New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Snub tips on skis?

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

Rossi and Dynastar are producing models with flat, snub tips.  Why?  Phil suggests this can adversely affect crud performance as these tips tend to plow the snow.  Surely it's not to reduce weight, as the loss of such an insignificant amount of material would likely be insignificant.  Plus, they look ugly.  Ideas?

post #2 of 12

worthless.gif

 

and to follow up anyhow, both the very low profile tip and the flattened radius tip have got to affect performance in a significant way. I agree.  I tried to start a thread on tip shape, which flopped, but maybe this will go. Some tip designs are specifically to create a longer effective edge when tipped over (in firm conditions) see the Stockli. By comparison, there's the tapered B-Squad shark nose tip design. also, you can see the difference in two years of Legend Pro Rider tip evolution, not too much, the newer is flatter and slightly more tapered but not much. The XXL for that year, the orange and black 2008 was liked very much by many skiers, but if anyone had a gripe, it was the tip, very large, sticking way up, an actual semi-circle shape. 

 

001 [800x600].JPG.

The Rossignol shark nose, long and tapered, quite the opposite, was the best crud cutting tip ever designed, IMO. Well, the Volkl Sanouk had a similar nose, but I never skied it. so are you saying there is a flattened radius tip out that is supposedly for deep snow?

 

[Moment is, to me, the blaring example of a tip that makes no sense to the stated purpose and class of the ski, evidenced also by the fact that every ski they sell, in a range of widths from the 80's to the 115's and beyond has the same ridiculous tip, as if it was all things to all conditions. dumbest ski made, IMO, and I have skied it, much to my regret.  my bad karma for being negative again, but that tip just gripes me no end, fashion statement for fake non-conformists, who are actually hyper-conformists.]

post #3 of 12

Agree 100% that flat, snub tips are unpleasant to look at and make absolutely no sense for anything beyond race skis where shaving off the rounded tip would arguably improve aerodynamics a little bit.

post #4 of 12

Completely ridiculous and ugly tip.  One could say that there is absolutely no point to it at all.

post #5 of 12

Some of my favorite powder skis have had very low tips. I don't know that that is what I liked about them, but it didn't seem to hurt them any. I like the looks of it too.

post #6 of 12

Interesting timing, Nordica ran an online clinic today focused on CamRoc and Willy Booker (Nordica USA's Pres) spent some time talking tip profile. There is some science behind tip height and vibration control, the idea is that you want the tip as close to the snow surface as possible to reduce unwanted vibration and to enhance the ski gliding over the snow and not 'plowing' the snow infront of the shovel. Th e low shovel actually has very little to do with aerodynamics.

post #7 of 12


Interesting implications w.r.t  hull tips, which would be both stiffer and more oriented to plowing.    

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

Interesting timing, Nordica ran an online clinic today focused on CamRoc and Willy Booker (Nordica USA's Pres) spent some time talking tip profile. There is some science behind tip height and vibration control, the idea is that you want the tip as close to the snow surface as possible to reduce unwanted vibration and to enhance the ski gliding over the snow and not 'plowing' the snow infront of the shovel. Th e low shovel actually has very little to do with aerodynamics.



Wasn't it Head at the forefront of the snub-tip  trend, back in the Cyber XP era?

post #8 of 12

You don't like the skis. You should see some of the carving boards out these days. I will say that aerodynamics doesn't seem to come into play until really high speeds. I notice air getting under my 210 snowboard around 65mph and it starts to get a bit squirrely. But I don't know if this would be different with a lower nose because I've never tried it on a different board.

 

RG185%2019.0%20World%20cuo-RG174%20World%20cup-RS154%20World%20cup.jpg

post #9 of 12
Thread Starter 

It's not that they are necessarily lower to the snow, it's that they are straight across, as in the pic above.  What is the supposed benefit?

post #10 of 12

Supposed benefit would be less swing weight in a part of the ski that's not on the snow. Same reason Fischer cut a hole in the tips of their race skis. That's my guess, anyhow.

post #11 of 12

I can't figure the performance advantage (I think their intention is to produce more float, less tip dive). It seems to me that an uneven shape in the tip, with an abrubt transition from running edge to tip is going to cause uneven resistance and break-through, pressuring that sharp corner and then releasing it at some random instant. another distinct fashion/image thing like Moment? It wreaks of I'm so special....rolleyes.gif The ski tip may be one of the most beautifully engineered concepts of all man-made objects when you think about it. It's been evolving a long time. I love the ski tip.

 

Who would offer testimony as to the best tip design in their quiver? I have to say that in mine, the Rossignol B-Squad shark nose holds that position, early rise, long taper, extra aluminum and rubber; it was ground-(snow)-breaking in it's day.

post #12 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_m View Post

It's not that they are necessarily lower to the snow, it's that they are straight across, as in the pic above.  What is the supposed benefit?



In these cases it's to provide maximum surface area to the tip, seems like a bad idea if you encounter more 'solid' snow or debris.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion