Drunken epiphany or stroke of genius

[bobdea]

I would be interested to know of any skis that I could actually buy, that are like a kessler, or NSR board (aside from kessler, and palmer).

BobD

kessler boards are not terribly different from race skis in shape and construction.

it's not hard at all to get race stock skis either.

[bobdea]

Any current FIS compliant GS race ski (not the consumer stuff). These are what Kessler bases his snowboard designs on.

yup, this is my understanding as well.

[BobD]

Any current FIS compliant GS race ski (not the consumer stuff). These are what Kessler bases his snowboard designs on.

That is exactly my point. Consumers were denied carvable skis for years because of the cost of new (wide enough) presses. If as so many are saying, the NSR boards are like having an instant 50% boost in your riding skills, why are ski companies not passing these designs on to consumers when it will make so many skiers happy ? It does not make sense, unless there is some production problem, as there was with skis with carvable sidecuts, or the ski design people have no idea what's going on in the race depts.

This sounds very like the ski BS that snowboards did not introduce carvable sidecuts. Sure, the ski industry had invented, and had the oppertunity to produce carvable skis. BUT THEY DIDN'T. It was snowboards that first made carving possible for most people. So it seems that snowboards will again lead the way in innovation for the consumer.

BobD

[bobdea]

That is exactly my point. Consumers were denied carvable skis for years because of the cost of new (wide enough) presses. If as so many are saying, the NSR boards are like having an instant 50% boost in your riding skills, why are ski companies not passing these designs on to consumers when it will make so many skiers happy ? It does not make sense, unless there is some production problem, as there was with skis with carvable sidecuts, or the ski design people have no idea what's going on in the race depts.

This sounds very like the ski BS that snowboards did not introduce carvable sidecuts. Sure, the ski industry had invented, and had the oppertunity to produce carvable skis. BUT THEY DIDN'T. It was snowboards that first made carving possible for most people. So it seems that snowboards will again lead the way in innovation for the consumer.

BobD

I completely disagree, there's plenty of skis that are widely available that have watered down shapes that are more for the all mountain ripper. look at the noses of even many park skis, long gradual nose where the sidecut stops well off the the snow. smells like our snowboards to me. the kicker is they were around before the KST kesslers.

sidecut skis were not so much a tooling issue I'm betting. it was more of someone taking a chance of doing a production run and having shops refuse to take the goofy looking things. I say this because most companies were making fat powder skis so they had the presses for them. straight fatties must of been a bitch on hard pack.......

[photodad2001]

I completely disagree, there's plenty of skis that are widely available that have watered down shapes that are more for the all mountain ripper. look at the noses of even many park skis, long gradual nose where the sidecut stops well off the the snow. smells like our snowboards to me. the kicker is they were around before the KST kesslers.

sidecut skis were not so much a tooling issue I'm betting. it was more of someone taking a chance of doing a production run and having shops refuse to take the goofy looking things. I say this because most companies were making fat powder skis so they had the presses for them. straight fatties must of been a bitch on hard pack.......

I think the tech and shapes have been around a lot longer than what riding would suggest and whatis being overlooked is the most important key to carving and that is the rider. The person actually doing the motions needed to create the sport. This has been a long time arguement of mine and it is this. The equipment is not the biggest factor in this equation. All a board or ski is, is the final extension, just a means of connecting what the athlete is providing via strength, balance, motion, etc. and putting that effort onto a metal edge. All we are really talking about is a conveyor from the lowest point of the athlete (toe or heal) to the metal edge providing the grip. We spend so much time on here discussing mear millimeters between the rider and the edge like it is the end all and be all of what we do, but in reality there's about 5 to 6 feet above that metal edge that is really what makes or breaks the carve. I laid down some seriously assdragging healside carves on an outdated 151 K2 doublewide park board. This thing is so flimsy and ridiculously stupid, but there were the right conditions and apparently I had the motion and control to make it perform. I really think we don't give ourselves enough credit. I've seen guys on the high end stuff that I could put to shame on a soft set up. Could I do better on high end gear, yes. But my point I've been trying to make for months on end is this. A sucky carver on the best gear vs. an awesome rider on the worst outdated, even soft boot equipment will lose every time.

[TheTruth]

That is exactly my point. Consumers were denied carvable skis for years because of the cost of new (wide enough) presses. If as so many are saying, the NSR boards are like having an instant 50% boost in your riding skills, why are ski companies not passing these designs on to consumers when it will make so many skiers happy ? It does not make sense, unless there is some production problem, as there was with skis with carvable sidecuts, or the ski design people have no idea what's going on in the race depts.

This sounds very like the ski BS that snowboards did not introduce carvable sidecuts. Sure, the ski industry had invented, and had the oppertunity to produce carvable skis. BUT THEY DIDN'T. It was snowboards that first made carving possible for most people. So it seems that snowboards will again lead the way in innovation for the consumer.

BobD

This stuff is available to anybody! Check out sites such as raceskis.com or racestocksports.com. Many skishops that cater to race programs have this stuff in stock. Just plop your money down, and you can walk out the door with a real race ski with the latest technology/shape.

What really is going on here is not that ski companies are not making this available to the general public (they have been for years) it it the general public does not want such high performance in their skis! The average skier wants some wet noodle that is soft and forgiving, a lets them ski around at ease. This is exactly why hardboot /alpine snowboarding is, and will be a nitch sport. They typical consumer snowboarder wants the same thing as the typical consumer skier: a forgiving noodle that takes little effort to get down the hill.

The ski and snowboard companies are giving the typical consumer exactly what they want. What ski racers and alpine boarders want in their equipment simply does not register with the general public.

[tex1230]

The best Skis I have in stock right now are probably some Salomon X-Wing Tornados. They are paired with Marker Z-12s and have a nice $799 price tag on them... Overall they seem to be nice skis from what I read about them......

Salomons With Marker Bindings?

Epic Fail.

1) Markers Suck

2) your Salomon rep would roast you for not putting Salomon bindings on that package. I guarantee he'd cut some sort of deal to keep the ski/binding pair all salomon.

3) Markers Suck

[NMU Alpine Boarder]

Salomons With Marker Bindings?

Epic Fail.

1) Markers Suck

2) your Salomon rep would roast you for not putting Salomon bindings on that package. I guarantee he'd cut some sort of deal to keep the ski/binding pair all salomon.

3) Markers Suck

Yea, my bad.... No idea where the hell Marker came from in this... They are Salomon bindings... The only Markers we got go on our crappy K2s....

[BobD]

sidecut skis were not so much a tooling issue I'm betting. it was more of someone taking a chance of doing a production run and having shops refuse to take the goofy looking things. I say this because most companies were making fat powder skis so they had the presses for them. straight fatties must of been a bitch on hard pack.......

http://skiinghistory.org/sidecut.html

BobD

[Dave ESPI]

http://www.antongliders.com/

I wonder if I can cooerce them to set some up for our hardboots hehehhee

EDIT: BobD, a Good read in that link. Thanks :)

[nekdut]

http://www.antongliders.com/

I wonder if I can cooerce them to set some up for our hardboots hehehhee

They hung out with us at Buttermilk during SES 05. It did not look like enough people really tried them out though.

[bobdea]

http://skiinghistory.org/sidecut.html

BobD

right, though olin had a press issue the real issue was:

Olin produced a run of 150 pairs for introduction at the 1986 SIA Trade Show. Instructors who tested it thought Albert was a fabulous idea, but retailers thought the asymmetric hourglass shape far too cartoonishly weird and declined to buy it. Albert slid into obscurity, but the patent drawings lived on in Olin’s corporate legacy, to surface in other offices.

and it later mentions rossi and and other cap crap vendors not wanting to retool. but this I'm betting was due to actual molds that they wanted to get a few years out of not that they would not touch them at all. rossi is usually not a company that's known for making groundbreaking gear. hell they got bought and later sold off by a company best known for it's t-shirts and hoodies, yeah, roxy/quicksilver. rossignol made it very well in some markets though rentals, promotional products like the beer boards and soda skis and low end consumer skis and often their low end stuff was and is the best bang for the buck in that range. they do make some high end stuff that's nice but that's not to who most of their product goes to.

when you're catering to the rentals departments of the world and 50 companies that want 1000 snowboards each to give away at bars you're looking at a product that the bottom line is cranking out massive amounts of them with a small profit, running with the volume. skis that were being sold for less than $100 a pair. here is a area you don't want to take a chance in. sometimes not taking the chance is the biggest gamble. most skis sold are the complete package deals that ski/binding/boot go for 300 to $500.

also, I'll have to post some pictures of the skis I have here, the GFs tele skis the rise starts way before the sidecut ends. these are older K2 she's piste skis

[Fastskiguy]

that describes pretty much most race skis from this decade.

Do modern race skis have rocker? Because I thought most were simple sidecuts and no rocker.

[Fastskiguy]

From what I can remember, all my ski boots were quite stiff in all directions. Talking mostly 80' stuff, though. I thought that major shortcomming of the older ski boots, for carving skis, is TOO STIF forward flex?

I see, *too* stiff, that I can believe, goes along with the stories of all of the boot top fractures in Lange boots. But still....I just think this stuff could have been developed sooner!

[TheTruth]

Do modern race skis have rocker? Because I thought most were simple sidecuts and no rocker.

The sidecuts are no longer simple due to the companies trying to please the racing community with fast turn initiation, while trying to adhere to FIS rules designed to prevent skis from getting locked into the turns, endangering the racer's health and safety.

The latest GS skis have far less camber than older versions, with a small amount of reverse camber the tip and tail. This enhances fast, modern GS technique, which is far removed from how the general public likes to ski.

[photodad2001]

I'm sailing tomorrow so if my own design doesn't work (putting another board on top of my beater board so I can place my mast foot on it) then so what, but I'm pretty sure it will work. Having fun making my own stuff and using cheap gear. 2 words. Ha and ha. put them together in repitition and fast and you get it.

[bobdea]

Do modern race skis have rocker? Because I thought most were simple sidecuts and no rocker.

depends on what you call rocker but if you mean a kessler style nose rise where the nose is widest off the off the snow then yes. a 2002 pair of she's piste k2s are like that and I think my k2s are like that too and they were made in the 1990s. I'd have to check though on those.

it's subtle like a inch or two out but it's nothing drastically different than new boards

[Fastskiguy]

The sidecuts are no longer simple due to the companies trying to please the racing community with fast turn initiation, while trying to adhere to FIS rules designed to prevent skis from getting locked into the turns, endangering the racer's health and safety.

The latest GS skis have far less camber than older versions, with a small amount of reverse camber the tip and tail. This enhances fast, modern GS technique, which is far removed from how the general public likes to ski.

Didn't know this...but glad to hear it, it might be time to try some "modern" stuff :)

[TheTruth]

Didn't know this...but glad to hear it, it might be time to try some "modern" stuff :)

True race stock can be an absolute blast to ski as long as one knows how to ski it properly.

Most recreational skiers absolutely hate skiing on race stock. They can manage somewhat on slalom skis, which are short and turny, but they are so reactive, you have to be on your "A" game at all times. No mindless cruising on these babies.

Many recreational skiers find new GS skis frustrating to ski. New GS skis turn by strong tip pressure. Release the tip pressure, and they drift and go straight (this is by design). Since most recreational skiers ski from their back seat, they find it very hard to turn the ski. GS skis (in the longer men's lengths) can be a bear in mixed conditions. They require a lot of strength to muscle their way through slop.

On the days I do race training, I always bring 2 sets of skis (or my race skis, and my board) Once I am done running gates, the race skis get put back in the car, and the mid fat skis or the board comes out. That way I can relax somewhat and enjoy the rest of the day on the snow. My mid fat skis, Stockli XXL, are based on a modern GS design, but are way more forgiving and give up little in carving ability.

[BobD]

True race stock can be an absolute blast to ski as long as one knows how to ski it properly.

Most recreational skiers absolutely hate skiing on race stock. They can manage somewhat on slalom skis, which are short and turny, but they are so reactive, you have to be on your "A" game at all times. No mindless cruising on these babies.

Many recreational skiers find new GS skis frustrating to ski. New GS skis turn by strong tip pressure. Release the tip pressure, and they drift and go straight (this is by design). Since most recreational skiers ski from their back seat, they find it very hard to turn the ski. GS skis (in the longer men's lengths) can be a bear in mixed conditions. They require a lot of strength to muscle their way through slop.

On the days I do race training, I always bring 2 sets of skis (or my race skis, and my board) Once I am done running gates, the race skis get put back in the car, and the mid fat skis or the board comes out. That way I can relax somewhat and enjoy the rest of the day on the snow. My mid fat skis, Stockli XXL, are based on a modern GS design, but are way more forgiving and give up little in carving ability.

First let me say that I appreciate the info in your posts, and I am always ready to learn more. I am a little confused though, by this post. The feedback from people on NSR boards, is that they are, if anything easier to ride (with the right technique) and tolerate poor/mixed conditions better than older boards. This seems at odds with what you are saying about the same technology in race skis.

BobD

[bobdea]

First let me say that I appreciate the info in your posts, and I am always ready to learn more. I am a little confused though, by this post. The feedback from people on NSR boards, is that they are, if anything easier to ride (with the right technique) and tolerate poor/mixed conditions better than older boards. This seems at odds with what you are saying about the same technology in race skis.

BobD

no, not at all.

a burton bullet or rossi budweiser promo board would be much easier to ride than say a SG full race for the average rider.

most everyone here is on alpine boards that are either consumer versions of race boards or boards that have more in common with race boards than the above burton or any other low end board.

even if you compare kessler or oxxess BX boards to other softboot rides you'd have the same thing for the average rider might be too much but they DO make going fast easier for a good pilot.

[TheTruth]

First let me say that I appreciate the info in your posts, and I am always ready to learn more. I am a little confused though, by this post. The feedback from people on NSR boards, is that they are, if anything easier to ride (with the right technique) and tolerate poor/mixed conditions better than older boards. This seems at odds with what you are saying about the same technology in race skis.

BobD

That's because race stock is designed for one thing: to let highly gifted racers, who are in superb physical condition, travel at insane speeds through an ice hardened race course. Race stock skis are designed for narrow, specific conditions. To the average skier, a modern GS ski would be "easier" to control than say a long, "straight" GS ski from Tomba's era. But compared to what most consumers like, even a modern GS ski would be considered much harder to ski well than what most people buy. But take the construction/shaping of a modern GS ski, and modify it for all mountain use, and now you have a ski that many good skiers can appreciate (if they are willing to pay the $$$ for the technology, which is another story). To be honest, I love the performance of race skis, but I find my Stockli XXL Stormrider, which is a modified GS ski, much more enjoyable for most conditions.

[Danked]

Burton does something like this on a few of their recent boards. It isn't adjustable, but it's supposed to maintain camber for longer. They give the board excessive camber, then use a rod, and the topsheet to flatten it back down.