SunSurfer Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qse5RO-HnXc There's an Apex plate on this "castoff" Kessler that Matt Morison's father is riding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Pukas Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 Great vid - thanks for posting! Who is the guy being interviewed? Now we have some info on the board's side cut - 21 nose, 20 underfoot, 15 tail. WTF???!!! That goes against what I've been thinking works for racing and seeing in other board designs with a smaller radius up front and bigger in the back. Is what he is saying true? mpp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Smith Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 That would be Paul, Matt's Dad. I to, am confused with the side cut... On a scale of 1 to 10; 10 being WC PGS talent, Paul rides at a 9. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDB Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 Here is the link to the radio documentary by Dominic Girard from CBC Radio One on Feb 12. http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2010/201002/20100212.html Half way down is Part One....just above "Olympic Families - Family" Part Two is just below the video Enjoy- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 Thanks for the link ... There seem to be bigger differences than I (we?) thought ... the nose has custom decamber (more than usual?) ... and the radii ... really strange ... any comments here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utahcarver Posted February 21, 2010 Report Share Posted February 21, 2010 Remember to reference taper when quoting the radii of the SCR. Taper is an important function of the SCR and the overall length of the board. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted February 22, 2010 Report Share Posted February 22, 2010 When it comes to side cut, there is none - mathematically; it is the Klothoid. The exact shape is determined by Mr. Kessler and input from the riders at the top level. I don't understand what you posted in the above quote. Obviously there is a side cut so why do you say there is none? Even if the side cut is based on a mathematical formula it's still side cut, right? Are you trying to say that side cut has to be based on a single radius to be called side cut? Is there another reason you call it a Klothoid when a simultaneous parametric plot of S(x) and C(x) is the Euler spiral, also known as the Cornu spiral or clothoid? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donek Posted February 22, 2010 Report Share Posted February 22, 2010 Mr. Morrison does seem to have the radii backwards. He indicates a 21m radius near the shovel and 15m radius near the tail. I'm pretty certain that is backwards. Such a geometry results in a board with about 2.5cm of reverse taper. It would be possible to pinch the tail to alter this, but I think the board would ride very differently than expected. The Kessler boards I've seen definitely have a tighter radius in the tip and larger in the tail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted February 22, 2010 Report Share Posted February 22, 2010 Please, give me side cut radius or a side cut number of a Cornu curve.For more discussion on this subject see "20m sidecut" thread. Everyone is patiently awaiting your answer. I'm out Why do we need one number? How do you propose to discuss snowboard shape without discussing side cut? I re-read the 20m sidecut thread where I posted a couple of times...the condescending attitude... BTW- The entire thread is about... SIDECUT. Guess we're not banishing that anytime soon. You didn't answer there so I have no idea why I asked. I won't make the mistake again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateW Posted February 22, 2010 Report Share Posted February 22, 2010 I don't understand what you posted in the above quote. Obviously there is a side cut so why do you say there is none? I'm guessing he meant there's no single sidecut radius that describes the curve. 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.