# Rocker Skis?? (reverse camber)?



## Rambo (Mar 11, 2010)

Anybody have any knowledge on "Rocker Skis"? Do they work in Eastern conditions? I guess they are great in powder... maybe they would rip in the spring slush? Some are saying that soon all skis will be Rocker or reverse camber. (I'm kind of confused).

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...i4mxCQ&usg=AFQjCNG3cApijIoIlZnXc6pQc_W0c06zbg

Found this in the Gear/Equipment Forum about the Rossi S3:
http://forums.alpinezone.com/showthread.php?t=73160


----------



## jarrodski (Mar 11, 2010)

on of my guys has teh s3.   says they're super playful and fun all around.  he loves them for park skiing... not good at all in bumps...


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 11, 2010)

Don't ever see them being a groomer ski. Maybe out west, but even they have dry spells as this season has proved.


----------



## drjeff (Mar 11, 2010)

Pick up the latest issue of _Skiing_ They actually have a pretty good explanation about the 3 types of rocker skis (full full out big tip/tail powder ski rocker, to slight tip/tail mid-fat all around rocker that per the article, many in the industry are hailing as the next big advancement for almost all of the ski industry.

Suprisingly enough it was actually a very good article/explanation in this issue of _Skiing_ instead of their ususal trivial BS fluff.


----------



## ta&idaho (Mar 11, 2010)

This being debated in depth on epicski right now: http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/93008/the-rockered-revolution.

I haven't been on anything with reverse camber or serious rocker, but I demo'd a few skis with an early rise tip (Elan 1010 and Salomon Lord) at Hunter in December and thought they were a blast on variable conditions (sluff piles near the fence, irregular bumps, even groomers).  Kingslug has raved about his new Rossignol S3s, which I think he's skied at various locations around the Catskills.  I think skis with traditional camber under foot and a soft, early rise tip and tail would be pretty fun for tight trees, bumps, and other Eastern terrain.


----------



## evil (Mar 11, 2010)

Not sure if a knuckle dragging opinion helps here due to different mechanics, but, last season I grabbed a Lib Tech TRS.
The rocker makes edge to edge mindless and instant.
I'm the rare breed that actually enjoys bumps and I have to say, the rocker made the quick turns I use for bump riding, so much more fluid.
At speed, they can get a little sketchy, but only if you "turn your back" on them and relax too much, you really have to be on them for mach 3.
Powder, they had good float but it was not the magical feeling I heard about and anticipated.
That may be due to the fact that the stance options aren't as far back as I like.
I'll let you know how it fares after I drill out more holes.
All in all, I can't really see myself ever riding a "normal" camber board again.


----------



## evil (Mar 11, 2010)

Oh, and the magna traction is AMAZING!
I would be curious to see if anyone has tried the N.A.S. skis with magna traction and what they thought of it.


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Mar 11, 2010)

I have a pair of Volkl Kuro's, which, aside from being absurdly wide, are rockered.

When it comes to something as firm as what us Easterners would consider "Packed Powder", their width is beyond fat, they're morbidly obese.  These are my only experience on rockered skis, so the width makes it hard to make a judgement on just the rocker aspect, but I doubt that a full rocker is going to hold well on firm stuff.

I've had them out on three powder days and enjoyed the heck out of them, My $0.02 is this will be limited to skies for soft snow.  (I can't speak to how they'd be the park.  I'm Old school..or maybe just old.)


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 11, 2010)

I have a 176 Rossi S7. They measure 145/115/123. They have early rise but have camber and sidecut underfoot. This season, I've been alternating between them and my Rossi B Squad. Skied them on powder days and on hardpack days at Jay, Stowe, Saddleback, MRG, Sunday River and Sugarloaf. First time I took them out was in early December at Sunday River when it was still mostly man-made and I had a one word review: Wow! They do fine in the groomers and I've taken them on ice and they seem to hold well (as long as the edges are sharp). I was worried about them on hardpack but they do fine. I'm pretty much in control. On bumps, they did fine but that was probably more a function of their forgiveness rather than rocker or width.

Of course, they really excel on powder days. I took them out for first tracks at Jay and I was pretty much skiing like a superhero. You could feel the ski coming up for air. No tip dive and you could vary your turn shape all over the place. One thing you can do well with them is that you can whip them around pretty fast. I like going in the trees and you need to stop, skid and turn on a dime. The S7 allows me to do this. When I have my Squads in the trees, I really have to really ride them and pay attention. They tend to track straight and can get scary. With the S7, you can relax a bit and go with the flow. They've become my glades ski this year. In fact, they've become my go to ski for anything.

Last week at the Loaf, some guy was ripping down the trees at Bubblecuffer Extension. When he got down near me, I noticed that he had a full on rocker. He was on Pontoons. I actually shied away from Pontoons because of the lack of sidecut but this guy said that they skied well even on the groomers. 

Anyway, I'm pretty much sold on reverse camber/early rise. If I buy another ski, it will definitely have rocker.

The latest issue of SKI also has a good explanation of rocker/early rise technology.


----------



## snoseek (Mar 11, 2010)

I'm convinced a multi point side cut with early rise is the ski that will dominate the market soon.....


----------



## Marc (Mar 11, 2010)

Austin had a pair of the Praxis skis.  He doesn't anymore.  If he's alive he could weigh in but the fact he sold them should tell you something.

If I remember right he liked them in the tight trees cause he could pivot on center, but for other stuff besides deep powder they sucked, especially for skinning.


----------



## kingslug (Mar 11, 2010)

picked up my Rossi S3's and tried them out at plattekill and Hunter. No deep powder anymore..just non stop moguls. Since this is real snow and not the crap they spit out of guns I still don't know how these things will work on ...ice. probably not too well. On this stuff as in real snow they rocked. Groomers where a blast, just shot down them..and they can carve! With reverse side cut on the tip and tails they can grab a carve. they did this because of the huge rocker both tip and tail. They are 186 in length but ski like a 168. In the moguls they where a blast, just blew through anything. At Platt it was powdery in the morning so they really could float through it. As the day went on it got firmer but they still cut through anything. Slamming into the mogul face was no problem as the rocker tip just glided you over it instead of into it. Turning is effortless they can pivot on a dime. on westway at Hunter they could make 90 degree turns...its pretty damn steep back there...overall they did great and I wasn't that tired after 8 hours straight at Plattekill. My volkls would have worn me out. Just wish I had these thursday and friday.















__________________
Lets go!
I'll drive. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by kingslug; Mar 2, 2010 at 12:42 AM.  






All times are GMT. The time now is 2:04 AM.


----------



## Marc (Mar 12, 2010)

What does Rossy mean with those skis when they say "reverse sidecut" at the tip and the tail?  That's confusing.

When I hear reverse sidecut, I think a ski with a wider waist than the tip or the tail.  Like the Praxis or the Spatula's.


----------



## rocojerry (Mar 12, 2010)

evil said:


> Not sure if a knuckle dragging opinion helps here due to different mechanics, but, last season I grabbed a Lib Tech TRS.
> The rocker makes edge to edge mindless and instant.
> I'm the rare breed that actually enjoys bumps and I have to say, the rocker made the quick turns I use for bump riding, so much more fluid.
> At speed, they can get a little sketchy, but only if you "turn your back" on them and relax too much, you really have to be on them for mach 3.
> ...



Similiarly, I grabbed a GNU Altered Genetics snowboard...  the board is 3cm smaller than my last one, but bumps are more enjoyable for sure.   Powder, feels pretty much the same as my last board.   I'd say my old board was more fun to bomb down the hill with, but I this board is more fun to play around with.

Whats also nice, is it seems that on flats you can almost rotate/spin... on my old board, I wasnt able to do that as the edge would dig into the snow...

This would be more appropriate for a fat ski discussion, but this is still a good laugh:
http://www.tetonat.com/2010/02/the-truth-about-powder-skis/


----------



## kingslug (Mar 12, 2010)

Marc said:


> What does Rossy mean with those skis when they say "reverse sidecut" at the tip and the tail?  That's confusing.
> 
> When I hear reverse sidecut, I think a ski with a wider waist than the tip or the tail.  Like the Praxis or the Spatula's.



The sides of the tip and tail flare out so you can carve a little with them. A lot of powder skis have very little sidecut, they're almost straight.


----------



## SkiDork (Mar 12, 2010)

I'm very intrigued.  Laseranimal has been telling me for a year that I shouldn't hesitate to go for a rocker for my next pair.  He says he loves them on all conditions, especially back country.  I should get him to chime in here and post his thoughts.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 12, 2010)

I assume one would need to go much longer than normal with a rocker tip (for skiing anything except powder exclusively) due to the shorter running length on packed snow? I don't buy it for anything except a rare specific condition ski. Just not versatile enough for the vast majority of days... even the vast majority of powder days when everything is tracked out by 10a and well packed by noon time. Seems like they have their limited use but I can not see them as being versatile enough for most folks.

Though as snoseek suggest, these types of skis will likely become a market dominator... whether or not skiers actually have better performance on them in the conditions they most generally ski. Tasty cool aid, though.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 12, 2010)

riverc0il said:


> Though as snoseek suggest, these types of skis will likely become a market dominator... whether or not skiers actually have better performance on them in the conditions they most generally ski. Tasty cool aid, though.



K2 has replaced their whole Apache series for next year. I skied the Richter today which is the successor to the Recon. This whole series is rockered to some extent now. The Richter has an early rise tip. They changed up the construction too. Conditions today were copped up heavy corn and slush. It was a very quick and lively ski that sliced through the slush piles effortlessly. Still stayed stable when I picked up the speed and ripped GS turns through all the muck. Very impresssed, none of the over dampness you got from the Recon was there.


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 13, 2010)

All I can say is don't knock it until you try it. I was skeptical at first then I got on the S7s. It makes skiing enjoyable.

And, yes, the effective edge is shorter. Go longer than usual. For a fully rockered ski, they recommend +10. My S7 is a 176 and it skis like it's in the 160s.


----------



## kingslug (Mar 13, 2010)

The only thing they don't like is ice....


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 13, 2010)

snowmonster said:


> And, yes, the effective edge is shorter. Go longer than usual. For a fully rockered ski, they recommend +10. My S7 is a 176 and it skis like it's in the 160s.


This is where I mostly take issue with tip rocker. That would put me into 190cm range. Not exactly a proficient length for tight woods skiing where my 186 twin tips are already pushing me when things get tight. This type of design does not seem likely to be that great on steep big mountain stuff like Washington gullies. 

I was actually very enthusiastic about trying a rocker tip ski and had at one point started considering that for my next touring ski. But there just seem to be so many inherent design negatives for what I want to use a fat touring ski for. Generally if there is a ton of untracked, I am at the lifts so the lack of versatility just does not hold up. Not saying it is not the right ski for the right skier but it is definitely not the right ski for all skiers and is not the second coming of shaped skis.


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 13, 2010)

riverc0il said:


> This is where I mostly take issue with tip rocker. That would put me into 190cm range. Not exactly a proficient length for tight woods skiing where my 186 twin tips are already pushing me when things get tight. This type of design does not seem likely to be that great on steep big mountain stuff like Washington gullies.



riv, good point. When I was shopping around for the S7, most recommendations leaned toward the 188. I'm quite smaller than you and was actually having problems with my 174 Squads in tight glades (of course, it could also be a function of the stiffness of the Squads but that's another topic). Something about seeing the tips of my skis going on different sides of a tree spooked me. Anyway, my favored glades ski was a 168 and, since I needed something to take in eastern glades, I opted for the 176 S7. Basically, I get the mobility of my 168 B4 with the added float in powder.

As for steep Mt. Washington stuff and doing tours on them, I haven't tried but we're getting to the point in the season where I'll be finding out. The S7s did quite well on the Sugarloaf snowfields but no straight-lining was involved. One thing about this ski is that when you go fast (on a groomer), the tips flap a bit. Since you're skiing on the cambered portion of the ski, it shouldn't matter (and hasn't) but there it is.


----------



## kingslug (Mar 15, 2010)

We did a lot of straightlining at Alta getting from one place to another and they did just fine..they like to go fast. As far as tight woods go..I suck in them anyway and the length, 186, was a bit much. In tight chutes they helped as they can bend to accomadate a super tight drop in, scraped the tip and tails a bit on the rocks either side but it was better than diggin and possibly taking a loong dive down.


----------



## bigbog (Mar 17, 2010)

kingslug said:


> We did a lot of straightlining at Alta getting from one place to another and they did just fine..they like to go fast. As far as tight woods go..I suck in them anyway and the length, 186, was a bit much. In tight chutes they helped as they can bend to accomadate a super tight drop in, scraped the tip and tails a bit on the rocks either side but it was better than diggin and possibly taking a loong dive down.



A few of those 186+cm-only skis I'd love to see shortened about 6-8cm...

$.01


----------



## kingslug (Mar 17, 2010)

They make the S3 in a few sizes..186 is the largest.


----------

