I learned on a pair of full camber 195 K2 ski's, and I'm a light 5'10". They were a blast. You can ski whatever you want, but these are good guidelines in today's world.
Thanks, good info, pretty well gels with everything I have experienced with camber vs rocker skis, something similar on twin tips and straight tails would be appreciated.👍
I've skied on my Salomon 1080 Guns (fully cambered, twin tips) for 15 years. They are solid all-mountain skis. I like the bumps and trees and therefore selected skis somewhat shorter than standard for my height. I demoed some Black Crows rocker skis. They were impossibly squirrely. Of course YMMV, but that's my experience.
Very good explanation of rocker and camber effect the performance in ski design. I would add tip and tail shape in this explanation. If you notice that many front side carving skis more angular squared off shovels and tails. The shovel is lower and the tail,is flatter. The Volkl Deacon 72, 76 or 84 are good examples. When on edge the contact point is close to the ends of the ski. Skis designed for powder or deep snow have longer more tapered tips and tails. The contact points are further back. The Nordica Enforcer series are a good example of this style of tip and tail shape. As soon as you see the shape of the tip,shovel and tail you can estimate if it’s a front side, all mountain, Freeride or powder design.
I don't get why people say full camber race skiis are demanding... They are light, super easy turning, amazing grip, %100 in control. Should be a beginners dream
I think using the term edge grip is inappropriate. In a fully rockered ski, you are correct, the grip is mostly directly underfoot rather than spread along the length of the camber. However, where this is deceiving is that the skiers weight is then directed almost totally underfoot (or along the whole edge if the skier engages very high edge angulation) when the entire skiers mass is directly underfoot, it actually creates more bite than a cambered ski-just in a smaller area most of the time. So it does in fact grip harder technically than a cambered ski. The grip area is just less. When the skiers weight is spread over the whole length of the camber profile, the skiers mass is dispersed further out, which actually means that the edge penetrates less than in a fully rockered ski, just over a wider area.
I find this video very well done, even though I wouldn't necessarily agree with litterally everything it says. IMO for example I don't find that you need to be a more aggressive skier to ride full camber. I would prefer the wording more precise. That is why IMO if you have the goal to improve on your skiing and don't exclusively go to the slopes for relaxed fun, a full camber ski is the weapon of choice for your plans. And also I find I don't need to ski fast when I use full camber. What I like most on my full camber skis and what is the main reason I always ask for it, is the immediate response I am getting on my "command". This said, what I do think the video is lacking a bit is the description of the effect the rocker profile has to such response: You will experience a bit of a latency on the response of the ski because you need to do more engagement until the edges on the tips will follow that. My full camber ski, when I engage ever so slightly, gives me that immediate response so I don't have to wait for it entering the turn.
The immediate response you get from a full camber race or high performance front side ski requires constant skier input. To do this proper ski technique and skills are essential. Many certified instructors prefer to teach on narrower high performance carving ski that have no or very little rocker and more camber. Instructors teach at low to moderate speed but ski with proper technique with lots of constant skier input.
💯 If you will be on the groomed all they might as well get better and kill it. You don't need to be an expert at all. The skiis are light. You will feel so much in control. It should be easy even if you are a beginer. I can imagine someone has ridden camber all their life strugeling with a rocker on groomed snow. But not the other way arround. They will find it super easy and feel more in control with a camber on a groomed slope
Great info. What might you recommend for a high intermediate skier who splits time between the groomers and corduroy of Vermont with soft powder/moguls of the west? Thank you!
The Blizzard Rustler 9 is a good ski to look at. 92 underfoot, Ti under foot to ad stability, and has tip and tail rocker for easier maneuverability in soft snow. The head Shape v10, 85 underfoot. More groomer biased, but can give you a bit of float when you need it. Nordica Enforcer 88. Similar shape to the Rustlers, but they have 2 layers of Ti in them. They will need more effort to ski them.
very nice video I am a more cautious skier after a shoulder injury a few years ago; thus speed is less important vs techniques. My question for the expert is the balance between rocker vs camber for someone who's doing mostly frontside slopes with some moguls, what skis do you recommend? I am looking at the Salomon QST vs Nordica enforcer or the Rossi Sender 94 or volkl mantra at 163 cm I am currently skiing an older Salomon shoganwith 100+ under foot not great in terms of carving nor bumps. thanks very much
hmm i began w 83 Atomic mavericks (173) and yes at times the ski gets away form me. I feel like i need to use more muscle, strength or physical force to go through a turn especially if the snow gets patchy, slushy, or choppy. I ski primarily Mammoth. Im considering going to 100 under foot Atomic Bent or 100 Enforcer's . I ski groomers primarily, so which ski would you recommend? I'm 6 foot tall and weigh a muscular 230 lbs, Great video
The Enforcers will be significantly more stable due to the Ti construction. They will need more engagement because they are a stiffer ski though. I'm not knocking the Bents, they just may not be enough ski for you, based on your stature. The Enforcer 94 will be a bit quicker edge-to-edge than the 100. Something to keep in mind.
I noticed that you have Tyrolia Protectors on the skis one pair of your skis. I was thinking about getting some for my significant other who has had knee surgery. What are your thoughts on the binding, how does it ski? Is the stack height an issue? (I ski on Look Pivots so my concept of stack height is skewed)
My Protectors came with my V10s. They ski well, as they were designed to go with the skis. I have yet to fall in such a manner to experience the horizontal release though. If you decide to go with them, they need to be mounted on a plate, so they will add more weight, and dead spots to the skis. In comparison to the Pivots, if you had them on the same skis, you will notice a difference in ski feel, and weight.
What would be good for a beginner to intermediate in the Midwest where we have shorter hills that are often icy and steep? So the snow is typically more packed and can be very icy at times
I'm in the Midwest as well. The Blizzard Thunderbird SP is a great beginner option. Narrow width (77mm) and some camber. Plus they're pretty cheap and come with an integrated binding so you can save money for your next pair of skis
buy a $60 pair of 6 year old race skis for icy days... demanding, YES edge grip/ hold on ice, YESSS - love, an eastern guy who knows his powder skis are pure fantasy
AHHHHH base was rock hard, storm came up a little shorter than hoped for, but Waterville was purely fantastic! as long as i can get ONE a season!! czcams.com/video/bGERA3i7Xe0/video.html
question if I am having an fischer rc4 the curve 2022, and the camber is almost gone - does that mean the ski is dead and needs to be exchanged? or is it still useable?
The skis are usable, but they won't perform they way they should. How many days do you have on them? I would contact Fisher, and see if you can potentially get them warrantied. For the camber to "die" that quick, seems like a manufacturing thing.
I am 6'4" an a beginner, people say I should be using shorter skis. can you do a video on ski length and what length does. thanks. I have been useing a 109cm and should a 95cm.
I'm about the same height. When I was a beginner almost every ski rental shop wanted to give me a ski that was too long for me... That said, are you sure about those lengths? I would often be given skis in the 185cm range and ask for something closer to 170cm when I was learning. 109cm sounds like child-length skis.
He’s probably talking about ski width. A beginner is less likely to venture off a groomed run. 109mm is way to wide. 95mm is more reasonable but when learning to carve turns properly, I’d go even more narrow.
I'd propose a 165 cm soft slalom ski for the learning, width under the bindings should optimally not be more tan 70 mm while for tip and tail 109 mm would be ok. But make sure tail is more narrow than tip. What a ski like this one does to you: It is easy turning for a tall person as you are and still provides the necessary guidance for straight gliding. With soft slalom I am referring to a ski that looks liek a slalom race ski but isn't, because per design it is a lot softer than race.
This video is most important and everyone should watch and fully understand as I know many people buys based on design!! lol This video help understand what kind of skier they are. Thank you for making the video and your dedication!!
First thing to know is that it's not a choice, you actually want camber and/or rocker. You never want a ski without camber unless you are a bad skier. Rocker makes thiner skis float better (but not well) in lighter snow conditions (meaning powder). Camber improves your mechanical advantage on turns by increasing the default ski bend position (think attack angle). Bad skiers won't notice the extra shovel (rocker) since they sit back and will be knocked over by camber as it will cause them to "catch an edge". 😊
The comments about the effective edge of a full rocker ski aren't really accurate. A full rocker AND full taper ski have will very short effective edge but there are only a handful (4 that I can think of, only one that's a regular production model) of those on the market. The rest match the sidecut to the rocker profile so the entire sidecut contacts the snow when you have it on edge, same as a full camber ski. They can still grip well but usually lack the energy that a cambered ski has.
to me rocker, outside of a music context, referring to skis means, bent, broken, ruined, useless for anything but skiing on rocks therefore rockers have some uses just not on good snow. no ski will magically make you ski well. It takes rare convergences of lifestyle and economics to become recognized as a great skier. I watch great skiers analyze their moves and develop progressive task scripts to teach instructors to use role models like Micaela Schiffrin to coach kids and adults hopefully inspiring them on to becoming great skiers themselves. Great skiers can ski on rockers, but they just don't... they demand performance expect to have good times consistently. camber, sidecut and gauge pressure are old school ski design that started us turning. The same things apply today even more. They got it right back then and nothing has really changed. Ski technique is still the same "New way to Ski" as in the 50's. Ski marketers always shop for gimmicks like rocker to sell each season to hard core intermediate and advanced skiers hoping to compensate for their choice of lifestyle.
Rockered skis have their place. Do they make you a better skier, not really. Does it make skiing easier for many people, yes... I was recently at a demo event and skied almost 20 different pairs of skis. The "traditional" ones were fantastic. Fast, snappy, superior grip, but I don't want to ski like that ALL day. Yes, rocker allows one to be a lazy skier. However, if the skis are built correctly (there's a lot of crap out there), and one has good technique, you can have your cake and eat it too. Rocker is not a gimmick. It's just a different way of making skis. When applied correctly, and matched with the right skier, one can have a lot of fun on the mountain. Isn't that why we got into this in the first place???
@@MountainVibes It is quiet a good description of it. It is against my nature, the way the tip rockered skis behave, but I agree that this is not valid for everyone. But have you noticed as I have, that most of the brands that almost exclusively built tip rockered skis about 6 to 8 years ago are now back on full camber for the most part of their familiy of top models? At least for the ones they sell most here in Europe, that holds true.
Man, there sure are a lot of people in your comments really upset that manufacturers make skis that aren't solely intended to go as fast as possible down a groomed piste and turn around gates!
Review pretty simple - these clown rocker angles and widths > 94 are for people who have zero technique and don’t know how to ski. You don’t need anything > 94 if you know what you are doing.
@@Dwaynefreeman As far as I can remember, every single racer in FIS WC is using copy of my original skis, please list your credentials. Repeating marketing gobble will not make anyone an expert.
@@jurijfranko9002 Full blast boasting will not make you a good ski designer. There were times even certain top racers (like Carlo Janka for example) were skiing tip rocker in GS. I would declare it was just past his best years and past his injury as well as past his time with the same brand as his hottest rival of the time, but it seemed to help him on the way back, especially also with his notorious back pain. (less immediate rebound hit back into the body at turn engagement).
@@beatreuteler Quote:" There were times even certain top racers (like Carlo Janka for example) were skiing tip rocker in GS". Why they stopped? Yes there were many ideas, but none worked, that is definition of marketing gobble.
This changed my life! For years I've been trying to understand what rocker and camber mean. I thank you good sir!
This was probably the best explanation of camber vs rocker...thank you!!
I learned on a pair of full camber 195 K2 ski's, and I'm a light 5'10". They were a blast. You can ski whatever you want, but these are good guidelines in today's world.
Excellent and the best explanation of rocker technology ever! Thanks!
Nicely explained - thank you very much. That's another little gap in my knowledge filled in a bit.
great to see a video again, keep em coming :))
Great explanation, got me to subscribe, thank you
Thanks, good info, pretty well gels with everything I have experienced with camber vs rocker skis, something similar on twin tips and straight tails would be appreciated.👍
I've skied on my Salomon 1080 Guns (fully cambered, twin tips) for 15 years. They are solid all-mountain skis. I like the bumps and trees and therefore selected skis somewhat shorter than standard for my height. I demoed some Black Crows rocker skis. They were impossibly squirrely. Of course YMMV, but that's my experience.
Thanks for this.
OMG, he is back!
Very good explanation of rocker and camber effect the performance in ski design. I would add tip and tail shape in this explanation. If you notice that many front side carving skis more angular squared off shovels and tails. The shovel is lower and the tail,is flatter. The Volkl Deacon 72, 76 or 84 are good examples. When on edge the contact point is close to the ends of the ski. Skis designed for powder or deep snow have longer more tapered tips and tails. The contact points are further back. The Nordica Enforcer series are a good example of this style of tip and tail shape. As soon as you see the shape of the tip,shovel and tail you can estimate if it’s a front side, all mountain, Freeride or powder design.
Good/simple explanation , ❄️✨✨✨✨.
Thank you so much
Well said..
Well presented.
Correct….
Nice exlanations
I don't get why people say full camber race skiis are demanding... They are light, super easy turning, amazing grip, %100 in control. Should be a beginners dream
Great video! Thanks a lot. Could you please make a video on twin-tip?
q
This video just made me feel better about myself because I’ve only used cambered skis lmao
I think using the term edge grip is inappropriate. In a fully rockered ski, you are correct, the grip is mostly directly underfoot rather than spread along the length of the camber. However, where this is deceiving is that the skiers weight is then directed almost totally underfoot (or along the whole edge if the skier engages very high edge angulation) when the entire skiers mass is directly underfoot, it actually creates more bite than a cambered ski-just in a smaller area most of the time. So it does in fact grip harder technically than a cambered ski. The grip area is just less. When the skiers weight is spread over the whole length of the camber profile, the skiers mass is dispersed further out, which actually means that the edge penetrates less than in a fully rockered ski, just over a wider area.
Thanx
I find this video very well done, even though I wouldn't necessarily agree with litterally everything it says. IMO for example I don't find that you need to be a more aggressive skier to ride full camber. I would prefer the wording more precise. That is why IMO if you have the goal to improve on your skiing and don't exclusively go to the slopes for relaxed fun, a full camber ski is the weapon of choice for your plans. And also I find I don't need to ski fast when I use full camber. What I like most on my full camber skis and what is the main reason I always ask for it, is the immediate response I am getting on my "command". This said, what I do think the video is lacking a bit is the description of the effect the rocker profile has to such response: You will experience a bit of a latency on the response of the ski because you need to do more engagement until the edges on the tips will follow that. My full camber ski, when I engage ever so slightly, gives me that immediate response so I don't have to wait for it entering the turn.
The immediate response you get from a full camber race or high performance front side ski requires constant skier input. To do this proper ski technique and skills are essential. Many certified instructors prefer to teach on narrower high performance carving ski that have no or very little rocker and more camber. Instructors teach at low to moderate speed but ski with proper technique with lots of constant skier input.
💯 If you will be on the groomed all they might as well get better and kill it. You don't need to be an expert at all. The skiis are light. You will feel so much in control. It should be easy even if you are a beginer. I can imagine someone has ridden camber all their life strugeling with a rocker on groomed snow. But not the other way arround. They will find it super easy and feel more in control with a camber on a groomed slope
Great info. What might you recommend for a high intermediate skier who splits time between the groomers and corduroy of Vermont with soft powder/moguls of the west? Thank you!
The Blizzard Rustler 9 is a good ski to look at. 92 underfoot, Ti under foot to ad stability, and has tip and tail rocker for easier maneuverability in soft snow.
The head Shape v10, 85 underfoot. More groomer biased, but can give you a bit of float when you need it.
Nordica Enforcer 88. Similar shape to the Rustlers, but they have 2 layers of Ti in them. They will need more effort to ski them.
Please do some reviews on narrow carving ski in the 75 underfoot. Prefer the upper end skies.. Thanks,
Unfortunately, many of the demos I have access to don’t fit this demographic.
A combo!
very nice video
I am a more cautious skier after a shoulder injury a few years ago; thus speed is less important vs techniques. My question for the expert is the balance between rocker vs camber for someone who's doing mostly frontside slopes with some moguls, what skis do you recommend? I am looking at the Salomon QST vs Nordica enforcer or the Rossi Sender 94 or volkl mantra at 163 cm I am currently skiing an older Salomon shoganwith 100+ under foot not great in terms of carving nor bumps. thanks very much
Kendo
hmm i began w 83 Atomic mavericks (173) and yes at times the ski gets away form me. I feel like i need to use more muscle, strength or physical force to go through a turn especially if the snow gets patchy, slushy, or choppy. I ski primarily Mammoth. Im considering going to 100 under foot Atomic Bent or 100 Enforcer's . I ski groomers primarily, so which ski would you recommend? I'm 6 foot tall and weigh a muscular 230 lbs, Great video
The Enforcers will be significantly more stable due to the Ti construction. They will need more engagement because they are a stiffer ski though. I'm not knocking the Bents, they just may not be enough ski for you, based on your stature. The Enforcer 94 will be a bit quicker edge-to-edge than the 100. Something to keep in mind.
@@MountainVibes Thank you for the feedback
I noticed that you have Tyrolia Protectors on the skis one pair of your skis. I was thinking about getting some for my significant other who has had knee surgery. What are your thoughts on the binding, how does it ski? Is the stack height an issue? (I ski on Look Pivots so my concept of stack height is skewed)
My Protectors came with my V10s. They ski well, as they were designed to go with the skis. I have yet to fall in such a manner to experience the horizontal release though.
If you decide to go with them, they need to be mounted on a plate, so they will add more weight, and dead spots to the skis. In comparison to the Pivots, if you had them on the same skis, you will notice a difference in ski feel, and weight.
What would be good for a beginner to intermediate in the Midwest where we have shorter hills that are often icy and steep? So the snow is typically more packed and can be very icy at times
Most definitely camber
I'm in the Midwest as well. The Blizzard Thunderbird SP is a great beginner option. Narrow width (77mm) and some camber. Plus they're pretty cheap and come with an integrated binding so you can save money for your next pair of skis
buy a $60 pair of 6 year old race skis for icy days... demanding, YES
edge grip/ hold on ice, YESSS
- love, an eastern guy who knows his powder skis are pure fantasy
I ski in New England a lot. Full camber, especially good for pinballing on bump runs with icy hardpack between the snow piles.
AHHHHH base was rock hard, storm came up a little shorter than hoped for, but Waterville was purely fantastic! as long as i can get ONE a season!!
czcams.com/video/bGERA3i7Xe0/video.html
question if I am having an fischer rc4 the curve 2022, and the camber is almost gone - does that mean the ski is dead and needs to be exchanged? or is it still useable?
The skis are usable, but they won't perform they way they should. How many days do you have on them? I would contact Fisher, and see if you can potentially get them warrantied. For the camber to "die" that quick, seems like a manufacturing thing.
Great info. Very dark visual
I am 6'4" an a beginner, people say I should be using shorter skis. can you do a video on ski length and what length does. thanks. I have been useing a 109cm and should a 95cm.
I'm about the same height. When I was a beginner almost every ski rental shop wanted to give me a ski that was too long for me... That said, are you sure about those lengths? I would often be given skis in the 185cm range and ask for something closer to 170cm when I was learning. 109cm sounds like child-length skis.
He’s probably talking about ski width. A beginner is less likely to venture off a groomed run. 109mm is way to wide. 95mm is more reasonable but when learning to carve turns properly, I’d go even more narrow.
I'd propose a 165 cm soft slalom ski for the learning, width under the bindings should optimally not be more tan 70 mm while for tip and tail 109 mm would be ok. But make sure tail is more narrow than tip. What a ski like this one does to you: It is easy turning for a tall person as you are and still provides the necessary guidance for straight gliding. With soft slalom I am referring to a ski that looks liek a slalom race ski but isn't, because per design it is a lot softer than race.
rockers are the new snowboarders cambers are the old school rulers
Combo has it 4 non racer.
This video is most important and everyone should watch and fully understand as I know many people buys based on design!! lol
This video help understand what kind of skier they are.
Thank you for making the video and your dedication!!
First thing to know is that it's not a choice, you actually want camber and/or rocker.
You never want a ski without camber unless you are a bad skier.
Rocker makes thiner skis float better (but not well) in lighter snow conditions (meaning powder).
Camber improves your mechanical advantage on turns by increasing the default ski bend position (think attack angle).
Bad skiers won't notice the extra shovel (rocker) since they sit back and will be knocked over by camber as it will cause them to "catch an edge". 😊
The guy in the video explaining this doesn't know what they are for... Omg. Stop talking moron. 😊
The comments about the effective edge of a full rocker ski aren't really accurate. A full rocker AND full taper ski have will very short effective edge but there are only a handful (4 that I can think of, only one that's a regular production model) of those on the market. The rest match the sidecut to the rocker profile so the entire sidecut contacts the snow when you have it on edge, same as a full camber ski. They can still grip well but usually lack the energy that a cambered ski has.
What are the four skis that you were able to think of?
to me rocker, outside of a music context, referring to skis means, bent, broken, ruined, useless for anything but skiing on rocks therefore rockers have some uses just not on good snow. no ski will magically make you ski well. It takes rare convergences of lifestyle and economics to become recognized as a great skier. I watch great skiers analyze their moves and develop progressive task scripts to teach instructors to use role models like Micaela Schiffrin to coach kids and adults hopefully inspiring them on to becoming great skiers themselves. Great skiers can ski on rockers, but they just don't... they demand performance expect to have good times consistently. camber, sidecut and gauge pressure are old school ski design that started us turning. The same things apply today even more. They got it right back then and nothing has really changed. Ski technique is still the same "New way to Ski" as in the 50's. Ski marketers always shop for gimmicks like rocker to sell each season to hard core intermediate and advanced skiers hoping to compensate for their choice of lifestyle.
Rockered skis have their place. Do they make you a better skier, not really. Does it make skiing easier for many people, yes...
I was recently at a demo event and skied almost 20 different pairs of skis. The "traditional" ones were fantastic. Fast, snappy, superior grip, but I don't want to ski like that ALL day. Yes, rocker allows one to be a lazy skier. However, if the skis are built correctly (there's a lot of crap out there), and one has good technique, you can have your cake and eat it too. Rocker is not a gimmick. It's just a different way of making skis. When applied correctly, and matched with the right skier, one can have a lot of fun on the mountain. Isn't that why we got into this in the first place???
@@MountainVibes It is quiet a good description of it. It is against my nature, the way the tip rockered skis behave, but I agree that this is not valid for everyone. But have you noticed as I have, that most of the brands that almost exclusively built tip rockered skis about 6 to 8 years ago are now back on full camber for the most part of their familiy of top models? At least for the ones they sell most here in Europe, that holds true.
oh and cambers ski in corduroys
Man, there sure are a lot of people in your comments really upset that manufacturers make skis that aren't solely intended to go as fast as possible down a groomed piste and turn around gates!
I guess they believe there is only one "true" way to ski.
Camber = groomed runs
Rocker = powder runs
Rocker, got it…….that’s why those guys at squaw think they are soo good…..psst I still ski better than you.
Bro has no idea what he is talking about. Full rocker ski best. Best all rounder. 5/5 sessionability
Review pretty simple - these clown rocker angles and widths > 94 are for people who have zero technique and don’t know how to ski. You don’t need anything > 94 if you know what you are doing.
After 30+years designing skis and 55+years of skiing I still do not get, what he is talking about - just sales and marketing gobble.
🤔Explain…
How can you have designing skis for over 30 years and not knowing these fundamentals in ski design? Bull shit.
@@Dwaynefreeman As far as I can remember, every single racer in FIS WC is using copy of my original skis, please list your credentials. Repeating marketing gobble will not make anyone an expert.
@@jurijfranko9002 Full blast boasting will not make you a good ski designer. There were times even certain top racers (like Carlo Janka for example) were skiing tip rocker in GS. I would declare it was just past his best years and past his injury as well as past his time with the same brand as his hottest rival of the time, but it seemed to help him on the way back, especially also with his notorious back pain. (less immediate rebound hit back into the body at turn engagement).
@@beatreuteler Quote:" There were times even certain top racers (like Carlo Janka for example) were skiing tip rocker in GS". Why they stopped? Yes there were many ideas, but none worked, that is definition of marketing gobble.