I know that there have been a number of discussions about camber on the forum in the past, but I was wondering if anyone had any new or different thoughts on the subject. It seems like many of us have ended up with camber measurements that were sometimes more, sometimes less than we had predicted or hoped for, but we, of course, skied them anyway and most builders are reporting better than expected skiing characteristics overall.
As I have indicated in past posts, I built 16mm into my mold and I pretty much end up with 16mm of camber in my skis. I initially built in the 16mm because I was hoping for about 8mm, not because I really knew what I wanted in a ski, but because that's what most available information was recommending. However, after skiing all of the skis that I have built, I think that I like more camber, rather than less camber.
I'm more of a smooth skier (at least I try to be) than I am a powerful skier and the little bit of energy load that the camber absorbs in between turns really seems to even out the flow of the turns for me.... seems to absorb and give back just the right amount of energy at just the right time. Some of my skis are pretty soft and some are pretty stiff, but I haven't really detected any notable downside to 16mm of camber with any of them.
Some other skiers have looked at my skis and said things like, "Man, look at all that camber", as if to say, " they must not ski very well". I've thought about re-doing my molds for less camber, admittedly, partially because of the seemingly negative feedback that I'm getting. At the same time, after skiing on the one's that I've built, a ski with less camber just seems that it'll ride sorta 'dead'. I have a lot of factory built skis that are basically flat cambered, and that's how I remember them feeling compared to my home-builds.
I suppose that I'll end up building a new camber block with less camber in it, just to do a side by side test of my own product. Anybody else have any thoughts on camber?
G-man
Anyone up for a camber revisit?
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
camber
Im still in the planing/accuring stage of building my own snowboard/ski's But I have a lot of on snow experience. Camber in general leads to a more energetic ski/board. It provides the "spring" you feel from turn to turn. It is in my opinion most needed in cojunction with shorter radius stiffer tailed boards( think slalom) although it plays a role in GS legnth boards as well.
When is it a bad thing? Take a great energetic carving board that is a hoot on the groomers and head for ungroomed chop, suddenly that camber that was sush an asset edge to edge on the groomed is now bucking you all over the place and demanding a lot of leg work to stay on top of.
Suddenly a softer, lower cambered ski will shine as it absorbs the terain and allows you to float your tips and enjoy the ride. The bottom line is do the skis feel energetic without demanding to much from you to stay on top of them? If the answer is yes your onto a good thing in as much as building a ski to suit yourself is concerned. I would think the thing to do is find some pepole who fit the skier type (skill and style) you had in mind when you designed the ski and let them ride your boards for a few days. Not a couple of hours, because every body is used to there own equipment and it takes a couple of days/different snow conditions to really objectively evaluate a ski.
Anyway Personaly I think Im in the same camp as you. I tend to enjoy boards with strong camber and stiff tails over the over abundant limp offerings avaiable from the big boys. How are your skis doing as far as holding camber? Any advice for a first time builder in terms of getting my board to be moderatly stiff with a strong camber that would go a full season of riding?
When is it a bad thing? Take a great energetic carving board that is a hoot on the groomers and head for ungroomed chop, suddenly that camber that was sush an asset edge to edge on the groomed is now bucking you all over the place and demanding a lot of leg work to stay on top of.
Suddenly a softer, lower cambered ski will shine as it absorbs the terain and allows you to float your tips and enjoy the ride. The bottom line is do the skis feel energetic without demanding to much from you to stay on top of them? If the answer is yes your onto a good thing in as much as building a ski to suit yourself is concerned. I would think the thing to do is find some pepole who fit the skier type (skill and style) you had in mind when you designed the ski and let them ride your boards for a few days. Not a couple of hours, because every body is used to there own equipment and it takes a couple of days/different snow conditions to really objectively evaluate a ski.
Anyway Personaly I think Im in the same camp as you. I tend to enjoy boards with strong camber and stiff tails over the over abundant limp offerings avaiable from the big boys. How are your skis doing as far as holding camber? Any advice for a first time builder in terms of getting my board to be moderatly stiff with a strong camber that would go a full season of riding?
Your captain of your own ship, So don't sink it!
Hey carver,
Thanks for the thoughts. As my skis get wider, I also make them softer, so even though my floaty skis still have 16mm of camber, they are soft enough that tips float up pretty nicely in soft snow. I also usually grab the wider, soft skis for firm, choppy snow just so I'm more likely to stay on top of the chop, so the softer flex pretty much mitigates the deeper camber in cruddy conditions also.
I've not noted any loss of camber over time in my skis. I've experimented with many different types of composites, but it seems to me that the biggest factor in flex stiffness comes from varying the thickness of the core. I know very little about snowboards, but I've noted that a ski with a core that is 3mm at tip/tail and 12.5mm at waist is vastly more stiff than a ski that has a core that is 2mm at tip/tail and 11mm at waist, using the same composite lay-up. I've often wondered if using side-walls (UHMW) versus not using side-walls (exposed wood core) has any effect on camber retention. It seems that a loss of camber would necessarily involve a change in the relationship of the top glass layer to the bottom glass layer. Maybe the UHMW side-wall helps to resist that movement??
I really have never looked very closely at a snowboard, but I am under the impression that the waist thickness is much thinner than that of a ski. It seems that a thinner and more consistent longitudinal thickness would lead to a greater tendency to lose camber over time, so maybe camber loss is more of an issue with snowboards than it is with skis.
Good luck and thanks for your feedback.
G-man
Thanks for the thoughts. As my skis get wider, I also make them softer, so even though my floaty skis still have 16mm of camber, they are soft enough that tips float up pretty nicely in soft snow. I also usually grab the wider, soft skis for firm, choppy snow just so I'm more likely to stay on top of the chop, so the softer flex pretty much mitigates the deeper camber in cruddy conditions also.
I've not noted any loss of camber over time in my skis. I've experimented with many different types of composites, but it seems to me that the biggest factor in flex stiffness comes from varying the thickness of the core. I know very little about snowboards, but I've noted that a ski with a core that is 3mm at tip/tail and 12.5mm at waist is vastly more stiff than a ski that has a core that is 2mm at tip/tail and 11mm at waist, using the same composite lay-up. I've often wondered if using side-walls (UHMW) versus not using side-walls (exposed wood core) has any effect on camber retention. It seems that a loss of camber would necessarily involve a change in the relationship of the top glass layer to the bottom glass layer. Maybe the UHMW side-wall helps to resist that movement??
I really have never looked very closely at a snowboard, but I am under the impression that the waist thickness is much thinner than that of a ski. It seems that a thinner and more consistent longitudinal thickness would lead to a greater tendency to lose camber over time, so maybe camber loss is more of an issue with snowboards than it is with skis.
Good luck and thanks for your feedback.
G-man
Hey G-man,
I don't have anything but logic to make this statement but here goes...
I think that the wood core has a lot to do with the ski feeling soft or stiff with reguards to the camber. Wouldn't a stiff design in the make-up of the ski with a low camber be simmular to a soft design and a higher camber? More compression to flex (with the high camber) will fesult in more rebound?? I'm just trying to understand also. My mould is built to 19mm. I'm currently waiting patiently for the materials to press.
However, Carver makes a great point in letting others try out your skis for a few days. I'm willing to sacrafice my time on your boards. You see, my new skis with 10 days on them started to delam at both tips. I sent them back to the factory for warranty evaluatioon and currently do not have anything to ski on! Just a thought.
rockaukum
I don't have anything but logic to make this statement but here goes...
I think that the wood core has a lot to do with the ski feeling soft or stiff with reguards to the camber. Wouldn't a stiff design in the make-up of the ski with a low camber be simmular to a soft design and a higher camber? More compression to flex (with the high camber) will fesult in more rebound?? I'm just trying to understand also. My mould is built to 19mm. I'm currently waiting patiently for the materials to press.
However, Carver makes a great point in letting others try out your skis for a few days. I'm willing to sacrafice my time on your boards. You see, my new skis with 10 days on them started to delam at both tips. I sent them back to the factory for warranty evaluatioon and currently do not have anything to ski on! Just a thought.
rockaukum
-
Chicagoskier11
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 9:45 am
- Location: Denver
rockaukum, sorry to hear about your skis, but it is comforting to know that even the pros can't get it right all the time.
p.s. I finally mailed your DVDs i promised today. Sorry it took so long. The hose works wonderfully.
Has anyone evaluated to use of heat (how much how long) and camber retention? I believe i read that a heated press will give you less relaxation after the ski comes out of the mold. What about after that... the long term effects of a room temp vs. low heat vs. high heat. My first pair was low camber to retained it as long as they were alive. They were pressed on an 80degree day with no external heat. Relaxed to about 8mm after pressing.
p.s. I finally mailed your DVDs i promised today. Sorry it took so long. The hose works wonderfully.
Has anyone evaluated to use of heat (how much how long) and camber retention? I believe i read that a heated press will give you less relaxation after the ski comes out of the mold. What about after that... the long term effects of a room temp vs. low heat vs. high heat. My first pair was low camber to retained it as long as they were alive. They were pressed on an 80degree day with no external heat. Relaxed to about 8mm after pressing.
G-man, I agree with you. I prefer a higher camber to a lower one except
if the ski is extremely stiff. Skis that seem to have a low camber
might not really have that. I think we measure it differently. If you
lay a ski flat on a table the camber will flatten out a bit. More if
the ski is soft. If you have binding on it, it flattens even more and
worse case is a race type of binding plate, it will make a high camber
ski look like one with a moderate camber if it is placed on a table.
The best way to measure camber is bottom to bottom with the tails on
the floor and holding them together without squeezing and divide the
distance with 2.
if the ski is extremely stiff. Skis that seem to have a low camber
might not really have that. I think we measure it differently. If you
lay a ski flat on a table the camber will flatten out a bit. More if
the ski is soft. If you have binding on it, it flattens even more and
worse case is a race type of binding plate, it will make a high camber
ski look like one with a moderate camber if it is placed on a table.
The best way to measure camber is bottom to bottom with the tails on
the floor and holding them together without squeezing and divide the
distance with 2.
-
Car_ve_diem
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:38 am
Been away for a few days, so time to catch up.
rockaukum,
Your theory makes good sense... I'm planning on coming up with a testing device that might shed some light on how the two skis that you describe react to an increasing pressure through the flex range. I'm sure that there is a point where a specific pressure achieves the same flex on both skis, but then what happens as the pressure increases past that point? It seems that the overall softer flexing ski (with a greater amount of initial camber) would flex deeper than the overall stiffer ski (with less initial camber) as the pressure increased. I probably should be able to extrapolate that information out of endre's work, but I have to admit that, not having an engineering background, I'm having a bit of a difficult time getting my mind around those graphs... they sure are pretty, though.
Thanks for the offer to test my skis
. Unfortunately, my local ski buddies are tying my skis up enough that I've come close to not having a pair to ski on myself. I've almost had to resort to skiing factory skis...Yikes! I bought a pair of factory skis last season and skied on them twice before I got my first pair of home-builds finished. I got the factory skis out the other day to weigh them and noticed that both tips and one tail were delaminating. One edge is peeling away from the ski. Good luck on getting some operational skis soon. The snow has been so rock hard here for a couple of weeks, I've been spending most of my time on crampons.
Good points Lennart. Actually, we do measure camber via the same method. I always seem to come up with right around 30mm betwixt the two skis, maybe a tad more... never seems to change. I weigh about 165 - 170 lbs and usually have a pack on with enough stuff in it to get me through an unexpected night out... maybe another 25 - 30 lbs there. Maybe a heavier, more aggressive skier could get my skis to de-camber over time... don't really know.
G-man
rockaukum,
Your theory makes good sense... I'm planning on coming up with a testing device that might shed some light on how the two skis that you describe react to an increasing pressure through the flex range. I'm sure that there is a point where a specific pressure achieves the same flex on both skis, but then what happens as the pressure increases past that point? It seems that the overall softer flexing ski (with a greater amount of initial camber) would flex deeper than the overall stiffer ski (with less initial camber) as the pressure increased. I probably should be able to extrapolate that information out of endre's work, but I have to admit that, not having an engineering background, I'm having a bit of a difficult time getting my mind around those graphs... they sure are pretty, though.
Thanks for the offer to test my skis
. Unfortunately, my local ski buddies are tying my skis up enough that I've come close to not having a pair to ski on myself. I've almost had to resort to skiing factory skis...Yikes! I bought a pair of factory skis last season and skied on them twice before I got my first pair of home-builds finished. I got the factory skis out the other day to weigh them and noticed that both tips and one tail were delaminating. One edge is peeling away from the ski. Good luck on getting some operational skis soon. The snow has been so rock hard here for a couple of weeks, I've been spending most of my time on crampons.Good points Lennart. Actually, we do measure camber via the same method. I always seem to come up with right around 30mm betwixt the two skis, maybe a tad more... never seems to change. I weigh about 165 - 170 lbs and usually have a pack on with enough stuff in it to get me through an unexpected night out... maybe another 25 - 30 lbs there. Maybe a heavier, more aggressive skier could get my skis to de-camber over time... don't really know.
G-man
Camber
G-man
From what you wrote it sounds like you are touring on your skis? I know the seasons been rough there in the sierra's (and Utah) but have you ever had your high camber skis in really dry, light untracked?
I am asking because I have heard that it is possible to have a good powder ski with camber but have never been able to experience it. My testing has been limited but when I ride my blizzard 8.2 (love them on hardpack) which have about 23mm of camber in anything soft it's a disaster. Unless I am laying on the back of the skis I feel like I am going over the handle bars constantly regardless of how much speed I try to pick up.
If you have managed to make a good powder ski with camber that would be very interesting as a have your cake and eat it to type of situation.
From what you wrote it sounds like you are touring on your skis? I know the seasons been rough there in the sierra's (and Utah) but have you ever had your high camber skis in really dry, light untracked?
I am asking because I have heard that it is possible to have a good powder ski with camber but have never been able to experience it. My testing has been limited but when I ride my blizzard 8.2 (love them on hardpack) which have about 23mm of camber in anything soft it's a disaster. Unless I am laying on the back of the skis I feel like I am going over the handle bars constantly regardless of how much speed I try to pick up.
If you have managed to make a good powder ski with camber that would be very interesting as a have your cake and eat it to type of situation.
- Ben
camber and powder
powdercow,
Have you tried a binding that allows you to shift your boot center back?
There are a lot of demo/rental style models that might improve your results in powder simply by putting you a little back on the ski. Salomon makes a few good ones and Atomic makes some that shift toe and heel together so it's a super simple adjustment. (although im not as confident in atomic as I am in Salomon reliability wise)
Have you tried a binding that allows you to shift your boot center back?
There are a lot of demo/rental style models that might improve your results in powder simply by putting you a little back on the ski. Salomon makes a few good ones and Atomic makes some that shift toe and heel together so it's a super simple adjustment. (although im not as confident in atomic as I am in Salomon reliability wise)
Your captain of your own ship, So don't sink it!
powdercow,
I made some wide (140/110/130), soft skis last season that I got about 30 soft snow days on. Some of those days were on powdery snow, but most were on our wet, gloppy snow that was so persistent last April and May around here because it wasn't freezing in the mountains at night. The skis had my usual 16mm of camber and they skied better than I had imagined any ski ever could on/in both dry and wet soft snow. When it finally started freezing and we were getting spring corn on a frozen base, I switched to a narrower, stiffer ski (same 16mm camber). The wide skis were just too soft for 2 inches of corn on a hard base (40ish degree slopes) and I just couldn't get/hold an edge on the steeps. The more stiff skis were perfect. Even with 16mm of camber, they held a turn very firmly and the flow from one turn to another was heavenly.
G-man
I made some wide (140/110/130), soft skis last season that I got about 30 soft snow days on. Some of those days were on powdery snow, but most were on our wet, gloppy snow that was so persistent last April and May around here because it wasn't freezing in the mountains at night. The skis had my usual 16mm of camber and they skied better than I had imagined any ski ever could on/in both dry and wet soft snow. When it finally started freezing and we were getting spring corn on a frozen base, I switched to a narrower, stiffer ski (same 16mm camber). The wide skis were just too soft for 2 inches of corn on a hard base (40ish degree slopes) and I just couldn't get/hold an edge on the steeps. The more stiff skis were perfect. Even with 16mm of camber, they held a turn very firmly and the flow from one turn to another was heavenly.
G-man
-
Cadman
Changing the camber
It is my understanding that if you are using heatblankets on top and bottom of the molds you can vary the temperatures so one is hotter than the other which will end up changing the camber in your skis when they
come out of the mold.
come out of the mold.
Wow it took a while for me to get back to this thread but today is my skibuilders catch up day so here we go.
Carver -
I actually do have my first home builts mounted with solly demo's. The idea was to use the demo's to find the right mounting point then to swap them out with regular bindings once I had them dialed in. The idea of using demo bindings idefinately to allow for/aft adjusment on the fly based on snow conditions is a very interesting one. I might even go that route if it weren't for the weight consideration. You see demo bindings are by neccesity heavier than their standard counterparts. You wouldn't think it would make that much difference but I think I have become a gram weenie.
You see while I was building my skis I was forced to use my touring setup (with dynafits and megarides) as my resort ski for a few months. Although I like the support of my alpine boots better I got very used to having so little weight around my feet. In comparison my demo bindings feel like metal blocks. Still it is something I might want to keep in mind.
G-man -
In looking at the ski you describe combined with what you said in another thread (you make fatter skis softer) I think what is happening is that your tips are just wide enough to flex your ski in a nice reverse camber ( or less camber) shape while you are skiing. This eliminates any tip dive you might get from having to much camber. It feels like it would be very much a balancing act to get a ski that could perform this way and still give a good pop on hardpack. Guess I will just have to make some more shapes and try to figure it out.
Carver -
I actually do have my first home builts mounted with solly demo's. The idea was to use the demo's to find the right mounting point then to swap them out with regular bindings once I had them dialed in. The idea of using demo bindings idefinately to allow for/aft adjusment on the fly based on snow conditions is a very interesting one. I might even go that route if it weren't for the weight consideration. You see demo bindings are by neccesity heavier than their standard counterparts. You wouldn't think it would make that much difference but I think I have become a gram weenie.
You see while I was building my skis I was forced to use my touring setup (with dynafits and megarides) as my resort ski for a few months. Although I like the support of my alpine boots better I got very used to having so little weight around my feet. In comparison my demo bindings feel like metal blocks. Still it is something I might want to keep in mind.
G-man -
In looking at the ski you describe combined with what you said in another thread (you make fatter skis softer) I think what is happening is that your tips are just wide enough to flex your ski in a nice reverse camber ( or less camber) shape while you are skiing. This eliminates any tip dive you might get from having to much camber. It feels like it would be very much a balancing act to get a ski that could perform this way and still give a good pop on hardpack. Guess I will just have to make some more shapes and try to figure it out.
- Ben