It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Yo dope man, full leg tats look great. Was the design yours, the artists or a collab?
I’ve got one mid work, my design it’s unfinished but I’m looking to continue it, my artist moved 3 hours from me and he’s better than anyone I’ve ever seen, and I’ve got work by Sarah miller.
I’ve got a very similar one coming to my leg, it’s color tho
Nothing special, just the cheapest decent thing I could get. The bedroom amp is more for my electric acoustic than the new bass, I'm not tryna blow it out haha. I'm so stoked to start diversifying my music inabilities
Nothing special, just the cheapest decent thing I could get. The bedroom amp is more for my electric acoustic than the new bass, I'm not tryna blow it out haha. I'm so stoked to start diversifying my music inabilities
i've smoked 2 guitar practice amps playing bass thru them. someday i'll learn
I think a damp ski is a good move with cast. Too light would be silly.
Anyone ever seen the Nocker that Evi skis uses? Weighs 200g and you put it in your pack uphill. Then, you twist it on to the attachment on the topsheet while going downhill
r00kieKartel 108 for this season just to get my feet wet. In future might buy a more uphill oriented ski to put them on.
BradFiAusNzCoCaI think a damp ski is a good move with cast. Too light would be silly.
Anyone ever seen the Nocker that Evi skis uses? Weighs 200g and you put it in your pack uphill. Then, you twist it on to the attachment on the topsheet while going downhill
powpatrolthat’s sick reminds me of the hoji lock or whatever 4frnt calls their thing
Except Hoji Lock makes your ski lighter and more efficient and speeds up transitions, whereas this thing is just literally a weight that you have to screw on and off of your ski every transition? I feel like I'm missing something important, because otherwise this seems like the absolute stupidest "innovation" I've ever seen?
I haven’t used it but I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s the “stupidest” innovation ever. I can understand the thought process behind it. Some people don’t want just light for the uphill.
cydwhitExcept Hoji Lock makes your ski lighter and more efficient and speeds up transitions, whereas this thing is just literally a weight that you have to screw on and off of your ski every transition? I feel like I'm missing something important, because otherwise this seems like the absolute stupidest "innovation" I've ever seen?
BradFiAusNzCoCaI agree. It’s a nocker. You twist it on and off. He does it in this video https://fb.watch/fwAC5_H6wL/
If all other variables are held constant, does adding weight to a ski improve dampness and stability? That seems to be Evi's argument here. I'm not familiar enough with ski design to know if it makes a legit difference.
Light touring skis chatter and get knocked around, but I assume that's mostly a result of material choices (like carbon fiber) and shape, rather than the physical mass of the ski. I've listened to enough Blister podcasts to know that reviewer Jonathan is a firm believer that heavier=better. It's interesting to see a brand using this same train of thought by adding removable weights and claiming it improves downhill performance.
Someone review these things. I want to see if it's real or a gimmick. I lean towards gimmick but maybe Evi is onto something.
BradFiAusNzCoCaI haven’t used it but I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s the “stupidest” innovation ever. I can understand the thought process behind it. Some people don’t want just light for the uphill.
Yeah... the skis look sweet, but if I'm gonna add 200g to my skis I'd rather it did something useful. Like, heavier materials throughout the ski to handle firm snow better, or heavier bindings with a more consistent release pattern, or heavier, stiffer boots. We know how to make a ski setup feel better on the way down, and cnc'd weights aint it. But I'd love to try them if I ever got a chance.
See I was under the impression that a heavier central “piece” (nocker, certain bindings, etc) on the ski wouldn’t increase dampness but I feel like I see a decent amount of people citing something along those lines (whether correct or incorrect). My initial thought process would be like Cy’s where you integrate materials across the whole ski.
Personally, I like a mix between light and nimble with backbone so I ride the fauna pioneer. I don’t like super damp 🤷♂️
BrandoComandoIf all other variables are held constant, does adding weight to a ski improve dampness and stability? That seems to be Evi's argument here. I'm not familiar enough with ski design to know if it makes a legit difference.
Light touring skis chatter and get knocked around, but I assume that's mostly a result of material choices (like carbon fiber) and shape, rather than the physical mass of the ski. I've listened to enough Blister podcasts to know that reviewer Jonathan is a firm believer that heavier=better. It's interesting to see a brand using this same train of thought by adding removable weights and claiming it improves downhill performance.
Someone review these things. I want to see if it's real or a gimmick. I lean towards gimmick but maybe Evi is onto something.
cydwhitYeah... the skis look sweet, but if I'm gonna add 200g to my skis I'd rather it did something useful. Like, heavier materials throughout the ski to handle firm snow better, or heavier bindings with a more consistent release pattern, or heavier, stiffer boots. We know how to make a ski setup feel better on the way down, and cnc'd weights aint it. But I'd love to try them if I ever got a chance.
BradFiAusNzCoCaSee I was under the impression that a heavier central “piece” (nocker, certain bindings, etc) on the ski wouldn’t increase dampness but I feel like I see a decent amount of people citing something along those lines (whether correct or incorrect). My initial thought process would be like Cy’s where you integrate materials across the whole ski.
Personally, I like a mix between light and nimble with backbone so I ride the fauna pioneer. I don’t like super damp 🤷♂️
Yeah, and that's another weird thing, the weight attaches at the contact point between the rocker and camber. So it's far out on the ski. So it'll definitely affect swing weight, and also make any sort of grab where your skis cross have the potential to catch on each other?
IDK, I've skied with Jonathan a lot, and agree with most of his thoughts on weight, event though I lean lighter because I walk uphill more. For their Slate, that's a 1700g 188cm, 123 underfoot ski. That's basically the ideal weight for a touring ski of that size in my book, equivalent to an Atomic Bent 120. Like, send me a pair, I want them. That's a perfect weight for a big pow weapon that's made for walking uphill. Why on earth would I want to add 400g of aluminum weights out near the tips and tails of the ski? It's gonna be less fun to slash and jib in pow.
And their more inbound's focused skis are at great weights too. The Hedonisme is 2100g in a 193? SICK! I know Jonathan would want it to be closer to 2300, but for folks on this website who like to get in the air and spin occasionally, that's a great inbounds weight. Like any brand should be able to make a ski that performs well in variable snow at that weight without having us bolt on extra weights.
That's sorta what I'm getting at with this being the stupidest gimmick. By the numbers, they're making smart, versatile skis. I'm really interested in trying a pair someday. But why talk down to their customers and try to convince us that these magic Nockers will make them ski any better?
cydwhitYeah, and that's another weird thing, the weight attaches at the contact point between the rocker and camber. So it's far out on the ski. So it'll definitely affect swing weight, and also make any sort of grab where your skis cross have the potential to catch on each other?
IDK, I've skied with Jonathan a lot, and agree with most of his thoughts on weight, event though I lean lighter because I walk uphill more. For their Slate, that's a 1700g 188cm, 123 underfoot ski. That's basically the ideal weight for a touring ski of that size in my book, equivalent to an Atomic Bent 120. Like, send me a pair, I want them. That's a perfect weight for a big pow weapon that's made for walking uphill. Why on earth would I want to add 400g of aluminum weights out near the tips and tails of the ski? It's gonna be less fun to slash and jib in pow.
And their more inbound's focused skis are at great weights too. The Hedonisme is 2100g in a 193? SICK! I know Jonathan would want it to be closer to 2300, but for folks on this website who like to get in the air and spin occasionally, that's a great inbounds weight. Like any brand should be able to make a ski that performs well in variable snow at that weight without having us bolt on extra weights.
That's sorta what I'm getting at with this being the stupidest gimmick. By the numbers, they're making smart, versatile skis. I'm really interested in trying a pair someday. But why talk down to their customers and try to convince us that these magic Nockers will make them ski any better?
I'd never heard of EVI skis before and this is really really cool. Definitely want to try the Hedonisme in a 198 or a 200 since I've always been curious about how a long ski would feel
They are really cool skis and they’re actually two companies: Evi and Prog . They’re building skis for Norrøna outerwear too, but they might be limited production. Apparently it’s just a guy in a barn??
I am all for more people being exposed to Evi. Would love to see a blister review on one of their skis!
cydwhitYeah, and that's another weird thing, the weight attaches at the contact point between the rocker and camber. So it's far out on the ski. So it'll definitely affect swing weight, and also make any sort of grab where your skis cross have the potential to catch on each other?
IDK, I've skied with Jonathan a lot, and agree with most of his thoughts on weight, event though I lean lighter because I walk uphill more. For their Slate, that's a 1700g 188cm, 123 underfoot ski. That's basically the ideal weight for a touring ski of that size in my book, equivalent to an Atomic Bent 120. Like, send me a pair, I want them. That's a perfect weight for a big pow weapon that's made for walking uphill. Why on earth would I want to add 400g of aluminum weights out near the tips and tails of the ski? It's gonna be less fun to slash and jib in pow.
And their more inbound's focused skis are at great weights too. The Hedonisme is 2100g in a 193? SICK! I know Jonathan would want it to be closer to 2300, but for folks on this website who like to get in the air and spin occasionally, that's a great inbounds weight. Like any brand should be able to make a ski that performs well in variable snow at that weight without having us bolt on extra weights.
That's sorta what I'm getting at with this being the stupidest gimmick. By the numbers, they're making smart, versatile skis. I'm really interested in trying a pair someday. But why talk down to their customers and try to convince us that these magic Nockers will make them ski any better?
Finally caved in and bought some corrective eyeglasses and I can see quite a bit better. Also I look like a professor or something so my IQ automatically increased.
Only cost me 76$ for two pairs of glasses. I don't exactly know how much they cost in America, but from what I understand, that's a lot less than just one of the cheapest pairs... So I feel like I got a good deal.
BrandoComandoIf all other variables are held constant, does adding weight to a ski improve dampness and stability? That seems to be Evi's argument here. I'm not familiar enough with ski design to know if it makes a legit difference.
BradFiAusNzCoCaSee I was under the impression that a heavier central “piece” (nocker, certain bindings, etc) on the ski wouldn’t increase dampness but I feel like I see a decent amount of people citing something along those lines (whether correct or incorrect). My initial thought process would be like Cy’s where you integrate materials across the whole ski.
cydwhitYeah, and that's another weird thing, the weight attaches at the contact point between the rocker and camber. So it's far out on the ski. So it'll definitely affect swing weight, and also make any sort of grab where your skis cross have the potential to catch on each other?
Why on earth would I want to add 400g of aluminum weights out near the tips and tails of the ski? It's gonna be less fun to slash and jib in pow.
The location of the weight makes perfect sense. The further out on the ski, the more effectively will affect the ski. Placing it at the intersection of the rocker and camber ensures it doesn't mess with either of those profiles. Putting it forward would reduce the effect of the rocker and bringing it back would reduce the effect of the mass.
Most damping masses (in skis or other engineered designs) have to be spring loaded to help counter the oscillatory motions. (Think the moving weights on race skis.) If they are rigidly fixed, added mass affects the vibration, but it should only provide as much damping as the air resistance it adds for viscous damping (negligible). Adding mass to the thing you want to vibrate less will make the amplitude get smaller, but it has more momentum, so it takes about the same effort to damp it. Location and length of objects affect vibration, too, so maybe adding mass to that location really does help, but I'd be surprised if it was noticable enough to want to mess with that system while touring. My skiing experience can be improved much more with a 400 gram Coors Light I can piss out during the downhill
have to post some guns, so the fragile people can go wæææææææ gungungun!
Really thinking about buying body armor because every mf and their dog is getting pieces. Also because I always wanted to just chill in the crib in full 3A armor.
