Sick of hearing rocker this rocker that getting tossed around so much.
if your tips start to rise before the end of your sidecut then that section before the end of your effective edge is rockered. If you end your effective edge and have a 50cm tip, then that's a damn 50cm tip not a rockered tip.
Feel free to yell and scream and tell me I am wrong.
A big tipped ski is not a rocker!
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
-
Yuki_otoko
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:08 am
If the sidecut extended into the tip radius, wouldnt this present problems with the point of contact at the ends of effective edge?if your tips start to rise before the end of your sidecut
I would class the length of tip as from where the tip radius starts. The difference from tight tip radius and the mild rocker radius is considerably different thus showing clearly where this point starts.If you end your effective edge and have a 50cm tip, then that's a damn 50cm tip not a rockered tip.
For me, I would say any reverse camber that is along the running length (from tip radius to tip radius) is rocker, whether it is over the whole board/ski, between the feet or either side of the bindings.
If the sidecut finishes before the tip radius starts, I would not consider this the point of where the tip starts.
However in a case like this where the sidecut finishes before the tip starts, I am not sure whether the effective edge includes what extends past the radius and to the start of the tip radius ????? For me, I would say it does.
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
[quote="Yuki_otoko]If the sidecut extended into the tip radius, wouldnt this present problems with the point of contact at the ends of effective edge?[/quote] Not at all, if it was an issue then rocker would not be being used as much. Check out the salomon rockers. They are rockered from the start of the effective edge (start of tip radius) back 7.2cm, The ski is then cambered underfoot and flat in the tail section. http://www.salomonsports.com/us/#/ski/s ... ski/rocker
Rock the mullet. Rocker.
I would agree that any reverse camber that is along the running legth should be considered rocker. I guess the question is then with rockered tips what determines the running length? Traditionally running length has been the length of the ski that is in contact with the ground when placed on a flat surface and weighted in the middle.
I would class the length of tip as from where the tip radius starts. The difference from tight tip radius and the mild rocker radius is considerably different thus showing clearly where this point starts.
For me, I would say any reverse camber that is along the running length (from tip radius to tip radius) is rocker, whether it is over the whole board/ski, between the feet or either side of the bindings.
Rock the mullet. Rocker.
You're wrong.... where sidecut or effective edge end have nothing to do with it.
There has been a lot of debate regarding this all over the place, and I think I understand it, but it's entirely possible that I'm also misinformed, though my view makes sense to me.
The first clarification: it is important that we don't use 'rocker' and 'reverse camber' synonymously. They refer to different profiles. Rocker describes a rise, prior to the tip. Reverse camber, in my opinion is rockered, but rockered is not reverse camber (similar to the square's a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square concept). Reverse camber is continuous; it is like flipping your camber upside down. It is possible to have regular camber and rocker on one ski, so it wouldn't really make sense to say that the ski has camber and reverse camber. Hope that makes sense.
I think that, as stated above, the rocker has a different radius than the tip. this is why we are able to measure rocker precisely. Early rise, as used in some Line skis, is perhaps more what you are referring to (?). The tips simply start significantly earlier than 'conventional' tips, giving a similar effect to rocker, though the entire tip ends up being a single elliptical line (I'm pretty sure on this last bit, though I am making some personal observations and assumptions with regards to the early rise approach).
There has been a lot of debate regarding this all over the place, and I think I understand it, but it's entirely possible that I'm also misinformed, though my view makes sense to me.
The first clarification: it is important that we don't use 'rocker' and 'reverse camber' synonymously. They refer to different profiles. Rocker describes a rise, prior to the tip. Reverse camber, in my opinion is rockered, but rockered is not reverse camber (similar to the square's a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square concept). Reverse camber is continuous; it is like flipping your camber upside down. It is possible to have regular camber and rocker on one ski, so it wouldn't really make sense to say that the ski has camber and reverse camber. Hope that makes sense.
I think that, as stated above, the rocker has a different radius than the tip. this is why we are able to measure rocker precisely. Early rise, as used in some Line skis, is perhaps more what you are referring to (?). The tips simply start significantly earlier than 'conventional' tips, giving a similar effect to rocker, though the entire tip ends up being a single elliptical line (I'm pretty sure on this last bit, though I am making some personal observations and assumptions with regards to the early rise approach).
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
right on dude, you rock!You're wrong
Ahh, see this is where I digress. Rocker is reverse camber. For some reason somebody started calling early rise tips rocker.The first clarification: it is important that we don't use 'rocker' and 'reverse camber' synonymously. They refer to different profiles.
reverse camber and camber on the same board!
touché.
I dunno. I guess we just define the terms ourselves, maybe. ill continue to use them as I've described them above, as this makes sense to me. I guess there is no definite definition... though there should be.
either that, or never summer is just crazy and likes using new terms to market their product. just kidding but not really. I haven't really looked into it, and I know you can get custom base from crown, but is there such a thing as 5501 grade UH? They claim to use DuraSurf XT 5501, which I've never heard of. Sorry for the change of subject, this just makes me think of all the questionable claims i read on manufacturer websites.
i hope you weren't being sarcastic with reference to your comment on my 'you're wrong' statement; you told us to tell you were wrong, so i did.
I dunno. I guess we just define the terms ourselves, maybe. ill continue to use them as I've described them above, as this makes sense to me. I guess there is no definite definition... though there should be.
either that, or never summer is just crazy and likes using new terms to market their product. just kidding but not really. I haven't really looked into it, and I know you can get custom base from crown, but is there such a thing as 5501 grade UH? They claim to use DuraSurf XT 5501, which I've never heard of. Sorry for the change of subject, this just makes me think of all the questionable claims i read on manufacturer websites.
i hope you weren't being sarcastic with reference to your comment on my 'you're wrong' statement; you told us to tell you were wrong, so i did.
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
good good. ya, it must be custom, I just mean I've never heard of anything being rated so high. I haven't looked into the material for a while and kinda forget what I'm talking about, but would be interested to see if it really is 5500 series... must be bombproof and fast as hell if it really is. expensive too.