 Poster: A snowHead
|
Eyeing up a seriously good deal on one of these and trying hard to sit on wallet.
Enforcer would more or less be a straight swap for my current ski which could then serve tele duties. Blower a bit fatter & longer but any feedback on how they handle in "mixed " conditions?
Not skied either but I have liked other Nordicas I've skied.
Any views?
'
I've not skied either but have like Nordicas which I have skied including Dobies (except Spitfire) and Hot Rods .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
i think your motherships have a few seasons more in them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Speak to NZK, he'll be around in a few minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
fatbob,
Dunno, but would like to try the Enforcer. It seems like it has the stats and thinking of a Mssion on steriods......fat and turney.
I do think that some skis are too turney tho' ( 15mtrs rad ) for off-piste. You don't want them to dive back into the turn too much, IMV.
If I see them in LG, I'll try them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
JT, 15m radius for off piste, i think you've become a little lost. Radius is about sidecut based on 100% resistance. Off piste radius is about camber ie stiff vs soft(prorider vs seth.) Unless the off piste conditions are boiler plate, radius doesn't figure off piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER,
Take your point..but my feeling is that some skis want to get into the turn too much ... and it takes more effort to correct this.
Maybe it is me... but I took a day of two to let them run better..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JT, I agree, the forementioned skis are a good example, both have very large tips and tails, which give the tighter turn radius, they can catch in chopped up conditions. Also when skiing steeps it's difficult getting good edge contact causing the skis to camber too much and making you feel unstable and almost bounce.
As for the comment 'Mission' on steroids thats exaclty how i describe the Black Crows range of skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008/9 Legend Pro Rider has to be, on paper, the best off piste ski ever.
Lengths;
166,176,184,190.
Sidecut;
128/100/118
Radius(184) 27m
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
Radius is about sidecut based on 100% resistance
|
No. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
veeeight, OOOOhhh, bring it on my friend. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
2008/9 Legend Pro Rider has to be, on paper, the best off piste ski ever.
Lengths;
166,176,184,190.
Sidecut;
128/100/118
Radius(184) 27m |
how will it be on snow though?
hoho
i am still on the lookout for an exact replacement of my 05/06 LPs. THEY are the best ever
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
fatbob, I ski the Enforcer in 177 with Dukes and I'm very happy with it -I have the distinct advantage of having a fleet of test skis available to me so I can ski everything from a 111mm Katana to Stoeckli Stormrider XL/Atomic slalom ski- the Enforcer was bought to be my all round ski , something I can take out in any conditions and have fun with. For that it fits the bill really well; plenty of float in the soft and a radius that is inbetween a slalom and GS ski so on piste carving is pretty fun and plenty manouverable enough.
Negative observations are as such; steep and icy pistes result in a bit of 'chatter' at high speeds and crudy/moguly pistes at speeds don't feel very stable at high speeds. However, it should be taken into account that this compared to a Stoeckli Stormrider XL in 184 which is a beast of a ski.
I've skied the 185 Blower once in about 1ft of fresh powder and some pistes when getting back to the lifts. After a couple of runs I was distinctly regretting buying the Enforcer, the Blower is awesome off piste; stable at speeds, loads of float and felt quite playful. It was apparent thoug that the Enforcer is a much more versatile ski and interestingly having spoken to 2 Nordica riders they both said they preferred the Enforcer in 185 over the Blower in the same length (I haven't skied the 185 Enforcer).
Let's simplify this. From my experience, if the demands are for a purely off-piste ski (i.e. you have a quiver of skis available with piste/all mountain already ticked), buy the Blower and stick Dukes on them.
If you a want more all round/versatile ski then go for the Enforcers, and stick Dukes on them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, don't confuse sidecut radius with turning radius.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
veeeight, Go on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
This is one of those thread titles where you just have to hope its about skis!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Suspect when SZK talks about "radius" he's refering to "sidecut radius" and when he talks about "off-piste radius" he's talking about "turning radius".
IMO a ski with a small sidecut radius will (in general) be more grabby and not the best ski for wide open powder bowls. Less than perfect powder can also be a problem with short sidecut radius skis but a long sidecut radius ski tends to be a lot of work on the piste.
The scott mission has a dual sidecut radius to try and get the best of both worlds.
Any chance people can put up skier height and weight as a perfect offpiste ski for one skier can be too soft or stiff for a skier who is a different size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
DB, We were/are talking about turn radius as specified by the Manufacturer, but can't wait for an explanation of anything that relies on anything other than 100% resistance, ie boiler plate ice. Lack of a constant means this will be interesting and reckon it's going to be one of those Disney Fairy Tales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Much as it might surprise you, no manufacturer specifies turn radius, they all specify sidecut radius.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
veeeight, Go on, can we have your explanation of the differences and the process of measuring these factors. I'm particularly interested in how we measure 'Turn Radius' if at all possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
veeeight, Also, is 'Side Cut' radius measured; tip to tail, contact edge length or surface length, with or without camber, at what angle, against which surface and when does 'Sidecut' radius become 'Turn Radius'?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veeeight, can I join in 
As I understood it the sidecut hasn't got a radius, its parabolic. The only radius you can get is the effective turn radius when the edge is in full contact with a flat surface.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rich, only if it's Elan are you allowed to use the term "parabolic".....
I'll say again, no manufacturer publishes a turn radius, they only publish a sidecut radius figure based on a design/geometrical exercise. The above formula is valid whether it's a true radius or parabola.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Again: Sidecut radius as specified by all manufactuers, is a figure derived at the design stage and is a mathematical exercise. This figure is derived from the drawing board/CAD and is not ever gained from any on snow measurements. Sidecut radius on paper is merely a reference to the geometrical shape of a ski, not how it will ski.
Q: What is turn radius?
A: The radius of the turn from a skier on a ski
Q: Does sidecut effect it?
A: Yes, along with lots of other factors, including terrain, slope pitch, skier, ski charecteristics (longitudinal flex, torsional flex etc.) skill of skier etc.
Q: Without physically measuring each track in the snow how do we know
A: We don't. Turn radius cannot be determined from paper specifications. At best a poor guesstimate can be made from the sidecut radius.
example:
Salomon Pocket Rockets vs. Head Monster iM88. Both have a specified sidecut radius of around 19m. I can ski one of them and make a (pure) carved turn radius of 14m, the other only about 16m.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Sun 2-03-08 16:50; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
veeeight,
Does manufacturers 'Sidecut' Radius eg: 15m, have more relevance on Ice or in Powder? How much of the said 'Sidecut' radius is effected by camber? Can a ski with a 44m 'Sidecut' radius have a shorter 'Turn' radius? If so, how?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veeeight, The answer doesn't bother me, your comments were a little vague. People assume that if they buy a ski with a 15m turn radius, then it will make 15m radius turns, you threw your hat into the ring. I was simply giving you the opportunity to explain your POV. I have a different opinion and a way of explaining to my clients how 'Radius' of any ski is effected. Camber/Stiffness, Anglation and Snow conditions have a greater effect on the 'Turn's' radius than 'Sidecut' alone. I believe that's where this discussion was going and stand corrected over my single use of the phrase 'Turn Radius' when talking about sidecut. What i know about skis often needs explaining to those not familiar with my terminology, for the value of the Forum, we can be helpful to explain this to others. We can discuss this via PM but that won't serve this community. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Cool
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
For a further 10cents, the 'Sidecut' radius is more likely to be accurate, through multiple turns on a hard packed piste than off the piste in deep snow. The effect of the Camber of the ski in deep soft snow means that the 'Turn' radius is more likely to be varied due to the lack of a constant resistance provided by the snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| Camber/Stiffness, Anglation and Snow conditions have a greater effect on the 'Turn's' radius than 'Sidecut' alone. I believe that's where this discussion was going and stand corrected over my single use of the phrase 'Turn Radius' when talking about sidecut. What i know about skis often needs explaining to those not familiar with my terminology, for the value of the Forum, we can be helpful to explain this to others. We can discuss this via PM but that won't serve this community. :nice: |
FWIW,
DM and I agreed some time ago to use the term 'published radius' when referring to the quantity under discussion.
Accepting all of what you say above, ski published radius and length
are the least dependent on skier posture, skier ability and conditions context in their effect on the turn shape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Its all simple geometry. If you take a ski with a parabolic/eliptical sidecut bend it and than offer the edge onto a flat surface you will find that there is only one ski radius of bend that allows the edge to maintain full contact with a flat surface. If you trace the arc the edge forms onto the flat surface and measure the radius that is the natural turn radius of the ski and as I understand it that is the published radius of turn.
If the ski sidecut was an arc of a circle it would not be possible to get a full line contact no matter how the ski was bent assuming the ski when it bends forms an arc of a circle (which it probably doesn't  )
They weren't called parabolics for no reason.
Also 3 points on the arc are not enough to define a parabola and so cannotbe used to calculate turn radius.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
rich, At what angle to you offer the ski to the flat surface, this will effect the available camber and therefore change the radius. If i understand what V8 is saying the measure is ski flat to the ground(on it's base) and the dimensions measured to produce the section/arc of a circumference then a radius calculated. To me this makes no sense as most skis sidecut straighten out waist to tail and is therefore not a proper arc. If the Sidecut is measured vertical with full camber to resistance we are more likely to see a true arc, however we almost never ski with the ski vertical (across it's width) and almost never ski against 100% resistance therefore the extra camber(achieved by softer conditions) can complement the lack of vertical anglation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| rich wrote: |
| Its all simple geometry. If you take a ski with a parabolic/eliptical sidecut bend |
You're assuming that that is in fact what real world skis have.
| Quote: |
| it and than offer the edge onto a flat surface you will find that there is only one ski radius of bend that allows the edge to maintain full contact with a flat surface. |
At a given angle of attack, which is what SZK says above in different words. The angle of attack is the angle of the plane slicing the cone to generate the conic section.
| Quote: |
If the ski sidecut was an arc of a circle it would not be possible to get a full line contact no matter how the ski was bent assuming the ski when it bends forms an arc of a circle (which it probably doesn't :? )
|
Google 'klothoid'. If we bend a ski into a klothoid shape, what contact shape would the edges have?
| Quote: |
| They weren't called parabolics for no reason. |
Only Elans were. That was after they abandoned the 'cycloid' sidecut.
There are a lot of assumptions in that calculation over how the pressure supporting the ski is applied (which is where snow conditions come in). If we were bridging a mogul trough we might be talking about catenaries.
| Quote: |
Also 3 points on the arc are not enough to define a parabola and so cannotbe used to calculate turn radius. |
They are enough IF all coordinates of the three points are known.
On a ski we generally don't know where the waist is between the two other points, from the published dimensions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| rich, At what angle to you offer the ski to the flat surface, this will effect the available camber and therefore change the radius. If i understand what V8 is saying the measure is ski flat to the ground(on it's base) and the dimensions measured to produce the section/arc of a circumference then a radius calculated. To me this makes no sense as most skis sidecut straighten out waist to tail and is therefore not a proper arc. If the Sidecut is measured vertical with full camber to resistance we are more likely to see a true arc, however we almost never ski with the ski vertical (across it's width) and almost never ski against 100% resistance therefore the extra camber(achieved by softer conditions) can complement the lack of vertical anglation. |
SMALLZOOKEEPER, whatever angle gets full edge contact,. There will only be one combination of ski bend and ski angle that will result in full line contact, what angle that is is down to the designer.
In theory its possible to have two skis of the same sidecut dimensions (tip,tail and underfoot) which will have different turn radii. In practice because of the usable part of the ellipse arc the difference you could generate is likely to be quite small.
Measuring a skis sidecut at 3 points and putting an arc of a circle through the 3 points is a pointless exercise. Its impossible to get line contact with the arc of a circle and so the ski would not have a natural turn radius it would always have 3 point contact.
All this is a bit theoretical, pistes aren't flat and infinitely hard, skis don't bend to form the arc of a circle but it is the basis of parabolic sidecut design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| rich wrote: |
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| rich, At what angle to you offer the ski to the flat surface, this will effect the available camber and therefore change the radius. If i understand what V8 is saying the measure is ski flat to the ground(on it's base) and the dimensions measured to produce the section/arc of a circumference then a radius calculated. To me this makes no sense as most skis sidecut straighten out waist to tail and is therefore not a proper arc. If the Sidecut is measured vertical with full camber to resistance we are more likely to see a true arc, however we almost never ski with the ski vertical (across it's width) and almost never ski against 100% resistance therefore the extra camber(achieved by softer conditions) can complement the lack of vertical anglation. |
SMALLZOOKEEPER, whatever angle gets full edge contact,. There will only be one combination of ski bend and ski angle that will result in full line contact, what angle that is is down to the designer.
In theory its possible to have two skis of the same sidecut dimensions (tip,tail and underfoot) which will have different turn radii. In practice because of the usable part of the ellipse arc the difference you could generate is likely to be quite small.
Measuring a skis sidecut at 3 points and putting an arc of a circle through the 3 points is a pointless exercise. Its impossible to get line contact with the arc of a circle and so the ski would not have a natural turn radius it would always have 3 point contact.
All this is a bit theoretical, pistes aren't flat and infinitely hard, skis don't bend to form the arc of a circle but it is the basis of parabolic sidecut design. |
So back to the top, we need 100% resistance to apply the 'Published Sidecut' as real. So, now we have gone full circle (see what i did there?) can we get back to soft snow, effect camber has on 'Turn Radius'? And relevance 'Published sidecut' has off piste.
Phew.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What a great & geeky thread! Well done chaps....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rich, Can i refer you to post 5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, makes perfect sense to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Mind you if some of the rumors 
