Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bellingham
    Posts
    134

    Reverse camber skis @ ~100 underfoot?

    I have the Volkl BMT 109 as a touring ski and really like the reverse camber. I'm looking for a similar sidecut/profile in a heavier construction @ ~100 underfoot for inbounds use. Any ideas?
    JimmyCarter:

    I was a MA high school "racer"... Dudes show up for a 200 yard "race" in full gear, getting leg rubdowns in the starting house while half my team was off in the woods getting lit.

    :Priceless

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Whistler, BC
    Posts
    1,325
    Last years mantra


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Whelk View Post
    a more stupid motherfuck does not exist.
    Big Balls is worst asshat kind.
    kind that wear bukkake from above.
    with warm drown he gurgles final death, for one time not worried about his misplaced import known of african american social standing and prominent community members. for he is only drown, as is the way.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    FR&CH
    Posts
    115
    Yep, I have the BMT 109, and I have the Mantra v4, and like them very much. Obviously they're way better at speed in the variable and for carving than the BMT.

    1st and 2nd year Raven also, a bit light but not too much. I had them but sold them for the BMT 109 because I wanted to go lighter. There not as good as the Mantra for inbound stability.

    Oh, there is the Black Crows Daemon also, didn't tried them, looks like an easier lighter Mantra v4. Pretty light also (spec says 1850g @ 183, but Blister says around 1930g).

    I would go with the Mantra v4.
    Last edited by stuntmanbo; 04-07-2019 at 12:35 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,375
    The more important question, imo, is why there are so few offerings for a 100mm reverse camber on the market.

    My theory is that athletes out-grow the design.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    318
    black crows deamon - good ski!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dreamland
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by gaijin View Post
    The more important question, imo, is why there are so few offerings for a 100mm reverse camber on the market.

    My theory is that athletes out-grow the design.
    I've skied the M4 and did not like the harsh feel on any kind of harder snow caused by the lack of camber. I was amazed at how much more they worked my legs on a bumpy traverse compared to several other similarly stiff skis. I had the same feeling on the original Cochise, which they put camber in on the next model. My two cents is that reverse camber is great for soft snow but not as a daily driver, but I've got old legs.
    Gravity Junkie

    How can you be in two places at once when you're not anywhere at all?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scotlandshire
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by LeoK View Post
    black crows deamon - good ski!
    Seconded, i demoed them twice and bought them in 188. They dont beat you up at all i found, they are my resort skis, they only stop being fun when its bullet proof ice. I keep my race sticks for those days.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    I Came, I Saw, I .... Made A Slight Effort & Then Went Home For Lunch.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    328
    Black Crows Daemon: ex wife has it and likes it
    Black Crows Corvus: a bit wider but looks good
    Old reverse camber Volkl Mantra
    Old Rossignol Scimitar: I own and love
    4Frnt Raven: I own but as a touring ski. Too light for dedicated inbounds but a good ski
    4Frnt Devastator: 106 underfoot but otherwise close to what you are looking for. Wish they had a bigger flat spot underfoot
    Romp 100: easy to semi custom with subtle reverse camber

    Mount point is the main difference. BMT series is around -10cm from TC. 4Frnt and Rossi are around -5cm from TC. Dameon around -7cm from TC. Mantra I think -8cm from TC (?). And Corvus closer to -10cm from TC.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    495
    step 1: order a moment meridian 107, but custom -10mm underfoot
    step 2: report back
    step 3: I'll order it in a touring layup
    step 4: we just brought back the bmt 94 full reverse touring ski around 1500g

    honestly though the 107 meridian is pretty dialed for everyday use

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,003
    Quote Originally Posted by gaijin View Post
    The more important question, imo, is why there are so few offerings for a 100mm reverse camber on the market.

    My theory is that athletes out-grow the design.
    More important question - why would anyone think of reverse camber for anything but a soft snow ski.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 04-08-2019 at 01:28 AM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    More important question - why would anyone think of reverse camber for anything but a soft snow key.

    ... Thom
    I’m in the minority, but I dislike camber in general. I much prefer the loose feel of flat or subtle reverse camber skis. Hold an edge well enough on piste once they are tipped over, much more predictable than rocker-camber-rocker when feathering turns off piste. Not much pop/energy out of the turn, but I don’t care about that. YMMV, IMHO, yaddah yaddah

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudfoot View Post
    I've skied the M4 and did not like the harsh feel on any kind of harder snow caused by the lack of camber. I was amazed at how much more they worked my legs on a bumpy traverse compared to several other similarly stiff skis. I had the same feeling on the original Cochise, which they put camber in on the next model. My two cents is that reverse camber is great for soft snow but not as a daily driver, but I've got old legs.
    After skiing a bunch of different skis this winter, have to agree. For me, Flat/micro camber with low/low tip rocker is the inbounds equvalent it fully rockered BC skis.

    Such a smoother and more rewarding ride, and physically less demanding/less harsh actually for me. Properly beveling and polishing your base edge get the clean drift if that is what you are after too.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,515
    Bent some decent tip and tail rocker and flattened out the camber for the midsection of a pair of 178cm, 95mm waisted, circa 2004 Rossi B3 Bandits. Used em for summer sand/gravel/scree skiing and bases were trashed but took em out on snow a few weeks ago just to see how they felt. A bit slow but damn, they felt much better for my style than stock. Roll em on edge and carve trenches on corn corduroy, and even with chunks of ptex missing from base and edges serrated like a steak knife, flatten bases and go sideways to dump speed or feather the edges to slarve...fun experiment.
    Master of mediocrity.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by lordf View Post
    Seconded, i demoed them twice and bought them in 188. They dont beat you up at all i found, they are my resort skis, they only stop being fun when its bullet proof ice. I keep my race sticks for those days.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    ^^^3rded. Also have the 188's, rip anything from 8 inches to hardpack. Love being able to pivot easy when keeping bases flat yet still grip hard when on edge. Straight up ice isn't great though

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    FR&CH
    Posts
    115
    @DGamms, BMTs around -10,5, Mantra v4 -9, Corvus 2019 -8
    I'm like you I don't like camber except for narrow skis, my only cambered ski is the Volkl Kendo. However I don't like reverses with too much rocker either (Hoji). I prefer Volkl flat camber actually. Renegade profile is great for pow also. More rockered than that I don't like.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,003
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    I’m in the minority, but I dislike camber in general. I much prefer the loose feel of flat or subtle reverse camber skis. Hold an edge well enough on piste once they are tipped over, much more predictable than rocker-camber-rocker when feathering turns off piste. Not much pop/energy out of the turn, but I don’t care about that. YMMV, IMHO, yaddah yaddah
    I confess to liking minimal (but not zero) camber. Oddly, I find RCR to be thoroughly intuitive, but of course, it depends on the ski and how you tune/detune it. Maybe the same applies to full rocker, but somehow, I can't visualize it working on hard snow. Of course, all of us do our best to avoid hard snow As Iggy said - groomers are a means of getting to ungroomed snow.

    Carry on folks ;-)
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,375

    Reverse camber skis @ ~100 underfoot?

    I think what this entire thread has turned into is what Thom pointed out. Reverse camber is pretty much a soft snow thing.

    And if this is a soft snow ski— why are we talking about 100 underfoot? Hence my original question— why so few skis of this niche on the market?

    Perhaps OP needs to consider a bigger quiver.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by gaijin View Post
    I think what this entire thread has turned into is what Thom pointed out. Reverse camber is pretty much a soft snow thing.

    And if this is a soft snow ski— why are we talking about 100 underfoot? Hence my original question— why so few skis of this niche on the market?

    Perhaps OP needs to consider a bigger quiver.
    I think you answered your own question. In the conditions that a ~100mm width ski excels in, camber can be an advantage a lot of the time. If you are getting a reverse camber ski you're likely getting it for its soft snow abilities, where a fatter width is an advantage. Its a niche that not many people need.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    58
    Another option is the Ogso Diable 100. Most rocker I have ever seen in the 105mm range. I haven´t tried it myself, but I tried the bigger brother Spencer 110 for a day last week and like it a lot. They also come in an ultra light carbon construction, but that was just too light to be usable for general skiing. The fiber glass Spencer was noticably heavier than the stated 2250 grams. More like 2500 grams.

    http://ogso-mountain-essentials.com/skis/diable/

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    4,421
    Quote Originally Posted by sruffian View Post
    step 4: we just brought back the bmt 94 full reverse touring ski around 1500g
    iiiiinteresting

    I dunno why but I still see a quiver spot for a full-reverse ultralight touring ski ~85-95 underfoot for very steep descents in springtime when there may also be oodles of variable snow

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    495
    Quote Originally Posted by mall walker View Post
    iiiiinteresting

    I dunno why but I still see a quiver spot for a full-reverse ultralight touring ski ~85-95 underfoot for very steep descents in springtime when there may also be oodles of variable snow
    That's cus it's the tits! Full reverse camber with a very subtle rocker line is such a versatile shape. In carbon touring layups, like the bmt 94, they end up super poppy and torsionally rigid. Then on corn or big faces they're carbon so you can still bend them into a beautiful arc. t's a full reverse ski w/ a decent sidecut for skiing steeps, but you can throw your heels around like you can't with a cambered ski on steeps.

    Your question also answers galibier and gaijin's questions. Full reverse is a very fun shape in steeps and on variable conditions. Especially hooky midwinter stuff. Might not be fun for the 'traditional directional skier' crowd? w/e

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    4,421
    Quote Originally Posted by sruffian View Post
    That's cus it's the tits! Full reverse camber with a very subtle rocker line is such a versatile shape. In carbon touring layups, like the bmt 94, they end up super poppy and torsionally rigid. Then on corn or big faces they're carbon so you can still bend them into a beautiful arc. t's a full reverse ski w/ a decent sidecut for skiing steeps, but you can throw your heels around like you can't with a cambered ski on steeps.

    Your question also answers galibier and gaijin's questions. Full reverse is a very fun shape in steeps and on variable conditions. Especially hooky midwinter stuff. Might not be fun for the 'traditional directional skier' crowd? w/e
    Curiously I am very much the "traditional directional skier" crowd but I find flat/reverse camber very nice in certain conditions in steep terrain; it lets you just sort of unweight your skis slightly and pivot (snowboarder/falling-leaf style), rather than committing to a full jump turn. I don't mind full jump turns on traditionally cambered skis either, but there's something fun and smooth and nice-feeling about the reverse camber way, sometimes anyway. More so in crusty/hooky/mushy conditions than in proper firm, where camber is reassuring.

    I'd love an ~85mm ~30m radius ~177cm ~1200g full-reverse option as a specialized quiver ski for very steep variable skiing. The BMT94 is a little wider/heavier than I'd ideally choose (I know I know) but if it comes back in full rocker, I might have to try out a pair.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,375
    Welp, there it is... I'm never on steeps anymore. smh.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by lrn2swim View Post
    ^^^3rded. Also have the 188's, rip anything from 8 inches to hardpack. Love being able to pivot easy when keeping bases flat yet still grip hard when on edge. Straight up ice isn't great though
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	168E2296-AB96-4C31-A4D1-365EF84BEEE3.jpg 
Views:	125 
Size:	1.36 MB 
ID:	294730

    I just got the exact same ski in the 188 length too. where did you mount em relative to the line ?



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    318
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil E View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	168E2296-AB96-4C31-A4D1-365EF84BEEE3.jpg 
Views:	125 
Size:	1.36 MB 
ID:	294730

    I just got the exact same ski in the 188 length too. where did you mount em relative to the line ?
    I mounted 1.5cm towards the tail (so minus 1.5 if I get this right)... I like going back a bit so if you favor centered stance and are not new to revers chamber and such you might be happy on the line, too. I also think there was a deamon thread somewhere where this has been discussed in more depth.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •