Ski Builders Forum

141-109-129 38 cm tip taper 7cm rise 24~meter turn radius traditional tail.
in bounds ski ~150cm contact length. 187cm length.
Thoughts?

Looks pretty good. Tip rocker dims?
24m radius getting towards a charger.
Pointy nose.

Looks good to me.
Is there a radius side cut/bias set back (or what it's called in snocad??)
maybe it's just the picture that makes it look a little behind the center...?

Yes the sidecut is setback about 5cm or so from center. the real shape I have is on center but the tip transition looks harsh, so I did this one setback a bit, I think thats how I will cut it.
The rocker is about 38cm long with a slow rise but not an even ellipse, more like the s7 rocker, a bit harsh perhaps, we will see. This is for a customer!

Looks good. Tail with seems a little light to me, but I'm a snowboard guy.

Looks good to me. That should tear up just about anything.

waaaaaaaaay too narrow.

For starters, 140/110/130'ish is my favorite all-round ski dimension for a soft'ish snow ski. If you match the flex properly, it'll float surfy turns in light snow, yet will still edge reasonably well when laid over on firmer snow. It's a little wide for much more than a few chargin' runs on hard groomers (you mentioned 'in bounds'), and if the flex is matched well for the width, the ski would be a bit soft for holding an edge very well if the snow surface is very firm. For my ideal in-bounds quiver of two, one pair would be a 140/110/130 with a 'medium' flex, and the other pair would be 15 to 20mm narrower with a quite 'firm' flex (to save on the knee strain of keeping a wider ski on a hard edge).

The thing that stands out the most to me with your proposed design is the length of the tip rocker. 380mm moves the 'sweet spot' quite far back, which really compromises your optimal binding mount position, in that it places the waist of the ski too much toward the tail. I'm not sure if the widest part of your tip is also at 380mm, but for a soft'sh snow ski, I'd suggest that you keep the two points relatively close to one another in order to limit the rocker from grabbing when the ski is put on edge in manky snow. Without adding some tail rocker to offset the longer tip rocker length, it's my experience that about 280mm is plenty of tip rocker on a flat tailed ski, and that any more that 280 creates too many binding placement issues, while adding a lot of forward swing weight that doesn't give you much in the way of performance payback. If you really want a ski with 380mm of tip rocker (for a more dedicated soft snow ski), adding a little tail rocker (and keeping the widest point of the tail near the rear contact point), will give you a much more balanced and better performing ski... for softer snow. For a really good all round ski, I'd just recommend shortening up the tip rocker length on the design you already have, which will move the waist forward where it's more ideal in terms of binding placement, and places the skier in a more balanced position on the ski.

There's a lot of other factors and variations that I'm sure you've factored in (like specific longitudinal flex properties, skier style, etc.), and without knowing what type of in-bound conditions this ski is being built for (deep off piste, packed groomed, mixing it up), I'll stop here. It'll be interesting to see how your final design turns out.

Regards,

G-man

doughboyshredder wrote:waaaaaaaaay too narrow.

+1