Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another obsessive technical one...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Another obsessive technical one...

    Well, another one I am asking myself... Take for exemple the same ski; one has a twin tip tail and no rocker... the other one doesn't have twin tip but have rockered tail... What would be the difference in handling specially at the end of the (tele) turn? Thanks again...

  • #2
    Sounds contradictory. Twin tip and rockered tail are pretty much the same - depending on the amount of rocker.

    Rockered tails make it easier to "let go" of a turn and initiate the next one. They also tend to "wash out" if you are driving them like a traditional cambered ski with a "hard" tail, especially on hard snow. Main difference between a rockered tail (or twin tip) is it won't rebound with energy from the end of the turn in to the next turn. Instead it will make it easier to let go and transition to the next turn which is nice in soft snow and crud, but can be a problem on hard pack. Hope that helps.

    ain't no turn like tele!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Dostie View Post
      Sounds contradictory. Twin tip and rockered tail are pretty much the same - depending on the amount of rocker.

      Rockered tails make it easier to "let go" of a turn and initiate the next one. They also tend to "wash out" if you are driving them like a traditional cambered ski with a "hard" tail, especially on hard snow. Main difference between a rockered tail (or twin tip) is it won't rebound with energy from the end of the turn in to the next turn. Instead it will make it easier to let go and transition to the next turn which is nice in soft snow and crud, but can be a problem on hard pack. Hope that helps.
      It sure does! Thanks Dostie... I got a Atomic all mountain twin tip that has rocker in the tip only... so... hum. I am supposed to understand that the twin tips tail acts as if it was rockered? What about a rockered twin tip tail? I don't want it to sound like an old scholastic debate...

      Comment


      • #4
        A twin tip tail can still provide plenty of rebound or power through the end of the turn, provided it is stiff enough. That is a function primarily of core thickness, though the composites have something to do with it as well. The turned up tail does release from the turn more easily than a flat tail, but nowhere near as easily as a rockered tail will do.

        The other difference between rocker and non rocker in the tail is the length of effective edge on firm snow. While the longer edge does not change the turn radius of the ski -- e.g., Icelantic Nomad vs. Nomad RKR -- it does make the ski a better carver on firm snow. Anyone who has skied both the Nomad and the RKR will tell you that the RKR is a slashy and playful little scooter on firm snow while the conventional cambered Nomad is more of a smooth round carving ride. The conventional camber plays out at both ends of the ski with much greater tip pressure farther away from your center of mass, meaning the ski has a stronger tendency to follow the tip. The RKR will carve with a light touch, as Dostie alludes, but also smears easily in deep snow. The cost is indeed the ability of the ski to provide strong edging power through the end of the turn, which decreases stability at speed a lot compared to the conventional Nomad.
        Last edited by cesare; 23 October 2013, 06:26 AM. Reason: fix the last sentence which I screwed up in the original post

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks Cesare... Interesting comparison.

          Comment


          • #6
            Question for the techy geek crowd, now that the first one seems to have run it's course, and it's on topic to some degree (justifying the thread jack):

            Is tail rocker solely for skiing pow / landing in pow switch? These moustache profiles make sense to me for snowboards that are commonly rode in either direction and I can see the appeal for pro's that are hucking and landing switch, but I can't figure it out for everyday joe's. Seems like some of these designs are a "one step forward, two back" kinda thing. Sidecut allowed people to downsize to reasonable sized boards and then now we have these floppy center-mount clown shoes that a big guys practically back up to a 210 cm. - And a lot of these flat / no camber designs seem to barely be stiff enough at a demo right out of the box, so I can only figure what they're going to feel like with a 100 hard days on them. But, I guess that's when you throw 'em away and buy another $1200 pair if you're training for Alaska? $12/day seems pretty steep even if you're embezzling grandpa's pension money by day.

            Comment


            • #7
              Matt, switch or not, rocker is definitely for skiing 3-dimensional snow. That goes for tip AND tail. But don't think tail rocker is just for skiing switch...it's not. It makes skiing pow a joy, period. It makes pow turns easy because the tip (and tail) are already decambered. Initiating that decamber is what used to make powder skiing somewhat of a challenge. The skier had to have enough speed to plane, and to put energy into the decamber and create that rebound.

              No longer. Now fat skis eliminate the need for much speed for planing, and the profile shape has enough decamber in it that there's no need for tremendous energy to initiate that and create rebound. Getting into the next turn is as easy as rolling your ankles.

              If the tip/tail have reverse sidecut then the combo also allows the ski to move through snow in more creative ways. Hence the terms "slarve" and "butter." These are also known as "skidding" in luddite parlance, but when executing in blower they look like sideways skiing, and it's pretty dang fun to execute.

              Tip rocker alone is a step up, and helps prevent tip-dive and initiate turns since that's the bigger challenge for skiers in pow. It also makes planing easier, but there's still the tail to decamber, yet it also provides more rebound. A tip rocker only ski also gives you a bit more effective edge for skiing boot-top, dust on crust, breakable and, yes, groomers. Tip rocker was seen for a long time as a good compromise for a resort ski, but companies are doing so much with the flex characteristics underfoot for tip AND tail rockered skis that it's not seen quite that way anymore.

              So, yes, tail rocker is for everyday joes that don't ride switch, as long as they're getting into some 3D snow. If you're skiing groomers then no. But, the same goes for tip rocker. Tail rocker is advantageous wherever tip rocker is, if that makes sense.

              Comment


              • #8
                Tail rocker helps make the ski feel looser and more playful, particularly in soft snow. It's easier to break out of the turn and change direction, release the "carve" into a wider turn, rotate independently of the direction of motion, etc.. That may or may not be a good thing depending on what you're looking for. They're also more nimble (vs. the length) so can be a good choice for trees and tight chutes.

                Note that a ski with tip and tail rocker can still be plenty stiff. E.g. Billy Goats, GPO, Bibby, etc..

                Depending on the exact rocker profile, tele turns on a ski with tail rocker may require a tighter and more centered stance. If you tend to lean back on the tail you may find less support than you're used to.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I ski a full rocker ski in pow, but what I'm more referring to is the rocker/camber/rocker profiles and the gentler rocker tails. I guess they still contribute to a smeary turn in soft snow. Looks like a lot of board to be dragging it around behind you. I like the pintails on my 'toons.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What teledad said.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      X3

                      I think what has been said has been very well said. About the only thing I could add is that a few years ago I did not like skis with tail rocker becuase they all tended to be softer with a very short turning radius. Today I think there are quite a few very good skis with full rocker that are stiffer with a larger turning radius like the ones teledad mentioned. For me with these skis I feel like I get the best of both worlds. A ski that will turn if you want it to but is stout enough to open up with. The Bibby Pro fits this description on paper and from what I have read. I will see how they work in the real world this year.
                      Last edited by James; 24 October 2013, 09:41 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by teledad View Post
                        Depending on the exact rocker profile, tele turns on a ski with tail rocker may require a tighter and more centered stance. If you tend to lean back on the tail you may find less support than you're used to.
                        I think this, ^^^, has steered many tele skiers away from using tail rockered skis. skiers concerned/hestitant (and/or not being able to adjust their technique) to "wheelie" effect.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X