Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

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!

Reverse Camber skis

profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
Ive been searching for skis that fit this description for about an hour now and all I've found are scimis and volkl bridges. Are there any other skis out there that match this description?
Jan 2 2014 6:07PM
8 6
profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
Alright so I titled this "Reverse Camber skis <105 underfoot" but I guess that didn't work.

so yeah reverse camber between about 95 and 105?
Jan 2 2014 6:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Peter.
Posts: 23796 - Karma: 13,014
i bought scimitars this year, and they are sweet so far. only rode them one day thus far, but it was on groomed slopes with not too much snow and they still handled great.
Jan 2 2014 6:52PM
0 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,055
i have the rossignol sickles (110 underfoot) its just a wider scimitar. the zero camber is awesome as its on edge immediately. floats great in the woods and the deep. can only imagine the scimitar being a great all mountain ski. evo has them right now in a 174 for 277
Jan 2 2014 7:11PM
0 0
profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
yeah i tried out my friends for a run this week and they handled amazingly in pow and groomers. just looking for any other options outside of these two
Jan 2 2014 8:05PM
1 0
profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
domains kind of fit the description, but those are just flat instead of reverse and theyre a bit narrower than what i wanted. anybody know if surface one lifes would be too wide for the east coast?
Jan 3 2014 2:29PM
0 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,055
do not under any circumstance buy a surface one life.. poorly built ski with a terrible rocker profile.
Jan 3 2014 3:26PM
1 5
profile picture
Peter.
Posts: 23796 - Karma: 13,014
i was looking for the same thing as you a few months ago, and the scimitars were really the only thing i could find.
Jan 3 2014 4:00PM
0 0
profile picture
scandy101
Posts: 460 - Karma: 19
I've skiied a lot of powder skis, and bought 179 one life's for 200 bucks just for the hell of it, and I gotta say they're easily one of the best powder skis I've ridden. Can be ridden with a very centered stance, pivot super easily without being catchy, makes them super slashy. They pop like crazy out of soft snow, more than any powder ski I've ridden.

I will agree that the rocker profile isn't perfect, IMO the ski would carve more predictably on hardback if they were flat underfoot so the rocker "kink" wouldn't be at such an abrupt angle. If it was drawn out another inch or so I think that'd help as well. But even with that, it's an awesome powder ski.

definitely the kind that skis pretty meh if you aren't skiing hard, but the harder you ski it the better it gets, when you just ski and charge the absolute shit out of it the ski really comes alive.

Plus it kills it in the park too, biggest presses ever!
Jan 3 2014 4:01PM
2 0
profile picture
NH_OPERATOR
Posts: 1070 - Karma: 2,883
OP the reason your search for Reverse camber didnt bring much up is because the industry refers to that as 'Rocker' generally. Try searching for that instead.
Jan 3 2014 4:49PM
1 0
profile picture
ThundaKilla
Posts: 2859 - Karma: 3,781
ON3P Jmo
Jan 3 2014 9:04PM
2 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
OP you're being wayyyyy too broad here. 95% of skis made today have at least a little bit of reverse camber, or rocker as you'll probably see it referred to. What are you trying to do with your ski? Park? All mountain? Groomers? Moguls?
Jan 4 2014 12:29AM
0 1
profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
That's actually not true, a lot of skis nowadays have rocker profile in the tip and tail, but thats not reverse camber. Reverse camber means that the only contact point is underfoot instead of a traditionally cambered ski which has two. You can have a ski with camber and rocker.

And I ski mostly park and powder, but as I live on the east I'd say I'm more park based due to lack of snow. Probably about 60/40.
Jan 6 2014 12:55PM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
Im not sure about that... ive always seen the two used interchangeably. Ive seen skis with camber underfoot and rocker in the tip and tail referred to as having "reverse camber" in the tip and tail. Anyway its not a big deal. I dont think you want a fully rockered ski in the park though. Itll ski like a snowblade.
Jan 8 2014 3:06PM
0 0
profile picture
El_Barto.
Posts: 11661 - Karma: 24,354
Reverse camber = upside down banana

Rocker, camber, rocker = sine wave

Not the same thing and not interchangeable
Jan 8 2014 3:37PM
0 0
profile picture
OCM
Posts: 1276 - Karma: 975
Yeah that's true I have seen companies refer to it as that every once in a while, I'm not sure why they would though.

As i may have said, I tried out my friends Rossi scimitars and loved them, in the park too, so I'm looking at any other similar skis. At this point I might just go with Filthy Riches or Jeronimos however.
Jan 8 2014 4:18PM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
I've heard good things about both those skis, but have you considered the Al Dentes? They're 98 underfoot with rocker in the tip. I love mine for both park and all mountain.
Jan 8 2014 5:54PM
0 0
profile picture
scandy101
Posts: 460 - Karma: 19
Never got how people think full rockered skis ski like snow blades, my hellbents and ep's killed it in the park, and carved super well, they were awesome for doing big carves off the lip
Jan 9 2014 9:18AM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
I may be wrong here but I believe both those skis had a bit of flat under the foot.
Jan 9 2014 2:23PM
0 0
profile picture
NH_OPERATOR
Posts: 1070 - Karma: 2,883
Full rocker obviously ski better than snowblades, but theres no arguing that they are less stable at speed than something with camber to it. Physics says that cambered skis will be more stable than rocker and thats that.
Jan 10 2014 5:19PM
0 0
profile picture
scandy101
Posts: 460 - Karma: 19
I was more talking about hellbent/EP pro, flat underfoot/big rocker. And there's more to how well a ski rides than just stability... I've found only having that short bit of ski underfoot contacting the snow makes them dig in and carve super hard, the "lack" of stability never seemed to be in issue in anything but crazy hard groomer carving. Even then I could deal with it.
Jan 11 2014 1:23PM
0 0
profile picture
NH_OPERATOR
Posts: 1070 - Karma: 2,883
Well of course, but even when you are talking about carving, a cambered ski will always carve harder than a rockered ski. Thats not to say you cant carve on full rocker profile, because you can but youll get a better carve out of something with camber. The stability thing only really comes into play at high speeds.
Jan 13 2014 6:12AM
0 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,055
i think this is true to an certain extent. my sickles when flat base are less stable but the minute im on edge, at high speed they are fine and i have no issue.
Jan 13 2014 11:16AM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
reverse camber≠0 camber≠rocker≠early rise, they are all specific design points
Jan 13 2014 11:20AM
0 0
profile picture
NH_OPERATOR
Posts: 1070 - Karma: 2,883
Here is a great article from evo on the matter.

Jan 13 2014 11:40AM
0 0
profile picture
~Gotama~
Posts: 821 - Karma: 3,160
I ride Volkl Gotamas (hey sweet username, dude) and while I can't say they are worth very much in the park, they are a super fun ski everywhere else on the mountain. Despite having a massive turn radius, the rocker and soft tail helps them smear and steer better than any other ski I've ridden (which honestly isn't that many, but still.), which kicks ass in the tight east coast trees and steeps. Plus they are pretty stiff so when it comes to opening up the throttle they charge super well too. They aren't as playful as a sin-curve ski, since they lack that pop zone where camber becomes rocker, so they aren't the best skis for jumping, buttering, or throwing fat ass nollies. They also don't float as much as, say, my friend's Line Opus, since they are a bit narrower (106mm underfoot) but that's fine with me cause not floating equals face shots.

recap: Volkl Gotama's are not a jib ski, but if you want an all mountain east coast gangster caddi, check them out.
Jan 13 2014 12:34PM
0 0
profile picture
TheDetectives
Posts: 634 - Karma: 1,472
the one time might be better for you if u want less then 105 waist, the 173 size is like 98 i think? and the 183 is 109, compared to the one lifes (which i have a thread about > https://www.newschoolers.com/ns/forums/readthread/thread_id/770883/ ) that are 112 under foot and have more rocker, also dont listen to the guy that said they are bad, he obviusly hasn't riden them, and as u can tell from the owner reviews on my thread, they ski amazing and are very loved skis! good luck finding something!

P.S. surface has fixed their quality isues, they are no worse then volkl or rossi
Jan 13 2014 1:07PM
0 0
profile picture
-SnowSnoli-
Posts: 756 - Karma: 1,703
Todo with the fact that on piste the 189 hellbent has the same turning radius as a slalom ski....


Jan 13 2014 1:42PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)