Hi Everyone.
Have been thinking a lot about ski building and design lately as everyone starting out (and I imagine those well versed too) seems to do. I have two thoughts about possible designs that might be stupid or revolutionary.
1. Concave bases - people say skiing powder is more like skiing on water. Surfboards and watercraft often have concave or double concave bases to better channel the water. Do you think a concave base would actually make a better powder ski? (obviously not great on hardpack and makes waxing/tuning more difficult)
2. Edgeless skis - for a pure powder tool. No edges, just plastic base to the edge and the sidewall etc. (I think not as even heli or cat skiing no doubt sees you encounter ice or hardpack at times. Plus durability)
Just a few crazy thoughts. Any comments welcomed to try and help me stop thinking too much about it.
Experimental Ideas
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
I guess I don't think concave bases would provide much better performance on a pair of skis because they really aren't all that wide in the first place. A surf board is pretty big and the concavity isn't probably all that much proportionally. Maybe this would be useful on a snowboard. I would imagine somebody has tried this and found that it wasn't as great as they expected or that they couldn't tell a difference at all. The mold might be hard to build also (unless you have a CNC of course). Even after saying that, I think you should try it. I would be curious to hear how it does.
Skis without edges ... you need to have a mountain that gets a LOT of snow. Even on really good years here edges are useful if not a necessity at some point during the day (even on the most epic days). I have considered building a pure powder ski without edges but haven't actually made one because it isn't that expensive or hard to add the edges (even though I do a fairly mediocre job bending them). I think a couple people on this site have built pow skis without edges too. There were some really sweet ones posted a while back.
Skis without edges ... you need to have a mountain that gets a LOT of snow. Even on really good years here edges are useful if not a necessity at some point during the day (even on the most epic days). I have considered building a pure powder ski without edges but haven't actually made one because it isn't that expensive or hard to add the edges (even though I do a fairly mediocre job bending them). I think a couple people on this site have built pow skis without edges too. There were some really sweet ones posted a while back.
-
twizzstyle
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:25 pm
- Location: Kenmore, Wa USA
Waxing with a base with even slight concavity is impossible. Also the physics in skiing powder a likely different than on water, so it might not even make a difference. But maybe it does, sounds like an experiment waiting to happen 
One thing to consider about not having metal edges is side impact with rocks, branches, etc. The metal adds a lot of durability to the side.
One thing to consider about not having metal edges is side impact with rocks, branches, etc. The metal adds a lot of durability to the side.
Accidental concave
Hi. I seem to remember somone on the Grafsnowboards forum accidently making a concave base snowboard. Might be worth a search to see how it went. C.
-
skidesmond
- Posts: 2337
- Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:26 pm
- Location: Western Mass, USA
- Contact:
Check this site out http://www.lightningboards.com/ A co-worker bought a pair a couple of seasons ago. His had no p-tex base or edges, 100% wood. Looks like he's putting base material on now.
-
twizzstyle
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:25 pm
- Location: Kenmore, Wa USA
whoops sorry...beginner mistake. of course i meant convex!twizzstyle wrote:Seriously? I would think a concave base would make it MORE susceptible to catching... a convex base might help?chrismp wrote:burton builds boards with concave bases. not specifically for powder though. they promote it as a catch free jibbing board.
-
twizzstyle
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:25 pm
- Location: Kenmore, Wa USA
A conVEX base would also be waxable as you could still scrape it. That might be a better idea for an experimental ski than a conCAVE one.-
knightsofnii
- Posts: 1148
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:02 am
- Location: NJ USA
- Contact:
"base high" i like to call it. I have a few built each way, depending on where the heater was placed.
Last one came out concave, and i ground it out so now its flat.
The few before were convex, i thought it would be awesome as a catch free board, but i really dont know because the tips were bent in the wrong spot, so there's huge contact points where the sidecut ends and becomes nose/tail curve, like magnetraction with only the outside contact points, sucks.
Ideally i'd like to make another convex one, or "base high" base, because yea it would be a bit more free edge to edge and better on rails, especially if i tune a flat spot down the middle. But the concavity/convexity of a "base high" board, is so subtle that the whole thing contacts the snow anyway probably.
burton's and batalleons are actually pressed in a 3d mold that lifts the base up on the sides, looks more skateboard deck like. Burton's first one was called the "con-dom", i dont know what they call it now.
convex in a ski might be good for pond-skimming? hahaha. REally no way to tell until you do it. I thought it was a problem with my boards causing them to be really grabby, but it was the contact points at the tips doing that, not the un-flat base.
Last one came out concave, and i ground it out so now its flat.
The few before were convex, i thought it would be awesome as a catch free board, but i really dont know because the tips were bent in the wrong spot, so there's huge contact points where the sidecut ends and becomes nose/tail curve, like magnetraction with only the outside contact points, sucks.
Ideally i'd like to make another convex one, or "base high" base, because yea it would be a bit more free edge to edge and better on rails, especially if i tune a flat spot down the middle. But the concavity/convexity of a "base high" board, is so subtle that the whole thing contacts the snow anyway probably.
burton's and batalleons are actually pressed in a 3d mold that lifts the base up on the sides, looks more skateboard deck like. Burton's first one was called the "con-dom", i dont know what they call it now.
convex in a ski might be good for pond-skimming? hahaha. REally no way to tell until you do it. I thought it was a problem with my boards causing them to be really grabby, but it was the contact points at the tips doing that, not the un-flat base.
Doug
-
ironmonkey
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 pm
bataleon TBT
i do know the convex TBT bases of bataleon boards really work. it takes a little getting used to about 5 minutes and then you know they are on to something.
Last edited by ironmonkey on Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
ironmonkey
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:28 pm
bataleon TBT
i do know the convex TBT bases of bataleon boards really work. it takes a little getting used to about 5 minutes and then you know they are on to something.
I'm just getting interested in building my own snowboards but have a long history of building whitewater kayaks and shaping surfboards. i still call my base a hull and refer to my tips as bow and stern.
I wonder why all/most skis and snowboard bases are flat?
hydrodynamically small concavities, and varying chamfers/chines on a hull make a huge difference. When i was learning to shape, a master shaper taught me that although a flat surface planes out faster a wave isnt flat so a surfboard has curvature(rocker) in every dimension to fit the shape of a wave. Mountains arent flat, and boards have sidecut, so why isnt the hull(base) curved in some fashion?
Shane Mconkey(sp?) likened skis to hulls, and thus the reverse camber/rocker movement was born.
Has any one out there played around with non traditional shapes?
I'm just getting interested in building my own snowboards but have a long history of building whitewater kayaks and shaping surfboards. i still call my base a hull and refer to my tips as bow and stern.
I wonder why all/most skis and snowboard bases are flat?
hydrodynamically small concavities, and varying chamfers/chines on a hull make a huge difference. When i was learning to shape, a master shaper taught me that although a flat surface planes out faster a wave isnt flat so a surfboard has curvature(rocker) in every dimension to fit the shape of a wave. Mountains arent flat, and boards have sidecut, so why isnt the hull(base) curved in some fashion?
Shane Mconkey(sp?) likened skis to hulls, and thus the reverse camber/rocker movement was born.
Has any one out there played around with non traditional shapes?
I am a bit skeptical about concave base, but skis without edges may be interesting on soft snow: http://www.skibuilders.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2306