Rockered Park Ski?

Mr.Huck

Mr.Huck

Active member
Legit questions. Who makes them? Who likes them? Why? It seems to me like this would not be a good idea. I took my rockered roller hockey skates into a mini pipe once, and it was painful. I think it screws with your pop because less of the ski is touching the snow. Thoughts please.
 
They never hookup on anything. Its like skiing a snowblade.

The rocker works against it on bigger features largely due to the lack of running length causing the ski to wash out.
 
I've never had any of said problems on my Halos. I ride a 176 and I'm 5'9", maybe a little less. To be honest, they may be a cheater ski because they're so light and so easy to spin. I rode 161 Invaders last year and the year before and those were more of a pain in the ass than the Halos. The Invaders were heavier, harder to spin, and too soft. Honestly, to me, if you're going to catch a tip, you'll probably catch it on a rockered ski too, but the Halos are just too damn fun. If you're looking at a park ski, I highly recommend the Halos, they are a little odd the first day, but once you get the feel they are insanely fun to ride. I was making carves at 50 the other day with fairly beat edges underfoot and they did fine. They are definitely not like a pow ski when on the groomers.
 
I have the alpha 1's and they're amazing on rails. They spin really fast too and butter well. I think it is a good idea unless all your hitting is jumps.
 
I think the newer generation of rockered park skis (lower and longer rocker, camber underfoot) is going to eventually become the norm. The key is going to be lots of R and D on the manufacturers side of things to balance the obvious advantages you get with rockered skis to the drawbacks. Differences between current cambered skis and new skis will be:

- Sizing up. If you ride a true 171, with rocker you'll be most comfy at something 10cm longer.

- Wider. You sacrifice stability even though you'll have a longer ski, so expect rockered park skis to generally be a little fatter

- Taper (maybe). I dont know where this one will go with park skis honestly. It shaves some swing weight, but it can make the ski feel strange in any type of deep snow... might just not be a perfected tech yet.

- Camber. About the same or smaller than most current park skis, and over the smaller running length. To make the ski perform correctly with this though,

- Stiffness. Expect them to be stiffer, way poppy and responsive. Instead of having an entire 171 ski as a springboard, your effective length on a rockered 181 ski is tiny, like 161, so to compensate, stiffen the ski. Stabler on landings, and the rocker will allow you to butter and press anyways.

Just some speculations anyways. Hope I didnt give anything away about next years skis.
 
The ON3P Blue Steele is what I ride. Honestly I didn't know what to expect but I had tried similar skis before so I went for it. They don't feel any different to me on jumps, and the biggest I get to hit are at Freeway in Breck. I think the last two are 70-74 feet this year so that's pretty big.

Super stable, no tip flap, honestly I don't really notice many advantages but I love the ski. It does ski shorter, so in excess of 50 mph on groomers they feel a little more squirrely than a longer ski...obviously. If it was regular camber I think I'd like it just as much. I guess it is cool that I can have a really stiff ski that is still very easy to butter on or do a tip stand!
 
this i got this years blue steeles also in 181 and he yeah they are amazing in every way. rocker makse a ski a lot more playful and fun to ride in my opinion.
 
i tried rockered skis for the first time when i was in colorado yesterday. it was the most fun i had using new skis. used some JJ's. i really want to try domains now.

 
What Rowen said, plus this.

Rockered park skis are the current wave of the future, so it's a two part question.

#1 What problems/solutions are we trying to recognize/solve in park skis in general, and #2 How do rockered skis fit into these problems/solutions?

My answers:

#1. Park skis have been, by and large, soft, narrow, and regularly cambered. I see all of these as problems. Soft skis work for buttery creativity, but they are far more of an issue on jumps over thirty feet unless you can land perfectly centered at all times. Narrow is a similar problem, because the skinny landing platforms aren't as stable as their wider brethren. Hence the growth of park skis by about 5-10mm in the waist over the past few years. And then the camber issue, which

#2. has switched for a number of reasons, all related to these other problems. Rockered skis don't need to be soft to still be butterable, so you can have a ski that allows you to slide around but won't wash out on large kickers.

Rocker gives the ski the upturned portion that the tip has traditionally constituted. You can dispense with the length of ski needed for that traditional down camber and upturn to tip, which yields less material length and less swing weight for the same length of ski.

Many of the guys leading jibbing right now are using way more than 90 degrees to the rail. This means that the catch points in a ski's sidecut are increasingly important to consider when designing a jib ski. Regular camber, when paired with regular sidecut, puts the widest section of the ski at the contact points of the camber. If a skier is doing a contact spin on a rail, this intersection can be a snag point. Rocker, however, allows these catch points to be elevated above the level plane of the base, and so more creativity can be achieved with less hassle.

With it's original use in soft materials, rocker provides a bit of float that wouldn't otherwise be there on a park ski. Slushy landings and ruts don't bother me with rocker on my park skis.

Overall, rocker with a park ski is just like rocker on a pow ski--something new that you either like or don't. My biggest suggestion is to try it out, and see how you like it.
 
I've still never ridden a rockered park ski, but they strike me as being stable and buttery at the same time. So you wouldn't have to compromise between a soft buttery ski or a stiffer stable ski. At least that's what I've always thought they were designed to do. If they're like that then I'll totally consider getting one next time I buy skis.
 
reno rockers dilemma over they have tip and tail rocker no comberHowever next year the Moment vices which are replacing the Rocker will have a mustache rocker so more stability plus the perks of the rocker
 
ive been using the k2 revivals, they havent impaired my progression at all.

and coming out of the extremes, im liking the revivals a lot more

and not really noticing any extra *washyness on landings
 
never ridden the blue steele, but when i hit the big line at key with my alphas they felt squirrely as fuck. I had to try and stay on edge or else they just wanted to wash out. I ended up going back to a traditional camber/ slightly shorter ski. I loved them on rails, but i needed something for everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top