FACT - there is no difference between Rocker, Early Rise and Reverse camber or pop rocker or spin...

There is actually a difference in these.

Early Rise: the tip of the ski has rise to and thus causes the contact point to be further towards the center of the ski.  The tail is a traditional tail.

Rocker: early rise in the tip, along with the same in the tail.  traditional camber underfoot.

Reverse Camber: The camber is completely reversed so that underfoot it is flat/curved up, along with rocker in the tip and tail

Rocker:  Big-ass tattoo across your six-pack that says "Gangsta"

Pop Rocker: that stuff Mikey ate and chased with a Pepsi that killed him.

Reverse Camber: What happens when you eat runny French cheese that's been sitting out on the counter overnight.

Early Rise: what I have to do to get to the bottom of the Fourrunner chair at 7:30 in the freakin' morning tomorrow.

Like wheelchairs for people who can't walk.

Meaning it's wonderful for people who need it. Nothing wrong with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Matta 

Its all market speak and nothing more. REALLY unless you can clearly define what the difference in a measurable quality my statement is true. 

nothing in the ski-world is EVER clearly defined. FACT. MY statement is true.

I differentiate between rocker and early rise profiles.

A rocker profile is just like it sounds - a profile similar to the curvature of a rocking chair.  That doesn't mean that profile has to extend from tip through tail.  You can have a rocker profile in the tip and another in the tail with traditional camber underfoot (commonly called mustache rocker these days).

Early rise designs are more like the designer has taken a traditional ski and "bent" the tip up off the snow.  The rise is much more linear (flat) along the length. 

These two profiles ski very differently.

So although many will argue that all the terms mean the same thing I think it's important that we actually provide some differentiation between rocker and rise to take into account these two different profiles.

No doubt that as these new designs continue to develop we're going to need better clearer terms that we all share in a common understanding.

All variations of base curvature are different, and ski different.

Full rocker gives you only a fraction of base contact.  Any area of camber distributes your weight along the camber when you are on the skis.

Early rise only, tip and tail rocker, and full rocker are all very different.

If you are going to be skiing soft snow, you really should be getting rocker.

5000 years ago, people in the Himalayas were using rockered boards to ski the soft snow.

This: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/228305-rocker-101-article

Was just about to searching for this same thread.  Here is the link for everyone else ot the article in the tread.  Good info.

http://blistergearreview.com/articles/rocker-101

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by beyond 

This: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/228305-rocker-101-article

Rocker vs. Early Rise

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski 

Unless you are skiing on smooth, hard, groomed snow, camber was a pretty dumb idea, probably conceived in a different time hastily.

http://www.epicski.com/t/60386/why-do-skis-still-have-camber

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrizzledVeteran 


Did you know that the "progression" of human existence always ends in death? Why not progress right along to the end right now and drink some hemlock? What are you, Mr Reactionary? Always trying to move backward!
I love the self-appointed ski gurus who try to tell everyone that they're "backward" or "stupid luddites" for not clamoring after whatever trend has gripped the industry at present. "Who are you to tell others to not have fun?", they argue. Well, to some people killing another human is fun, and we tend to dislike that as a species, so obviously "others having fun" isn't boundless nor is it an excuse for anything.
I'll let you ski whatever you like Josh. You're going to come in here and tell us we're all so much worse skiers than you anyway, so what's the difference?
Don't forget to gloat about this thread over on TGR. Surely it makes you a hero!

What's it like being such a miserable person that you have to invent a scenario for you to feel insulted so that you can respond in kind. The original post said nothing about what you "should" be skiing. It's funny how there can be no discussion about anything modern without you coming in and crying about it. And then you throw in some additional bat shit crazy talk about progression ending in death. Seriously man.....How fried is your brain?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrizzledVeteran 


Did you know that the "progression" of human existence always ends in death? Why not progress right along to the end right now and drink some hemlock? What are you, Mr Reactionary? Always trying to move backward!
I love the self-appointed ski gurus who try to tell everyone that they're "backward" or "stupid luddites" for not clamoring after whatever trend has gripped the industry at present. "Who are you to tell others to not have fun?", they argue. Well, to some people killing another human is fun, and we tend to dislike that as a species, so obviously "others having fun" isn't boundless nor is it an excuse for anything.
I'll let you ski whatever you like Josh. You're going to come in here and tell us we're all so much worse skiers than you anyway, so what's the difference?
Don't forget to gloat about this thread over on TGR. Surely it makes you a hero!

GV, you're coming across as pretty over the top. Are you even sure what you're heated up about? Josh has been around Epic for a long time, knows how to ski, knows how to pull people's chains too.  Especially when he's suffering from a ridiculous March - I'm writing from down the highway from him and it was 81 friggin degrees today, rivers running down and across what's left of the few runs still open. We all might as well launch a few threads back here since our summer's starting three months early. 

Barrel staves.

A poll is stated with a false premise then gives choices built on that which are all very different.

What would your point be here ?  All skis not traditionally cambered are similar ?   You know this is not true.  You lost me with this one. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarryZ 

A poll is stated with a false premise then gives choices built on that which are all very different.

 

What would your point be here ?  All skis not traditionally cambered are similar ?   You know this is not true.  You lost me with this one. 

Pretty simple point I think - the words used to describe non-traditional camber have very low correlation to observable ski performance and any marketing moniker will stick. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarryZ 

A poll is stated with a false premise then gives choices built on that which are all very different.

 

What would your point be here ?  All skis not traditionally cambered are similar ?   You know this is not true.  You lost me with this one. 

What do you mean?  I thought the poll was pretty clear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cantunamunch 

 

Pretty simple point I think - the words used to describe non-traditional camber have very low correlation to observable ski performance and any marketing moniker will stick. 

There are clearly major differences in each type of non traditional ski shape. Early rise is not similar to tip and tail rocker nor is it similar to reverse camber. To call them just marketing or all the same is silly 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarryZ 

 

There are clearly major differences in each type of non traditional ski shape. Early rise is not similar to tip and tail rocker nor is it similar to reverse camber.

A clear difference between paper concepts.   We can all agree on that.      

Quote:

uote:

Originally Posted by GarryZ 

 To call them just marketing or all the same is silly

Only if we actually believe that the distinctions between paper concepts are preserved in their implementation in skis. 

Toss out the marketing.   

  What can the purchasing skiers feel when you put them on the actual skis that allegedly embody these concepts?    Do they sense the distinction?  

Or are they likely to mistake the Rolling Rock taste of "early rise" for the Coors Lite taste of  "pop rocker"  the moment you stop giving them marketing cues?

That's the point of this thread.    Toss out the marketing.   Toss out the normal "feel" cues of flex, waist, sidecut progression,  spring response and damping that we knew back before all these non-conventional cambers came out.  

If all those are held constant, the as-implemented distinctions between all these camber concepts are about as vast as the taste differences between major market light beers.

I guess it depends on who is saying it.  I use/understand early rise and rocker interchangeably (though rocker could be a bit more inclusive as it would include tail rocker whereas with early rise I will think just tip rocker).  When I'm told a ski is reverse camber though, I'm thinking something like an ARG, Praxis Pow, etc.  Something without any camber underfoot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcusBrody 

I guess it depends on who is saying it.  I use/understand early rise and rocker interchangeably (though rocker could be a bit more inclusive as it would include tail rocker whereas with early rise I will think just tip rocker).  When I'm told a ski is reverse camber though, I'm thinking something like an ARG, Praxis Pow, etc.  Something without any camber underfoot.

There is no industry standard in terminology, each manufacturer uses different words.       Volkl uses the words full rocker to describe full reverse camber (continuous bend), which should be the industry standard.   IMO

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdiddy 

There is no industry standard in terminology, each manufacturer uses different words.       Volkl uses the words full rocker to describe full reverse camber (continuous bend), which should be the industry standard.   IMO

I agree.  I didn't add it to my list but when I hear "full rocker" I think "full reverse camber".

Poll: What should we call skis without traditional camber?

A: Skis