BlueB Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 SG race boards have subtle/slight rocker in the tip as well as Kessler and some Colier boards, and many others. Yup, metal Priors too, and my Virus Vampire - quite a bit. Many modern glass boards have it too, to a bit lesser extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buell Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Don't naysay until you ride a rocker board first. The first turn I made on a skate banana last season, my first impression was......Oh my this technology was make the perfect race board for steep, icey SL racing. There are reports of many of the top World Cup racers testing boards with full rocker for icey courses.For buffed flatter terrain I think I'd still prefer a board with camber, but when it's steep and firm I'd take a rocker. The above quote is from another thread a couple of weeks ago. From our testing with the K2 Gyrator (slight camber between the feet, lots of rocker in the nose and tail) I would say that rocker definitely deserves more testing and an open mind. The Gyrator is really meant for powder and has more rocker than I think a groomer board should have. The nose and tail do not fully engage until the board is very high on edge. It may not be an end all for many people, but three people have ridden our 162 K2 Gyrator and all three have found it very easy to carve. While it does not track straight as well as a fully cambered softy carver, none of us have found truly significant or dangerous stability issues running flat on groomers. It goes down cat tracks just fine, it traverses just fine. All three of us consider it an amazingly fun and easy board to ride. In fact, today we got to watch someone just learning to carve get on the K2 and start carving many of his turns immediately. It starts to carve at very slow speeds and that was an immense help. It put a giant smile on my friend's face for the rest of the day. Stability was not an issue. I recently made some groomer turns on a Lib Tech banana rocker Snow Mullet. This board has rocker between the feet and is flat from the bindings to the nose and the tail. This board carved like it was on rails. Better than my Prior MFR. On this design, when going straight, the full running length makes contact with the snow and it tracks like any cambered softy carver. There is a lot of refinement that still needs to be done. The soft boot board companies are already doing a lot of work on this. Compared to the cambered boards, the flex patterns are different and figuring out rebound is an issue. Even the rocker / camber patterns still need to be resolved based on the fact that most companies seem to still have their own version. Interesting stuff. Buell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 re: Donek's illustrations, I always thought rocker was reverse camber....? I recently made some groomer turns on a Lib Tech banana rocker Snow Mullet. This board has rocker between the feet and is flat from the bindings to the nose and the tail. This board carved like it was on rails. Better than my Prior MFR. Is that a result of the reverse camber, or the Magne-Traction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buell Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Is that a result of the reverse camber, or the Magne-Traction? I have no idea. Without changing only one variable at a time, I cannot answer what was doing it. The flex pattern was also different than many soft boot boards. Stiff in the nose, soft in the middle, and stiff in the tail. The banana rocker in the Lib Tech certainly did not seem to hurt its performance and it is an example of a rocker shape that puts the nose and tail on the snow when riding flat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Most boards "turn up" at the front, so I contend that they all have rocker. Therefore it's not a hugely useful concept here. As far as the snow mullet, that's interesting. I only rode it off piste. If it's a banana shape, surely that puts the nose and tail *off* the snow if you stand on it, or did I miss something there? Obviously the nose and tail of a conventionally cambered board rest on the snow also. I definitely missed something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Most boards "turn up" at the front, so I contend that they all have rocker. Therefore it's not a hugely useful concept here. Actually it is. My Coiler has this "decambered nose" thing going on, and the initation is smoother and the nose seems to slice more than plow. It makes sense, because the upturn of the nose is better blended with the sidecut this way. This is important because in real life when the board is carving, the edge is engaged in the snow quite far up the nose. The shape of the nose effectively becomes part of the sidecut. As far as the snow mullet, that's interesting. I only rode it off piste. If it's a banana shape, surely that puts the nose and tail *off* the snow if you stand on it, or did I miss something there? The nose and tail are on the snow. I fondled one of these boards in the store the other day. The reverse camber is only between the bindings. From the bindings to the tips is flat. So when you stand on the board it "de-cambers" and the ends of the board are on the ground. There's just not much pressure on them. Interesting idea. Probably great for freestyle, because when you shift your weight to one foot, the other end of the board naturally comes off the ground. Lib-Tech themselves seem to admit that there would be less edge hold at the ends of the board, so they add Magne-Traction to make up for that. their info: http://www.lib-tech.com/banana/index.html (see, they're calling reverse camber "rocker" too. that's how I've always heard it used.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCrimson Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Actually it is. My Coiler has this "decambered nose" thing going on Haven't ridden to the point where I can discern the difference that the nose makes, but it's definitely cool. Mine has a good 8 inches before the tip rise that sits flat on the snow, then a huge camber that apexes between the feet. Is it necessary to have stance setback for this? Everything on my board is biased rearward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Is it necessary to have stance setback for this? Everything on my board is biased rearward. nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svr Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 After having ridden my rockered Tinkler and a couple more rockered prototypes, I have found that it is actually better to ride centered on the board even if you have set-back built into the board, it will ride really squirrelly if you are anything but centered. Also, on the prototypes, it was necassary to make the tip and tail core both torsionally and laterally stiffer to compensate for the rocker. I am not sure that rocker works well on hard pack, but on groomers and in powder it has been a lot of fun for me. I am not giving up my cambered boards, but my rockered boards are a fun and different style of ride that balances my quiver well. cheers, sandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Thanks for the write up Sean, glad you are taking a look at the ideas floating around out there. I still think for some racing applications and some other carving applications reverse camber is worth looking into more. You admitted that on edge the board felt good, just in the transitions it was uneasy. How much do PGS racers base even touch the ground? Maybe 30 feet so stability when flat isn't much of a concern. Also beginner carvers. Put it on edge and it carves, simple. Ice, you don't need to put extra pressure to get the board to bend, so it would be more forgiving on ice. Standard crusing around Buttermilk, probably less than idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Soooo, howcome one isn't allowed to predict it won't work without riding it, but one is allowed to predict it will work without riding it? What's the diff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Varsava Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Thanks for the write up Sean, glad you are taking a look at the ideas floating around out there.I still think for some racing applications and some other carving applications reverse camber is worth looking into more. You admitted that on edge the board felt good, just in the transitions it was uneasy. How much do PGS racers base even touch the ground? Maybe 30 feet so stability when flat isn't much of a concern. Also beginner carvers. Put it on edge and it carves, simple. Ice, you don't need to put extra pressure to get the board to bend, so it would be more forgiving on ice. Standard crusing around Buttermilk, probably less than idea. Phil: I saw a modern race board done with reverse that started almost at the bindings and all who tried it did not like it. I saw a guy riding it and it looked very bouncy and he was struggling a bit. This is real on hill info and riders who pretty much have a good idea of whats going on. That was enough for me to put it on the permanent back burner BV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Cool at least it was actually tried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Soooo, howcome one isn't allowed to predict it won't work without riding it, but one is allowed to predict it will work without riding it? What's the diff? I'm taking my predictions based on me ACTUALLY riding a few different reverse cambered softboot boards. Plus I've always stated that I feel it COULD work. You always implied that it WOULD not work. There a differance. When someone has a reverse cambered board and they are saying "hey I got a chance to ride it today and I liked it" then you came along and said it's crap and has no real applications while never riding anything similar. That's the diff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm taking my predictions based on me ACTUALLY riding a few different reverse cambered softboot boards. ah, I missed or forgot that. Was it a full-rocker board like the Tinkler? Or a Lib-Tech Banana? Because I believe the two are different. The Lib is rockered only between the feet, and is flat in front of and behind the feet. The Tinkler appears to be rockered in front of and behind the feet, and I assume between. Seems like there would be a huge difference there, because when you stand on the Lib the board goes flat and the ends will be on the ground. Not so on the Tinkler. When someone has a reverse cambered board and they are saying "hey I got a chance to ride it today and I liked it" then you came along and said it's crap and has no real applications while never riding anything similar. That's the diff. Well if I paid $1500 for a board, I'd be trying real hard to enjoy it. I never said it IS crap. I said everything I think I know about snowboards tells me it will suck, but I've never ridden one so what do I know. There's a difference there. But let's not relive that thread. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokkis Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Well if I paid $1500 for a board, I'd be trying real hard to enjoy it. I never said it IS crap. If my experience of board would have been bad, i just would have kept my shut up, and none would have known nothing of it, so there is no need for me to say soething about board which i dont stand behind :rolleyes: Same goes with NSR, i've been telling everybody how freaking great board that is. My absolute favourite carving board, specially these local bunny hills we have here :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical.Experience Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm taking my predictions based on me ACTUALLY riding a few different reverse cambered softboot boards. Are you testing those new 2010 DC's snowboards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donek Posted January 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I still think for some racing applications and some other carving applications reverse camber is worth looking into more. You may be right. You admitted that on edge the board felt good, just in the transitions it was uneasy. How much do PGS racers base even touch the ground? Maybe 30 feet so stability when flat isn't much of a concern. The transitions became harder the steeper the terrain became. Wether that would come with time, I'm not sure. For my style, I felt that any payoff decreased with increased pitch. Also beginner carvers. Put it on edge and it carves, simple.. I think this is truly the big payoff. All the freestyle companies producing these things will ultimately grow the carve market. Ice, you don't need to put extra pressure to get the board to bend, so it would be more forgiving on ice.. Perhaps. My experience on ice included a steeper pitch, so I can't comment for sure on this one. Standard crusing around Buttermilk, probably less than idea. I found the board worked best for lower speed cruising and carving on terrain similar to Buttermilk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Huh I was thinking Buttermilk would be bad because all the time you have to spend going flat base to get enough speed to actually carve a good turn.:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donek Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Huh I was thinking Buttermilk would be bad because all the time you have to spend going flat base to get enough speed to actually carve a good turn.:) You need to attend SES. Most of the attendees agree that it is the best carving mountain in Aspen. That's why we do it 3 days. A lot of people choose Buttermilk on the day off too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 I'm not a Buttermilk fan. too flat. Give me Aztec on Ajax every day. But it is true that it is popular for carving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 The only time I've actually been to Buttermilk was at a FIS race in '01 I think all I remember is that it was sooooooo flat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TB64 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Just thought I would chime in on what I found with reverse camber and the magna-traction. First I found you get more pressure in a small section of edge, but that puts you riding on only a small edge. Very powerful but not balanced and not flowing. If you carve a magna-traction on hard snow and drive the board through the turn, you get a carve that looks normal to start, flatens or straightens in the middle as you drive the wobble through, then it finishes rather normal. I found for people who know how to carve well camber is more powerful and faster, for an average rider they like the feel with reverse camber making it easy to make a turn with out having to flex your board. Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buell Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Tom, I am curious if you find the effect you are describing is due to the magnetraction or the camber / rocker profile that Lib Tech is using. Have you tested other rockered boards with different profiles? Thanks, Buell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TB64 Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I have only rode a board with no camber and a front rockered board. I have rode with a few people who have had other boards but have not tested them out myself. I believe there is a place for rocker but I find it is not the ultimate answer. It is a nice tool like for lift in pow, easy initiation but you give up stability, power and speed. 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.