Thread: Bluehouse Monarch Wondering, Ideas?

So my old man bought some bluehouse Monarch's, first rockered ski ever, and first new ski in a long time. Took them in to get mounted, base structure, edges (.5,2); edges were detuned to right about where the rocker/side-cut come into contact with snow.

He went out to ski them and said the things just wouldn't track or run stably at all, the only way to control them was to put them on edge, but any time you let it run they would wonder and were impossible to control.

Im trying to think what some problems could be, bases look very flat, are the edges detuned too far/not sharpe far enough? Something else?

He also said that it took a lot of effort to turn them but I wonder if thats more a result of the little side cut, combined with no camber, and a good amount of rocker. But if you guys have ideas here as well opinions and thoughts would be great.

On a plus side the graphics seem to be bluehouses best effort, the finish on this skis looks great (but topsheets seem to have the same duribility issues as before).

Thanks for your help.

I'd guess it's a combo of a first non-cambered ski + rocker. Takes a bit of getting used to. Once you do it's fun as hell though.

maybe its because that ski is not made for the type of sick park jibbing your dad is into.

Originally Posted by CDubz

are the edges detuned too far/not sharpe far enough? Something else?

I'd guess the opposite of this. Probably not detuned far enough/aggressively enough. At least that's what solved a similar issue for me.
[ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207169"]de-hooking billy goats - Will this help? - Teton Gravity Research Forums[/ame]

Originally Posted by CDubz

He went out to ski them and said the things just wouldn't track or run stably at all, the only way to control them was to put them on edge, but any time you let it run they would wonder and were impossible to control.

19m turn radius and 112cm running length = no, they're not as stable when straight-running as a traditional cambered ski.

Originally Posted by CDubz

He also said that it took a lot of effort to turn them but I wonder if thats more a result of the little side cut, combined with no camber, and a good amount of rocker.

Actually they've got tons of sidecut. How wide was the last ski he used? Anything over 90mm feels a bit planky if you've never skied a big ski before. (Yes, I know 96mm is small on TGR, but it's still huge by most people's standards.)

Originally Posted by millerstone

I'd guess it's a combo of a first non-cambered ski + rocker. Takes a bit of getting used to. Once you do it's fun as hell though.

I agree this could very possibly be it except I remember having a similar feeling with my original districts, with no rocker, normal side cut etc.

Originally Posted by lobstahmeatwad

maybe its because that ski is not made for the type of sick park jibbing your dad is into.

very valid point nothing like watchin the old sack of bones throwin down in the park with his tall tee and steezey getup.

Originally Posted by Chowda

I'd guess the opposite of this. Probably not detuned far enough/aggressively enough. At least that's what solved a similar issue for me.
de-hooking billy goats - Will this help? - Teton Gravity Research Forums

possibly this might be it but I've always thought of hooking as when a ski locks into a turn and wont roll over and initiate the next turn because the edges are sharp all the way up and down the ski. Hence you dutune the tips and tails so the skis release out of turner easier. am I interpreting the definition of hooking wrong? maybe were using the same term for different problems. His problem seems to be that they wont track, not that they wont release.

Really best way to figure out what they feel like is probably to get a few runs on them since most of this is based on me trying to interpret how he perceives the problem.

Originally Posted by Spats

19m turn radius and 112cm running length = no, they're not as stable when straight-running as a traditional cambered ski.



Actually they've got tons of sidecut. How wide was the last ski he used? Anything over 90mm feels a bit planky if you've never skied a big ski before. (Yes, I know 96mm is small on TGR, but it's still huge by most people's standards.)

He has skied biggerish skis, not TGR big but he has skied some of my old Rossi Scratch BC and Dynastar Big Troubles and enjoyed them. I tend to agree with your first point 19m radius and 112 run length might be the problem. Although I feel like my maestros seem to ski very traditional and while they dont rail groomers they arent bad and seem to go where i point them.

Again I probably should take a few laps on them and see if they ski similar to other rockered skis I've been on (Maestros, JJ, S7, ARG,etc.), although I've never skied a rocker ski thats this narrow, could that be part of it?

I think he was hoping for a good resort ski for colorado, decent in pow but could ski open bowls to trees to bump runs and groomers on the way back to the lift when the snow isnt uber deep.

Thanks everyone for your help so far.

Originally Posted by CDubz

possibly this might be it but I've always thought of hooking as when a ski locks into a turn and wont roll over and initiate the next turn because the edges are sharp all the way up and down the ski. Hence you dutune the tips and tails so the skis release out of turner easier. am I interpreting the definition of hooking wrong? maybe were using the same term for different problems. His problem seems to be that they wont track, not that they wont release.

I agree with your definition of hooky, but that wasn't the problem that I had. It was more severe wondering.

In addition to detuning, check if the bases are flat, and also I'd consider a 1* base bevel.

Originally Posted by Chowda

I agree with your definition of hooky, but that wasn't the problem that I had. It was more severe wondering.

In addition to detuning, check if the bases are flat, and also I'd consider a 1* base bevel.

cool, yeah I've gone with 1 degree on my rockered skis and that seems to be good. the guy at the shop said .5 a degree and they went with that, but im thinking a 1 degree base bevel might be the way to go. we shouldnt have to remove too much base material to go from a .5 to a full degree should we?

bases should be flat, the shop really worked them over because i dont think they were anywhere close to flat coming for the manufacturer, but taking a true bar to them to double check isn't a bad idea.

other than that maybe we just need to be more aggressive with detuning the skis and run a gumi stone down a little further and if that helps break out a file, although at that point im not sure i trust myself.

thanks for your help, hoping we can get this ironed out so he can really enjoy the advantages of a rcokered ski.

Originally Posted by CDubz

we shouldnt have to remove too much base material to go from a .5 to a full degree should we?

Shouldn't have to remove any material to go steeper. You only have to remove material if you want to go back to a flatter bevel.

Have you checked the mount point against BOF? Here's how to measure that:
http://www.gnolls.org/756/howto-moun...urface-method/

Let me know where they're mounted relative to BOF.

Since rockered skis have a short running length, they are even more sensitive to mounting point than a traditional ski. I definitely found this to be true with my LL2s: the "all-mountain" mounting point was too far back, and caused people all sorts of problems until they moved their bindings forward.

Bumping this thread to see if anyone's been on these yet. Thoughts, comments, feedback? Anyone ride these skis...what do you think. Pics of the camber/rocker?

Thanks!

I've skied them a couple days on hardpack, crust, and corn/slush. I like the rocker profile and the width, but wish they had less sidecut. More when I've got deeper impressions.

Originally Posted by Spats

I've skied them a couple days on hardpack, crust, and corn/slush. I like the rocker profile and the width, but wish they had less sidecut. More when I've got deeper impressions.

Any further observations on the Bluehouse Monarch? The price is right on their website right now, but not a lot of stuff on it out there in review-land.