EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › carving vs smearing on "rockered" skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

carving vs smearing on "rockered" skis - Page 3

post #61 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by swellhunter View Post

 

To me the Fujas are such a highly rated big mountain freeride ski b/c they excel in that category at the expense of being more well-rounded.

 

Had you really researched and wanted a wider waist ski that can carve I don't think you would have bought that ski.

 

 

So, first disclosure, what motivates me to get out of bed and get to the slopes is not laying down some sweet railroad tracks on snow glare hardpack.  Just not me.

 

In my quiver, the skis that spend 90% of their time on my feet are a set of 2009 Kung Fujas (95 mm waist, first year of rocker tip and tail) and 2009 Obsethed (105 waist).  They both have almost exactly the same charateristics (I got a really good deal on the Obsethed last season which justified the purchase).

 

I've never, ever had a problem skiing a wider ski in what passes for hardpack in Colorado, and both the Kung Fujas and Obsethed have far exceeded my expectations when it comes to hard-snow performance. I love these skis and find them extremely versatile. 

 

They aren't carving skis, but they don't suck, either. They will lay down railroad tracks if you understand how to lay tracks. Will they do it on glare ice? Not for me, but I don't exactly buy skis to make me a hero blue ice skier.

 

For the few days a year where I know EVERYTHING will be rock hard, I'll ski a different ski. As I ski with a developing skier, I spend a fair bit of each day on groomers.  So, I use these apparently terribly designed skis to ski all over the mountain, and they do well. Hmm. I bet there is a term to describe a ski that works well ALL over the MOUNTAIN.  A pintail is not exactly an all mountain ski attribute, although I wouldn't rule out using an S7 for my ski days either.

 

Not everybody is looking for an ultimate slarve ski, and I find it kind of funny that a pintail performance in deep snow enters the conversation when the OP is talking about the hard snow performance of his Kung Fu's.

post #62 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buttinski View Post

Tail sink and wheelie wash sounds like a boot center too far back.

 

Same goes for tip inadequacies.

 

The default ski design post 2011 is a tapered tip, tapered tail, rockered ski.  

 

Every maker has their version, S7, RP112, Automatic, Billygoats, and so on.

 

If you like a big tail fine buy some, ski makers make those too.  But for those who tire of hooky tails, the world of variable radius turns is opened with a nice "pin"tail.

 

Chowder, Crud, and Chop is not much different than untracked powder once you stand up on a good pair of modern boards.  

 

Hardpack is a different mindset, but these new sticks can and do work just fine with adjustments to style.

The big difference skiing the S7 is that no longer are many of your failed turns resulting from tails hooking up. Something else maybe, but not hooky tails.

post #63 of 70

This thread is the first time I've ever heard of "tail sink."

 

Seriously, if your tails are sinking you are going way too slow on too flat terrain or skiing way the hell in the back seat.  I can't even imagine how this is an issue.

post #64 of 70

There is also an interest in skis that wheelie, or don't wheelie, I'm not sure.

post #65 of 70

Anyone care to muse on the virtues of the swallowtail?  Not very enduring in popularity, but an interesting way of getting the tails to sink while not giving up too much edge.

post #66 of 70

As a lifelong surfer I just find it funny how all of the hydrodyamics built into surfboards have come into skis (powder mostly).  Rocker first and now more talk of tail shapes?????

 

Let me tell you this about tail shapes in the water - when you a going fast at trimming out you hardly notice what tail you have because your board is on plane.  The only time you notice the tail is at the apex portion of turns and maneuvers.  Then the difference between round, pin, square, swallow all have their own "feelings" as you go to "release" them in the lip.  You don't really feel it when you are railing a high speed arc - only at apexes. 

 

The greatest thing affecting a surfboard is the overall planshape #1, entry rocker #2, tail rocker #3, rail shape #4 (which is the one thing skis will never have but some companies are trying to affect these characteristics by going to "capwall" which can change flex and dampening characteristics over the entire length of the ski).  AND - Tail shape is waaaaaaay down the list for me.

 

So in deep pow railing a turn on steep terrain railing a turn at speed in powder I see tail "shape" being way down the list for me as well on a ski.

 

The rocker vs camber issue in the tail and the stiffness of the tail are more significant IMO.

post #67 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post

Anyone care to muse on the virtues of the swallowtail?  Not very enduring in popularity, but an interesting way of getting the tails to sink while not giving up too much edge.


Never skied a swallowtail, but I almost bought a set of Katanas back when they had the "powder channel"- basically the same thing just without a sharp inside edge to catch on things.

 

In terms of getting the tails to sink, I think rockered tails, twin tips, and pintails all manage to do this well- pin tails by reducing the ski area, twin tips and rockered tails by raising the skis contact point.  I haven't skied any powder oriented ski in the rockered area that had any problems with tip dive.

 

Is giving up edge on the last bit of the ski really an issue? Properly skied, that part of the tail should have minimal weight and force being applied to it anyways.

post #68 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by swellhunter View Post

As a lifelong surfer I just find it funny how all of the hydrodyamics built into surfboards have come into skis (powder mostly).  Rocker first and now more talk of tail shapes?????

 

Let me tell you this about tail shapes in the water - when you a going fast at trimming out you hardly notice what tail you have because your board is on plane.  The only time you notice the tail is at the apex portion of turns and maneuvers.  Then the difference between round, pin, square, swallow all have their own "feelings" as you go to "release" them in the lip.  You don't really feel it when you are railing a high speed arc - only at apexes. 

 

The greatest thing affecting a surfboard is the overall planshape #1, entry rocker #2, tail rocker #3, rail shape #4 (which is the one thing skis will never have but some companies are trying to affect these characteristics by going to "capwall" which can change flex and dampening characteristics over the entire length of the ski).  AND - Tail shape is waaaaaaay down the list for me.

 

So in deep pow railing a turn on steep terrain railing a turn at speed in powder I see tail "shape" being way down the list for me as well on a ski.

 

The rocker vs camber issue in the tail and the stiffness of the tail are more significant IMO.

Pretty good summary. 

 

One aspect of retro fish that bears in mind relative to skis is they give good speed and float at the expense of turn shape.  Skis flex and have other differences, of course.  On snow, one area where swallowtails do shine is carving, but with other drawbacks.  The "fish" shape in skis and snowboards tends to be more one with dramatic taper, but the drawback there is they are squirrelly at speed, and it is inherent in the design.

post #69 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by swellhunter View Post

As a lifelong surfer I just find it funny how all of the hydrodyamics built into surfboards have come into skis (powder mostly).  Rocker first and now more talk of tail shapes?????

 

Let me tell you this about tail shapes in the water - when you a going fast at trimming out you hardly notice what tail you have because your board is on plane.  The only time you notice the tail is at the apex portion of turns and maneuvers.  Then the difference between round, pin, square, swallow all have their own "feelings" as you go to "release" them in the lip.  You don't really feel it when you are railing a high speed arc - only at apexes. 

 

The greatest thing affecting a surfboard is the overall planshape #1, entry rocker #2, tail rocker #3, rail shape #4 (which is the one thing skis will never have but some companies are trying to affect these characteristics by going to "capwall" which can change flex and dampening characteristics over the entire length of the ski).  AND - Tail shape is waaaaaaay down the list for me.

 

So in deep pow railing a turn on steep terrain railing a turn at speed in powder I see tail "shape" being way down the list for me as well on a ski.

 

The rocker vs camber issue in the tail and the stiffness of the tail are more significant IMO.

You remind me of a detail that has gone completely under the radar;

Fins

 

Now with a big tail rocker, a nicely shaped fin would give a wee bit more effect in the deep while on the groomed it just waves in the air harmlessly.

 

Slashing off speed is fun, I'm curious as to how a fin would be in this equation.

post #70 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buttinski View Post

You remind me of a detail that has gone completely under the radar;

Fins

 

Now with a big tail rocker, a nicely shaped fin would give a wee bit more effect in the deep while on the groomed it just waves in the air harmlessly.

 

Slashing off speed is fun, I'm curious as to how a fin would be in this equation.

For a surfboard, a modern fin has two main purposes:  to hold the board onto the wave, and to give drive (speed) during turns.  If you beef up your tail to give superior planing float on a ski or snowboard, you have some of the same hold issues.  There have been a couple experimental snowboards in the last couple years to play with surfboard shapes for true bc powder conditions, and word is they do work better with a very small center fin at very least because of better hold.  This is sort of a modern recycle of old and neat design concepts.   No reason the same shouldn't apply to skis, but I haven't heard anything about someone playing with the same concept for two sticks, yet, in the current timeframe.  I am sure someone has, though.  If only there were a way to be sure of enough deep pow to keep this type of concept working...


Edited by CTKook - 1/11/13 at 2:44pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › carving vs smearing on "rockered" skis