Jack M

gear review section is in the works. for now you can post it in the carving community, and we'll move it when the time comes. thanks!

Nitro did that decades ago. Pretty sure it was called the Pyro. And I bet magnetraction might work, would be cool to try it on an alpine board.

this makes me smile.

Don't worry too much about facing totally forward - I give that advice to total newbies just to keep them from facing the toeside edge. As long as you're facing at least your binding angles, that's all that matters. 55/55 isn't too low. I'm mostly just facing my binding angles here:

I'm loving my Coiler Schtubby X2. 171cm, your choice of width, and either 13.2 or 14.2m sidecut. I'm glad I went 14.2, as the board turns a bit tighter than that number would imply. Donek Freecarve Metal 171 looks interesting too. And of course there's Prior's metal FLC 173.

Is that what they're doing on the PGS boards? I know that's what Bruce is doing with the VSR, but I thought the NSR and PGS boards were strictly increasing radius....? Prior, Donek, and F2 list their PGS boards as having 2 radii, with a longer one in back.

I'll say it's less dramatic and less important, but I wouldn't say it's not important at all. Splitting hairs here. Yeah, you're right about that. I agree it is now more spread out and further back from the nose.

I am inclined to agree, but at the same time obviously Kessler etc are using a clothoid for some reason. However I suspect that its performance can be effectively equaled by blended radii, which is part of what I want to find out in my review. Agreed. However for racing and high speed GS style freecarving, I'd say the increasing radius sidecuts are very important too. Less hook to the turn finish is a good thing at high speeds. I think perhaps it eliminates it (your "HLCA") altogether. I think the pressure may be evenly distributed along the whole length. Also, the decambered nose provides a significant amount of mechanical suspension. The nose simply carves over or through bumps that would upset a traditional nose.

it also looks like you could have some boot drag there. that can blow a carve if conditions are hard enough. you should probably fix that, and while you're at it, maybe experiment with binding angles that are closer to parallel.

I'm not even sure there is a HLCA at all anymore. To me it feels like the nose is simply slicing through the snow rather than plowing. It is, but don't think about it in terms of the board flat on your kitchen floor. Think about it angled up to about 60 degrees, carving in the snow. The shape of the sidecut, the whole decambered board, and the nose all fall in line. And then it is almost as if the nose doesn't even have an upturn. agreed. In addition to what ink said, I think taper has something to do with this too. Let's say the "taper angle" of the board is 5 degrees (WAG). Now imagine you're riding flat on your base, straight down the fall line. As soon as you tilt the board up on edge, it is instantly pointing 5 degrees away from the fall line.

hey just kidding man. were three winks not enough? :D cool. I think it's relevant to describe the maximum length of the edge that might be carving at any moment. ehhh.... I really don't think the effective edge gets any shorter as the carve gets deeper/harder/sharper/whatever. As long as your weight is anywhere close to the center, the whole edge should be in the snow, contributing to edge hold and turn shape. Of course sometimes that's not the case:

Man what do they put in the non-exported Molson up there?? ;) ;) ;) A 185cm board with a 150cm effective edge wouldn't be a very effective race tool, methinks. F2 and Donek list specs for effective edge that are longer than they would be on a old-school board. For example, F2's 183 is listed as 173cm effective. I strongly believe effective edge should be measured as widest point to widest point now: Putting my board on the ground and pressing the waist down to the floor, a piece of paper would slide down almost to the K: <img src="http://www.jmphotocraft.com/Kessler.JPG" height=400> If what I think you're saying was true, the sidecut wouldn't need to continue much beyond there. But it does, because very often the whole board is carving from widest point to widest point.

I think we agree here - I believe you're talking about an old style nose plowing and the new style slicing. I agree that happens on a hard floor, but I don't think it is representative of what happens while carving. The paper test is no longer relevant, and perhaps it never even was anyway. In practical use the board penetrates down into the snow, and the edge is carving from widest point to widest point. Therefore I believe "effective edge" should be measured from widest point to widest point. It's certainly what's happening in the photo above.

I completely disagree, look at the picture above. The snow is flying off the board way up at the corner of the nose. Yeah, but that's not a meaningful or relevant demonstration. It neglects the fact that the board digs down into the snow, often by several centimeters.

Am I reading this right? Are you suggesting that the effective edge (the length of edge contacting the snow, contributing to grip and carve) is less on a modern board? I don't think that is the case at all. The edge is buried in the snow right up to the "corner" of the nose. Check out BlueB's sig, and this picture of bschurman on his Coiler NSR (a modern board): The reason the decambered nose works so well is that now the gradual upturn of the nose blends better with the sidecut when the whole board is decambered in the turn. It works with the sidecut, where a traditional nose fights the sidecut. The difference is slice versus plow. Ultimately, the sidecut is now being designed in 3D. Sidecut, camber, and nose upturn were formerly considered 3 separate things. Therefore they were designed separately, without concern for how each one affects the other two. Now the sidecut, camber, and nose are considered one continuous shape. Kessler finally realized a lot more of the nose counts as "effective edge" than was previously thought. So I really don't think that a decambered nose results in less effective edge, actually I think it results in more.

I wonder if Jay Leno has his order in yet.

I wonder if Rain-X would work?

You didn't. It works surprisingly well in several ways. When you're bending the back of the board more than the front, like in the end of a turn, it makes sense to put a longer sidecut back there. And you can manipulate it in other ways too, it's almost like having two boards in one. I need to put more miles on mine before I can elaborate further, but I am a believer. yyz - someone pointed out here once that the difference between a radial sidecut and a parabolic sidecut is so slight that it can be destroyed by heavy-handed sharpening. So I think you could be right that the difference between a clothoid and a 2+ radius blend or other shapes could be insignificant. The interaction of all the 3 dimensional shapes of the board and the flex and materials matters most. When there is harmony between them, you'll have a good board.

There is your answer.

I wouldn't know, but... maybe in Nastar, but I'd be extremely surprised if this were true at the wc level. A skier has too many mechanical advantages.

Didn't you know? If someone is being rude, if you call them on it, YOU are the rude one. Like, duh! ;)

Was at Sugarloaf this weekend, and I guess it was mostly condo owners because I've never seen so many Kjus jackets!! I want to walk up to these people and ask them "Seriously??" http://www.stbernardsports.com/products2.cfm/id/1653/utm_source/googlebase/utm_medium/comparisonshopping I mean there can't possibly be $1290 worth of performance in there, can there? I'm all for looking good and splurging every now and then, but this seems over the top to me.

Absolutely true. Case in point, my sister-in-law. She sends out the worst photos of her kids taken with her Nikon D70. Poorly exposed, wrong white balance, bad lighting, bad composition, blecch. The one thing she knows how to do is get an in-focus shot. Benno - great stuff! Are all those shots on Velvia? Every now and then I take a break from my 5DII and shoot an old Pentax K1000. BobD - how bout a Leica then? After you win the lottery of course. Not really related, but a quote I like from a photography forum: "amateurs worry about sharpness, professionals worry about sales, photographers worry about light". Not that I'm photography genius, but it makes me chuckle.

<img src="http://www.carvingcup.com/ATLETI/FOTO_BONDONE_1000/IR4L4619.jpg" width=600> I hear what you're saying BobD and you may be on to something, but I'd say the above two pictures look very similar technique-wise, and I'd say the GS racer is in a more balanced position. But man I still cannot get my head around the sight of a skier without poles! It just looks so politicallyincorrectslur to me, lol.

I swear I've seen a guy who looked like he was doing it. Eric Schneider, not that I think anyone here but Beckman knows that name. I think a big part of it is they have a safety net (another ski) and we don't. Skiers can recover a lot better and faster than us. They can also "recover" before it even looks like anything has gone wrong - I think a good skier is continually performing "traction control", and is standing more on the ski with the better edge hold at any given instant. Or at least they have that option. They simply have (roughly) twice as much edge to use, and an infinitely larger base area upon which to balance. It is easier for a skier to decouple their c.o.g. from uneven terrain.