100mm waist skis (Shogun, ObSETHed, Gotama, Prophet 100)

#31

Rating: 0

9/24/09 at 11:53am

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

There's still a bit of paradox with the "rockers" they're great for powder but once that gets tracked and piled, they tend to lose thier appeal. Unfortunately, this makes grabbing that big rocker and heading into the deep problematic unless you are in the OB or can switch out at lunch! Although this is a bit of an exageration, you get my point. This is why I am advocating demoing or maybe waiting till next season for a rocker but hey, Who am I to tell anyone not to buy skis!!! :)

Be More Like Your Dog...

#32

Rating: 0

9/24/09 at 12:29pm

tromano
offline

Joined: November 2004
Location: Logan, UT
Post Count: 1,974

Its not a paradox. Its a choice. Reverse / reverse skis work and you can ski them all over the mountain when the snow is soft. I don't think the praxis powder gives up anything on soft crud compared to a conventional ski. And its not a problem cruising home on a groomed run at the end of the day.

Pow doesn't always get skied out by lunch. At my home area if is dumps on Sunday you can still find untracked on friday. Even at places like alta/bird you can still find untracked lines in the afternoon or next morning after a powderday. It really just depends.

#33

Rating: 0

9/24/09 at 12:31pm

elkskier00
offline

Joined: September 2008
Location: Eagle-Vail, CO
Post Count: 17

I have become a fan of "Zero" Camber skis. I have been skiing the new 09/10 Blizzard Answer with the IQ max slider and I am in love with it. March storms in Colorado and April storms in Utah, they were unreal.. Gad Trees were as smooth as could be with 28" of fresh. Also as everything got chopped up it was still solid. I really felt like that ski had no limit. That would be my pick.. Rocker skis just are not good enough at all the other conditions.

#34

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 4:47am

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finndog

There's still a bit of paradox with the "rockers" they're great for powder but once that gets tracked and piled, they tend to lose thier appeal. Unfortunately, this makes grabbing that big rocker and heading into the deep problematic unless you are in the OB or can switch out at lunch! Although this is a bit of an exageration, you get my point. This is why I am advocating demoing or maybe waiting till next season for a rocker but hey, Who am I to tell anyone not to buy skis!!! :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tromano

Its not a paradox. Its a choice. Reverse / reverse skis work and you can ski them all over the mountain when the snow is soft. I don't think the praxis powder gives up anything on soft crud compared to a conventional ski. And its not a problem cruising home on a groomed run at the end of the day.

Pow doesn't always get skied out by lunch. At my home area if is dumps on Sunday you can still find untracked on friday. Even at places like alta/bird you can still find untracked lines in the afternoon or next morning after a powderday. It really just depends.

Yu can easily find untrcked at any good mountain for days if you know where to look. My point is that for the average skier at the average resort the rockers out now are not to where they need to be. My guess is that by next season, you will see much improvd designs. FWIW, I love the HB, it's a blast and even with its huge 20/40 no camber, I can ski it anywhere, but my bet is that skis like this will give way to better designs

Be More Like Your Dog...

#35

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 8:14am

tromano
offline

Joined: November 2004
Location: Logan, UT
Post Count: 1,974

Funshape skis (incorporating rocker) were pioneered 8-10 years ago by mcconkey and other pro freeskiers at the fringes of the sport to be skis that were specialized for a specific set of conditions and ski styles like those involving deep or funky snow and later BC jibing. The spatula has been around for 8 years, copied succesfully a number of times and is a proven design for that purpose. The HB was purpose built as a BC jib ski. None of the funshape skis developed early on with rocker were designed for the everyday use by the average man skiing around at an average ski area. But the fact remains that rockered skis have become very popular with people skiing inbounds.

Flash forward to today... Rockered skis have taken over the FR ski market and rocker elements are being added to skis down in the all mountain / draily driver segment. These have been out for maybe 1-2 seasons or so. I am not disapointed in the performance of conventional skis in this segment. But I think that a ski like the obseth makes sense since it is supposed to be more soft 3d snow optimized. Personally I think 0 (flat) camber makes more sense for a ski that will be used in 2d and 3d snow in more equal proportions. And for a harder charging fat skis, conventional camber just works.

#36

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 8:27am

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

I dont disagree with anything you are saying, and I also really like the flat camber. As good as they are now, I just think there's more to come and by next season, we should be seeing some significant refinement, especially to the all mountain category. I toast to your rocker if you will toast to mine! Now, I say this as I am really waiting to see what Icelantic brings out for next season, in a few conversations I have had, they are testing a few different models, they have (and wouldn't divulge) come up with some variations that they think are really different and provide improvements to the current designs. Lets see! In the mean time, Lets hope that we get plenty of good powder days to enjoy our toys in

Be More Like Your Dog...

#37

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 9:28am

mudfoot
offline

Joined: February 2004
Location: Durango
Post Count: 2,419

FWIT, I have the first edition Watea 101s, before they put the carbon I-beam in them. They are a fairly soft zero camber ski, and I am a big guy, but they really are an adequate all-around ski. If they had rocker I think the hard snow and cruising performance would be way squirrelier. I have other skis and am not about to use 101s for my everyday use, but they carve a turn on hard snow and in the bumps surprising well, considering their magnificent powder performance.

I have very little rocker demo experience, so I don't have much of a basis for comparison, but for me a zero camber soft ski ends up being rockered once I get in the deep stuff, but doesn't have the spin factor on hard snow, which seems like a good compromise for someone looking for a predominately powder board that will still handle the rest of the mountain. It seems to make more sense than a double camber ski that changes personality in the middle of a turn.

#38

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 1:19pm

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

well, no, it won't beome a rockered tip. the construction is much different but what you are describing is where I think the design is going. Tramano is correct in that rockers were really intended just for powder skiing- this includes tip.tail rocker and reverse camber- don't confuse the two- there are a lot of new skis coming ou this season that are attempting to modify the floatation of the rocker to make more all mountain friendly and effective. Not sure if its entirely possibel but then again, All mountain pretty much means "better at some and not so good at others". Hard to say that one ski can excell in all aspects especially for folks like me that don't have all the skills that some do and can ski barrell staves and make it look good! :)

Be More Like Your Dog...

#39

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 2:05pm

UGASkiDawg
offline

Joined: October 2006
Location: Under the CO Sun
Post Count: 478

Out of that list for inbound skiing.....p100 or Shogun unless you can find an older pair of Goats without the rocker.

Finn I wouldn't say the P100 is a traditional camber ski. It has almost no camber which is why I love it for a mix of powder and your typical inbounds western snowpack.

#40

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 3:11pm

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

my fellow dog, it may have less camber but the fact it has camber makes it a traditional camber, all skis camber varies, it just refers to the characteristic of the ski having camber underfoot. I am not suprised, it seems like most wider soft snow oriented skis tend to have a little less camber than hard snow ski's.

Be More Like Your Dog...

#41

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 3:38pm

SierraJim
offline

Joined: October 2005
Location: Tahoe
Post Count: 3,105

Quote:

Originally Posted by mudfoot

but for me a zero camber soft ski ends up being rockered once I get in the deep stuff

Of course it does, that's how they work. So would a soft flex conventional ski. After you take the frabba jabba aside, what a rockered ski does is pre-flex itself so you don't have to ski as fast or work as hard to bend it. The bend is the most operative factor in turning the ski in deep snow and the rocker does that for you. The float is a function of surface area and the distribution of surface area but is independant of whether the ski has rocker or not.

Reverse shapes have an effect as well but it is a different effect and IMO the rocker is more operative than the reverse shape.

BTW: I also like flat cambered skis better than tip rockers or full rockers as well for all around use.

SJ

www.starthaus.com (Check out SH ski deals #2 in the special deals forum)

#42

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 4:10pm

mudfoot
offline

Joined: February 2004
Location: Durango
Post Count: 2,419

Quote:

Originally Posted by SierraJim

Of course it does, that's how they work. So would a soft flex conventional ski. After you take the frabba jabba aside, what a rockered ski does is pre-flex itself so you don't have to ski as fast or work as hard to bend it. The bend is the most operative factor in turning the ski in deep snow and the rocker does that for you. The float is a function of surface area and the distribution of surface area but is independant of whether the ski has rocker or not.

Reverse shapes have an effect as well but it is a different effect and IMO the rocker is more operative than the reverse shape.

BTW: I also like flat cambered skis better than tip rockers or full rockers as well for all around use.

SJ

My point was that negative camber takes the tips and tails off the goomed or hard snow, which makes them ski very different than a zero camber ski that has complete contact in that condition. I guess the other side is how much better do rockered skis do in deep snow than zero camber, and is it worth giving up the hard snow performance for that? I have always favored softer flexing skis for powder and never felt like there was an issue reversing the camber when I needed to, so I am skeptical of the need for a ski that is pre-flexed, which takes some of my control away.

#43

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 5:47pm

tromano
offline

Joined: November 2004
Location: Logan, UT
Post Count: 1,974

Mud. Rocker is not needed (actually is might be needed or at least extremely helpful on a reverse side cut ski). But in deep snow it can make for a very fun ski. If you want to try it then go demo some or borrow from a friend.

#44

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 6:31pm

mudfoot
offline

Joined: February 2004
Location: Durango
Post Count: 2,419

Tromano: I traded some work for rockered ski demos this coming winter, so I hope to try a few different kinds, both alpine and tele. By the way, spent some time in Logan a couple weeks ago. Great single track mountain bike ride up to the old tree, and a fantastic public golf course along the river. Very nice nice town. MF

#45

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 7:16pm

SierraJim
offline

Joined: October 2005
Location: Tahoe
Post Count: 3,105

Quote:

Originally Posted by mudfoot .......I guess the other side is how much better do rockered skis do in deep snow than zero camber, and is it worth giving up the hard snow performance for that?

I am skeptical of the need for a ski that is pre-flexed, which takes some of my control away.

On the first point, I'd say it depends upon how much rocker. My take is (all other factors equal).... give a ski a little rocker, you get a little better in deep snow but you give up a little of something else. Add a lot....you get a lot, but you give up a lot as well.

Tradeoffs = no free lunch

On the second point with added emphasis on the need part, I own a Rossi S7 and a Huge Trouble (both 115mm). I like both. If I were to keep only one....it's the HT hands down.

SJ

www.starthaus.com (Check out SH ski deals #2 in the special deals forum)

#46

Rating: 0

9/25/09 at 7:48pm

Johnnys Zoo
offline

Joined: June 2007
Location: WV
Post Count: 1,511

I have the Karhu Team 100, (same ski as the Prophet). From the OP list, this is likely the best all around ski. Thats why I bought it! It makes SG turns on hardpack, holding an edge nicely.

Honestly, I don't know how anyone can complain abouta 100 width ski lacking float?

But, I'm kinda old school. : )

I vote for the Prophet!

#47

Rating: 0

9/26/09 at 3:53am

Finndog
offline

Joined: January 2000
Location: NJ & on my way To Steamboat
Post Count: 5,338

maybe thats why that ski ever changes? Its a ski you can't go wrong with.

Be More Like Your Dog...

#48

Rating: 0

9/30/09 at 6:40pm

niege111
offline

Joined: December 2007
Location: western colorado
Post Count: 5

I second that for the Prophet 100-very versatile and forgiving, still fun on packed snow,and in the powder seems light enough to be easy to throw around in the trees and smear turns a bit to scrub speed. And what, it has been 4 or 5 years with no changes in design. I actually have the Karhu Team 100s also, same ski as Prophet 100. I am skiing mostly in the trees in Colorado and have gone with the 179 (for my 190 lbs), which seems short in the tips in deep snow on open faces, but in 12" of new snow, in the trees, these skis are a lot of fun! The Line Prophet/Karhu Team 100 does run (and ski short) in this model I guess due to how they measure the twin tip?? The 179 is probably more like a running surface on a 172 ski. I would sure recommend Prophet 100 for the originator of the post for Idaho tree skiing. Then demo the latest rockered, reverse whatever this year if desired while "the dust settles" on these big changes in ski design...

#49

Rating: 0

10/3/09 at 4:42pm

darkstar1974
offline

Joined: August 2009
Location: Franklin Lakes, NJ
Post Count: 21

Is anyone planning on riding the 2010 Gotama in 194?? I'm 6'2 and 215 lbs, ski pretty aggressive, level 7-8 (I think at least)...I bought a pair to use on both the east and west, but mainly east as this is where I live. I've started thinking this size may be too long for east coast, esp in the tigher trees. Some people tell me with the tip and tail rocker these 194's will ski smaller and I won't have any issues. I also continue to hear and read about people 50-60 lbs lighter then me and much shorter (no offense) planning to ski the 186 in the same conditions.

Any thoughts??

working hard to stay young

#50

Rating: 0

10/3/09 at 9:29pm

SierraJim
offline

Joined: October 2005
Location: Tahoe
Post Count: 3,105

Mainly East?

Well....IMHO......it's the right length in the wrong ski.

SJ

www.starthaus.com (Check out SH ski deals #2 in the special deals forum)

#51

Rating: 0

10/3/09 at 10:03pm

liv2 ski
offline

Joined: April 2008
Location: Coronado
Post Count: 217

My favorite ski ever in powder and trees are Praxis Powders. You should look at the Protest here: http://praxisskis.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=61&category_id=1&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=29 Don't let the 188 length scare ya, as they ski more like a 178 IMO. When I was shopping for a 105 waist ski I decided on these: http://praxisskis.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=11&category_id=1&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=29 I have yet to ski them, but I am pretty sure I will love them.

#52

Rating: 0

10/4/09 at 1:47pm

darkstar1974
offline

Joined: August 2009
Location: Franklin Lakes, NJ
Post Count: 21

Hey Jim,

Just curious....what would you recommend in that 190-195 length for mainly East coast?

working hard to stay young

#53

Rating: 0

10/4/09 at 3:14pm

SierraJim
offline

Joined: October 2005
Location: Tahoe
Post Count: 3,105

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkstar1974

Hey Jim,

Just curious....what would you recommend in that 190-195 length for mainly East coast?

First thing is........I wouldn't normally suggest that length range. If you just had to have a 2010 Gotama then that's the best choice but other than that (or a similar ski) I'd say that you could be very well suited by something in the 185-190 range.

The best 105mm ski that I know of for eastern conditions is the Blizzard Titan Argos. (187)

SJ

www.starthaus.com (Check out SH ski deals #2 in the special deals forum)

#54

Rating: 0

10/4/09 at 7:17pm

darkstar1974
offline

Joined: August 2009
Location: Franklin Lakes, NJ
Post Count: 21

Thanks Jim, appreciate the insight. I'm still very undecided about what to do. At this point i'll probably just start the season with these 194 gotama's and my 177 AC 40's. I'm not heading out west until late Jan.

working hard to stay young

#55

Rating: 0

10/15/09 at 4:11pm

Downhillin99
offline

Joined: March 2009
Post Count: 129

I know this is kind of an old post but what ski do you guys think is the "quickest"? And if you have any more info that would be help-full too.

thanks

#56

Rating: 0

10/15/09 at 6:19pm

davluri
offline

Joined: October 2007
Location: Tahoe
Post Count: 1,081

now this is really wierd, but with forms of rocker, quickness is no longer an issue (not saying you don't want quick if you ask about quick). We had to have quick in trees and tight chutes in the past so that we could fit our turns into terrain. But now, on a rockered ski, you are able to maneuver in a tight spot by varying the direction and speed of a side-slip, slarve, whatever. Instead of fitting in three quick turns, you might extend one turn with a long sideslip and make your line work that way. wierd, a total change coming out of new ski design. (see MSP's Deep, it's all in there) Actually, this same technique/style can be done with any fat ski if you brush up on your sideslip, with a little more work of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Downhillin99

I know this is kind of an old post but what ski do you guys think is the "quickest"? And if you have any more info that would be help-full too.

thanks

Tags

Other Threads

Recent Reviews

What Barking Bears Want

Got Facebook?

Already a User?

Create a New Account

Recent Discussions

Recent Reviews

Recent Wikis