Results 26 to 50 of 275
-
09-12-2012, 07:40 PM #26
could you take a pic of them next to each other for a camber comparo?
Life of a repo man is always intense.
-
09-13-2012, 09:48 AM #27Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Posts
- 472
-
09-13-2012, 01:28 PM #28
Im super tight on time the next few days but if I get a chance I'll snap a few shots with both models and post em.
After unpacking these things I had to wonder about another length too. I'd definitely like to see mid 180's with this stick!
-
09-13-2012, 07:27 PM #29
RPC vs. RP profiles
-
09-13-2012, 07:54 PM #30
Bummer. RPC tail is still quite twin-tipped in comparison to RP. Thanks for the shots. Side by side tells a clearer story.
Life is not lift served.
-
09-13-2012, 08:10 PM #31
i can post splay and rocker line numbers for both in the AM, but the RPC tail rocker is both lower and shorter than the RP.
-
09-13-2012, 08:49 PM #32
Just got my pair tonight! They look sick. The flex is stout in comparison to the rest of my quiver right now (mainly 191 billy goat, 193 c&d). If these ski half as good as they look and feel, they are going to be huge winners. Now the waiting game begins.
Marshal, I presume you would recommend a midsole on the zero line mount? It looks a little back coming from the billy goat, but also seems to make sense in the context of the sidecut profile. Tele flail mount if it makes any difference.
-
09-13-2012, 09:00 PM #33
yo man! how is it. been a little bit...
anyhow, yeah it would really depend on your style. but telewhackers will for sure want to go off boot-center.
no way i would suggest any further back than the line.
stick with the line if you are a hands forward shovel driver.
move it forward a bit if you ski more neutral.
i can't imagine anyone wanting to move more than +1.5 forward anyhow.
i have only skied this shape on the line, with my own style, not mixed it up turn style-wise and moved bindings around... but will as soon as there is snow.
not sure if that helps at all.
-
09-13-2012, 10:43 PM #34
-
09-14-2012, 09:58 AM #35
i just randomly grabbed 1 pair of RPC and 1 pair of 190 RP to measure, YMMVDTMV.
RPC:
135 tip splay combined, 430 contact point from tip
97 tail splay combined, 310 contact point from tail
RP:
192 tip splay combined, 470 contact point from tip
107 tail splay combined, 390 contact point from tail
the RPC has much less RADIUS to the rocker profile (i.e. less kink), which is plainly evident with the skis in your hand.
and for those still confused about the use of the word charger, that is in comparison to the other fully rockered, short running length skis out there (Ie automatic, squad 7, rocker 2, wailer 112RP etc).
the RPC is not trying to be a full running length, long effective edge, large radius ski; but yeah, DPS does make those too (wailer 105, lotus 120).
-
09-18-2012, 12:05 PM #36
Just got back from a week of testing constructions down in Chile where we used the RPC as our platform shape.
I think it's safe to get pumped, because we all feel this is truly a great ski that skis exactly as it was designed. If you have one coming, enjoy–excited to hear the feedback.
Regarding Mounting: the ski has a really large sweet spot. Of the three of us testing, all were happy within a range of midsole all the way up to +2cm, even with different styles (our BSL's are 305, 313,315). If you are going to jib more, like butters, etc., feel free to go up to +2cm to easily access the shovel (If your BSL is 315mm or more nudge rearward of +2cm if going for the the more jib oriented mount). The ski still finishes turns crisply at +2cm but doesn't come across the fall line as powerfully or as smoothly as it does at +1cm or at midsole. Generally the more technically/ angulated/faster you ski, the farther back you will enjoy it because you are able to load up the tails across the hill, but alas there are no set rules for all the body types, boots, ramp angles, styles and mindsets out there.Last edited by dps; 09-18-2012 at 12:21 PM.
-
09-19-2012, 08:05 AM #37
^^^ liking the sound of this.
The Passion is in the Risk
-
09-19-2012, 10:01 AM #38
^Certainly excited for mine, cheers dps, please keep the great detailed mount point info coming early users, would be great to drill it right first try. I won't be mounting till January, so if anyone is around Revvy with a pair next season it would be great to have a play beforehand.
-
10-01-2012, 03:56 AM #39
Super excited as well and just got my shipment confirmation. Huge thanks to Marshal for reserving me a pair via PM while I was traveling this summer.
"Dude - I'd kick his ass. I can take my ski-off so fucking fast." - Jongsy
-
10-02-2012, 02:31 PM #40
Birthday present to myself.... I wanted to bring them to bed with me but the g/f said no because she wanted them. I can't wait to ski them.
Originally Posted by blurred
-
10-03-2012, 11:31 AM #41
Important caveat to our initial review of the RPC
I just posted this editor's note to our RPC review:
[Editor's Note: Unfortunately, we have to place a significant caveat on our initial review of the RPC. Upon returning from South America, we discovered that the RPCs we had with us in Las Leñas were edge high (i.e., the bases were concave), and the base edges were less beveled than they should have been.
According to DPS, here’s what happened:
“The RPCs that were sent with BLISTER to South America were the first pair of skis out of the mold, and there was a 24-hour turn-around time to tune and mount the skis in order to make the trip. The regular DPS factory ski tuner was out of town the day the skis came out of the mold, so DPS took the skis to a local ski shop for edge and base prep. The ski tuner used excess pressure on the feed-wheel, resulting in the ski being slightly edge-high (railed).”
Obviously, no one is happy about this.
BLISTER’s policy is to review the product as we receive it from the manufacturer, and we did. And we can’t say exactly how much these issues affected or compromised the ski’s performance, but it is clear that the RPC will perform differently when these issues are resolved.
As soon as we are able, we will be back on the RPC, this time, with the DPS factory tune.
If it skis differently, we will tell you. And if it doesn’t ski much differently, we will tell you. No more, no less. As always.]
-
10-05-2012, 03:14 PM #42
^^^ awesome honesty - hoping your initial review was not right!
Just opened my pair. Fondled them side by side with RP and the RPC just looks and flexes way better. I have high hopes for this ski. I know it won't be dank damp, but it should definitely charge harder than the RP.
Thinking +0.5 on the mount. Might just wait for more feedback since these babies ain't rock skis. . .
-
10-05-2012, 03:18 PM #43
Some flex comparisons Core Shot?
-
10-05-2012, 03:32 PM #44
Flex comparisons... RPC is awesome stiff
Originally Posted by blurred
-
10-06-2012, 05:03 AM #45
Compared to RP, RPC is much stiffer in tail and forebody, and a bit stiffer in the tip rocker.
The RPC will tip flap a lot less at mach looney (I would say not much at all).
It will also need to be loaded with more energy (not a problem at my weight)
It will also flex a lot less in deep pow, so some of the playful, slarvy reverse bending will not be there like the RP currently has.
Like everything, its a compromise. I think this one will be good.
Compared the the trusty XXL, the tip and the forebody of the RPC are way stiffer.. . .
-
11-17-2012, 06:03 PM #46
any on-snow reviews?
my flex 3 (aka 'charger flex') w105s are great on consistent snow conditions but regardless of bevel and tunes I've tried, they skitter and deflect significantly in less optimum conditions. part of the issue is length (the w015s mysteriously weren't available longer than 188s, and feel like snowblades) but based on my lotus 120 200s (also somewhat skittery, albeit better than the w105) I know that length is only part of the story.
I know the RPCs won't have the charging [sic] performance of my 197 katanas (12 lbs) or 193 husumes (9.9 lbs, damp construction), but i am looking for a DPS ski w/ more dampness and stability than my current DPS pure skis.
-
11-24-2012, 09:32 AM #47Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Trondheim
- Posts
- 29
I´m have som question about the mounting !
how far back from core center is the recomended line ? I did mount on +1,5 and still feel so wrong positioned ! I just want to go forward more, maybe +3-+4 ?
i´m coming from bibby pro 190cm that i think is mounted on the line !Last edited by linkan110; 11-24-2012 at 09:45 AM.
-
11-24-2012, 11:49 AM #48
the recommended line on the RPC is -7.5cm from the center of the running length (wide point of tip to wide point of tail).
i believe the 190 bibby is -7cm from center of running length, but i could be way off there. been a number of years.
it is super easy to find the wide point of the tip, the wide point of the tail, and then locate the center of those points, and measure how far behind this point the midsole line is located.
stephan and I 100% agree that the line on the RPC is super dialed, but our ski styles might be totally different than yours. boots, bindings, etc all factor in a huge amount as well.
-
11-24-2012, 01:22 PM #49Registered User
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Trondheim
- Posts
- 29
okay thanks for that fast answer !
i´m not 100% sure that the bibbys is on the line, bought them used, but i will check it out !
and it might be as my friend sad to me going up with the lift today, damn those are big and pointing on the rocker shovel on the rpc, and that might
just be the case ! it´s just in my head, that i see it and then i think i stand way back !
-
12-04-2012, 04:00 PM #50Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- Central California
- Posts
- 531
Any new performance feedback, reviews or impressions on the RPCs now that we're starting to get some real snow?
And I just want to thank all those who so kindly coached me on the correct location for this query.
Bookmarks