5-point skis and tight trees

[Lindahl]

Lurker JONG just starting to participate here, will hopefully get some TRs up this season. 5'10, 170lbs, 28, skiing since I could walk (26+ yrs), 40-60 days a year, aggressive go-for-broke style.

(see bottom for the rest of the original post)

=============== UPDATE ===================

I ended up buying the 2010 186 ON3P Billy Goats with the same (low) camber as the 2011 version. My original post can be found further down below. Here's my review:

After 8 days or so in tight trees, all in lots of powder (boot to waist), with quite a few runs in open areas, I've found that the BGs are $$$. Tons less effort - so much less that I'm starting to take a lot more airs off logs, stumps and rocks at speed in really tight trees, knowing I can shut it down or change direction just about as fast as I think it. I'm sure I'd have some impressive POVs by now if I had a helmet cam. Biggest hit so far this season has only been 20', and I haven't had a bad enough landing where I needed a stiff tail to recover.

Very unexpected finding, but I'm really impressed with the way they can charge huge turns in chop and soft mogul fields at speeds where you're spending ~half the time in the air. This is probably a better testament to the stability/stiffness of the tail, when sometimes you have to do an emergency backseat to clear a mogul or snowdrift. The tail is plenty stiff to get back into the front seat at mach schnell speeds in choppy conditions. They have me wondering if I really need a second ski for hard-charging soft conditions.

The only problem with using it as a hard-charging ski, is that when I'm charging untouched powder at high speed, I find that they're a bit too easy to turn sharply and that I'll sometimes accidentally initiate a short-turn radius, instead of a long one (overpower it?). For a hard-charging ski, I'd prefer something that required more input. But I bought these for easy turns in tight trees, and they do that beautifully and so much more. At more normal speeds, I haven't noticed this problem and I have other skis for large SG turns on huge faces in powder.

Groomer performance is traditional and predictable. My ankles feel the torque getting them up onto edge, but that's just the 115mm talking. At high speeds, I sometimes lose edgehold. However, it's predictable, I can tell when it's coming and can easily reset the ski into the snow. I'm not sure if this is the tune, the running length, or just the fact that I'm not torquing my ankles hard enough to get onto a high enough angle. I don't think the loss of edgehold is due to a design fault. I think its more likely operator error or limitations of the running length - in other words, I'd expect similar skis to have the same result.

On icy groomers or very strong crusts, I noticed the tail washing out once or twice at high speeds. It doesn't really pose a problem, but it does require some attention/effort to keep them tracking. However, the tail's desire to washout at high speed is WELL worth the benefits in the trees.

Scott and his riders did an amazing job with this ski for the intended application. I've found it more versatile than I expected. I'll add more thoughts as they come to me throughout the season.

=============== UPDATE ===================

It's now the end of the season, and the BGs have been fantastic over the 70 ski days I had this season. Quick to float in pow, extremely quick in the trees, and able to stop or change direction on a dime, even right after landing 20-40' cliffs. They still don't like to hold high speed BIG radius turns in denser untracked powder and you do have to be aware of the tail on hard snow, but it's a strong testament to say that this is the only fault I've found in the ski for the entire season (and probably the reason why it's so quick in the trees). I've also taken them on quite a few spring and summer tours and the edgehold in spring corn has been excellent, allowing me to bomb down 40+ degree slopes at 40+ mph with confidence in a racer stance, even when things get rough, bumpy and runnelled. Here's a short video from one of the best weekends over the season, and a few pictures, showing the edging capability in firmer snow:


http://www.vimeo.com/22027522

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/4083/27311116681542829701810.jpg
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/6339/23061415472252998211810.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/3964/24231715511534780231810.jpg
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3777/24355615511731185141810.jpg
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/7131/22413115349505129591810.jpg

============ ORIGINAL POST =================

I'm currently riding some 05/06 183 Gotamas which were a great first powder ski back then, but I have to muscle them a bit in the tight trees. When I say tight trees, we're talking suicide tight (ate a tree branch last year - I don't recommend bark as sustenance). These videos are pretty much what/how I ski, a bit tighter trees where I am, though:

More Stupid Fun on Vimeo
POV Volume I: WP Powder on Vimeo (see ~halfway through)

Aside from R/R, which would be a bitch on traverses, skins and groomers back to the lift, I'm thinking the 5-point shapes would be the best - am I wrong? Here's the options I've come up with, ordered from what I think is softest to stiffest:

S7 -> JJ -> Bent Chetler -> CRJ -> Night Train -> Maestro
Billy Goat? Maven? Any others I missed? Or misplaced in this line?

I have other skis for charging open bowls (and old/hard/early snow), so I'd like to go soft. What I'm worried about, though, is finding out the hard way that the tail isn't stiff enough when I don't pop forward enough off ~30+' (who measures this shit anyway!?), or stiff enough to really shut it down fast when a tree moves into my line. See this picture for a steep ~pillow line with a nasty tree at the bottom you have to crank to avoid:
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4273/highres9452959.jpg (http://img146.imageshack.us/i/highres9452959.jpg/)

I'm not sure where the Billy Goat would be in this lineup, but I'm guessing about CRJ stiffness? I'm pretty sure I can rule out the S7, due to the weak tail, and the JJ for being hooky. I'm pretty sure the Maven is just too wide for the tighter parts.

Right now, I'm really liking the Billy Goat design. With the serious pintail, I'm thinking it'd be as maneuverable as the softer skis, but with the stiffer tail that I'd like for digging in and shutting down. Still worried about it sinking in too much on landings and wheeling out.

Anyone skied a few of these skis in similar lines and have some input?

Thanks!
Brian

[ego7man]

The first 5 point design I ever skied was the s7. I skied it in incredibly tight trees and it really is amazing. The tail is soft as you mentioned but I took it off probably a 20' cliff and didn't have problems with the soft tail. You can stop on a dime also, they're pretty much what you're looking for.

[ectreeskier11]

jj's are the best tree ski i've ever been on.

[ectreeskier11]

that said, fuck armada.

[klauss]

that said, fuck armada.

and salomon and atomic and...and rossi too


Get the BGs. They will NOT sink too much on landings.

[ectreeskier11]

and salomon and atomic and...


Get the BGs. They will NOT sink too much on landings.

yeah... that's what's so sad about the armada thing. we have all these awesome fucking choices for super good skis, so we can make an informed decision, support brands we trust, and get a great product. armada in a certain fashion seems to be trying to stop that, which is fucked up and a horrible move.

[lurk]

DPS 190 RP Hybrid, stiffer than the S7 lots of pop in the tails & smooth/damp in the crud.You will not be disappointed ,they also rail groomers way better than S7.:smoking:

[lynchdogger]

I skied Bents last year at Jay, Cannon and Sugarloaf in tight to "suicide" trees and really thought they were fun for said purpose. Very easily manipulated, check speed at will and stop on dime. Pretting sweet. Gamechangers in our eastern glop toward April (or any time of year for that matter)! Do have speed limit but as a tree ski that most likely won't be an issue. Trees don't move! :biggrin:

[khyber.pass]

Hell, get something light & agile with tip rocker and slight tail rocker... if you want to ski the trees in harder conditions too, then you need something with bite & some camber. Besides the above (lots of choices) may I also add:

DPS Wailer 112RP
Surface Live Life 2 (or whatever it's called now)
Gotama


A lot has to do with style. If you know how to ski bumps, and can platform and spring, you could ski trees as above in 200 skinnies. It just exhausts the shitnit out of you ;p

PS. Mmm.. suicide trees. Some of the trees off Jay & Tremblant require pinning it through underbrush, moss-in-teeth style. But it never gets that steep. You need more blind drops and 40+ degree terrain with sharp, pointy burnt trees sticking out so that the next turn might send you to your impalement doom:

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=84633&stc=1&d=1288464902

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=84634&stc=1&d=1288464902

[arewolfe]

Strongly recommend reverse/reverse. They really don't pose significant problems on traverses, skinning, or groomers. A lot of people make them out to be much worse than they really are.

As far as I'm concerned full reverse shapes are the ultimate means of skiing tight trees (untracked or very few tracks). I went from 176 Gotamas to ARGs and it made skiing deep trees about 5x more incredible.

I think BGs are a bit stiffer than CRJs. I had 176 Billy Goats last year and now have 180 CRJs. CRJs hand flex nice and soft... really nice feel in hand. Not Hellbent soft, but more than than BG. On snow I have yet to test them.

[khyber.pass]

If going reverse-reverse, check out Lotus 138s.

[Lindahl]

Hell, get something light & agile with tip rocker and slight tail rocker... if you want to ski the trees in harder conditions too, then you need something with bite & some camber.

No hard conditions except when getting to the trees. With hard conditions in the trees, I'd rather rip bowls in the sun (or groomers if the bowls are frozen too).


A lot has to do with style. If you know how to ski bumps, and can platform and spring, you could ski trees as above in 200 skinnies. It just exhausts the shitnit out of you ;p

Haha.. yeah, parents were pro bump skiers and Alpental rats back in the 70s, can't imagine what it was like back then. I was pulling tight trees off back at Mammoth's Dragon Tail on some 198 X-screams before the Goats, but yeah, no kidding. A few runs like that and you just want to head back to rippin bowls on some heavy battleships, even with freshies in the trees. Good times. Reminds me when I'd be ripping down 45 degrees on those screams in crud at Mammoth and my downhill jitters right off my boot (boot out). Thank god for fatties made for all sorts of terrain.


PS. Mmm.. suicide trees. Some of the trees off Jay & Tremblant require pinning it through underbrush, moss-in-teeth style. But it never gets that steep. You need more blind drops and 40+ degree terrain with sharp, pointy burnt trees sticking out so that the next turn might send you to your impalement doom:


Sick... where at? Reminds me of some sidecountry terrain at the Beav near that ~pillow line picture - no buried samauri swords, though. I'm definately breaking tree branches where I'm skiing. Duct tape is your friend... though I'm pretty impressed with the Armada Inverse I've been using - got a nice poke from a branch and my skin gave up a bloody bruise with not even cosmetic damage to the jacket!

[JimLad]

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=84633&stc=1&d=1288464902

Or you could air over all that. Uhh I'm going to have nightmares tonight...

[LightRanger]

The answer to your prayers is the Praxis Protest

[wren]

Haven't been on the 2011 Billy Goats, but the 2010 version were 90% as manoeuvrable as my ARGs in the trees. Plus you could actually carve a turn on them. They were also longer, I found the ARG too short. I personally wouldn't go for a full reverse/reverse ski again, at least for resort skiing. The hybrids are so close to being as good in the trees but are much better in more mixed conditions.

[YetiMan]

I had really good luck with the fatypus alotta. It's so wide that you can go pretty short...that feeling of float and stability on a really short ski = lots of confidence in tight trees = lots of fun.

[Chowda]

IMO the pintail on the Billy Goat makes them much easier to handle in real tight trees, then the more symmetrical designs. It's a great tree ski, period. I found myself pushing into tighter and tighter lines without any hesitation.

It may not be the best option for stomping airs.

[Lindahl]

It may not be the best option for stomping airs.

Can you go into any more detail? Generally in the really tight trees, I don't tend to drop anymore than 20', but I sometimes will be skiing these in somewhat more open terrain (glades) where I could be dropping as much as 35', I suppose. Where did you find them lacking when hucking? I'm not a park guy, so just cliffs into pretty soft stuff, and conservative on tricks - mostly straight, some 3s, and a rare flip.


Haven't been on the 2011 Billy Goats, but the 2010 version were 90% as manoeuvrable as my ARGs in the trees.

Can you comment on any differences you noticed in stomping? From what I've read, it's pretty much impossible to sink the tip with the ARGs, but if you didn't get forward enough, forget about a clean stomp (supersoft tail). However, I don't think I've read much about how the BGs stomp.

[JayPowHound]

186 Lhasas should definitely be in the running... stiff enough, yet incredibly maneuverable in tight woods for a ski of their size!

[Shorty_J]

Have to agree that R/R are not hard to handle at all on traverses. I absolutely LOVE my Spatulas in tight trees... you can do whatever you want on them.

If you really can't convince youreslf to go R/R, I think that a 5-point sidecut is the next best thing, for sure.

[neck beard]

183 Atlas?

[vanisle]

186 Lhasas should definitely be in the running... stiff enough, yet incredibly maneuverable in tight woods for a ski of their size!

Ill second that, owned Billy Goats and ARGs and have skied most of the skis your looking at and find the 186 Lhasa just as quick,almost as slarvy and have a nice solid tail. For sure my favorite tree ski....

10127569

[Chowda]

Can you go into any more detail? Generally in the really tight trees, I don't tend to drop anymore than 20', but I sometimes will be skiing these in somewhat more open terrain (glades) where I could be dropping as much as 35', I suppose. Where did you find them lacking when hucking? I'm not a park guy, so just cliffs into pretty soft stuff, and conservative on tricks - mostly straight, some 3s, and a rare flip.

I'm commenting with only ~5 days on the BGs, so it's easier to comment about what they can do then what they can't. For landing high speed hits like wind-lips, or little rock drops in glades, they're great. The tips plane up immediately, and they carry speed well out of the landing without loosing the ability to slash.

The couple of slower drops i did on them, I felt the tails sank until they hit bottom and the tips stayed high, making them feel a bit uneasy. I was able to muscle through it fine, but they were more on the 15' scale, so at 35' I think I would have been on my back.

Others may have different experiences though. I'm by no means a great hucker, and seem to shy away from it more and more each season. I doubt I've sent anything over 25' in the past couple seasons. And, I only have a few days skiing them.

[D(C)]

I'm commenting with only ~5 days on the BGs, so it's easier to comment about what they can do then what they can't. For landing high speed hits like wind-lips, or little rock drops in glades, they're great. The tips plane up immediately, and they carry speed well out of the landing without loosing the ability to slash.

The couple of slower drops i did on them, I felt the tails sank until they hit bottom and the tips stayed high, making them feel a bit uneasy. I was able to muscle through it fine, but they were more on the 15' scale, so at 35' I think I would have been on my back.

Others may have different experiences though. I'm by no means a great hucker, and seem to shy away from it more and more each season. I doubt I've sent anything over 25' in the past couple seasons. And, I only have a few days skiing them.

It's a different balance point. Once I got used to stomping forward on my S7s, I found them to be the best skis for taking airs I have ever used. The tips are unsinkable and you land in a forward position ready to make turns rather than in the backseat having to recover a bit.

[Chowda]

It's a different balance point. Once I got used to stomping forward on my S7s, I found them to be the best skis for taking airs I have ever used. The tips are unsinkable and you land in a forward position ready to make turns rather than in the backseat having to recover a bit.

I can buy that.

[Rossta]

didn't read what you wrote; but, to destroy lines on the pictures you posted, i would pick my 189 hellbents for sure.

[Sinfield]

It's a different balance point. Once I got used to stomping forward on my S7s, I found them to be the best skis for taking airs I have ever used. The tips are unsinkable and you land in a forward position ready to make turns rather than in the backseat having to recover a bit.

x2

They really reward the kind of drops where you are rocketing off with a fair bit of forward speed. Sometimes you touch down and rip right into the next turn without even really realizing you made a landing.

[wren]

Can you comment on any differences you noticed in stomping? From what I've read, it's pretty much impossible to sink the tip with the ARGs, but if you didn't get forward enough, forget about a clean stomp (supersoft tail). However, I don't think I've read much about how the BGs stomp.

You don't really sink the tips per say, but I landed a number of airs where I was a touch too far forward and went ass over tea kettle. I think the ARG is a fun ski, but better suited to smaller/lighter folk. They are also a wide footprint, in a short area, and I feel you get popped up pretty quickly. FWIW I think the C&D is one of the best stomping pads I've been on, but I don't really drop anything bigger than 20'-25'. Bigger than that the C&D and 125mm-ish underfoot might be too much.

For those suggesting Lhasas, it's definitely a ski worth considering (from what I've read). Never been on a pair myself.

[DoWork]

Right now, I'm really liking the Billy Goat design. With the serious pintail, I'm thinking it'd be as maneuverable as the softer skis, but with the stiffer tail that I'd like for digging in and shutting down. Still worried about it sinking in too much on landings and wheeling out.


Well, I've been using the BGs on the EC and for tight trees on a big day, I can't imagine a pair of skis being easier to swivel and pivot than these. Really, really tight turns are possible anywhere (think spontaneous dial-a-radius) and at any speed. Hucks are very predictable, and I love the way it planes out as if on autopilot in big dumps. All you need is a smidge of forward motion and you're pretty much golden. I feel like they're pretty pow-specific and are a handfull on groomers until you detune them a bit and get used to the swishy microturns they want to make- but once you loosen up on them they're a blast!

Can't really comment on any of the other skis you listed, but I give giant props to ON3P whenever I can for making them- sick, sick boards!

[Big Steve]

Icelantic Shaman is great ski for tight trees. No rocker, traditional camber, very non-traditional but highly effective shape

[camplemur]

Chances are you'll like any of the skis you've mentioned. I was in the same dilemma last year and went with the JJs. I love 'em. Haven't experienced any of the hookiness you mentioned? The tips haven't dived on me and have have kept me from going over the bars on at least one poorly taken wind-lip. I feel like I can disengage the tails at will and pivot whenever I need to.

I haven't skied them, but the CRJs felt softer to me than the JJs. You can't seem to go wrong with the S7s. I really liked the Bent Chetlers on the one demo run I had on them. They turn well for such a fun ski. Sir Francis Bacons?

[XXX-er]

Chances are you'll like any of the skis you've mentioned. I was in the same dilemma last year and went with the JJs. I love 'em. Haven't experienced any of the hookiness you mentioned? The tips haven't dived on me and have have kept me from going over the bars on at least one poorly taken wind-lip. I feel like I can disengage the tails at will and pivot whenever I need to.


^^^this

JJ is a great ski for in the trees and I don't get the hookiness comment either ?

[arewolfe]

Well, I've been using the BGs on the EC and for tight trees on a big day, I can't imagine a pair of skis being easier to swivel and pivot than these. Really, really tight turns are possible anywhere (think spontaneous dial-a-radius) and at any speed.

Dial-a-radius? Dude I just about shat myself.

To echo the multiple posts in here already, the Billy Goats are a nasty tree ski. 90% of ARG maneuverability sounds exactly right. But I stuck with my ARGs because the float and smearability is nuts. I'm also 130 pounds.

[Lindahl]

Thanks all - your input has been incredibly helpful. I think I'm gonna go with the Billy Goats to compliment my powder chargers. Maybe someday if I really get into touring (instead of just slackcountry and short bc jaunts), I'll grab some Sollyfits, 914s, Dynafits, Dynafit-compatible AT boots, and some Lhasa Pows and sell off the Billy Goats. But, right now, I just can't justify the extra cost to get something touring capable when I don't tour (yet).

I'll be sure to come back and post my thoughts (and some TRs!). For now, enjoy some powder trees and pre/post-huck stoke from last season (hit the far left POV lump - perfect for backflips):
http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/149/21934112997898892418107.jpg (http://img4.imageshack.us/i/21934112997898892418107.jpg/)http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/7982/21934112997922893018107.jpg (http://img835.imageshack.us/i/21934112997922893018107.jpg/)http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/5462/25977114656276350818107.jpg (http://img221.imageshack.us/i/25977114656276350818107.jpg/)

[Wetdog]

Wow, it makes you wonder how people ever skied trees at all in the past.

[Lindahl]

Wow, it makes you wonder how people ever skied trees at all in the past.

Those aren't pictures of the tight trees - the videos almost show how tight they get. Regardless, I don't have a problem skiing them with what I have now. I just want to do it with less effort - same reason we choose burly 13lb charging skis.

[Wetdog]

Those aren't pictures of the tight trees - the videos almost show how tight they get. Regardless, I don't have a problem skiing them with what I have now. I just want to do it with less effort - same reason we choose burly 13lb charging skis.

I hear you. I have to admit, that I have some 195 Praxis Powders, and they ski tight trees better than any other ski I have tried.

[Fatfish]

ARG's are my favorite tree ski. Things are great landing pads mounted at -6 I find. You said you have other skis and want a tree specific ski? Get the Donner Party then as Armada has become a bunch of Fuck Tards!

[MC Slayer]

Not saying it's better or worse than the skis already mentioned, but you might wanna throw the Icelantic Keeper into the mix. 119mm underfoot, 18m radius on a 189cm ski.

YouTube - bentgate.com Presents Icelantic Keeper Ski Intro

[ectreeskier11]

ARG's are my favorite tree ski. Things are great landing pads mounted at -6 I find. You said you have other skis and want a tree specific ski? Get the Donner Party then as Armada has become a bunch of Fuck Tards!

i wasn't a fan. maybe it's just the way i ski but they were a little more ungainly than i suspect the ARG's to be.

[SupreChicken]

Anyone out there to vouch for the 3.zero, Keeper, Night Train or the new Bibby to be used for similar circumstances? Anyone got a pair of folsom gambits? I'm trying to make a similar decision.

My impression (though, I probably am off in a couple of places) of Lindahl's original line from softest to stiffest:

S7 -> JJ -> Bent Chetler -> CRJ -> Night Train -> Gambit -> Bibby -> Lhasa -> Faction 3.zero with rocker -> Keeper -> Maestro

I suspect that the Lhasa tops the list for versatility
What to get, what to get?
Lindahl, did you decide yet?

[AustinFromSA]

Have you tried the newer Gotamas? I found that the rockered design made them ski a bit easier through the trees for me. Maybe it was just in my head, but it seemed to make a good deal of difference. I love 'em.

[Lindahl]

I went with the ON3P Billy Goats. I think the more exaggerated pintail allows it to have a stiffer tail for better hucking, while still being just as manueverable in the trees as the ones with softer tails. That's all just theory, but there are lots of satisfied customers, saying it's the best tree ski, ever, and I got to see the build quality in person and was very impressed.

I was tempted by Lhasas, but they contain lightweight technology that I won't take advantage of (yet), and thus, are more than I felt like spending - at least, new.

The newer Gotamas aren't what I'm looking for. I want a more tapered tail for easier pivoting in the trees. I really don't think a standard sidecut with rocker would perform as well.

[AustinFromSA]

Cool! I may have to try out the Billy Goats, then. They sound great.

[Lindahl]

updated my original post at the top of this thread with a review

[sqikunst]

The answer to your prayers is the Praxis Protest


Agreed

Praxis is one of the only companies making decently long pow skis.... R\R can be a hand full when the groomers are really icy. My pow boards having giving me the splits on more than one occasion!!! As long as it is some what soft then carving around on sketch skis is pretty fun. My ankles are the better for it!!

[LawndartGustav]

I know i'm a year or so late but Vanisle, that's like open fields, not skiing the trees =)

[PowTron]

Sweet bump...;)

I did want to add that it is hilarious reading this thread after skiing with Lindahl last season. He 147889% made the correct decision to get the BG's.

[vanisle]

I know i'm a year or so late but Vanisle, that's like open fields, not skiing the trees =)

Lets call it skiing glades then:wink:
nice bump...I stand by my love of the Lhasa but have spent a fair bit of time on the
S3s and up until 15 or so cm fresh they are the skis im grabbing in the morning.

[capulin overdrive]

Sweet bump...;)

I did want to add that it is hilarious reading this thread after skiing with Lindahl last season. He 147889% made the correct decision to get the BG's.



yup, for some reason i thought Lindahl had been around here longer.


this years BG's sound even better! ON3P is like crack for me, gotta have more.

[Lindahl]

Haha.. definitely the right ski for me and the terrain we have here. I like super-straight skis for places like Loveland and a few high-alpine areas of A-Basin or Breckenridge, but for everything else, the BG is where it's at. Updated the original post for a post-season review. I'll probably put together a more formal review later.

[PowTron]

Ahhhhhhhhh....memories.

March was insane.

[TDXIII]

Could someone please explain to me what 5-point ski design is?

i've not heard this phrase before.

cheers

[XXX-er]

Could someone please explain to me what 5-point ski design is?

i've not heard this phrase before.

cheers

http://armadaskis.com/product/skis/jj/

notice they list 5 dimensions instead of just 3 the usual tip-waist-tail

the widest part of the ski is where the front & rear shovels start to rise and the tips are narrower

[SiSt]

http://armadaskis.com/product/skis/jj/

notice they list 5 dimensions instead of just 3 the usual tip-waist-tail

the widest part of the ski is where the front & rear shovels start to rise and the tips are narrower

Just to get nerdy on this point.

Are there any clear definitions as to where the 1st and 5th number is measured? Or just anywhere behind or ahead of the widest points? Without any such definition, the information is pretty useless, really.

[XXX-er]

you have exceeded my nerd quotient but I would guess where the radius of the tip starts ?

[Knipping12]

Lindahl I have to say man that the amount of hootin' and hollerin' you do while skiing is fucking awesome. Brings a smile to my face every time.

[XtrPickels]

http://armadaskis.com/product/skis/jj/

notice they list 5 dimensions instead of just 3 the usual tip-waist-tail

the widest part of the ski is where the front & rear shovels start to rise and the tips are narrower

Although the taper numbers are fairly irrelevant

[XXX-er]

Although the taper numbers are fairly irrelevant

I dunno if or how they are

my thots of how a 5 point design works is when the ski is laid on edge the profile of the edge is already decambered so to speak and the decreasing taper at the tips is doing the steering action instead of using sidecut like a more traditonal ski which is using sidecut , which is my theory of why 5 point designs don't have much side cut but these are just the ramblings of someone who has spent a alot of time sitting looking at them ... anyone feel free to school me

[SiSt]

I´ll ditch the term five-point in the following and substitute with "tapered tip and tail" instead. (Only Armada using it anyway...)

Tapering the tip and tail: Moving the widest point of the ski towards the ski centre.

Slices through uneven snow, avoids hookiness by making the tip and tail narrower than it would otherwise be. Works by “stretching” the part of the ski that comes into contact with the uneven snow and making the slicing through more gradual (longer cutting surface), thus reducing the forces uneven snow exerts on the ski and stretching it out over a longer period of time. Let´s you make a ski that is wide, long and has a short turning radius without the tip and tail becoming excessively wide if you should be so inclined. No need to have a short radius though, unless you want a ski that gets nervous at speed...

[XtrPickels]

I dunno if or how they are

my thots of how a 5 point design works is when the ski is laid on edge the profile of the edge is already decambered so to speak and the decreasing taper at the tips is doing the steering action instead of using sidecut like a more traditonal ski which is using sidecut , which is my theory of why 5 point designs don't have much side cut but these are just the ramblings of someone who has spent a alot of time sitting looking at them ... anyone feel free to school me

I have no clue what you're saying here.
The edge that touches the snow and the subsequent bend in the ski dictates the turn.
On Hardpack, your "5 point" ski has a really short running length.... which can have a tight turn radius off a non-dramatic sidecut.
In 3D snow, the rocker, in addition to the sidecut, will dictate the turn shape.

The tapered tips and tails are just there to stay the fuck out of the way and NOT influence anything except ski length (float and stability).

[XXX-er]

In 3D snow, the rocker, in addition to the sidecut, will dictate the turn shape.

The tapered tips and tails are just there to stay the fuck out of the way and NOT influence anything except ski length (float and stability).

yes but they DO engage unconsolidated snow as the ski is laid on edge and if they touch ... I think they will do some carving

[merlinmassoud]

SISt: for the 1st and 5th dimension, it should be good to measure at 13 ou 15 centimetres from the tip; wich is the average lenght of a classical tip.

[SiSt]

SISt: for the 1st and 5th dimension, it should be good to measure at 13 ou 15 centimetres from the tip; wich is the average lenght of a classical tip.

That could be a possibility, but until this gets defined, the numbers mean nothing.

XXX-er: If a tapered tip engages, it´ll initiate a turn in the opposite direction of where you want to go. A properly designed tip/taper/rocker will help reduce this, but a heavy detune of everything that isn´t sidecut minimizes it to the point where it´s no issue at all.

[merlinmassoud]

with they didn't make these tapered parts with round rails and the edge under the sole to keep thoughness.

[XXX-er]

XXX-er: If a tapered tip engages, it´ll initiate a turn in the opposite direction of where you want to go. A properly designed tip/taper/rocker will help reduce this, but a heavy detune of everything that isn´t sidecut minimizes it to the point where it´s no issue at all.

Well water skis are tapered and engage the water when put on edge and water is a denser medium that off piste snow ?

[merlinmassoud]

water shoud be betwenn spring snow and heavy powder.
the tapered tip engage in the wrong direction almost on firm snow, hard pack, crust ... when you are imbalance on the front , on the tip or sometimes on bumpy places.
these five dimensions skis have a short lengt off contact >>more sensible to that.

for the same effort, water skis are less pivoty and they're very very stiff.
cqfd

[XtrPickels]

Well water skis are tapered and engage the water when put on edge and water is a denser medium that off piste snow ?

In both cases the rocker is important in dictating turn shape. You don't "engage the edge" in 3D snow or water. Engaging an edge is not smearing or skidding a turn, its carving one.

You're never tried to carve spatulas on hard snow, have you?
You can skid 'em no problem... but if you lay them on edge to carve you'll get the splits.Skis such as the Lotus 138, even with a bit of traditional sidecut, can do this to you as well.

[XXX-er]

In both cases the rocker is important in dictating turn shape. You don't "engage the edge" in 3D snow or water. Engaging an edge is not smearing or skidding a turn, its carving one.

You're never tried to carve spatulas on hard snow, have you?
You can skid 'em no problem... but if you lay them on edge to carve you'll get the splits.Skis such as the Lotus 138, even with a bit of traditional sidecut, can do this to you as well.

never skied spats

[SiSt]

with they didn't make these tapered parts with round rails and the edge under the sole to keep thoughness.

The rocker 2 is made like that, or rather, the edge is removed and the base is rounded.

It´s an ok idea, though I prefer to have a steel edge all the way. Detuning is fast and easy, even if I have considered getting a dremel and really rounding the edges on the tip and tail completely just for shits and giggles. Currently, I just use a file at 45 degrees.

We´re drifting, though this is still remotely relevant for the discussion? Could potentially start a thread on 5-points and tuning?