Need camber for pop. It's the rebound out of a turn or off a jump that the camber provides. Carbon in a cambered ski can help add pop as it helps the ski snap back to its desired shape rapidly.
would it make sense to compensate camber by stiffer skis with/or more carbon
Flat camber skis have no pop. But I don't feel like pop is a powder thing which is what flat camber excels at.
exactly my point. skis in question with no pop 110 under foot not exactly your first choice for carving skis to begin with but gotta give the people what they want
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
Thomas A. Edison
Camber wont negatively affect powder performance if you get the tips right. I have camber boards that float better than commercial rocker powder boards.
You can have your cake and eat it too in this case
Need camber for pop. It's the rebound out of a turn or off a jump that the camber provides. Carbon in a cambered ski can help add pop as it helps the ski snap back to its desired shape rapidly.
would it make sense to compensate camber by stiffer skis with/or more carbon
From where I'm sitting, adding the camber allows the ski/board to be preloaded during riding conditions ready for the additional loading from the pop so no matter how stiff you make it to compensate for no camber you still don't have that preloaded force in the ski
For pow you dont want a too stiff ski. Imho the camber dampens also a little bit trough the asym flex curve, like a shock absorber. Thats also the reason why leaf spring setups on cars have a pos or negative curve but they are never flat.
Depends also on the wood you use. Did one ski with just 2mm camber which still has a decent pop and damping. Used ash for this one.
I think its the wrong way if you try to compensate the absence of camber with stiffness.
gozaimaas wrote:Camber wont negatively affect powder performance if you get the tips right. I have camber boards that float better than commercial rocker powder boards.
You can have your cake and eat it too in this case
thx
Couple designs I built perform in powder very well.
Most likely best course is to add camber the same design for better comparison apples to apples
I need to decide what is the best way to make camber pull it by heat differential or modified mold by shims
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
Thomas A. Edison
Both ways are try and error. Depending on the materials you need more camber on the mold then you want to archive. On one mold i have 6mm camber and the boards come out with 2 - 4 mm, depending on thickness and heat.
I understand that. From reading on the board I see heat differential approach have more variables
I think its the wrong way if you try to compensate the absence of camber with stiffness.
why not? theoretically speaking if more carbon create more pop and stiffness at the same time. This way skis need bend less to create same rebound effect. ???
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
Thomas A. Edison
Carbon should be banned from peoples minds until they have built 10 ridable sets of skis or boards. It just clouds peoples judgement, kind of like buying a car and not caring about anything but the colour of the paint.
Get your process down, build skis that work without bells and whistles, then once you have it dialled start to thin out the core and add carbon to compensate.
You will become a much better builder this way.
gozaimaas wrote:Carbon should be banned from peoples minds until they have built 10 ridable sets of skis or boards. It just clouds peoples judgement, kind of like buying a car and not caring about anything but the colour of the paint.
Get your process down, build skis that work without bells and whistles, then once you have it dialled start to thin out the core and add carbon to compensate.
You will become a much better builder this way.
good point..... I'm glad it not longer applies to me
After reading old discussions about heat and camber I realized to simplify process with minimum variables shimming camber would be simple job in my set up.
Why that pop need it anyway?
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
Thomas A. Edison
Pop is for park jumps and snappy turns on groomers. It's part of an all mountain ski if you want powder performance but also a decent ride back to the lift or on non pow days.
When you look at a traditional ski. Camber, no rocker. When you turn it on hard snow you force it into a curve (like gozaimas saying the bow in bow and arrow). When you relax (unload the ski) the ski springs back to its desired shape with a lot of energy or 'pop' to throw you up and into the next turn. In a flat cambered and especially rockered tip/tail ski the entire ski is effectively already bent into the curved shape you make in a turn. This makes it easy to just roll it over on edge and carve a turn, but when you transition to the next turn there isn't any springing back from the bent shape so the ride is more dull. It's the shape of the ski more so than the stiffness that determines it's energy edge to edge.
Once you add some camber it's the elasticity of the laminate that determines the pop. Carbon seems to snap back into shape more rapidly than fibreglass.
The feeling of pop is maybe better described as the acceleration created at the end of a turn as you transition your weight and unload the ski. The ski recoil out of the decambered state and shoots you into the next turn.
Why is it needed? It isn't, it's just a fun feeling.
Edit: falls best me to it, good to see great minds think alike
falls wrote:Pop is for park jumps and snappy turns on groomers. It's part of an all mountain ski if you want powder performance but also a decent ride back to the lift or on non pow days.
When you look at a traditional ski. Camber, no rocker. When you turn it on hard snow you force it into a curve (like gozaimas saying the bow in bow and arrow). When you relax (unload the ski) the ski springs back to its desired shape with a lot of energy or 'pop' to throw you up and into the next turn. In a flat cambered and especially rockered tip/tail ski the entire ski is effectively already bent into the curved shape you make in a turn. This makes it easy to just roll it over on edge and carve a turn, but when you transition to the next turn there isn't any springing back from the bent shape so the ride is more dull. It's the shape of the ski more so than the stiffness that determines it's energy edge to edge.
Once you add some camber it's the elasticity of the laminate that determines the pop. Carbon seems to snap back into shape more rapidly than fibreglass.
ditto. Camber will give it that pop along with other factors like the type of wood, composites like CF, can effect the pop. But it's primarily the camber.
I usually use 3-5 mm of camber in my mixed camber designs and might increase that to 5-8mm for something with less width geared towards harder snow conditions.
I use a mix of heat differential induced camber along with camber in my mold to manipulate this.
falls great explanation thx
I had to grab one of those "mainstream skis" for a couple runs to
re-experience what that pop all about to realize that's not something I want in skis for myself. However I was told "mainstream skiers" want that kind of skis and obviously "mainstream ski companies" provided what do people want
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
Thomas A. Edison