EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Dampness, rebound and Monsters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dampness, rebound and Monsters

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
After demo-ing about 10 pairs of skis in the 78 - 88mm wide range, I settled Head Monster 82s (183cm). I've been enjoying them tremendously-- as advertised they are plenty soft and turny for powder, and they have terrific edge grip on the hard packed. They feel damp to me, or did at first.

I'm finding that when cranking fast turns in chopped up snow, I'm spending more time in the air than I like. It seems that at the end of a turn, the flexed skis straighten out like an efficient spring-- that is, they give back all of their energy-- and I am launched into the air a little bit.

Question 1: Is this what is meant by "rebound"?

These skis do feel damp to me-- it feels like they do a good job of absorbing the shocks of rough snow without transmitting everything to my leg. But I would have thought that having dampness would necessitate having minimal rebound.

Question 2: If my understanding of rebound is correct, does it make sense that a ski could have both high dampness and high rebound, as I believe these Monsters do?

Question 3: What comparable ski would have less rebound? I assume K2 Outlaws would have the least. Maybe Nordica Afterburners, too?
post #2 of 24
Question 1 yes

Question 2 yes thats exactly what they are like its a trait of Heads worldcup sandwich skis

Question 3 yes a great example would be a K2 ski those K2s are pretty lifeless except in their slalom race carver skis and another example would be a Rossignol Bandit B3
post #3 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramshackle View Post
Question 1 yes

Question 2 yes thats exactly what they are like its a trait of Heads worldcup sandwich skis

Question 3 yes a great example would be a K2 ski those K2s are pretty lifeless except in their slalom race carver skis and another example would be a Rossignol Bandit B3
Ditto, Its also a trait of the cap construction skis from Head, including the Monster 72.

Most people find the Head Monster 72 to be excessively damp.

Michael
post #4 of 24
If you are getting "launched into the air", I would suggest checking out what is going on technique-wise instead of looking to buy a different ski. You may prefer a different ski (like a Legend 8800 or K2 Outlaw) and maybe thats the way to go, but you should be able to control the rebound of the ski and stay on the ground...
post #5 of 24
Crudmaster:

You have encountered the age old problem when looking for good crud skis. You need a ski with a stiff enough flex to ram through without getting kicked around, but then you end up being pushed by the stiff flex at the end of the turn. If the ski is soft enough not to do that it tends to flap at speed in rough snow conditions. IMHO the perfect crud ski has a stiff flex in the front, including a stiff tip that will not keep trying to climb up on top of the snow, and a somewhat soft tail that allows you to continue arcing the finish of the turn without popping you out of the snow. Being damp is also essential. Unfortunately, they don't tend to make skis with a stiff fore and soft aft. Most skis are exactly the opposite.

Based on your name I am sure I am not telling you anything you don't know when I say that the secret to crud skiing is staying in the snow, but it seems to me that most skis fight that either with the construction of their tips or their tails. All the skis I have had that I considered good crud skis always start to push me out of the turn once the speed gets up there. Finding a good crud ski without "snap" is not as easy task.

As Whiteroom suggests, some of that "launch" can be overcome with technique, but in my opinion most skis have more tail stiffness than they need. I could never understand why they resist building a good ski that doesn't punish you for trying to use the back half of it?
post #6 of 24
Yep, pretty accurate on all counts. Wood/Metal Sandwich skis act like this, that's why people ski them and love them. They also retain good bit of livelyness and snow feel...which would seem counterintutive to being damp...but it's true.

It's all about technique as whiteroom said...as you finish the turn you need to translate that spring from vertical motion into forward motion - you will gain speed at the turn exit.

Only other thing -I can't speak for the cap'd k2's, but my K2 Public Enemies have tons of beef and rebound (wood core, torsion box, sidewall). If you put an agressive , flat (0, -.5, etc) base bevel on them, they are quite a handful to ski. They are damp, but they also feel sort of dead, and don't have the livelyness of a metal sandwich ski.
post #7 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
If you are getting "launched into the air", I would suggest checking out what is going on technique-wise ... you should be able to control the rebound of the ski and stay on the ground...
Unless, of course, you enjoy the sensation of being launched into the air at the end of a turn, which you should also learn to control so that you are able to do it at will. Rebound is a feature of the ski, learn to control it and enjoy it !

WW
post #8 of 24
My Titans will do this too..if I let them. As mentioned, it is in the technique. If I want, I can let teh ski load up out of the turn and as I exit I can get launched to the next turn or I can let my legs absorb the enegry and keep the ski on the snow across the hill. The latter is the "correct' way, but I still like doing to the first way an a lot of conditions .
post #9 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
It's all about technique as whiteroom said...as you finish the turn you need to translate that spring from vertical motion into forward motion - you will gain speed at the turn exit.
"If I want, I can let the ski load up out of the turn and as I exit I can get launched to the next turn or I can let my legs absorb the enegry and keep the ski on the snow across the hill." Philpug

These statements illustrate my complaint. Either the ski accelerates you out of the turn or your have to soak up the unwanted energy with your legs, but I am usually turning to control my speed. There is another option and that's a crud ski like the old Volant G-max with a long soft tail that can ooze out of a high speed crud turn. I never liked skis with snap or pop because they create energy I don't usually want or need. Based on the kind of skis that are being produced I am apparently in a small minority. Having a high performace ski with a soft tail lets you actually use it to brake your speed and continue to carve your turn by rearing back if you choose. Intead of getting an unwanted push I prefer a second chance at working the turn or slowing down. This is particularly nice in big mogals where a soft tail will actually slow you down through the trough of the bump and allow you to stay on the snow and continue to carve, as opposed to accelerating and popping you off the snow every turn.
post #10 of 24
Word to using your tails to spring off (ollie) or....backseat, baby!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post










Joey #1: Check that foo in da jeans!!.....heaz guna crash on his ass!!

Joey #2: Freekin' guna snap tha damn tails off!!!
post #11 of 24
HS:

I am not advocating skiing in the backseat. The guy in the pictures looks like one of the many skiers who is unfortunately only using half of his skis, the wrong half. I ski forward like just like you, but I like to also be able to work the back half of my skis when it is useful, and I can assure you that when I do it I don't look like that guy. IMO a person who cannot carve on the back half of their skis is missing just as much as the guy in the pictures who seems to have no relationship with anything in front of his bindings.

You can take you snappy skis and pop all you want, but I'm aiming for that "glued to the snow" feeling and a continuous carve until "I" decide to take it off the snow. As I've said before, I paid for the whole ski and damn I'm going to use it. Different strokes (and skis) for different folks.
post #12 of 24
Mudfoot, that's HS in the photos.

Early 90's GS skis plowed through crud beautifully. See Jer's posts on the subject.
post #13 of 24
Now that you mention it, his hands are pretty far forward and he seems to be balanced and in control. I generally stop way short of doing a wheelie. He's one hell of a skier if he can tail rudder on command and control it. That comes in handy as a an emergency manuver, but Highway Star seems to be using it in the open for fun. It's way beyond what I have been talking about.

He's behind the backseat. I think he's skiing from the mudflaps.
post #14 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
Now that you mention it, his hands are pretty far forward and he seems to be balanced and in control. I generally stop way short of doing a wheelie. He's one hell of a skier if he can tail rudder on command and control it. That comes in handy as a an emergency manuver, but Highway Star seems to be using it in the open for fun. It's way beyond what I have been talking about.

He's behind the backseat. I think he's skiing from the mudflaps.
It's an emergency manuver as shown, in about 2 feet of melting untracked mank. Look how deep the tails are sticking in, a good 1 ft. They're 186 im88's. I've also got serious angulation.
post #15 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by crudmaster View Post
Question 3: What comparable ski would have less rebound? I assume K2 Outlaws would have the least. Maybe Nordica Afterburners, too?
My $.02:
I've been looking to demo some Afterburners this spring, so I haven't skied them yet, but from the reviews I've read they actually have good rebound. Hopefully I'll be able to say for myself, soon. But if you search for afterburner and rebound, you'll find a couple reviews praising them for their rebound energy.
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
"If I want, I can let the ski load up out of the turn and as I exit I can get launched to the next turn or I can let my legs absorb the enegry and keep the ski on the snow across the hill." Philpug

These statements illustrate my complaint. Either the ski accelerates you out of the turn or your have to soak up the unwanted energy with your legs, but I am usually turning to control my speed. There is another option and that's a crud ski like the old Volant G-max with a long soft tail that can ooze out of a high speed crud turn. I never liked skis with snap or pop because they create energy I don't usually want or need. Based on the kind of skis that are being produced I am apparently in a small minority. Having a high performace ski with a soft tail lets you actually use it to brake your speed and continue to carve your turn by rearing back if you choose. Intead of getting an unwanted push I prefer a second chance at working the turn or slowing down. This is particularly nice in big mogals where a soft tail will actually slow you down through the trough of the bump and allow you to stay on the snow and continue to carve, as opposed to accelerating and popping you off the snow every turn.
Have you tried the nordica jetfuels? They sound like exactly what you want to be on. Wider midfat ski, damp, stiff burly tip and a mushy tail. I personally think a ski like that is no fun at all and vastly preferred the IM88. Specifically because it has a stiffer tail and is a more lively ski. I have found that good crud skis have few design charachteristics in common with good bump skis.
post #17 of 24
double post. I lose at the interweb.
post #18 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
It's an emergency manuver as shown, in about 2 feet of melting untracked mank. Look how deep the tails are sticking in, a good 1 ft. They're 186 im88's. I've also got serious angulation.
here we go again...
post #19 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post
Have you tried the nordica jetfuels? They sound like exactly what you want to be on. Wider midfat ski, damp, stiff burly tip and a mushy tail.

I've been reading this thread thinking the same thing.
The jetfuels are a crud ski. Stiff tip and forgiving tail (though I wouldn't call it mushy)
They aren't the most lively, but they will crank out very powerful medium raidius arcs at incredibly high speeds.
post #20 of 24
"Have you tried the nordica jetfuels?" tromano

Thanks, haven't tried the Jetfules but I'll check them out. It is usually very hard to really tell the fore/aft flex characteristics of a ski from reading industry and review info.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post
I have found that good crud skis have few design charachteristics in common with good bump skis.
I agree, but IMHO they both benefit from having a softer tail than what you find on most of the skis out there.
post #21 of 24
FWIW, I won the iM82's in 172, also find them fairly damp - nothing like a Rossi or K2, though - and yep, they have serious tail. : My answer was to move my RFD's forward 2 cm. Recommend it for lighter skiers who like beefy damp skis but find the tails can have more exit energy than needed.

Alternatively, there are skis like Stocklis, Rossis, and Dynastars that have more traditional tails, reward active management of the last third of the turn.

Finally, I notice that my Heads like more forward pressure than say a Dynastar; this will also reduce space launches.
post #22 of 24
post #23 of 24
Thread Starter 

thanks, fellas...

Thanks, fellas, for the thoughtful responses. I agree with much of the analysis, and I recently ran across another incisive disquisition from Mudfoot that encapsulates the debate: "I was thinking along the lines of Volant lovers who tend to like that glued-to-the-mountain damp (some say dead) feel, as opposed to a Volkl fan that likes a lot of snap to their ski resulting in a little more of chopping attack on the terrain. But as I said, once the speed starts to ramp up you better have a ski with some damping no matter what your style."

Having been a passionate Volant skier in recent years I've taken for granted that I can roar through any snow and stay glued to it. In my search for a wider ski I was looking whatever would feel closest to my Volant T3 Epics. (I disliked the Chubbs and McH's I bought on eBay-- too soft in crud and lousy on packed).

And, yes, of course I can suck up the rebound, but when screaming down the hill too fast, beyond control part of the time, making a series of miraculous recoveries (which is my preferred style-- just ask around Crystal Mtn), I don't like having to worry about proper technique or making an extra effort to compensate for the ski's overeagerness.

I liked Rossi B3's pretty well, but at 184cm they were a little too much ski, and the slightly softer Monster 82's were good at 183cm. I like longer skis for smoothing out rough snow.

You'd think K2 Outlaws or Recons would have been a favorite (at 181cm), but there's something about how they turn in crud and powder that doesn't feel excellent to me. Yes, they turn easily and quickly, but it doesn't feel like the ski flexes deeply, steering with the tail following the line of the tip. That's how my Volants and many other skis feel in powder and crud, and I love it. Pure steering-- no sliding. It feels as if the K2's easily flex to a just a slight reverse camber (not a deep flex), then somehow they quickly flip around. Yes, the turns are quick and easy, but it doesn't feel like pure, smooth steering. These K2's are widely regarded as soft, yet, since they don't seem to flex very deeply, they feel stiffer to me than Monsters. No one has ever described this (as far as I have read), and it doesn't make much sense, but that's what it feels like to me.

Does this make sense to anyone else? Does anyone else think that K2's don't feel like any other ski, and the difference is not explainable by differences in stiffness and dampness?

And does anyone else agree with Whiteroom about Legend 8800's being another wide ski with minimal rebound? Realskiers rates them a moderate "3" on rebound (same as Monster 82) and calls them "lively".
post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by crudmaster View Post
I liked Rossi B3's pretty well, but at 184cm they were a little too much ski, and the slightly softer Monster 82's were good at 183cm. I like longer skis for smoothing out rough snow.

You'd think K2 Outlaws or Recons would have been a favorite (at 181cm), but there's something about how they turn in crud and powder that doesn't feel excellent to me. Yes, they turn easily and quickly, but it doesn't feel like the ski flexes deeply, steering with the tail following the line of the tip. That's how my Volants and many other skis feel in powder and crud, and I love it. Pure steering-- no sliding. It feels as if the K2's easily flex to a just a slight reverse camber (not a deep flex), then somehow they quickly flip around. Yes, the turns are quick and easy, but it doesn't feel like pure, smooth steering. These K2's are widely regarded as soft, yet, since they don't seem to flex very deeply, they feel stiffer to me than Monsters. No one has ever described this (as far as I have read), and it doesn't make much sense, but that's what it feels like to me.

Does this make sense to anyone else? Does anyone else think that K2's don't feel like any other ski, and the difference is not explainable by differences in stiffness and dampness?
Crudmaster:

It sounds like we have similar taste in snow and skis. Like you, I want a ski that I can relax on, so I like one without a mind of its own that pretty much lays there until I tell it to jump. I agree with you about K2s and cannot figure out how they are one of the most popular skis. They turn easy but to me they don't have a pure feel of a deep carve. I like a ski with an even tip to tail (big smile) flex (more like a Rossi) and the K2s all seem to have a stiff middle that resists the turn just when I am getting into it. After they stopped making full cap Volants I started skiing Atomics. I bought a pair of Fischer Wateas at the end of last year and fell in love with their even soft flex. They are a pure powder ski and probably too soft and wide for what you are looking for, but you might want to check out some of the other narrower Fischers. Not super damp but an extremely smooth ride. They are somehow lively without having a kick at the end of the turn.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Dampness, rebound and Monsters