Full rocker skis with metal; what are the options?

**skime** · 10-26-2013, 03:15 PM

The winter is still not quite there (for the most of us), so my waiting around for snow has my head spinning around as said topic.
As title describes it I'd would like help to get an overview over skis with pronounced rocker and metal, preferably without the camber of the Stöckli type skis. I'm thinking more in the line of Volkl Katana and Blizzard Bodaicouse and co.
Maybe even a short short review?

Why, well I'm looking for this ski and I'm not sure I got the...oh eh..well overview of what's to choose from?

**Banh Mi** · 10-26-2013, 04:06 PM

Cocheese

**whatsupdoc** · 10-26-2013, 04:11 PM

Blizzard Cochise & Bodacious, Volkl Katana, G3 Empire 115 & 127. 4FRNT Renegade & Devastator aren't metal but sound pretty stout based on reviews.

**skime** · 10-26-2013, 04:26 PM

Keep it metal, please!

**Sessiøn** · 10-26-2013, 04:29 PM

Why metal?

**rod9301** · 10-26-2013, 05:21 PM

boththe cochise and the katanas are awesome skis, best out there

Sent from my SCH-I500 using TGR Forums

**MC Slayer** · 10-26-2013, 05:50 PM

Line motherships? Katana, kuru (probably not ALL metal), Cochise & bodacious (some camber), helldorado (some camber).

**Cocximus** · 10-26-2013, 06:01 PM

The blizzards are not full rocker... but they rock.

**d542east** · 10-26-2013, 06:04 PM

The Cochise and Bodacious have no camber, very little rocker in the tail and low-rise rocker in the tip. The helldorados have more pronounced tip and tail rocker and are cambered underfoot.

Bodacious (Cochise have an almost identical rocker profile):
http://stk.tetongravity.com/forums/a...20253_b535f2b5

There's a Bodacious review thread on here somewhere.

**bl2000** · 10-26-2013, 06:09 PM

Did you ever think about walking into your local ski shop and asking?

**Sessiøn** · 10-26-2013, 06:58 PM

I feel like OP is limiting himself because he still thinks you need metal for a ski to be damp.

**1000-oaks** · 10-26-2013, 07:50 PM

L138 flex 3. No metal but really stiff.

**Sparwood Dave** · 10-26-2013, 07:52 PM

X 2 what d542east said. I have about 100 days on the Cochise and they have a very subtle rocker not 'pronounced'. The reason the skis work so well is the combination of no camber, subtle rocker and metal construction. The skis pivot and slarve beautifully because the tips and tails are slightly elevated above the centre when the ski is flat or in powder. Any rockered ski will do this but the Cochise design means that when you tip the ski on hard pack the entire edge engages tip to tail and you are on rails with a very high speed limit. This is something skis with pronounced rockers can not do.

**pfluffenmeister** · 10-26-2013, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by 1000-oaks

L138 flex 3. No metal but really stiff.

i've got a pair of 202 L138 flex2 rocker2s.
they are stiff as fuck (like i-beam stiff).

**mountaingoat** · 10-26-2013, 08:10 PM

I had my hands on a Skilogik Powderball the other day. Noticed it had a metal sandwich. Caught my eye, because not really seen a boutique ski with metal.

**tuco** · 10-26-2013, 08:21 PM

Highball

**1000-oaks** · 10-26-2013, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by Sparwood Dave

X 2 what d542east said. I have about 100 days on the Cochise and they have a very subtle rocker not 'pronounced'. The reason the skis work so well is the combination of no camber, subtle rocker and metal construction. The skis pivot and slarve beautifully because the tips and tails are slightly elevated above the centre when the ski is flat or in powder. Any rockered ski will do this but the Cochise design means that when you tip the ski on hard pack the entire edge engages tip to tail and you are on rails with a very high speed limit. This is something skis with pronounced rockers can not do.

Just picked up a pair of G3 Empire 127s, and they appear to subscribe to this design philosophy. Two layers of metal, full suble rocker (no camber or flat area) , full length sidecut. 2,330g for the 183 length, and an even flex but on the stiff side (similar to my L138 R1/F2). The 193 is supposed to be a beast.

**Cocximus** · 10-27-2013, 12:35 AM

Originally Posted by PhiberAwptik

I feel like OP is limiting himself because he still thinks you need metal for a ski to be damp.

Ski dampness is very subjective. People say the wailer 112 is damp... Metal guarantees a pretty damp ski no matter what.

**SiSt** · 10-27-2013, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by daught

Metal guarantees a pretty damp ski no matter what.

Metal makes a ski heavier and torsionally stiff. The added weight decreases the natural frequency of the ski, changing it's feel. It does not do jack shit to dampen the ski. You need a lot of rubber in order to dampen a metal ski to the point where you get a performance benefit, further adding weight to the construction. A metal ski with insufficient rubber is damn near unskiable.

Just in order to clear up some common misconceptions.

**verbier61** · 10-27-2013, 03:35 AM

Katana, cochise and bodacious are money to ski when there is no more than a few cm of new snow. When there is more new snow I personally like more skis w/o metal

**skime** · 10-27-2013, 06:09 AM

Ok PhiberAwptik. The thread said rocker skis with metal. Otherwise I could just said rockered skis which would be useless. For me at least.

I've tried the the Katanas a couple of times and really like their combination of damp and a bit "springiness" (is this pop?). So I realise that metal doesn't necessarily mean extremely stiff. Look at Stöcklies where the more powder oriented skis at least are quite soft and still have metal. So the Katana experience had me thinking about Blizzard Badciouse as an interesting ski. Though shop flexing gets me thinking that the tail is to hard, but maybe the rocker takes care of this issue.

bl2000;
Shop.
The skishop employees is usually limited and mostly interested in what they can sell you (eg. lack of objectivety).

I have several skis, but now I'm pondering what skis I haven't tried.

**Cocximus** · 10-27-2013, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by SiSt

Metal makes a ski heavier and torsionally stiff. The added weight decreases the natural frequency of the ski, changing it's feel. It does not do jack shit to dampen the ski. You need a lot of rubber in order to dampen a metal ski to the point where you get a performance benefit, further adding weight to the construction. A metal ski with insufficient rubber is damn near unskiable.

Just in order to clear up some common misconceptions.

Name me one metal ski that's not damp at all.

No one advertises how much rubber a ski has. Maybe all metal skis have rubber, maybe it's the weight, but I never skied a metal ski that was all over the place. Sure there are excellent non-metal skis out there, but I would't buy them without a demo.

**marshalolson** · 10-27-2013, 07:58 AM

add nordica el capo to the helldorado camp of tail rocker + camber

**SiSt** · 10-27-2013, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by daught

Name me one metal ski that's not damp at all.

No one advertises how much rubber a ski has. Maybe all metal skis have rubber, maybe it's the weight, but I never skied a metal ski that was all over the place. Sure there are excellent non-metal skis out there, but I would't buy them without a demo.

All skis have rubber. A heavy glass layup ski with a lot of rubber will also be very damp, hell, a carbon ski with enough rubber will also be pretty damn damp.

But there is of course a reason that racing skis are built with metal in them, and I'm not arguing against using metal in skis, simply pointing out that the metal is not what dampens the ski. It does a lot of other things and there are plenty of reasons why one would use metal in skis meant for certain types of skiing and where touring is not a big part of the equation.