Then, everyone moved to synthetics - polypropylene or Kevlar - because they were 1/6 the price to produce, and consistent in production and sound.

Yet, they had a dull, damp sound. Wood-pulp remained the choice of purists, and is now making a comeback.

The simple, predictable, cheap way didn't dazzle. If you want performance, the difficult way remains the best.

Ski companies have apparently come to a similar conclusion.

Natural, more expensive and less predictable products, render the best result.

Wrong for many high end skis, correct for a few. Another example of SJ's premises in action. It isn't the material, it is the design.
So is foam.
Dubious claim. Source: personal experience with high N, including a period where I skied on many foam Rossignol and Salomon products an awful lot. I own several pair of foam skis that ski like the day I unwrapped them. The number one reason I toss skis is tuning the edges off them.
Depends on volume and price point. Small volume manufacturers almost always use wood, and "wood is better" shtick has proven an effective marketing tactic. Cheap skis are very frequently made with simple wood cores which are cheaper than quality high density foams.
You are what texts on persuasion would refer to as susceptible. I'd say more, but SierraJim appears to have covered it in hilarious detail. edit: I see you are in the high end loudspeaker business. That really says it all.
Not exactly reinventing the wheel, but it is great to hear about more uses for renewable resources like balsa. The ME Magazine story said people laughed when it was suggested. That sort of institutional ignorance is cringeworthy...balsa is a common core material in composites...including floors of airplanes, trains, etc. One more nice thing is that when it burns it doesn't produce nearly as toxic as most foams. Keep this feature of woods in mind for your next ski sacrifice...

Careful with all these details, I am liking what I am reading more and more, my HEADS are going to get jealous.

If all this was true I might very well be on Volkls!

If you can find me a pair of skis made out of meteorite alloy....I will switch.

(Actually I have a friend who has a Rolex with a face is made out of real meteorite, so not so far fetched an idea I am surprised an ultra high end ski maker has not banked on this idea yet.)

I always preferred wood over foam cores for dampness. Especially good when the joints are getting worn.

Slight hijack, has anyone skied bamboo cored sticks (Kingswood ect.)? Heard raving stories about them - or is it just hype?

Don't forget also, that to assist in tweaking the growing process they pump specific types of music into the various tree groves.
I've heard the west facing slopes get music with a little harder edge to it...

Yes...I'd forgotten that. In fact I hear that the western facing groves even get a weekly oompah band concert, while other groves get violins etc.

Happy trees make happy skis you know.

SJ

I am with ya on most of this stuff. Form was a cost of production decision that didn't pan out for performance ski.

Have to side mostly with SJ and Garrett on this one. Anyone who thinks "foam" is jouncy or breaks down should go try some Stocklis or Dynastars. If manufacturers are reverting to wood, suspect it's more about the economics of making a shaped syn core (ain't necessarily cheaper than wood, and anyway doubt they have the skill set to do it in China yet), or Euro green laws, or simple market pressures driven by endless threads like this one (ie, wood=quality, syn=crap).

I actually owned a pair of Dynastars (Omecarve 09) a couple of seasons ago. One day, after a four inch dump and a morning of ski traffic had pushed the snow around into six inch high piles I noticed that I was being thrown around all over the place, bouncing and being thrown off balance by every one of those little bumps.

On a whim, I changed out to my old P50s, and it was like they had run a groomer over the hill. No more bounce, no more being thrown around - I just carved through those little bumps like they weren't there.

The Dynastars had a "for sale" sign on them the next day. Although they worked great on corderouy and even boilerplate, they were awful in lumpy crud.

I hadn't thought of "jouncy" as an adjective, but it describes those skis perfectly. I also hadn't thought about the wood core very much, but now that this thread has brought it to my attention, all the skis I've really liked have a wood core. Interesting...

I taked to a Stockli rep last year about their Synthetic cores. He told me that they were used in conjunction with wood. I don't know about the hole line of skis but we were taking about the upperend models. He lead me to believe that wood cores are a key element in their skis.

Sounds about like what I would expect when comparing those two skis.

Dynastar Omecarve 09 = hyper-carver ski. 12m radius. Not super damp. No metal? What length were you on? 165?

Volkl P50 = GS race skis. 21m ? radius. Lots of metal. What length were you on? 170-180?

The question is if the omecarve had wood cores instead of the the composite foam would they have been awesome for lumpy crud instead of jouncy. The answer is no becuase they would still be two different skis that will feel and ski totally differently.

All of what?

Since you asked:
170 for the Dynastars
178 for the P50s (and they are the Platinum model - a toned down rec version, not the actual race version)

Agree that there's more to building a ski than the core. Or the sidecut. or the length. Or the width. Or any other single factor.

So, yeah, they're two totally different skis. And wood is only part of the picture.

How many racers ski on foam skis?

Whether "Sensorwood" has been blessed by the urine of holy yaks, or not, wood still has to be grown, harvested, treated, cut into strips, glued, etc.

Foam doesn't.

Absolutely. The difference there is the wide tip and very deep sidecut on the Omecarve vs. the narrower and much straighter P-50. The core is irrelevant.

SJ

Hey Strato - I'm new to the forum so can't PM you (apparently until I have 5 posts). I'm looking into new loudspeakers and wonder if you could offer some guidance. If so, please PM me. Thx!

I think there's much more to it than just the sidecut. "Bouncy" vs "damp" is not governed by the sidecut. My guess is that this difference is due to titanium & wood vs foam. And of course the magic Yak urine.

Obviously the material is important. But from everything I've read, there is no clear winner in "wood versus foam" in terms of it being a good ski material.

"Foam" covers such a huge variety of synthetic materials that you can't just make blanket statements about whether it is "good" or "bad". At the very least there's a significant difference between injected foam cores and milled ones (which are then assembled with a more conventional ski construction.)

The synthetics in use have probably also changed dramatically over time, so I don't know that you can draw conclusions about newer foam-core skis based on ones from even a few years ago.

Not me...


He told you right, Stocklis use alot of wood in their higher end models. The only models that I know of that use synthetic, which is not necessarily foam (could be carbon fibre with who the hell knows what), are the edition line skis and a handful of other skis. All of the Stormrider series, the Snakes (aside from the Coral), and the GS Race skis all use wood. And as for Dynastar... they make skis?!

RTT typed:And as for Dynastar... they make skis?!

yes they do if you want to see what next years Stocklis are going to look like look at last years Dynastars...

as for wood vs foam a 1000$ ski is a 1000$ ski no matter how it is made
of course the same applies to 100$ skis too...

Based upon my limited experience (don't know anyone with unlimited), injected foam is worthless.

The skis I've used with injected foam (K2's, Rossi's), and my wife's, died quickly. They lost life within a few months of hard use. Big mistake.

The milled synthetic cores, ("Densolite") on my Atomics are robust, with solid structural integrity. I"ve owned several, and they don't turn to mush.

At that point, it's a personal "feel" issue. Everyone has their own take on this, so there's no right and wrong.

Personally, I find my Atomics to be excellent skis, but less smooth than my wood-core Volkls. I find my Volkls to be dynamic, yet silky. On my Atomics, it feels like too much vibration is transmitted.

Each to their own.

When you tabulate the trends, it seems many skis on the rack are now wood, vs. 3-5 years ago.