How shitty is cap sidewall?
- Thread starter bait
- Start date
Cadenmccullough
Member
I definitely prefer sandwich rather than cap.
No.Quarter
Active member
13793642:parkplayground said:
Top 5 really isn't saying much given that edges only range from ~1.8mm to 2.5mm, only 7mm of difference, and you don't see single millimeter jumps in the manufacturing of edges. Armada probably uses edges with the same exact dimensions that came off the same exact production line as most other ski companies out there.
No.Quarter
Active member
13793650:No.Quarter said:
Actually let me rephrase that, there are so many ski manufacturers out there and edges are all manufactured in such a similar way by only a handful of manufacturers (very likely not by the company pressing the skis) that saying armada is in the top 5 really means nothing. Sure the sizes of the edges make a difference in the durability, you can get away with a really small edge on a race ski or a budget ski while a thicker edge will be beneficial on a park ski, but the dimensions of the edge have less of an effect on the durability than the overall construction of the ski.
Disclaimer: I do not work in the ski industry, I am only basing this on a deep interest in ski manufacture and am currently studying engineering and manufacturing processes
.lencon
Active member
13793642:parkplayground said:
13793643:parkplayground said:
They're not 2.5x2
I can name 5 other companies that have thicker edges off the top of my head.
One of the reasons I like ON3P is cause they're pow skis (and all their skis) have thick edges. 2.5x2.5 of pure bliss.
I'm sick of companies putting a "thick" edge on their park ski and a thin edge on the pow ski to save weight. I bet the rocks I hit out on the mountain and in the pow are more damaging than cruising around in a park.
13793652:No.Quarter said:
most companies that have a racing background (Rossi/Fischer/Atomic) use much thinner edges throughout their product lines where freestyle oriented brands (Line/Armada/Faction/Indie brands) specifically get thicker edges. I was just trying to make a point to say that they are in the minority of larger ski brands that uses thick edges which is true.
13793658:.lencon said:
I'm not sure which armada skis you have used but I compared Thall's to 1.0's and they had similar dimensions. Faction edges were noticeably thicker on only one dimension. Since Faction edges are 2.5x2.5 mm, and I doubt Armada does something like 2.5x1.8 mm , Its reasonable to think it was 2.5x2 mm since that is the edge that Line uses meaning it is available to other ski brands.
If you think you need to name 5 companies with thicker edges then feel free. Im not opposed to learning something new.
13793652:No.Quarter said:
I agree with this. Overall construction is very important, but I learned something this season about edges. While construction is important, Edge treatment may be the most important. I have a pair of Liberty Antigens with a fairly average edge thickness, but they were heat treated to be softer than the standard 48 rockwell edge. I have broken a couple skis this season already and the edges had plenty of edge cracks under 3 days each with 2.5x2.5 mm sizing, but my Liberty's have 1 edge crack on each ski after the entire season essentially. They are paperthin, but they are only starting to crack now which is amazing to me. If Liberty tossed 2.5x2.5mm edges on their skis and did the same heat treating process, I think they would change the game for park skiing.
I Only ride rails btw.
patagonialuke
Active member
Armada specifically states what size edges they use for their skis (1.7, 2.2, and 2.5mm)
However, by the look of their little graphic, it looks like the bottom dimension stays the same, and only the height of the edge differs (instead of 2.5x2.5 squared off edges like ON3P).
https://issuu.com/zuzupopo/docs/armada_1617_hardgoods
However, by the look of their little graphic, it looks like the bottom dimension stays the same, and only the height of the edge differs (instead of 2.5x2.5 squared off edges like ON3P).
https://issuu.com/zuzupopo/docs/armada_1617_hardgoods
No.Quarter
Active member
13793768:parkplayground said:
What is your detuning process
.lencon
Active member
13793761:parkplayground said:
I have only borrowed armadas, never owned them. But looking at the edges compared to my ON3P they are thin. I skied on the JJ/Magic J btw.
ON3P
Kitten Factory
Caravan
Vishnu
Oh shit I can't think of 5. Guess that means not that many companies are doing 2.5x2.5
Also KF only offers 2.5x2.5 on their jibby skis. I want 2.5x2.5 on my pow skis.
qazwsxedc34
Active member
Half sandwich, half cap. Most companies do this now. Plus capwall is much more ridged, so It could benefit softer skis as well as skis that have metal and need the rigidness but also the lightness. Sandwich works great underfoot and across the full running length as well.
I don't think capwall is bad, it has it's purpose.
I don't think capwall is bad, it has it's purpose.
Zennan
Member
Ya know, I believe that any cap construction is of lesser quality. Decreases the vibration dampness, decreases strength and durability, decrease edge control, and just looks bad too lol. But for sure there have been skis that are made that are cap construction that aren't bad, just that they could be much better if they weren't :/
onenerdykid
Active member
13793826:fuckmekevin said:
13794599:Zennan said:
100% vertical sidewall skis will chip like crazy, no one wants this. So most companies now are incorporating some sort of "cap" to the top sheet, as in letting the top sheet round down a bit in order to prevent chipping and the skis looking like shit after 10 days of use.
A cap ski does not necessarily mean that it is not a vertical laminate construction. For years, our World Cup race skis were cap but used a vertically laminated, sandwich construction. A "good" ski has far more to do with what is on the inside, rather than what wraps around over the top. It just so happens that most cheap skis use a cap construction, and this is what leads people to believe that cap skis suck.
In short, a ski being a cap ski does not necessarily tell you that it will suck. It's internal construction and general material usage (type of woods, carbon/ti reinforcements, base material, edge material, etc.) will be a better indication.
onenerdykid
Active member
13794644:.lencon said:
I think you prefer full sidewall only because those skis you like are full sidewall- none of those brands make a full cap ski that is built like a vertically laminated sandwich ski.
Just like our Double Deck GS ski (which is 100% cap) would feel amazing to you, but it's a GS ski and not a 100mm all mountain ski or park ski. It's the opposite scenario from those brands.
Also, I'm not saying that cap is the best. I'm just saying that you can have a cap ski that skis absolutely amazingly well to the highest standards of stability at speed, edge hold, feel, durability, damping, etc.. You can also have a sidewall ski that skis just as well with the same attributes. The simple distinction between cap vs. sidewall isn't enough to say if the ski is good or bad. You need to know what is on the inside in order to say for sure.
Quick example: our Double Deck GS ski is cap, but vertically laminated über wood, sandwich construction, with 2 sheets of metal. It will ski far better than a sidewall ski of the same shape/purpose that has a soft/light wood & fiberglass-only construction.
.lencon
Active member
13794647:onenerdykid said:
Nope. My favorite ski shape I have ever been on wasn't sandwich. It was cap or semi cap. And I know that sandwich vs cap doesn't mean good vs bad. I have been on and seen plenty of poorly built sandwich skis.
I understand everything you are saying about the internal parts of the ski, but I am just saying that a well built sandwich ski (ON3P, 4FRNT, KF, Caravan, etc.) performs better. It is just physics. Cap has its pros though. Also, the chipping issue isn't a big issue to me because it is cosmetic and because it is a very easy fix.
Zennan
Member
13794634:onenerdykid said:
Exactly, that's why beveling the sidewalls is also a requirement. Vertical sidewalls just won't have the lifetime either. Most good ski companies that know what they are doing that are creating a sidewall will not do vertical sidewalls for that specific reason, but do like a 2 degree bevel on it. (not to say that good ski companies don't do cap either) I agree that cap ski does not mean it sucks, it is just one of many different ways to go about designing the ski.
I just personally feel like it is one of those things that adds a bit of the tech to the ski that makes a noticeably nice difference in my opinion. The general material usage will tell you a crap ton about the ski like you said, because, well that is the entire ski n stuff, which the sidewall construction is apart of! Just another thing to look at and basically see, hey I personally as a skier like this type of design better than this other type of design. The reason most skis that are not cheap skis do not use cap construction besides the overall cloud of ideas people have about it being horrible, is that it does help in some areas. Because, I mean you cannot argue with physics, rubber will decrease vibration and on your edges in the rougher snow or chopped up crud, you will be using that. Cap construction is just like another way to go about it, where some skis that are still high quality that use it will then reduce vibration by doing something different such as adding an extra layer of VDS tape or something on the edges to reduce vibration that way.
onenerdykid
Active member
13794720:.lencon said:
I think a lot of people's confusion around this topic stems from a basic misunderstanding of terms. "Cap" and "Sandwich" are not mutually exclusive terms (they are not opposed to one another). So when we argue "sandwich vs cap" we are making a mistake at the very beginning of our argument.
"Sandwich" just means there are layers in the skis, built like a sandwich. Cap skis can have this.
"Vertically laminated" just means that thin(er) strips of wood are positioned vertically when glued together. Cap skis can have this.
"Sidewall" just means there is a hard ABS-type layer on the outside, above the edge. This is what (full) cap skis lack.
A cap ski can be built to be just as torsionally rigid as a sidewall ski, but few companies invest the time and resources to figure this out and simply go the route of making a sidewall ski. Most cap skis are not as torsionally rigid as a sidewall ski because most brands are using cap skis as their entry level, low price point option which lack all the good stuff on the inside.
If cap skis were absolutely inferior to sidewall skis, we would have been fighting physics at every race over the last 20 years, and not have won as many World Cup races as we have.
qazwsxedc34
Active member
Supernaturals, line influences all have semi cap verticle sidewalls. They are by no means bad skis.
Zennan
Member
13794928:onenerdykid said:
I really like how you put this. Very well said. Really the difference between the two is so very minimal, but still such two different ways of approaching the same problem! To be honest actually the skis I am currently riding on are a nice combo of the two with a semi-cap construction, but more "sidewall" than "capwall" and they are sick I love em!
supersquid
Active member
I have had multiple lairs of sidewall construction skis delam underfoot including on3ps with only 10 days on them. I have not seen this with a cap ski though. thoughts?