Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 72
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Alta
    Posts
    920
    Most of my skis are reverse camber. Never once complained about them being dead feeling. 4frnt devestators absolutely kill groomers with plenty of pop. But Iím not an engineer. Just know what skis feel like on my feet. Only bad thing about full reverse camber, that Iíve found, is decreased suspension on bumpy traverses

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    A positive camber ski is a leaf spring.

    How do you load up a reverse camber ski? You canít compress both ends simultaneously on a plane.
    Uh, theyíre wider in the tips and tails. When you roll them over the sidecut allows the tips and tails to load. Thatís just on hard snow, the softer and deeper it gets makes the same process easier. This isnít true for reverse camber/reverse sidecut skis except in deep snow.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thomas View Post

    To respond to JackAttack, yes, not quite the same rubbery damp as as the old Katanas and it does make a different sound, more of a, for lack of a better description, brittle, metallic sound. I would say it feels a little more "crisp" under foot but it doesn't feel pingy. .
    So the on snow feedback is kinda like a Confession 108?

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central VT
    Posts
    141
    Less importantly, load them up through a compression with a tighter radius then the rocker, or porpoise into 3D snow.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,745
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    Uh, theyíre wider in the tips and tails. When you roll them over the sidecut allows the tips and tails to load. Thatís just on hard snow, the softer and deeper it gets makes the same process easier. This isnít true for reverse camber/reverse sidecut skis except in deep snow.
    The reverse ski can only return the amount of energy imparted in the turn it doesnít store any additional potential energy or pop. Leads to a dead feeling in between the turn.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    The reverse ski can only return the amount of energy imparted in the turn it doesnít store any additional potential energy or pop. Leads to a dead feeling in between the turn.
    Sure it does, depending on how stiff it is and what the load is. Iíve had enough rebound with the reverse Corvus to come clean from the snow in only an inch over soft grommers.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    The reverse ski can only return the amount of energy imparted in the turn it doesnít store any additional potential energy or pop. Leads to a dead feeling in between the turn.
    Sure it does, depending on how stiff it is and what the load is. Iíve had enough rebound with the reverse Corvus to come clean from the snow in only an inch over soft grommers.

    The side cut and stiffness play more of a role in rebound than camber. The Supershape Titans I had were almost flat but had incredible rebound.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,745
    So in one specific hero-snow situation you got a moderate amount of rebound out of the ski. Letís be clear, energy out of a turn and stability in a straight line are not hallmarks of reverse camber skis. Skis like the old Cochise and Bode were regarded as fairly powerful. I did not experience that in the Corvus.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    So in one specific hero-snow situation you got a moderate amount of rebound out of the ski. Letís be clear, energy out of a turn and stability in a straight line are not hallmarks of reverse camber skis. Skis like the old Cochise and Bode were regarded as fairly powerful. I did not experience that in the Corvus.
    No, I get rebound all the time from the Corvus. The point is that it doesnít take much. Hereís a question, how do you continue to flex a cambered ski after you decamber it?

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    my own little world
    Posts
    2,824

    Katana 108 - the resurrerection

    I havenít skied the Corvus, but.... comments that reverse camber = dead or unstable are nonsense. Like a leaf spring, the early parts of the decambering in a cambered ski are as likely to dampen rebound as enhance rebound. If anything, reverse camber allows a ski to return more energy and more power out of the same turn shape.

    IME, reverse cambered skis are more powerful and less smooth than normally cambered skis. Think Cadillac with long travel suspension vs sports car with shorter, stiffer suspension.
    focus.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,745
    I'm happy you found your forever unicorn, but you're not convincing me. I skied the same skis, in a few inches of pow pow and variable crud over hardpack. The Corvus is not the powerhouse you claim it to be. Have you skied the Katana referenced in this thread? It is electric by comparison. Your former love, the Armada Invictus, is a pretty planky ride so maybe the transition has convinced you that the Corvus is lively as hell, idk?

    From the press:

    Quote Originally Posted by https://blisterreview.com/gear-reviews/2018-2019-black-crows-corvus
    The last thing to note is that the Corvus, like most other reverse-camber skis, produces almost no energy coming out of a turn. So if a dynamic / poppy experience on groomers is what youíre seeking, this is not the ski for you.
    From a ski manufacturer:

    Quote Originally Posted by https://wndr-alpine.com/blogs/stories/to-camber-or-not-to-camber
    Camber vs. Reverse Camber

    Skiing a reverse cambered ski on-piste takes a lot of energy, but the off-piste advantages far outweigh the negatives in my opinion. Reverse cambered skis get a bad rap because they feel very short and hard to control, but as long as you put effort into staying on edge and in control when you're on hardpack, itís really tough to beat them in powder. They are really fun to carve too, as when you enter the turn the skis kind of fall into the turn and arc really nicely. All that being said, they aren't for everyone, and placing some camber underfoot with gentle rocker up front still leaves you with great off-piste performance combined with the stability on packed snow and skin tracks.
    From the maggots:

    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.
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Iím 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 donít care about that. YMMV, IMHO, yaddah yaddah
    Quote Originally Posted by Marshal Olson View Post
    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.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    I'm happy you found your forever unicorn, but you're not convincing me. I skied the same skis, in a few inches of pow pow and variable crud over hardpack. The Corvus is not the powerhouse you claim it to be. Have you skied the Katana referenced in this thread? It is electric by comparison. Your former love, the Armada Invictus, is a pretty planky ride so maybe the transition has convinced you that the Corvus is lively as hell, idk?

    From the press:



    From a ski manufacturer:



    From the maggots:
    Iím not trying to convince you to like the skis kai, thatís irrelevant because ski preference is purely subjective. Iím not concerned with maggot approved skis either, Iím an independent thinker.

    Iíve been trying to explain the physics of how skis flex. Camber has little or nothing to do with flexing a ski or itís potential energy. A ski is flexed because of the force exerted on it and itís sidecut on harder snow and snow with less depth. Itís potential energy has nothing to do with camber. Potential energy is determined by stiffness and modulus of elasticity.

    To be honest, your willful ignorance is a little disappointing.

    Itís interesting that you quoted the blister review. I chose the Corvus based on that review. I have 70 pounds on their heaviest reviewer and I know that the ski will feel markedly different for me than it would for them in certain aspects. Same thing for the Invictus 108. I donít know if itís my forever ski but the Corvus is a great replacement for my beat to shit Invictus. Thatís what we call subjective.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    435
    The one thing Iíll chime in on this random argument:

    Just like camber, there are varying amounts of Ďreverse camberí. Some skis like 4frnt reflect tech really donít like the ski to flex when rolled over on an edge. Side cut matches rocker profile, so they really do return no energy.

    I believe Corvus is more of a flat shape with a shorter radius meaning that as its on edge it will in fact flex into the camber. Side cut does not match rocker profile. If the ski is stiff, this means there could be some pop that comes out of your turns even from the minimal flex happening.

    However, It is likely a matter of comparison if the ski has energy. Is it a lot compared to 4frnt Hoji; could be. Compared to a Line Sakana; nope.

    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    Iím not trying to convince you to like the skis kai, thatís irrelevant because ski preference is purely subjective. Iím not concerned with maggot approved skis either, Iím an independent thinker.

    Iíve been trying to explain the physics of how skis flex. Camber has little or nothing to do with flexing a ski or itís potential energy. A ski is flexed because of the force exerted on it and itís sidecut on harder snow and snow with less depth. Itís potential energy has nothing to do with camber. Potential energy is determined by stiffness and modulus of elasticity.

    To be honest, your willful ignorance is a little disappointing.

    Itís interesting that you quoted the blister review. I chose the Corvus based on that review. I have 70 pounds on their heaviest reviewer and I know that the ski will feel markedly different for me than it would for them in certain aspects. Same thing for the Invictus 108. I donít know if itís my forever ski but the Corvus is a great replacement for my beat to shit Invictus. Thatís what we call subjective.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Golden
    Posts
    303
    Skied the new Katana. My biggest takeaway is it is a very turny ski. Feel like it has a 16m turn radius despite what the specs say. Doesn't like to be let loose and run, wants to be worked and turned constantly, and across the fall line. That being said, it does turn well. It is soft and damp and holds and edge through chop. It is heavy. It is energetic. It is loud as hell. Like a carbon dps, but a few notes lower. Like riding a Norco VPS loud. I think the skis I skied could be more detuned, so I will reasses after I do that.

    I regularly ski the Corvus in the same length. The Corvus is definitely a dead feeling ski but I want that in a freeride ski. Yes, when doing tight turns on flat groomers, it feels boring and dead but do Super G turns down a 30 degree groomer or charge fans in chop and I don't want a spring loaded ski. The Corvus has a much longer (and longer feeling) turn radius than the Katana. It is much more comfortable letting it run and doesn't feel like it needs to be on edge and finishing it's turns all the time. The Corvus flexes stiffer and feels stiffer.

    I wouldn't buy the Katana. They have made it a fat carving ski.

    FYI: 5'6" 155lbs. Skied the 184 Katana with no detune. I regularly ski the 183 Corvus with no detune, although at this point it has done it itself. I loved the 190 Corvus as well but didn't want a touring ski in that length. Would be curious about the 191 Katana.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post

    Iím an independent thinker.

    Iíve been trying to explain the physics of how skis flex. Camber has little or nothing to do with flexing a ski or itís potential energy. A ski is flexed because of the force exerted on it and itís sidecut on harder snow and snow with less depth. Itís potential energy has nothing to do with camber. Potential energy is determined by stiffness and modulus of elasticity.

    To be honest, your willful ignorance is a little disappointing.
    Camber does affect the energy of a ski.

    Spring potential energy: E = .5 * k * d^2

    k is the spring rate, which is determined by the physical dimensions and the modulus, as you correctly stated.

    d is the distance through which the spring is flexed.

    Like most leaf springs, cambered skis are shaped as such so that they can flex further than a straight beam of the same length and cross section, thus absorbing (and returning) more spring potential energy.

    A reverse camber ski is not able to flex as far since it is already "flexed", so it takes more force input to return the equivalent energy.

    But they are fun in powder.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Land of the Long Flat Vowel
    Posts
    879
    Turny and noisy?

    There goes my interest in the Katana.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,568
    Quote Originally Posted by Island Bay View Post
    Turny and noisy?

    There goes my interest in the Katana.
    The noisy carbon tips is definitely a turn off. Was this an issue for the Mantra? That ski seems to get universal praise and this is supposed to be a beefed up version of that ski.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Whistler, BC
    Posts
    1,398
    Watch Hoji ski- reverse camber skis have energy for sure


    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.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    Nobody said they don't. I have multiple pairs and enjoy their behavior in natural snow.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Camber does affect the energy of a ski.

    Spring potential energy: E = .5 * k * d^2

    k is the spring rate, which is determined by the physical dimensions and the modulus, as you correctly stated.

    d is the distance through which the spring is flexed.

    Like most leaf springs, cambered skis are shaped as such so that they can flex further than a straight beam of the same length and cross section, thus absorbing (and returning) more spring potential energy.

    A reverse camber ski is not able to flex as far since it is already "flexed", so it takes more force input to return the equivalent energy.

    But they are fun in powder.
    Iím not an engineer but thatís basically what I said.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Whistler, BC
    Posts
    1,398

    Katana 108 - the resurrerection

    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Nobody said they don't. I have multiple pairs and enjoy their behavior in natural snow.
    They did on the last page? Anyway...we agree. Skis without camber still rebound with energy at the end of a turn.
    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.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    ah fuck, you're right. Post first, smoke rocks later. I don't agree with the claim of "no energy out of the turn" or whatever from a reverse camber ski... but "less energy", yes.

    This is getting EpicSki-y, sorry. Ski whatcha like.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a parallel universe
    Posts
    4,794
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Nobody said they don't. I have multiple pairs and enjoy their behavior in natural snow.
    But not on unnatural snow?

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Bellevue
    Posts
    5,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    ah fuck, you're right. Post first, smoke rocks later. I don't agree with the claim of "no energy out of the turn" or whatever from a reverse camber ski... but "less energy", yes.

    This is getting EpicSki-y, sorry. Ski whatcha like.
    I think it's that you get 'free energy' out of a ski with camber just by standing on it. It's not a lot but it's a few mm of deflection that you can almost always feel pushing back. With reverse camber you have to actively push through those first few mm just to get the same amount of spring pushback.

    Assuming I'm not pulling off the rocks too

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,738
    Quote Originally Posted by ACH View Post
    But not on unnatural snow?
    Pow, schmoo, chunder, zipcrusts, corn. Not groomers so much
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

Posting Permissions

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