Usually I'm more the kiteboard builder and build stuff like that:
Some years ago i already built a pair of skis which turned out OK. Not great, but I shred them a lot anyway and had a ton of fun. So since i got my hands on a pair of Idris skis last Friday i got infected with the ski building fever again and i would reeeeeeally appreciate if you guys could have a look on what I have drawn and let me know what do you think about it:
length: 1890mm
width: 151/125/131mm
Tip Rocker: raises 70mm on 430mm length
Tail Rocker: raises 35mm on 280mm length
flat camber
The idea was to create a touring ski for the big days. I come from a composite background and have a pretty good idea about the layup and everything - but not much experience with the shape.
For touring I would put a camber on the ski. makes skinning easier. I made a pair more or less like yours, dimension wise, last year. They turned out really light weight but I soon realised that the real weight when skinning uphill is the weight of the snow that gets on top of the ski. The wider the ski the heavier it gets. (it is still my favorite touring ski though, and I don't mind the extra effort on the way up as it is compensated on the way down)
thanks PTTR for your answer. I know i should probably put camber in there. But flat was actually already a compromise because i would have them made rockered all the way through... I have to see, it isn't an everyday ski anyway and I'm exactly like you. Optimize for the fun part - skiing not skinning
I plan to build them super lightweight as well. In my opinion lightweight isn't just an advantage when going uphill, it gives the ski a more nimble feel on the way down as well.
And by the way - is there any skitouring in denmark? I love to go there for Kitesurfing, but i guess it's not the best place for skiing?
I moved here many years ago from Sweden. I usually get 50 or so days a year on snow in other countries. Skiing is an expensive hobby when you live in a flat country without winters.
In my opinion a full rockerd ski is boring to ride. and if you plan on doing them super light weight I guess they will be soft too which means you will be able to force them into a rocker shape very easily even with a camber. I would build them with a rocker nose, maybe a small rocker tail and camber inbetween. If you plan on going backwards down the mountain, well then maybe add a little more rocker on the tail. We are all different, but I want camber in all my skis.
I kinda agree. But think of this. When looking at skis and checking the camber, What do we do? We set the skis base to base and squeeze them together with our fingers, right? So with just finger pressure we are able to flatten out the camber. Just think what body weight will do...
I may be totally wrong here but the camber will help account for the variations in the snow surface allowing to maintain snow contact. So a lightweight touring ski usually will be softer and to me the main benefit of camber is to maintain contact for climbing. I have a set that is flat with early rise tip and tail and it is fun to ski but climbing is much more of a pain unless you are by yourself and each climb is a new track (fresh snow).
ra
@ rockaukum
interesting point about the finger force... I will definitely built them with a little camber.
And they will be light (at least for the size), but not necessarily soft. But I think I will start a thread in the Journal and keep you guys up to date.
