or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BOF on Powder Skis

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
I have 3 pair of fat skis to mount this year. Two are going to be used mainly for powder while the third will be a powder/crud/crud-pile ski. My current favorite powder ski mounting is on my Nordica Beasts which were mounted back by mistake. These skis are used almost exclusively for powder, crud, crud piles, steeps and moguls. When I do ski groomers on them its almost exclusively SG turns. I measured them and the mount point is 2 cm behind the normal BOF mounting point. I probably going to do the same on the skis I'm mounting this year. Anyone do something similar????

(PS - I measured my two pair of Bluehouse Skis & found some interesting things about their mount-points.....I'll start a thread on that tomorrow.)
post #2 of 12
I have found through experience (starting by just moving my boot relative to midsole marks on different ski brands, then looking at where my BOF was when I decided on a spot I liked) that I like my center of the ball of my foot at center of the running surface. I have a pair of skis I had mounted about one cm ahead of there that I enjoyed on hard snow but found very submarine like in soft snow. I remounted them with AT gear about 3.5cm back from the original, so about 2.5 cm behind BOF/center of running surface, and now I can't stand them at all on hard snow.

Sorry about the rambling, but I guess my point is that this is a very interesting topic I'd like to know more about.
post #3 of 12
What skis?
post #4 of 12
How would one measure for BoF with reverse camber skis? Not that I need to, just seems like an interesting conundrum.
post #5 of 12
Originally Posted by volantaddict View Post
How would one measure for BoF with reverse camber skis? Not that I need to, just seems like an interesting conundrum.
Is it interesting?
I admit I've a lot to learn here, but isn't reverse camber pretty trivially shown to be the same as a ski with very soft initial flex?
I don't see sidecut taken into account in these calculations so what makes reverse camber interesting?

(another Bluehouse shopper)
post #6 of 12
Sidecut SHOULD be taken into account, according to some manufacturers. You'll want to be at the center of the arc, regardless of where it is relative to running surface center/BOF. Can't speak to camber, except that in theory it'll be reversed anyway in powder, just easier to do if you start out that way.
post #7 of 12
Oh yeah, and do a search. Coupla long threads a few years back on this, lot of discussion about locating BOF, impact on skiing. Keelty has some stuff too.
post #8 of 12
Why don't you just center mount them? That helps with landing switch in pow!!!!
post #9 of 12
I have had some limited experience with movable bindings and different mounting positions on powder skis. IMO it comes down to how stiff the front end of the ski is. With a stiffer ski like the Mantra you might not want to be on center because you'll have to fight the tendency to dive, but with a softer ski you'll want to be on center to help fight the tendency of the ski to crawl up on top of the snow. It's really a matter of choice depending on personal style and how your boots are set up. Finding the sweet spot where you can relax in the middle of your skis in deep snow is a constant battle based on snow consistency, speed, and how agressive you are feeling that day, but IMO the general rule is that stiffer the ski the father back you want to be mounted, and vice versa, whereas for hard snow it is just the opposite.
post #10 of 12
Thread Starter 
mudfoot -

Interesting theory. I was wondering more about how length effected powder ski mount points. The Beasts I have mounted back are a moderate flex ski in a 177cm length, which is short for me for a powder ski. My Pocket Rockets are softer but also 185cm in length. They are mounted BOF deadcenter and work fine. The question is if the longer length or softer ski allows them to be mounted more forward. Its probably a combo of both.
post #11 of 12
GReat thread, i am trying to decide where to mount my Watea94's. I am thinking +1 cm off the center. THis is all good to think about.
post #12 of 12

My goal is to have a ski that you can stand in the middle of (the most relaxed position) and have it run through deep snow without surfacing or diving. Obviously this takes a stiffer tipped ski for heavier snow. I like a somewhat soft tipped medium flex ski that stays down in the snow and allows me to control my speed by applying or reducing pressure to the tips (a "reverse accelerator" as I like to think of it). This allows me to stay in the fall line without having to turn much to reduce speed. In order to make this work you have to match your speed to your skis and snow consistency, so the snow dictates my optimum speed, although my experince has been that there are often two speeds where this will work reasonably well in a particular snow condition. My stiff=back formula relates directly to this concept.

For me the problem with the "perfect" powder ski/mount is that as the snow gets cut up and sets up you tend to want a stiffer tip and more forward position to keep you from climbing on top of the crud and then having to fight to get back down into it.


FWIW I have the orignal Watea 101s with 4-position Atomic bindings and after experimenting I found that having then on center works pretty well. They carve better on groomed behind center, but they have no camber and pretty much suck when not in deep snow because of my weight. The front ends are so soft I can lean straight into them and they turn on a dime in deep snow. I think Fischer is making some of the most fun powder skis these days, but they tend to be almost too soft.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion