Application of heat (but not too much) has orked for me in the past too.
It's no fun hen they break though
cockayne
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
well boys, time for an update!
tried the new edges - and the new base - and the new topsheet of course. pretty much the same shap as the cockayne, but because of the more heavy duty hardcore 2mm edges the shape got 2mm wider. then i tried to cut the base material to shape with a sharp knife instead of a router: bad idea! as i started i thought "oh well, let`s take a new blade for the cutter to be sure that it gets as precise as possible. but let`s be careful to not cut yourself". not 2min later the blade stuck in my finger. but the good thing about the new blade was, that there was deep but pretty accurate cut which is said to heal fast.
anyway. conclusion nr.1 : cutting the base with a router is much messier than with a knife, but less dangerous and more accurat. the base didn`t came out bad, but there were some minor irregularities of about 0,5mm in some areas.
then because of the transparent topsheet i had to think about grafics again. first of all i wante to use some leftover cloth, but then suddenly it crossed my mind while glancing through a post from alexisg1. an it hit me like lightning.
layup was the same procedure as always. oh yeh, big difference between the cockayne and gunnar, as i called the new project: on gunnar i used a fully ash core instead of the fir core as on the cockaynes. composites more or less the same quantity. endresult: cockayne 2200g per ski (and i wasn`t that happy with it) gunnar 2600g per ski! WTF! i mean...it`s in the range of the heaviest facory skis, the head monster, 4front ehp and dynastar xxl.... but 2600g per ski are truly massively heavy... got to see how to fix this issue. but it seems like the 400g are the price for a bulletproof construction.
during pressing of the woodcore i suffered some minor shifting, so the result looks awesome, but there are some "serious" imperfectnesses.
in the last few weeks/months i was thinking very hard about duckstance and such stuff related to ergonomics, natural stance etc. as these boards are not perfect i decided to try it out and mount them duck - there are no good informations about this topic available, so i`ll find out how it is to ride by myself.
so, long text, small sense, let`s add some pictures!
this one shows the best how glossy and insanely shiny, evenly etc. the surface is. in real it looks awesome, the glance of the carbon combined with aramid.
here`s one of how i mounted the binding and the shape in general...
funny thing: same problem as on the cockaynes - the brakes just don`t fit. no way! as i said, already on the cockaynes brakebending was a pain in the ass with the fritschi freerides. now with the markers it was mission impossible: i think because these brakes already were a bit wider, the dimensioned them pretty strong and tough. just no chance of bending them! i even tried to heat them, without any success. so i was that frustrated at the end that i took the angle grinder and cut away those bastards. an other advantage of duckstance: one brake fits without bending
and to be honest...i think one brake is enough on the slopes it should get as much hold as if i had bent the second one. on the bent one there would just have remained about 1cm to stick into the snow. and in powder... well...the surface of these boards is that big, i`m screwed anyway if i get ejected
and now i have to go to bed so that i can get up early tomorrow. there are some skis to be tested! i`ll write more about my thoughts about duckstance after i did some first runs on them. and i`ll explain the name also a little further.
tried the new edges - and the new base - and the new topsheet of course. pretty much the same shap as the cockayne, but because of the more heavy duty hardcore 2mm edges the shape got 2mm wider. then i tried to cut the base material to shape with a sharp knife instead of a router: bad idea! as i started i thought "oh well, let`s take a new blade for the cutter to be sure that it gets as precise as possible. but let`s be careful to not cut yourself". not 2min later the blade stuck in my finger. but the good thing about the new blade was, that there was deep but pretty accurate cut which is said to heal fast.
anyway. conclusion nr.1 : cutting the base with a router is much messier than with a knife, but less dangerous and more accurat. the base didn`t came out bad, but there were some minor irregularities of about 0,5mm in some areas.
then because of the transparent topsheet i had to think about grafics again. first of all i wante to use some leftover cloth, but then suddenly it crossed my mind while glancing through a post from alexisg1. an it hit me like lightning.
layup was the same procedure as always. oh yeh, big difference between the cockayne and gunnar, as i called the new project: on gunnar i used a fully ash core instead of the fir core as on the cockaynes. composites more or less the same quantity. endresult: cockayne 2200g per ski (and i wasn`t that happy with it) gunnar 2600g per ski! WTF! i mean...it`s in the range of the heaviest facory skis, the head monster, 4front ehp and dynastar xxl.... but 2600g per ski are truly massively heavy... got to see how to fix this issue. but it seems like the 400g are the price for a bulletproof construction.
during pressing of the woodcore i suffered some minor shifting, so the result looks awesome, but there are some "serious" imperfectnesses.
in the last few weeks/months i was thinking very hard about duckstance and such stuff related to ergonomics, natural stance etc. as these boards are not perfect i decided to try it out and mount them duck - there are no good informations about this topic available, so i`ll find out how it is to ride by myself.
so, long text, small sense, let`s add some pictures!
this one shows the best how glossy and insanely shiny, evenly etc. the surface is. in real it looks awesome, the glance of the carbon combined with aramid.
here`s one of how i mounted the binding and the shape in general...
funny thing: same problem as on the cockaynes - the brakes just don`t fit. no way! as i said, already on the cockaynes brakebending was a pain in the ass with the fritschi freerides. now with the markers it was mission impossible: i think because these brakes already were a bit wider, the dimensioned them pretty strong and tough. just no chance of bending them! i even tried to heat them, without any success. so i was that frustrated at the end that i took the angle grinder and cut away those bastards. an other advantage of duckstance: one brake fits without bending
and to be honest...i think one brake is enough on the slopes it should get as much hold as if i had bent the second one. on the bent one there would just have remained about 1cm to stick into the snow. and in powder... well...the surface of these boards is that big, i`m screwed anyway if i get ejected and now i have to go to bed so that i can get up early tomorrow. there are some skis to be tested! i`ll write more about my thoughts about duckstance after i did some first runs on them. and i`ll explain the name also a little further.
plywood freeride industries - go ply, ride wood!
hi plywood,
so you've been making the same ski as the cockayne, but you made a full ash core and used some carbon-kevlar fibers right ?
The reason why we used these fibers last year (despite their price...) is that it is lighter than glass for the same level of performance, and also that, according to our "guide", it brings the ski a better contact with the snow...I can't tell if there i really a difference with glass, but for a 170 cm long ski with 140-110-120, the skiare only 1,6kilos each.
Of course, cconsidering that we were using these fibers, I think the FG we used was only 220 g/m² !
Moreover, on the top we did not use any topsheet, but microfiber, which is very fine glassfiber. I can tell the result is amazing, and it's probablly much lighter than a topsheet. However we cannot tell about durability.
I guess your skis are gonna be monster of rigidity...i can't wait for your feedback as I am actually haping my future cores right now
the guy that gave us its technolog, ideas and materials now do skis...
http://www.phenix-snowboards.com/
For those wha haven't seen them, he's got also a bunch of very interesting manufacturing vids... (and yes, tip and tail are formed after pressing...)
so you've been making the same ski as the cockayne, but you made a full ash core and used some carbon-kevlar fibers right ?
The reason why we used these fibers last year (despite their price...) is that it is lighter than glass for the same level of performance, and also that, according to our "guide", it brings the ski a better contact with the snow...I can't tell if there i really a difference with glass, but for a 170 cm long ski with 140-110-120, the skiare only 1,6kilos each.
Of course, cconsidering that we were using these fibers, I think the FG we used was only 220 g/m² !
Moreover, on the top we did not use any topsheet, but microfiber, which is very fine glassfiber. I can tell the result is amazing, and it's probablly much lighter than a topsheet. However we cannot tell about durability.
I guess your skis are gonna be monster of rigidity...i can't wait for your feedback as I am actually haping my future cores right now
the guy that gave us its technolog, ideas and materials now do skis...
http://www.phenix-snowboards.com/
For those wha haven't seen them, he's got also a bunch of very interesting manufacturing vids... (and yes, tip and tail are formed after pressing...)
Are those carbon torsion strips in the tip/tail? if so how well did they stiffen it up?
Top sheet looks rad.
For duck stance . . . The volkl sanouks had a angle gague for mounting them duck but I dont know anyone who ever tried mounting them angled. Id like to hear how they ride. What angle did you mount them at?
Top sheet looks rad.
For duck stance . . . The volkl sanouks had a angle gague for mounting them duck but I dont know anyone who ever tried mounting them angled. Id like to hear how they ride. What angle did you mount them at?
Brian
@alexisg1: yep, i toop the same template for the base, just cut out the thicker base and the thicker edges. i used 1sheet unidirectional fibreglass 220g and one biaxial 308g under the core, another biaxial above the core, some carbon strings and the carbon-kevlar-hybrid tissue. and some reinforcements in tip, tail and under the binding.
i mainly used the hybrid because of its cool look seriously, it looks awesome and at the same time it prevents some mechanical strenght and properties. so i have a sweet "grafic layer" and a technical fibre united in one tissue. so there was of course a little thought about weight in using it.
they`re stiff...but not too stiff. i somehow like them how they are, i lack of comparison to the stiffness to other skis, but they`re the stiffest skis i made so far. but they still flex nicely when hold with one hand on the tip and pushed with the other in the middle.
and btw thanks for the link! i remember having seen a video of this guy once, but forgot his site!
@three31: yep, carbon torsion strips. my philosophy behind this is...if i build such mounstrously wide skis, why shouldn`t i take advantage of snowboard technology?! and there it is very common to use such carbon strips for torsional forces. i`m not that sure if i used them in the best way. i mean, they do it like i did on snowboards, but maybe the results would get better if i put them between base and core, and not on the upper side - carbon is better for tension. i`ve got the feeling that they do have an impact on torsional stiffness, but it`s difficult to tell how much it stiffens up the ski. cause it has not just a torsional impact, but also a longitudinal one...
and now....
duckstance
i mounted the bindings 3° duck on each side, shifted around the centermark. i did several "experiments" trying to elaborate how duck i stand. so i stood for maybe 2h back at home in my skiing boots, walked, stood still, measured the angle and such stuff. the angles ranged between 3,5° and 4° but i decided to go with 3°. basing on fischer soma boots i had the feeling that the angle there is relatively small - otherwise they would get some problems with the limited space in a skiing boot. and i didn`t wanted to go too rad for my first attempt.
and now for the testing. don`t ask me what went wrong...but somehow i managed to screw in the binding too narrow so that my boots didn`t fit in. by shifting the heelpart as far back as possible i managed to get in...so i was some sort of lucky. but really - how stopid do you have to be to not check the binding before mounting it! anyway, i just can blame myself, stopid ass i guess i was too excited about the skis and just wanted to get them on snow as quickly as possible...
because of this stopidness i didn`t fully trust the binding and didn`t rip that hard. so i just can give you my first impressions of duckstance. it feels different! i mean, 3° sounds not that much, but the difference is huge. i had some problems getting into it at the beginning. let`s talk about slideturns (the ones not carved, don`t know how to call em): normally when turnin my uphill leg is bent, the downhill leg is straight and i`m leaning a little in. now with duckstance if you push the uphill ski forward and bend the knee you automatically get pressure on your toes and by this on the edges of the uphill ski. at first this is a little strange because with normal mounted skis i`m used to have all the pressure on the downhill ski. duckstance makes you distribue your weight more evenly on both skis.
the second thing is connected with this weight distribution. i had some difficulties with finding the "new stance". maybe described best as "where to put your center of gravity". at first i had reverse, but then it got better. it felt like i had to place my center more forwards than without duck. like maybe 2/3 on the toes on the downhill ski and 1/3 on the uphill ski, the centre on the same height as the toes of the downhill ski. while with normal mount i felt more like my centre is evenly distribute over the whole foot on the downhillski. difficult to describe.
but in conclusion i felt like having more power and more control in slided turns. it`s wicked for the first few runs, but you get used to it quickly. an other funny thing i recogniced: on all previous skis i suffered some chattering when sliding and putting too much pressure on the edges. the "lose grip, gip, lose grip"-kind of evil vibrations that bring you to fall. not so on these boards. it has to do something with the stance, because on the cockaynes i got that problem too. i can imagine that because the binding controls more "surface" of the ski and goes from one side to the other it could have a positive impact on this sideways chattering.
in general i had more control over the ski. when skiing straight i previously had problems keeping the wide and rockered boards straight. the tended to swerve quite easily. not so with duck. i was pretty comfortable at higher speeds (even if i didn`t trust the binding).
now for carving: i didn`t fully get the point there so far. if i distribued my weight on both skis as on slided turns the uphill ski started to grip as the downhill didn`t.... which really really sucks. and as i tried to carve as i usually did the downhill ski didn`t grip that much as normally. it went better as i leaned as forward as possible and put all my weight on the downhillski and on the big toe. but i`m still not that used to it.
so in conclusion i had to lean forward more than usual. maybe i`ll reduce the setback of the binding which actually is pretty freeride oriented - 70mm. it is somehow logical that the weight gets more distributed on both skis with duck. and it`s also logical that you have less pressure on the downhillski. i`ll ride them as i mounted them to see if i get used to it, or if i had to change something. i could imagine that shifting the bindings more to the inside edge could may have a positive effect and "gain" some pressure on the downhill ski.
but as always - try and error. over all it feels better than normal!
i mainly used the hybrid because of its cool look
seriously, it looks awesome and at the same time it prevents some mechanical strenght and properties. so i have a sweet "grafic layer" and a technical fibre united in one tissue. so there was of course a little thought about weight in using it.they`re stiff...but not too stiff. i somehow like them how they are, i lack of comparison to the stiffness to other skis, but they`re the stiffest skis i made so far. but they still flex nicely when hold with one hand on the tip and pushed with the other in the middle.
and btw thanks for the link! i remember having seen a video of this guy once, but forgot his site!
@three31: yep, carbon torsion strips. my philosophy behind this is...if i build such mounstrously wide skis, why shouldn`t i take advantage of snowboard technology?! and there it is very common to use such carbon strips for torsional forces. i`m not that sure if i used them in the best way. i mean, they do it like i did on snowboards, but maybe the results would get better if i put them between base and core, and not on the upper side - carbon is better for tension. i`ve got the feeling that they do have an impact on torsional stiffness, but it`s difficult to tell how much it stiffens up the ski. cause it has not just a torsional impact, but also a longitudinal one...
and now....
duckstance
i mounted the bindings 3° duck on each side, shifted around the centermark. i did several "experiments" trying to elaborate how duck i stand. so i stood for maybe 2h back at home in my skiing boots, walked, stood still, measured the angle and such stuff. the angles ranged between 3,5° and 4° but i decided to go with 3°. basing on fischer soma boots i had the feeling that the angle there is relatively small - otherwise they would get some problems with the limited space in a skiing boot. and i didn`t wanted to go too rad for my first attempt.
and now for the testing. don`t ask me what went wrong...but somehow i managed to screw in the binding too narrow so that my boots didn`t fit in. by shifting the heelpart as far back as possible i managed to get in...so i was some sort of lucky. but really - how stopid do you have to be to not check the binding before mounting it! anyway, i just can blame myself, stopid ass
i guess i was too excited about the skis and just wanted to get them on snow as quickly as possible...because of this stopidness i didn`t fully trust the binding and didn`t rip that hard. so i just can give you my first impressions of duckstance. it feels different! i mean, 3° sounds not that much, but the difference is huge. i had some problems getting into it at the beginning. let`s talk about slideturns (the ones not carved, don`t know how to call em): normally when turnin my uphill leg is bent, the downhill leg is straight and i`m leaning a little in. now with duckstance if you push the uphill ski forward and bend the knee you automatically get pressure on your toes and by this on the edges of the uphill ski. at first this is a little strange because with normal mounted skis i`m used to have all the pressure on the downhill ski. duckstance makes you distribue your weight more evenly on both skis.
the second thing is connected with this weight distribution. i had some difficulties with finding the "new stance". maybe described best as "where to put your center of gravity". at first i had reverse, but then it got better. it felt like i had to place my center more forwards than without duck. like maybe 2/3 on the toes on the downhill ski and 1/3 on the uphill ski, the centre on the same height as the toes of the downhill ski. while with normal mount i felt more like my centre is evenly distribute over the whole foot on the downhillski. difficult to describe.
but in conclusion i felt like having more power and more control in slided turns. it`s wicked for the first few runs, but you get used to it quickly. an other funny thing i recogniced: on all previous skis i suffered some chattering when sliding and putting too much pressure on the edges. the "lose grip, gip, lose grip"-kind of evil vibrations that bring you to fall. not so on these boards. it has to do something with the stance, because on the cockaynes i got that problem too. i can imagine that because the binding controls more "surface" of the ski and goes from one side to the other it could have a positive impact on this sideways chattering.
in general i had more control over the ski. when skiing straight i previously had problems keeping the wide and rockered boards straight. the tended to swerve quite easily. not so with duck. i was pretty comfortable at higher speeds (even if i didn`t trust the binding).
now for carving: i didn`t fully get the point there so far. if i distribued my weight on both skis as on slided turns the uphill ski started to grip as the downhill didn`t.... which really really sucks. and as i tried to carve as i usually did the downhill ski didn`t grip that much as normally. it went better as i leaned as forward as possible and put all my weight on the downhillski and on the big toe. but i`m still not that used to it.
so in conclusion i had to lean forward more than usual. maybe i`ll reduce the setback of the binding which actually is pretty freeride oriented - 70mm. it is somehow logical that the weight gets more distributed on both skis with duck. and it`s also logical that you have less pressure on the downhillski. i`ll ride them as i mounted them to see if i get used to it, or if i had to change something. i could imagine that shifting the bindings more to the inside edge could may have a positive effect and "gain" some pressure on the downhill ski.
but as always - try and error. over all it feels better than normal!
plywood freeride industries - go ply, ride wood!
I did more or less the same experiment, and I ended up also by choosing a somehow smaller angle than my actual stance.plywood wrote:.... duckstance
i mounted the bindings 3° duck on each side, shifted around the centermark. i did several "experiments" trying to elaborate how duck i stand. so i stood for maybe 2h back at home in my skiing boots, walked, stood still, measured the angle and such stuff. the angles ranged between 3,5° and 4° but i decided to go with 3°. .... and i didn`t wanted to go too rad for my first attempt.
I will try them when I will be back for Christmas.
I mounted them tele, no size problems...plywood wrote:.... but somehow i managed to screw in the binding too narrow so that my boots didn`t fit in. by shifting the heelpart as far back as possible i managed to get in....
Regarding your impressions, thanks a lot, it was very interesting to read it.
It looks very promising: in off piste skiing carving is not that usefull, but having more control and pressure can be quite interesting.
I wonder how it will be with tele bindings. Ah, I mounted them duck stance on reverse sidecut skis (no carving there).
with what angle did you came up?
tele could be interesting with duck as it "twists" the boot out during a turn. i`m not into tele, but i think this maybe could be an either cool and useful effect or it totally screws the ride
big advantage of tele, no size problems. i still didn`t figure out why i screwed them too narrow... strange thing. because i measured everything on the template i had - so the template has to be wrong...but how?! anyway. some redrilling to be done.
can`t wait to try them in pow. if i`m lucky i can ski in two days because at the moment it started snowing. the problem we have very changing weather, today snow down to 600m, tomorrow rain up to 1400...
one further advantage of duckstance i forgot to mention: on all my previous skis after a few runs/days there were scratches, cracks and chips in mainly the tip. they came from accidentially bashing the skis together and injuring one with the edges of the other. not one single damage with duck - i never hit my skis together! also a sign for the gained control and stability with duck.
tele could be interesting with duck as it "twists" the boot out during a turn. i`m not into tele, but i think this maybe could be an either cool and useful effect or it totally screws the ride
big advantage of tele, no size problems. i still didn`t figure out why i screwed them too narrow... strange thing. because i measured everything on the template i had - so the template has to be wrong...but how?! anyway. some redrilling to be done.
can`t wait to try them in pow. if i`m lucky i can ski in two days because at the moment it started snowing. the problem we have very changing weather, today snow down to 600m, tomorrow rain up to 1400...
one further advantage of duckstance i forgot to mention: on all my previous skis after a few runs/days there were scratches, cracks and chips in mainly the tip. they came from accidentially bashing the skis together and injuring one with the edges of the other. not one single damage with duck - i never hit my skis together! also a sign for the gained control and stability with duck.
plywood freeride industries - go ply, ride wood!
I could finally test them.
Last summer I built a pair of reverse camber-sidecut skis (105-108-96) and I mounted the binding with duck stance: 3.7 degrees, rotation point is 10 cm from the 3 pin line.
I tested the skis 10 days ago on hard snow (Macugnaga), and few days ago in powder (Myoko Kogen and Akakura Onsen).
The boots-bindings-skis arrangement looks quite wired, especially because the heels are so much off the central line, but as I skied them, I felt no difference in balance. Indeed I could apply more pressure on the edge of the inner skis. Usually I feel more natural to ski such wide boards in alpine mode, but in this case, it was fine to make tele turns too.
Skis were still a bit unstable on hard snow, but the reason is the reverse camber: contact lenght is less than 80 cm...
Duck stance can really increase edge hold on wide skis. I would say that 5 or 6 degrees would be even better: in that case, a 100 mm ski would probably have the same edge hold than a 80/85mm ski.
Last summer I built a pair of reverse camber-sidecut skis (105-108-96) and I mounted the binding with duck stance: 3.7 degrees, rotation point is 10 cm from the 3 pin line.
I tested the skis 10 days ago on hard snow (Macugnaga), and few days ago in powder (Myoko Kogen and Akakura Onsen).
The boots-bindings-skis arrangement looks quite wired, especially because the heels are so much off the central line, but as I skied them, I felt no difference in balance. Indeed I could apply more pressure on the edge of the inner skis. Usually I feel more natural to ski such wide boards in alpine mode, but in this case, it was fine to make tele turns too.
Skis were still a bit unstable on hard snow, but the reason is the reverse camber: contact lenght is less than 80 cm...
Duck stance can really increase edge hold on wide skis. I would say that 5 or 6 degrees would be even better: in that case, a 100 mm ski would probably have the same edge hold than a 80/85mm ski.
Last edited by davide on Mon Jan 14, 2008 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
as soon as i have time i`m going to write a longer review about all my thoughts on duckstance. as i may have mentioned before i had problems finding informations about "natural stance" and noone could really help me out of this. orthopedists were not that much into dynamical forces and too much focused on feet only etc.
so it happened that i got an opportunity to talk with hans-martin heierling from davos. he`s one of the guys that pushed carving back in the early days and did a lot of experiments, so he has a huge experience and knowledge. his focus is basically on skiboots and everything linked to stance and biomechanic flows and such stuff and a lot of skiracers get their boots fitted by heierling. we didn`t spoke very long, but for a first time it gave me quite a lot of new inputs, insights and further knowledge.
but practically i had absolutely no time to write more, but there is definately more to come!
so it happened that i got an opportunity to talk with hans-martin heierling from davos. he`s one of the guys that pushed carving back in the early days and did a lot of experiments, so he has a huge experience and knowledge. his focus is basically on skiboots and everything linked to stance and biomechanic flows and such stuff and a lot of skiracers get their boots fitted by heierling. we didn`t spoke very long, but for a first time it gave me quite a lot of new inputs, insights and further knowledge.
but practically i had absolutely no time to write more, but there is definately more to come!
plywood freeride industries - go ply, ride wood!