Jack M Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 Sorry, I spoke too soon. The shape of the nose is also a result of redesigning the whole nose both in shape and lift in order to work in better harmony with the sidecut. Notice from this picture where the nose is actually cutting into the snow: http://www.jmphotocraft.com/JM06toeside.jpg It's quite past the end of the running length and well up into the upturn of the nose. This affects turn initiation and the carve. These new stubby/Kessler style noses act more like an extension of the sidecut when the board is tilted up. That way the nose doesn't fight the sidecut. You can feel this on turn initiation - it's quite smooth. Also during the carve, the nose doesn't plow as much. Very cool. If you built a nose this way and then stuck a traditional rounded or pointed nose silhouette out beyond that, you'd have quite a big nose that isn't really doing much. My board worked great all last year and never got hung up on the nose. I took it off the groomers too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 <del>It is purely to maximize running length.</del> <i>see my followup post</i>. My board is 170cm overall, 155cm running. A typical board with 155cm running length would be 175cm overall.bobdea is describing the effects of the decambered nose (camber stops well before sidecut ends) which has nothing to do with the stubby look of the nose. You could have a decambered nose with a traditional rounded or pointy style. I feel like the short nose makes more sense with a decambered nose because the geometry allows what in older models was more spread out is now two less distinct areas requiring less surface area to get the same goal accomplished. same thing happened with skis awhile back it just did not look as dramatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queequeg Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 Sorry, I spoke too soon. Also during the carve, the nose doesn't plow as much. Very cool. I haven't had the chance to try out any of the new stub-nozed boards but they always look to me like they are more likely to cut a finer line and rail through it more smoothly once up on edge (which probably contributes to the ride feeling damper). It seems to me that this quality would provide a similar benefit when dealing with irregular, bumped up snow ... it seems like the slimmer noze profile would probably slice through irregularities in the surface a lot more readily and with less deflection than an upturned nose - though I wonder if the softer nose would be more likely to get pushed around despite its lower profile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 If you built a nose this way and then stuck a traditional rounded or pointed nose silhouette out beyond that, you'd have quite a big nose that isn't really doing much. Exactely - it should just be there for a ride, until you need it, hitting the soft snow, a bit of pow, or a bump. It dosn't hurt having it and the board would look better (at least to me). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Exactely - it should just be there for a ride, until you need it, hitting the soft snow, a bit of pow, or a bump. It dosn't hurt having it and the board would look better (at least to me). We're not talking about freeride boards. :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 I haven't had the chance to try out any of the new stub-nozed boards but they always look to me like they are more likely to cut a finer line and rail through it more smoothly once up on edge (which probably contributes to the ride feeling damper). It seems to me that this quality would provide a similar benefit when dealing with irregular, bumped up snow ... it seems like the slimmer noze profile would probably slice through irregularities in the surface a lot more readily and with less deflection than an upturned nose - though I wonder if the softer nose would be more likely to get pushed around despite its lower profile. You could be right about that. I was pleasantly surprised at how well my board was able to masquerade as an All-Mtn board... which was my hope, and why I gave it a 170 length and 21cm waist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateW Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Twin Tail Technology You beat me to it. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Varsava Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 As usual I have a bit of info on the subject:D The nose lengths I am going to use this season are pretty much 3 different lengths 10 cm on Stubs, 14 cm on classics and 17 cm on AMs Testing has shown that when you get to 17, there is a bit of noticeable vibration but not enough to piss you off. 10 and 14 really are pretty much the same as the 10 is flipped up at a length far enough up that it rarely hooks into the snow. Of course in softer snow it will touch but seems not to make much difference as softer snow will not grab it as hard. As mentioned, with the required decamber on the noses which is generally 6mm this gives a boost to the nose before it actually gets to the nose so you can cheat a bit and go stubby. If anyone has ridden a square tail board backwards, you probably noticed that they are still quite capable of going over some decent sized bumps without catching so the stub design seems to be plenty for anything you will encounter in normal riding. I even ride my extremecarve in powder sometimes. Not ideal but not impossible by any means. Short is good, you can fit it in your small econobox and get to the hills cheaper and more often Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokkis Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Thanks Bruce, your comment confirms my believe/quess to "hammerhead" pros and cons. So i dont have need for those due i have long board bags ;) I've bee rather lookin nose end like on Spearhead for my next (next winter) AM board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shred Gruumer Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Why in fact it does look a lot like the X3!!!!! Which Bruce first dubbed the "proppellerator" or the "lunch Tray" as some called it during its coming out party at the ECES last year in Stowe... I rode it the most after that to finish out the season!! not quite a twin tip per say.. it was more of a hybrid BX was its intention... but what the heck.. ride it anyway ya want!! Your right Bruce.. these stubbies and X boards will never catch on.. they never work and no one will buy them!!! .................. The lunch tray in action at Stowe Right Said Shred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przemek/Brooklyn Posted September 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Hi Guys Thanks so much, i was expecting a lot of negative comments about graphic but this thread turned out to be very constructive to me. I knew that i wanted short board with maximum runing edge but now i understand better dynamics of the hammer nose and i am even more convinced that this is right direction. It is great!!!! Any thoughts about width? i am thinking to increase it to 24cm, maybe. What are the consequenses of wider waist in metal construction? how is torsional stiffnes? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 oh... dude? the graphics are 110% girly. but you've got the skills to pull it off, so nobody's giving you crap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex1230 Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 oh... dude? the graphics are 110% girly. but you've got the skills to pull it off, so nobody's giving you crap! Yeah, I've seen you ride - You could have graphics of pink unicorns with rainbows coming out ot their asses and you'd still look badass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Yeah, I've seen you ride - You could have graphics of pink unicorns with rainbows coming out ot their asses and you'd still look badass. OMG, thanks for the graphics idea! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Hi Guys Thanks so much, i was expecting a lot of negative comments about graphic but this thread turned out to be very constructive to me. I knew that i wanted short board with maximum runing edge but now i understand better dynamics of the hammer nose and i am even more convinced that this is right direction. It is great!!!! Any thoughts about width? i am thinking to increase it to 24cm, maybe. What are the consequenses of wider waist in metal construction? how is torsional stiffnes? Thanks if I go too wide it really starts to suck, for me, that's at about 22 cm. the biggest part of that seems linked to stiff boots/bindings. I could happily ride fairly wide boards with burton freecarves and burton raceplates but if I put cateks on the same board and used my af700s the board was next to unridable. A few others here have run into their width limit. Tex I think did as well. the graphics, I like that quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateW Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 To me, the right width is the one that matches the stance that I find most comfortable. I came down slowly, riding 25, 23, 21 cm boards, and settled on 19 as the sweet spot. Had a 17, but had mixed feelings about it. (Speaking of which - Bruce, did you get my email about paying full price for a second one? I came to terms with the fact that I just plain broke the first one all by myself. :) ) Narrower boards feel lighter under my feet. I doubt they really are much lighter, but it takes noticeably less effort to tip a skinny board on edge compared to a wider board. But stance comfort is still the thing that dictates width for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave ESPI Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Yeah, I've seen you ride - You could have graphics of pink unicorns with rainbows coming out ot their asses and you'd still look badass. I saw him in ONE pass as I was riding a lift up at his home mountain last year he was instructing at (on a SWOARD), and the conditions were gnarly, yet some how he managed to hang a nice drop over a cap lip into a smooth run. Roses? ha, paste a rainbow on it, and call him Jeff Gordon :p Its all good. Prz, I'd say since we are on the ICE COAST, design a good Boiler plate performer board, and we can beat the pants off any "perfect snow" riders anyday ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadBrad Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 One thing that hasn't been mentioned regarding the stub noses is a reduction in the polar moment of inertia. I don't know if it's significant, but it could at least help you quickly throw the board sideways if you need to and may result in a lighter feel overall. As far as widths, my sweet spot seems to be in the 19-20cm range for my mondo 26.5 boots. My narrowest board is a Madd 158 at 17.7cm and I love its light and lively feel. Stance angles are 60/57. My widest board is a 164 Prior 4WD at 21.4cm and it's a great all-mountain board but feels heavy and almost cumbersome in comparison. Stance angles are 54/51. I personally wouldn't want to go any wider than that. I recently ordered a new '09 WCR metal and some folks recommended that I get a wider custom width as that seems to be preferred by a lot of riders these days, but the stock 19.5cm sounded just right for me and I couldn't really afford the upcharge for a custom width anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groovastic Posted September 15, 2008 Report Share Posted September 15, 2008 Hi Jack I am not sure if I want to increase overall size I really don't need one more long board, however acording to Bruce runing edge does not end when camber ends but where round (top view) so this board running edge will be 145 at least even with 160 lenght. I need to confirm it with Bruce SCR went up to 13 becouse Bruce said that metal board can be bend easier. As I remember SG Race T 08 model had some 14 m radius at maybe 146 cm running length. I could be wrong, but as I remember, it rides Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.