Numerical Ski Rankings/Comparison

[reckless toboggan]

Yup. But torsional stiffness isn't something that is only needed to make wide skis "rip" hard snow. If you have a skinny ski that is a torsional noodle, it will twist and tend to slide out turns on the groomers too. Torsional stiffness or softness isn't limited by, or specifically associated with, ski width.

The way Betelgeuse refers to sidecut is also vague and confusing. There is no specific sidecut that "rips" hard snow. You can lay rails on almost any raduis non-reverse sidecut.

Keeping the ski in contact with the surface is important (not necessarily contact legth because there are plenty of skis that have short contact patches that rail on hard snow), so a damp, stiff ski through whatever contact patches there is will likely "rip" hard snow better. I could lay GS and super G tracks on very hardpack and icy Rockies conditions on my 189 Hellbents back in the day,-- wide 122mm, short contact, full rocker, floppy tips and tails, but very stiff/solid directly underfoot.

So again, more speed, wider stance, more lateral loading/movement, more angulation from the hips.

[Self Jupiter]

4frnt YLEs ripped firmer at 118 under foot iirc

[Vitamin I]

Thats not what I mean. Im talking about how some wide skis rip firm, while some arent as good. Is it all sidecut and effective edge? Or what else?

I might have an answer if you can clarify what you mean by "ripping". Like, is there precise PASS/FAIL criteria for "ripping"? I guess I always assumed it was a very vague slang word that usually involved speed, and maybe also some high g-forces??? I dunno.

.

[Banh Mi]

Ripping is ripping lol. Skiing fast and hard, and everything is going correctly. Idk how to explain it further.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Banh Mi]

So again, more speed, wider stance, more lateral loading/movement, more angulation from the hips.

Ya, but I can do all that on a ski that sucks on firm, and that ski will still suck on firm.

I’m wondering about design aspects that guarantee a wide ski does well on firm. Not what to do with my body.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[reckless toboggan]

Ya, but I can do all that on a ski that sucks on firm, and that ski will still suck on firm.

I’m wondering about design aspects that guarantee a wide ski does well on firm.

Same ones that "guarantee a" skinny "ski does well on firm".

[carlh]

My movement goliaths rip on the firm, 191, 30m radius no rocker or taper and reasonably stiff, you just have to get some speed and drive the edge in. My supergoats are fine one the firm but don't drive superg arcs the same way. Chose the right ski for the conditions.

[Banh Mi]

So for manufacturers, coming up with a new fat ski that does well on firm is just luck through prototyping enough (or the right) designs? Not being condescending, really asking. Is it the “total is more than the sum of it’s parts” sort of thing?





Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Norseman]

I've heard that the color red helps.

[Banh Mi]

Attachment 241866


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[XavierD]

I’m wondering about design aspects that guarantee a wide ski does well on firm. Not what to do with my body.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Any ski will suck if you ski it wrong or poorly. Even skinny, firm snow specific skis will suck on firm if you ski outside of their envelope. Nothing in skiing is guaranteed other than the snow will melt.

[Banh Mi]

I’m wondering what makes Praxis Rx so good on firm snow.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[pfluffenmeister]

My movement goliaths rip on the firm, 191, 30m radius no rocker or taper and reasonably stiff, you just have to get some speed and drive the edge in. My supergoats are fine one the firm but don't drive superg arcs the same way. Chose the right ski for the conditions.

Goliaths do rip the hardpack.
Square tail.

[reckless toboggan]

My movement goliaths rip on the firm, 191, 30m radius no rocker or taper and reasonably stiff, you just have to get some speed and drive the edge in. My supergoats are fine one the firm but don't drive superg arcs the same way. Chose the right ski for the conditions.

Goliaths do rip the hardpack.
Square tail.

Absolutely.

Love mine.

[reckless toboggan]

So for manufacturers, coming up with a new fat ski that does well on firm is just luck through prototyping enough (or the right) designs? Not being condescending, really asking. Is it the “total is more than the sum of it’s parts” sort of thing?





Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

You can achieve it in a number of different ways, as manufacturers do.

Otherwise there would only be one model (a universal and single set of dims, layup, sidecut, camber/rocker, flex, etc.) of wide ski that rips hard snow that we would all being skiing on.

[Banh Mi]

You can achieve it in a number of different ways, as manufacturers do.

And that’s exactly what i’m wondering about.

[reckless toboggan]

I'm changing my answer.

It's the red ones.

Wide skis that are red rip on hard snow.

[Banh Mi]

I dont think you know at this point.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[reckless toboggan]

Your question is imbecilic.

It's like asking, "what makes a good sports car?"


Obviously, it's the red one.

[Banh Mi]

I love red

I dont think my question was nearly as broad as “what makes a good sports car”.. I specified wide skis, even named certain models, and how they perform on any sort of firm snow.

It was more like asking what makes the new M3 or Z06 handle well.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Vitamin I]

...I dont think my question was nearly as broad as “what makes a good sports car”.. I specified wide skis, even named certain models, and how they perform on any sort of firm snow...

I see potential for a good discussion, but I don't know the difference between "ripping" vs "not ripping", and "firm snow" can mean smooth groomers or coral reef or the deepest suncups etc. And "sucks on firm" can mean anything, so I might guess you mean "results in unexpected out-of-balance moments I don't like" or whatever???

I mean, I can say a wide plastic saucer "rips" 60-degree slopes of smooth "firm snow", and it doesn't do anything unexpected so it doesn't "suck".

For skis, I say just mount laterally rigid bindings on any wide ski and then go rip every snow condition you can handle.

.

[Banh Mi]

When I say firm snow, I mean everything. Groomers, ice patches, coral reef, whatever. Bibbys and Rx rip those condtions so well.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Vitamin I]

How do you go about making a wide ski rip firm? Is there a formula for sidecut or something, or is it simply effective edge?

It's definitely more complicated than that. Feel free to try to connect the dots and draw conclusions about ski design attributes if you are willing to analyze the combo of your own observations plus some of my raw observations on firm refrozen nastiness at this old thread: Nine ski reviews in nasty snow

It seems like each ski design attribute can be set to a wide range of values without any single attribute ever being "absolutely wrong" or "absolutely right"---you just gotta make sure the final blend of all the attributes' values work together to deliver the performance you want.

In order for me to safely "rip" at high speeds on firm surfaces, especially on surface shapes with disturbances that are within the nasty range of wavelengths (like chattery coral reef, refrozen tracks, etc.), I prefer a ski that inspires confidence to "shut 'er down" or "scrub speed" as smoothly as possible at any time without getting unexpectedly knocked off balance too much rotationally or translationally. What attributes help that? Heavy weight reduces deflection (both rotational and translational). An aftward mount position reduces rotational deflection. It really, really helps if the faraway part of the tip and tail don't catch much (so an effective blend of rocker &/or not too much camber &/or higher radius sidecut &/or tapered tip &/or flex), so that all impact sensations are more predictable to the pilot (or even confined to only underfoot on a R/R design). It helps control to have high lateral transmission underfoot (rigidity in the ski material, in the binding, in the boot, plus sharp ski edges)...and if the nasty surface-of-the-day ends up dictating to your body with unbearably nasty vibrations, more than your body is dictating to the snow, then you can mitigate that by conceding victory to the nasty snow and just loosen your top boot buckle a notch or two to reduce transmission. Also, while skiing bases flat, it helps if the tip absorbs disturbances without transmitting the nasty range of frequencies into your boot (so a nice blend of flex & absorbing rocker shape & absorbing rocker zone length). Etc.

I feel like I got surprisingly kickass lateral transmission out of a Volkl Three (135mm underfoot). One of my boot buckles popped right off of a Salomon Course 130 boot. Bye bye.

.

[reckless toboggan]

What a load of horse hockey.

(Just FYI, in my head, this is Norm MacDonald's voice)

You can just completely ignore Vitamin I. He's drunk as usual.

The only real thing that will make a ski, any ski, rip on hard snow is ...

[reckless toboggan]

...a suspension system.

The Anton Active Suspension System.

This is really the next technological breakthrough in skiing.

I mean, how could Wayne be Wong?


Err..um..I mean wrong.

How could Wayne be wrong?

Jesus Christ.

Just roll the tape.