Decambered Nose

[TheTruth]

I would say all of the modern skis have widest poit of sidecut ahead of base contact point, even when just sitting on the floor unloaded. Dynastar had this quite exagerated for at least 6-7 years.

Race ski design has definitely changed over the past 4-5 years. I just compared my newest race stock GS skis (2009 Dynastar WC GS) to a 8 year old pair of GS skis (Atomic 10.22). The Dynastar is the full blown hand made, matched flex race stock (the good stuff). When placed on a flat surface, there is no camber in the ski--it sits flat in the middle by its own weight. The widest part of the sidecut is well ahead of where the front of the ski contacts the surface, and the contact point is several cm rearward of where the older Atomic makes contact. The turn radius is blended along the length and listed only as "meeting FIS specs" (minimum of 27M)

The Atomic 10.22, in spite of being 8 years old, has over 1/2 cm upward camber at the center when sitting on a flat surface, and the forward contact point is right where the tip curves up. The turn radius is clearly listed as 22M.

No comparison in the way they ski. In spite on the Dynastar being a much "straighter" ski, it is much easier to turn, vary the turn shape, and release a turn at will. The older Atomic seems "locked" into a single radius turn, and will plow the tip into the snow if you try to tighten up the turn.

I mostly ski, but I also have an alpine board that I enjoy riding to mix things up and I have found this thread very interesting.

[ohiomoto]

I'll have to take a look at my skis I guess. I have two pair of SLX and one GSX. All are race stock and 3-4 years old. I know they do lay "flat" under their weight (with really heavy bindings on them) but never noticed a decambered nose. I know a few local reps, but never really talked about the specifics when I run into them.

My original point was that if a decambered nose is so great for racing applications, you would think the ski racing community would be all over it. Maybe they are and I never noticed?

[KingCrimson]

No, the boards in the photos are a Madd 180 and Coiler NSR 185.

Bahhumbug thought it was a 170. Somewhat o/t, is there a difference in the nose profile?

[powdahbonz]

After watching Jack ride this NSR today, I would disagree with the lack of stability at speed. He was ripping on it, through slop and spring mashed snow. First time I ever saw him ride and I could not keep up. I felt pretty good about my riding last week. Today, I felt like I have alot of work to do. Nice turns Jack.

[lowrider]

A single camber board will pressure the nose of the board as it is loaded carving a turn. Will a double camber board create a rocker effect on the nose since the flattening of the camber is acting as if on two fulcrum points causing the nose to rise???

[bobdea]

A single camber board will pressure the nose of the board as it is loaded carving a turn. Will a double camber board create a rocker effect on the nose since the flattening of the camber is acting as if on two fulcrum points causing the nose to rise???

that question makes my head hurt

[Bobby Buggs]

Old or new? to me it does not matter, All I know is it works
Steph, you will totally Rip on it

[ohiomoto]

I was wrong! I never noticed, but the widest point of the sidecut on all of my skis are on what would be considered the "tip" on the curled up portion. I'm talking way up there! Probably 1/3 of the way up the radius. I never noticed this before.

Put your race stock skies base to base, use a strap to tie them together in the middle so the bases are actually touching and I'm sure you'll see that you can start to see space between the bases far before where you would consider the actual "tip".

Actually no. My tips placed base to base look "normal" They make contact right around the point at which the tips curl up at the nose. They look nothing like the pictures Jack posted here. BUT, the widest point of the sidecut is way ahead of the contact point.

I wouldn't call it decambered because the base of the ski looks "normal", but the widest point is way ahead of the contact point of the base so I guess you could argue that it's decamberd.

I'll go eat crow now.

[BlueB]

Actually Elan pioneered this back in 80s. It was just a slight move of the widest point forward from where it traditionally was on straight skis, but noticeable.
If my old RC Omni Lite are still kicking around my auntie's place in Europe, I'll take few pics late this summer...

[Jack Michaud]

Bahhumbug thought it was a 170. Somewhat o/t, is there a difference in the nose profile?

If anything, the 170's nose might be even more abrupt.

After watching Jack ride this NSR today, I would disagree with the lack of stability at speed. He was ripping on it, through slop and spring mashed snow. First time I ever saw him ride and I could not keep up. I felt pretty good about my riding last week. Today, I felt like I have alot of work to do. Nice turns Jack.

Great to meet you in person today. You've got a lot of potential there. Thanks for the compliments, but you should have seen that board killing it last weekend when conditions were firm. I'm not a fan of mashed potatoes over ice. Looks like our carving season is over unless there is another dump. Oh well!

[Jack Michaud]

Now I get it, thanks Jack, as always very informative
If you don't think that Jack can rip
You don't know jack

I love this place.

Jack I noticed toelift on your front binding. How do you like it(pros and cons)?

Love it. I recommend a balanced stance of equal front-foot-toe-lift and back-foot-heel-lift, with a little outward cant on the back foot. There's an article on this somewhere.

[Mattias112]

I wouldn't call it decambered because the base of the ski looks "normal", but the widest point is way ahead of the contact point of the base so I guess you could argue that it's decamberd.

This is not what I call decambered either. This is not new at all but has been like this for years.
But to have decambered 1/4 of the total length of the board, that is another matter That will probably be a little unstable at speed... But as you sy it will also make the board easier to initiate the turn. If it is combined with a flexpattern to suit. But a soft nose and a really decambered nose? Not for me on my alpine board... But everybody likes it different So ride and be happy!

[powdahbonz]

Never got comfortable-I really can't perform in mashed spuds and I washed out later on spillway and ate $hit-didn't notice until end of the day but think I picked up a 1st degree sep. on my right shoulder. I was trying hard to keep transitions smooth and felt like I couldn't keep board from chattering out on heels or toes. Power drove head and shoulders for an over the handle bars endo..guess I may have been loading the nose up.Least I know what the new board dims. will look like now for bruce and thanks for the advice on topsheet design-sfleck, email forth coming to you soon.

Great to meet you in person today. You've got a lot of potential there. Thanks for the compliments, but you should have seen that board killing it last weekend when conditions were firm. I'm not a fan of mashed potatoes over ice. Looks like our carving season is over unless there is another dump. Oh well!

[TheTruth]

This is not what I call decambered either. This is not new at all but has been like this for years.
But to have decambered 1/4 of the total length of the board, that is another matter That will probably be a little unstable at speed... But as you sy it will also make the board easier to initiate the turn. If it is combined with a flexpattern to suit. But a soft nose and a really decambered nose? Not for me on my alpine board... But everybody likes it different So ride and be happy!

Right, the idea that the widest part of the sidecut is way up on the ski tip and off the snow has been around for a long time. This isn't new. What is different on my 2009 race stock Dynastars, is the lack of camber when sitting flat, and that the ski rises off the surface a few cm behind where the tip curves up. I'd call it "mini decamber" -- not as pronounced as a new school powder ski, not quite as pronounced as Jack's board--but it is there. Whatever Dynastar has done it works. These skis are the most stable, fast, yet turnable race stock GS skis I have ever been on. All the other WC GS skis have similar designs--less camber and no defined turn radius other than "meeting FIS minimum specs".

What is really interesting (and I'm curious how this applies to snowboard hardboots), is that you need a modern ski boot design to really get the performance out of these new race skis. For example, at the start of the season, I had a trusty pair of 2008 Lange RL11 plug boots. The RL11 shell design has been around in one form or another for 15 years. It was the standard that all other ski race boots were judged against. And it does not work with the newest race skis. Lange dumped the RL11 and now has the RL12, a design with a shorter cuff, more upright stance, and the hinge points moved way back. Nordica, Atomic, and Fischer came out with similar designs a few years ago, and have been eating Lange's lunch in racing. The new designs allow you to engage the greater tip sidecut NOW (like steeping on the gas pedal of a dragracer!!!), and then allow you to vary the turn shape along the rest of the ski length. My bootfitter warned me that I would never get full performance out of the new Dynastars with the geometry of the RL11 boot, and boy was he right.

So, my question is with all the advancement in alpine board design in the last few years, do we need new thought given to hardboot design? The DeeLuxe, Head, and UPZ design are very old, and by using their designs, are we getting the top performance out of our fancy new board designs?

[dave29]

I love this place.



Love it. I recommend a balanced stance of equal front-foot-toe-lift and back-foot-heel-lift, with a little outward cant on the back foot. There's an article on this somewhere.

Thanks Jack.

[Jack Michaud]

So, my question is with all the advancement in alpine board design in the last few years, do we need new thought given to hardboot design? The DeeLuxe, Head, and UPZ design are very old, and by using their designs, are we getting the top performance out of our fancy new board designs?

Try your RL12's on a new board and get back to us!

I've never been able to figure out why snowboard hardboots don't have a 0 forward lean setting.

[philfell]

I thought I would post a few pics to go alone with Jack's these two pics are of a Black Toped Kessler built less than a month ago for a female world cup rider.

Pic #1-Board laying flat on the ground, no binding or weight on the board.



Pic #2-Board is weighted to take the camber out so that the inbetween the bindings is on the ground.

[colintkemp]

Phifell: This is a little OT, but what bindings/plates are on that Kessler? (The reason for my question: I'm curious about the camber in the photo of the board unweighted. It looks like my 185 w/ hangl.)

Thanks,
Colin

PS - Jack, thanks for this thread.

[Jack Michaud]

Phifell: This is a little OT, but what bindings/plates are on that Kessler? (The reason for my question: I'm curious about the camber in the photo of the board unweighted. It looks like my 185 w/ hangl.)

Thanks,
Colin

PS - Jack, thanks for this thread.

My pleasure. By the way, can I cite your post in my upcoming master's thesis? It's entitled "People Don't Read". I kid, I kid.

[philfell]

No bindings or plate on the board at the time of the pic.

[colintkemp]

HA! You got me Jack. Missed the no binding comment indeed!

[TheTruth]

Try your RL12's on a new board and get back to us!

I tried it already! However, my Lange RL12s are the 160 full race plug, and calling them mega-stiff is an understatement. Incredible ski race boot, but way too much for snowboarding. I was really worried I was going to snap the Kessler right in half! An experiment I do not recommend to be repeated unless you have a bottomless bank account for new boards!

I've never been able to figure out why snowboard hardboots don't have a 0 forward lean setting.

Agree with you on this one. For my tastes, all the hardboots out there have way too much forward lean. I always ride mine at the most upright position--front and back. Just seems like I can initiate a turn better that way.

[Jack Michaud]

Thanks Phil. I am curious about how square Kessler noses are. I know, reduction of swing weight, maximization of running length, etc, but when the board is tilted up I would think the outline of the nose has a lot to do with terrain clearance. If so, wouldn't such a square nose be an issue in bumpy terrain?

[philfell]

They are pushing it in my opinion as far as shape goes. I think the Black Pearls are too squared. But with the mounting position and current technique there isn't a ton of pressure on the nose so it dosen't bash into stuff, but rather tracks over things.

Have you taken a look closely at the coiler's tail? Is it's camber profile similar to the nose?

[Jack Michaud]

Have you taken a look closely at the coiler's tail? Is it's camber profile similar to the nose?

I have, and no, there is a lot less "decamber" in the tail. You can sort of tell in this pic:



I really don't think there would need to be as much, because the tail isn't impacting oncoming terrain like the nose.

[philfell]

I hear what you are saying. I'll take a pic of the Kessler I'm working on this week tomorrow after riding. I haven't looked at the tail while it's on a flat surface, but eyeing down it there is some decamber in the tail, not nearly as much as the nose, but there is some.

[bobdea]

flat noses


I read somewhere that the less nose you have the more you can dampen it.
I think it was on this very forum.

[Bruce Varsava]

A reason to put the dacam on is also to make them more slide friendly. Once you get over 180 ish and have full camber with a decent stiffness they are beasts to slide. The amount done in the tail helps with that function of breaking the tail loose when needed. Back in the glass board day we just used lighter biax fabrics for more twist to allow for sliding. With metal ,the thickness and therefore the torsion is predetermined. You have to control power through shaping in this case.
BV

[philfell]

Thanks for the insight Bruce.

[Mike T]

A reason to put the dacam on is also to make them more slide friendly. Once you get over 180 ish and have full camber with a decent stiffness they are beasts to slide. The amount done in the tail helps with that function of breaking the tail loose when needed.

When I first got my NSR in December 2007, this was the first thing I noticed... that it behaved as well on a skid or slide as it did in a carve. I think I mentioned on Jack's "Game Changer" thread that my 185 felt as maneuverable as say a Donek FC 175... should have mentioned it feels as skiddable as a a freeride deck when I need it to be.

Knowing I could safely put on the brakes was huge in terms of getting into the right mental state to ride more aggressively and push myself harder.