186 Rocker Review Thread

**pechelman** · 11-22-2007, 01:09 PM

Skier
5'10, 170, pretty good, but there are definitely lots better people here than I
Favorite skis: Axioms and Legend Pros
Not-So Favorite Skis: mojo103s (long story, but it was a jekyll-hyde ski for me)

Location \ Snow Conditions
A-Basin and keystone on everything from bulletproof, soft scraped fluffy section, crud, and 4" of untracked yesterday.
Ive got 4 days on them so far

Ski Details
186 Proto Rockers
Built up with 188 cores with a spliced in stringer
Asymetric sidecuts with the larger sidecuts placed inwards
5lbs even
Round flex throughout, stiffness seems to be on par with a ski in the 6'ish range.
Camber
In their natural state, they have 2-3mm of camber underfoot, so basically none.
When you press the bases together, the tip rocker extends about 250mm past the widest point of the ski.
At the widest point of the ski they have about 10mm worth of rise.
At the tails, they have very little rocker and more of just a low - long rise tail.

Bindings\Boots
Due to hole conflict issues, I mounted them -2cm from Pats line.
Dynafit Comforts \ Dynafit ZZero 4 PX

To everyone reading this, please keep in mind these are protos, so some things may not be exactly the same on the production models. ie no asymetry, different - slighly thinner core with a slightly thicker tail, and perhaps a tad more tip rocker. This review should however give you a good idea of what to expect.

Hard Snow performance
Due to my mount location, they felt a bit awkward at first, and this was the first time ive been on a heavily tapered ski. Taking that out of the equation though, edgehold is great and standard PM Gear quality compared to 179s and 192s. Turns are initiated pretty easily for a ski this wide and can be carved cleanly, if you're patient on the tails. The skis have a smooth damp feel with lots of energy when you want it going from turn2turn. Not as much so as something like a Legend pro, but more like a mojo103 minus the gobs of metal feel. Stability is slightly better than my 186 Legend Pros mounted on the line yet due to the shorter effective edge, 152cm, they are super easy to throw around. Really fun combination

Soft fluff ontop of Hardsnow
This is where these ski shapes really start to shine imo.
As they were designed to be "soft snow skis" like a dp120 and ehp193 Id expect nothing less.
When you want them to, its super easy to release the tails, yet there's enough tail that you can reenter a carve pretty easily once sliding around a bit. It takes a gentle\patient touch as with any ski this big\large radii.

Crud
In one phrase, this ski crud as if there wasnt any.
Reminds me a bit of spats in how smooth it makes crud and also has the wonderful feeling of being able to destroy crud skiing by carving through it like Legend Pros. The shovel\waist proportion I think really creates this sensation.
The tips do bounce a little between crud pockets, but really arent disorienting in the least. If you ski faster they actually settle down. I felt the tips were a TAD hooky, but I think thats because of rearward mount location.
Honestly though, if I can deal with that given my experience and soft AT boots, there is no reason anyone else here with more skill than I couldnt handle it just fine....or just mount them on the line

The day I had them out called 4" and I never hit bottom unless I came accross a section that was completely scraped over.

Pow
Unfortunately I only had one partial run in untracked. (500vert maybe?)
Its hard for me to comment on them given so little vert.
I had fun, they did well, the tips were perma fixed to the surface, and they were easy to ski.
Really just like skiing a groomer. These seriously remind me of the way axioms ski pow\curd in the few turns I got them in.

Final comments on the initial review
Right now Id reccomend an on the line or maybe a -1 mount depending on your ski preference.
I dont think im going to move mine though, because id really only want them forward for hardpack.
As the season continues im sure ill get stronger and any hookyness i thought i felt will feel even more miniscule.

At first I wished they had a bit more tip rocker, but now im unsure.
Really I just need to ski them in some shitty breakable windcrust to find out.

Overall, a really fun, quick, and playful soft snow ski. (ie what i intended when i was designing them)

Things I didnt like
Everyone asking me what the skis were.
I wished they were .5 lbs lighter.
Speculating here, but I also wished they were stiffer and had 10mm more rise in the tips. (time will tell)
Asymmetric sidecut would pull to the inside (think pizza) when running flat, very little though and corrected with a bit more function tension. (will not be an issue on production\symmetric skis)
Mount location wasnt dialed.
Wish I had more effective edge, but being the designer, realized this was as much as I could fit given other constraints.
(compare this 152cm effective edge to the dp120 190cm and youll see its 3cm larger for a ski thats 4cm shorter)

Things I did like
Hardpack performance really surprised me. Lots of fun once you get used to having 152cm of effective edge.
The waist\tail width proportion. Feels just right for what I wanted.
The tip\waist width proportion. Borrowed from the Iggy FFF and Legend Pro, it feels just right and very familiar.
Tail rocker profile, at least conceptually right now, as I havent had them in breakable crust.
Stability, not twitchy like my LPs can be when running flat.
Easy to initiate turns in pow\crud\ice.
Skiing on something I designed and that was made by maggots. fkna awesome.

Ill update this thread as I get more days on them.

feel free to ask questions \ comparisons.

sorry for this being so stupid long

**Tyrone Shoelaces** · 11-22-2007, 01:19 PM

The BROcker?

nice review man. Looking forward to more as you ski them more and begin to make & suggest tweaks in the design. A 186, 140-112-120 with rocker and a flat tail sound great to me.

**splat** · 11-22-2007, 01:36 PM

Craaazy, Phil. Lucky you gettin some pow. We haven't had shit to ski them in yet.
I have cores arriving next week for the next round of rockers to be built, but a ton of other skis to build first.
The skis from Europe arrive Monday, too.
It's that time of the year...

**Toby** · 11-22-2007, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

Wish I had more effective edge, but being the designer, realized this was as much as I could fit given other constraints.

Make the 196, then you'll have more effective edge

.

**pechelman** · 11-22-2007, 06:37 PM

^ indeed

really though, the limitations that come from a shorter effective edge arent that great, especially for a ski of this nature.

the 196 should be a lot of fun if\when it goes into proto -> production.

**foreal** · 11-22-2007, 08:50 PM

Nice review. However, it'd be a lot cooler if you had some pics

**pechelman** · 11-22-2007, 08:59 PM

ask and ye shall receive

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...2&postcount=67

**mojorisin** · 11-22-2007, 10:20 PM

just out of curiosity, why the asymmetrical sidecut? is there a ski on which it has worked (well) ?

**pechelman** · 11-22-2007, 10:34 PM

not intentional

when you cut the bases from the stock material, sometimes they skew a bit
one of the reasons PMGear had so many issues with blems last season.

honestly though, i really dont notice it anymore.

**splat** · 11-23-2007, 01:53 PM

Asymmetrical sidecuts occur because of the cooling/curing process involved with sintered uhmw pe plastic. It shouldn't happen, but the material develops a tension in it. When cut, this tension releases. In bases, it usually seems to want to release sideways, thus creating asym bases.

The reason those bases were asym is because the skis were protos and we hadn't made a mold yet. After cutting, they tweaked and created a larger radius on one side than the other. Typically, we wrestle asym bases into a mold and they come out to spec, having been properly realigned. For protos, we just press between a couple sheets of metal with no borders to hold the base to shape and the asymmetry of the base manifests in the skis. Once we feel like we have a viable design, we make a mold to ensure the skis have a symmetrical sidecut.

I have cussed and insulted the base manufacturers for this and even gotten refunds out of them for shipping us shitty material. Lately, in order to further minimize that tweaking when cutting, we have been putting the material through a heat up/cool down process. This has been very successful , as evidenced when the bases fall right into the mold like they're supposed to.

I have wrestled some ugly bases into molds and gotten perfect skis, but it's time consuming and frustrating. Some of the guys we had pressing last year were cheating when my back was turned and pressing the crooked bases between two sheets of metal and we shipped some asym skis. They got fired for that. If a company does not use molds for their skis, there's a good chance that either 1) their skis are asym or 2) they are getting some damn sweet base material that isn't twaeking and they aren't making asym skis. However, most people in the US are getting their bases from Crown Plastics, where we get ours.

To check for asym, all you have to do is hold your skis together so the edges are flush tip and tail, then squeeze and see if the edges match up in the center.

**Core Shot** · 11-23-2007, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces

The BROcker?

.

Do the testing.

Get the ski absolutely dialed.

And then pull out your ace in the hole

and call it

the FKNA

(I know its been suggested before when creating the big Bro, but ther are 2 reasons to go FKNA.
1) this is really different - when someone raves about the new Bro, you dont need someon confusing that with the tradititional Bro: and
2) you now have FKNA tradmarked, so start earning your publicty in the ski world. Even if you don't sell a shit ton of FKNA rocker skis, you certainly will get in the black selling FKNA t-shirts to the skiers that read about your new ski. Soft Goods - thats where the real money is.

**pechelman** · 12-02-2007, 10:17 PM

alright
2 more days on these skis in the environment they were designed for.

day 1
vail pass tour
sidehilling is a tad tricky, but doable given their sidecut.
the tips are a little wide screwing with the setting an edge on really hard tracks, but its doable for sure. not many worthwhile turns on the way down due to coverage, but really though they did well. The snow was pretty heavy down lower and I could sink a tip, but I was also going like 5-7mph (ie flat). Id think with a more upturned tip and the same amount of rocker OR more rocker and the same tip would be perfect. Until I get them in real pow I can ski with some speed, I wont know for sure, but my inclination is to keep a minimal amount of rocker and just increase the tip profile. (look at the legend pros)

day 2
massive dump at vail. knee to ball deep
WOOOOHOOOO!
These were a shit ton of fun.
In my opinion. I Loved the rearward mount. Just enough tail behind you to keep things stable and give you something to press on, and not too much tip that it made it hard to ski it in tight spots. These skis really shine in crud and anywhere there is a soft base. They absolutely just rip/slice straight through crud, no hint of getting knocked around, and when you want to turn, let the tips do their majix.

Carving on the groomer back to the lift these were a blast. They did not ski short at all like they did on a hard groomer. Tons of stability and really fun to carve normal sized turns on. Id say it felt like a 25-27m radius in comparison to other skis Ive been on in soft snow packed runs.

Going through bumps was a breeze. Very easy to control your direction by using or sliding the tail around.

Not once all day did I feel the tip was hooky in any fashion. One of my concerns for a ski this wide with that much tip and tip rocker.

Complaints of the day
I wish I was on the freaking 196s!
Wish they had a bit higher tip profile as above. (or more rocker, still undecided)
There were a couple of times I think Id have liked the ski to be a TAD stiffer underfoot, but ONLY underfoot. Im not really certain on a ski of this nature that you want that are of the ski to be moving that much. Again these are protos and not using the designed cores which are stiffer.

I cant comment on my ability to bury a tip today because i never really got the chance to ski untracked. Sure there were times theyd be under a pile of 12-18" crud, but theyd slice through it, rise up, and be ready at the surface to initate there next command.

Shape wise, I think its a good compromise all over.
I also dont think reducing or increasing any of the dimensions would have really helped the ski that much in any area to take that hit in all the other areas.

ie a REMOVED would have been as fun on groomers or as wonderfully floaty in pow, especially since I dont find them hooky at all, even with a -2cm mount & dynafit zzero boots.
or
REMOVED would have been less fun on soft snow groomers for not that much gain in pow, again, just my opinion. Also, these arent "pow" skis so much as they are "soft snow" skis ala marshaLOLson.

so yea, overall im really very happy with the shape, but with just a few minor tweaks, I think that will be a pretty freaking dialed ski for what you guys wanted me to draw up.

if I had to do it over again, what would I change on the shape?

I might have moved the widest point of the ski a LITTLE further forward (3cm?) to give it a bit more edge, more surface area, and more tip surface area. Of course then id be concerned with adding more rocker to keep it from being hooky and a couple of other things. but like i said though, these skis transform into a much longer skiing ski in soft snow, so im not sure i want\need that extra edge.

other than that, I like it.

sorry if this is poorly written, just wrote it down as throughts came to my head. which is to say....all at freaking once

**splat** · 12-02-2007, 10:29 PM

HA!!!!!! I've been waiting for your take on those babies, pechelman.
More rocker? Done. Stiffer underfoot? Done.
I just got enough cores shaped for ten more pair of 186s. And this time they are they 186 cores.
We'll get these dialed then move to 196s.
We have a few 179s to press to catch up, then 192s, then 188 softs and we'll be ready to play with the 186s again.
We'll have 5-10 pair made by mid-January and we'll send you some of those.

**pechelman** · 12-02-2007, 10:34 PM

Originally Posted by splat

HA!!!!!! I've been waiting for your take on those babies, pechelman.
More rocker? Done. Stiffer underfoot? Done.
I just got enough cores shaped for ten more pair of 186s. And this time they are they 186 cores.
We'll get these dialed then move to 196s.
We have a few 179s to press to catch up, then 192s, then 188 softs and we'll be ready to play with the 186s again.
We'll have 5-10 pair made by mid-January and we'll send you some of those.

If you can afford the time\money\materials, Id say to make 2 identical pair, one with the same tip profile and more rocker and one with a bigger tip and the same rocker as the ones i have. Do a back to back and just let that decide. Theyll both rip im sure, but i think one will be a bit better in "soft snow conditions".
Put my money on the slightly larger tip profile category.

I think the 196 will be much easier to dial. With the limited real estate on a 186 its tough to get the variables right and in the right proportion to each other.

more skis huh?
shit, i need more bindings

guess thats a good problem to have.

**corn dog** · 12-02-2007, 10:34 PM

They sound awesome for soft snow billygoating, my preferred pass time

Nice work.
Hmm 5lbs, do they have carbon in there?

**pechelman** · 12-02-2007, 10:37 PM

only guessing here, but i think mine are 3-4 layers of glass and no carbon?
pat will need to confirm that as he is the manufacturing guru.

skinning with them wasnt bad at all honestly
after 5mi\3kish vert I was tired, but not bad at all.
no worse really than I remember skinning with freeride aeros and 182 VCTs (and comforts on both skis)

**splat** · 12-03-2007, 12:02 AM

No carbon in those yet, but we could kill a pound per ski by doing it.

hmmmmmmm...........

**BrianGriffin** · 12-03-2007, 10:54 AM

I want a pair of 186's. These look badass.

Edit: Seriously, I will actually put my money where my mouth is and order one of the early pairs of these if it is possible to.

**XtrPickels** · 12-03-2007, 11:31 AM

Pat,
I'll remind you of my willingness to be a beta-tester

**pechelman** · 12-03-2007, 11:55 AM

Anyone in CO who wants to try them let me know.
Ive got dynafits on them, but Ive got a couple of boots that you might be able to fit into.

**ChowdahRidah** · 12-03-2007, 02:35 PM

Wow! I may be taking you up on the demo offer very soon. This ski sounds perfect.

**splat** · 12-03-2007, 09:06 PM

Since both the factory and I are extremely busy this month, it looks like I'm gonna ship the other pair of protos over to Stunt Cok in Japan.
I won't have the time to do any new ones until Jauary.
I just need them for a lil heli time first.
They'll ship to you at the end of the month, bro.
Ya hear that Stunt Cok????

**pechelman** · 12-04-2007, 10:05 AM

uh oh
now someone else will have some out there and i wont be as cool anymore

cant wait to hear someone else's perspective on them.

**Toby** · 12-04-2007, 03:55 PM

Note to self: meet Stunt Cok in Japan.

**splat** · 12-04-2007, 10:18 PM

It'll be almost a month before I ship them.
They need some serial testing first.
Email slavebro about orders now.
That might be possible, but only a few.
They'll get built in January.