Lotus 138--anyone prefer rocker 1 to rocker 3?

[natty dread]

I owned some Rocker 3 138s, but couldn't make them work for me after many days and 2 very different mount points. I kept getting thrown by variable snow and going over the handbars unless I kept my weight uncomfortably back. My belief was they had too much rocker.
I just picked up a nice pair of rocker 1 138s from ticketchecker and it's a different world. Love them as much as I loved my spats, except lighter and not such a chore on hardpack. They feel looser and happier slarving and unflappable and stable at speed, even in variable conditions. Totally different ski. I think I like the narrower tip better too.
For me, rocker 3 was a step backward for the 138.
Anyone else? I know probably not too many have experience with both...
And on that note, anyone have any r1 138s they wish to part with?

[abraham]

I was skied on a pair of what I believe were the rocker 3's. FOr some reason I did not like them at all especially compared to praxis powders. I had a similar reaction to them and could not find a good mount point that allowed me to be comfortable on them. Now im curious to get on a pair of rocker 1's, I did like the low tip of some EHPs I was on last week.

[mc_roon]

im the same, but moreso. totally agree that the recent generations of the 138s are a step back. I have a pair of the rocker 0 138s and they are my favorite ski of all time. even less rocker then the rocker 1, and even more of a shark tip like the spats.

this picture shows what im talking about. left are the rocker 1, right are the rocker 0. if DPS would bring back this design i would buy another set at full price tomorrow.

[summit]

I love my R1s and R3s (not 3.1s)

[IvanLipko]

I own the newest ones (Rocker 3.2) never had any experience with another rocker's.
I believe the 3.2 have lesser splay than both the 3 and 3.1 and the rocker is continuous. They are super sick just about anywhere. They are easier for me on the groomers than either Pontoon or ARG and superstable in the powder/cut-up powder.

Go test them if you can and then buy because you definitely will.

[natty dread]

im the same, but moreso. totally agree that the recent generations of the 138s are a step back. I have a pair of the rocker 0 138s and they are my favorite ski of all time. even less rocker then the rocker 1, and even more of a shark tip like the spats.
if DPS would bring back this design i would buy another set at full price tomorrow.

So would I!

[natty dread]

I own the newest ones (Rocker 3.2) never had any experience with another rocker's.
I believe the 3.2 have lesser splay than both the 3 and 3.1 and the rocker is continuous.

If you had the time to take a pic of the 3.2 rocker that'd be awesome.
I'd like to get another pair of 138s at some point, but not if they ski like my 2009/10 (I think that was the year) R3s.

[marshalolson]

i think rocker 3.1 lightyears ahead of the old ones, i think that ski jsut flat out nailed it. so stable, so stompy, so manuverable, so smooth, so buttery, so slarveable, so carveable. its the one ski quiver. it does everything perfectly, except lay trenches on hardpack.

if i never skied on another ski, ever, for the rest of my life i would be happy. any day that is not inbounds hardpack, rocker 3.1 for me. 2" of corn on top of a soft base? yes please. wind effect sun effect soft slab? yes please? 4" of creamy re-crystalized? yes please. touring 5 miles to ski a 2000 vert chute with unknown snow conditions? yes please. epic pow? nothing else. send 40 footers? absolutely.

[JeffreyJim]

Having skied Praxis Pows and the Rocker 3.1 I echo most of these thoughts. Not to say Rocker 3.1 isn't good, its just different.

I remember reading an article in some surf mag awhile back about low rocker profile vs high rocker profile and the difference between the two in the water. I know surfing is way different but the general rule of less rocker resulting in more stability/a "faster board" and more rocker resulting in quicker turning and a bit less stability is something I'd agree with.

In the end, its all good stuff. I just feel you have a little less room for error (skier position/balance point) on the 3.1 stuff whereas you have a bit more sluggishness (not much) and forgiveness on Praxis/older DPS stuff. Plus I think steepness of terrain really plays into this too. (3.1 being better the steeper it gets).

Both good. Just different.

Just my $0.02

[El Chupacabra]

I've never skied any other version of the 138, but I really like the first year ("rocker 0" ?) ones that I have. Narrow tip slices through crud nicely -- but can be prone to tip dive if you don't get some speed going first.

[nate s]

I have only been on R2 but love them for the lack of tail rocker, feel much more stable, chargey? than skis with more rocker.

[natty dread]

Just realized that the 138s I have and love now are rocker 0 not rocker 1, didn't realize narrow tip/even less rocker than R1 is rocker 0. Ski much like a spat except on hard snow where you can actually turn them.
Glad I snagged a pair!

[turboLT]

its the one ski quiver. it does everything perfectly, except lay trenches on hardpack.

if i never skied on another ski, ever, for the rest of my life i would be happy. any day that is not inbounds hardpack, rocker 3.1 for me. 2" of corn on top of a soft base? yes please. ...

Do you really ski these more than anything else in the BC? I've got 138 flex 3 r 3.1 and 191 Lhasa pows set up for touring and the lhasas are my go to. The lhasas crush the 138's in about every category except super deep - and generally when it's fresh and that deep the bulletin is too gnarly to go out.

Where did you mount yours? Definitely moving mine now...

[marshalolson]

i also have w112rp 190s for touring. and they shred super hard and i love them, but i guess i prefer the lotus 138 to all things soft if i am skiing something with pitch and vert.

[nate s]

Do you really ski these more than anything else in the BC? I've got 138 flex 3 r 3.1 and 191 Lhasa pows set up for touring and the lhasas are my go to. The lhasas crush the 138's in about every category except super deep - and generally when it's fresh and that deep the bulletin is too gnarly to go out.

Where did you mount yours? Definitely moving mine now...

I have 138s and 191 Lhasas with tech binders, 138s get out about 10x as much as the lhasas. I feel just the opposite, there are few conditions I would rather be on the Lhasas, and usually it has to do with skinning up on a 138 waist, not the down part.

[turboLT]

... there are few conditions I would rather be on the Lhasas, and usually it has to do with skinning up on a 138 waist, not the down part.

to bring back on topic - which rocker on the 138's?

I didn't find skinning too difficult on them, but I cut my skins super funky to make it easier. By super funky, i mean (with rocker 3.1, BD STS skins) removed more material than usual in front, then brought them out to 125mm at the waist so there's a good bit of ski and edge overhang, then cut them to fit correctly at the tails.

I weigh 220 w/o gear and am a crappy skinner and still have no problems skating or skinning. If it's more of a weight thing for you then I can't really comment. My setup should have "BARBELL" stamped to the sides - I'm using Dukes and heavy alpine boots until I save enough scratch for something else.

[turboLT]

i also have w112rp 190s for touring. and they shred super hard and i love them, but i guess i prefer the lotus 138 to all things soft if i am skiing something with pitch and vert.

just out of curiousity, are the 138's stiffer than the 112's? I know rocker and sidecut are different...

Also, when you're touring on the 138's do you encounter much hard pack?

[rabbit]

i think rocker 3.1 lightyears ahead of the old ones, i think that ski jsut flat out nailed it. so stable, so stompy, so manuverable, so smooth, so buttery, so slarveable, so carveable. its the one ski quiver. it does everything perfectly, except lay trenches on hardpack.

Not to argue against this but as a DPS lover who has only skied a few different versions I would have answered the OP that snowconditions strongly influence which version of the rocker is "best"

So now I gotta ask you, Marshal. Are you stoked enough on the 3.1 rocker to say its better than the others in all conditions or would you agree with my thesis that snowconditions might be considered when trying to grade "the best" rocker of these versions?

On a side note I got to ski the original Spatula last weekend and did my best to put a smile on the face of the ghost of Shane...
Im guessing i succeded since Ive read he was a huge fan of fart jokes.

As fun as the Spats where. the 138s really kicks their ass. Did anyone ever get Shane to test-ski a pair?

[natty dread]

Can anyone tell me which rocker version these are, r0 or R1?

[adam]

I have skied both for a season and definitely prefer the R1s. Don't know why this is, but it is

[mc_roon]

Can anyone tell me which rocker version these are, r0 or R1?

R1. You can tell by the tips(more rounded) and the r0 had black ABS sidewalls not the wooden ones r1 have. those skis do look fucking minty though

[natty dread]

Thanks mc_roon!

[marshalolson]

natty, those are rocker 1's.

so, i have spent at least 30 days on every generation of 138s, so here are my thoughts:

rocker 0 - (skinny tips, first year, plastic sidewall, white w/ red pinstripe) - lowest rocker, balanced tip and tail. i felt there was too much taper in the tip, which made these overly turny, and they lost stability.

rocker 1 - (wider tips, bamboo sidewall, white w/ red stripe) - slightly more rocker that rocker 0, super fun ski in corn, pow and pretty much everywhere.

rocker 2 - (black topsheet, bamboo sidewall) - flatter tail than rocker 1, different shovel profile. i felt these where the the most boardy and least resposive of the iterations. i prefered rocker 1 in all snow conditons.

rocker 3/3.1/3.2 - (red topsheets, plastic sidewalls) - combining a tail similar to rocker 1 with mega shovel rocker. all are pretty similar, jsut playing around with where the rocker lines are and how it profiles up from the plane.

overall, i have found that the rocker 3/3.1/3.2 are the most stable at speed, most "stompy", most reactive and manuverable, etc. all around the best. from there, i find rocker 1 to be my next favorite. super versatile. i really don't care for the rocker 0 tip, now, after skiing the wide tip generations. the rocker 2 is a great ski, and works well, but it is the least reactive and manuverable, and skis the most like a "regular" ski of the bunch.

really all are super sick and awesome powder skiing tools. we are talking shades of difference. all IMO blow the spatula, arg and praxis pow out of the water (personal opinion).

i PERSONALLY find the 3.1 rocker to perform the best out of the bunch in all snow conditons, at all speeds, and in all turnshapes. that is me though, so FWIW. i think the low(er) rocker 3.2 is a great shape as well... but the mega shovel rocker is what gets the lotus 138 powerfully stable at speed in mixed snows, again, in my opinion.

hope all that helps someone?

[Piggity]

Someone care to send me a pair of each and I can give my honest opinion, not that it will matter or mean much. My Praxis are heavy as shit by the way

[natty dread]

Thanks for taking the time to write that Marshal, good to have in the archives.
It's all personal preference and style I guess...
I had my new-to-me rocker 1s out the last few days in deeep LCC pow and all I can say is fuuuuck. Thank you DPS!