I have an idae, any marhe, check it...

CTD

CTD

Active member
ok. ive been working on building my own skis for a while, and its finally comming together. im guessing next weekend we can get the first pair pressed. but thats besides the point.

last night i had a revelation. it has to do with rockered park skis. while i see the advantages, i also think theres some major issues that need resolved. while im still working on perfecting the idea and how i will do it, i think i may really be onto something.

picture a ski. completely flat, just the actual outline of the ski. now, picture two lines extending front to back, lined up against the edge at the waist. the center of the ski would be completely normal, camber, etc. however, the segments of the skis outward of the waist would be "folded" upwards, maybe 5-8 degrees. so if you were to cut the ski in half at the tip or tail, itd look like this: \_______/

underfoot, youd have the edge contact. when you laid the ski down on its side, youd have a full arc of edge. but picture the possibilities of buttering and jibbing. youd have full lenghs of the ski for pop, but pretty much uncatchable edges in the tip/tail. that means confidently buttering off jumps at full speed, riding on the tip/tail sideways into rails, etc etc.

now, the big problem with this, is that shape in the tips naturally counteracts the flex of the ski. i have been thinking of ways to construct the sides that would allow natural flex while maintaining stiffnes torsionally and horizontally. also, aligning the edges within the ski seems to be a very crucial issue that still needs resolved. while i dont want to disclose some of my ideas on how to resolve those problems, this will be the next ski i build.
 
no rocker, regular camber underfoot, then bent up near the tips and tails is what "rockers" means. they are flat, or have some camber underfoot, then they are bent up at a point about 20 cm in front of the toepeice and behind the heelpiece. If the whole thing is bent, with no flat spot, that's reverse camber.

I completely could have misunderstood your post, but I'm pretty sure that you are describing rocker construction, which is what they ski on. 

That's sooo sick that you are making skis man. Post up a bunch of pics when you are done!
 
id get this copy writed fast.

with regards to the 5 or 6 degrees of ''up turn'', the ski would need to be reasonably fat at the tips and tail, because there is still the possiblity of catching an edge unless the skier is leaning over say 20-30 degrees from verticle.

just a though.
 
i SORT OF understand what you mean, but i think i have misunderstood the edge design..could you draw something on MS paint etc?..it seems to me you could get some delam issues with what you are talking about inder massive flex conditions - especially in the front 1/3 of the ski.

Scratch that - Reading what i have written, im pretty positive i have no idea what you are talking about
 
nope. your missunderstanding. its a cambered ski. but the EDGES bend upward, along with the base. so the contact point would be essentially a long narrow rectangle.
 
look at the burton dominant slick or the nitro Tzero the bases are flat until about an inch in from each edge then it has a 15 degree base bevel ... there is no need to shape the entire ski this way all you need to do is mill the core so when pressed the base and edge are beveled.. and the topsheet of the ski can still be flat.... your putting to much thought into it!
 
if your building a sidewall construction ski wich i assume you are ... the main part of the core of the ski will be a normall thickness and if you were to do anywhere from 5 to 6 degree bevel like you were saying you really wont be tinning it out much maybe 3mm max .. fyi i just measured the tip of 3 different pair of sidewall skis at the contact point the one with the most minimal thickness was still 7 mm
 
it could work fine if they use that special soft sidewall material Ride puts in some of its park boards. they would be like the perfect butter sticks, i really like your idea.
 
slimewalls are good and bad they do absorb shock and vibration really well but being s softer material the board is much more sucsceptable to a blown out edge and you cant fix that shit epoxy will not bond nore ptex..
 
ok i think i'm with you now - check the pic, is that the sort of thing you mean?? hard, but sick idea if thats the case. I think it would need to be pretty stiff underfoot?

edgebevel002ow1.jpg
 
^exactly but you would not need to angle it anywhere near that amount.. anything over 10 degrees would make the ski nearly unturnable.. the snowboard with 5 degree bevels are scary loose on the snow and never catch edge... and it takes quite a bit of effort to put them on to edge and actually turn... there would be no need to go over 4-5 degrees
 
yeah, definitely.

I just wanted to see taht i understood the concept. Its the sort of thing that would make some aspects of skiing, esp. park AWESOME - but detract from other parts of the sport, like trying to hold an edge, stopping in a hurry etc.
 
yup. you got it. like, the base would be flat at the waist, but would bevel up from the waist out. and yea, the burton and nitro boards are pretty much what im talkin bout, but at the tips instead of underfoot. as for a patent on the idea, im in the process
 
omg could you imagine the butters that could be done.

You could butter perpendicularly down a slope!!Like a side-nose haha
 
you are going to need a funky cassete or something along those lines for this to work. Also making the core the right shape is going to be a real bitch. you probably already have that thought out though. good luck on your first pair this weekend. post them quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top