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!
Can someone tell me why a ski that is specifically designed for park riding would not have the middle of its side cut in the middle of the ski. All of their pro athletes will ride it center mounted, 95% of their customers will ride it center mounted, so why would a company put the middle of the radius 5 cm or more behind center. Do they want us to turn badly???? Please help
I feel like most pros don't ride center mounted though, I can't think of a pro off the top of my head that doesn't ride at least a centimeter or two back from center
**This post was edited on Oct 23rd 2023 at 11:53:14am
I’ve thought about this too much… I used to seek mostly symmetrical skis since “i ski switch so damn much”, but if you think about it regular vs switch stance are very different in terms of weight dist, how you hold your skis, etc.
If you look at a skateboard, most of those aren’t symmetrical anyways (aside from Ishod’s pro model notably).
I think it more comes down to “how you ride the ski switch” over “how close your switch is to regular”, because that makes no sense (you’re going fucking backwards)
Farmville420I feel like most pros don't ride center mounted though, I can't think of a pro off the top of my head that doesn't ride at least a centimeter or two back from center
**This post was edited on Oct 23rd 2023 at 11:53:14am
Voyage86Can someone tell me why a ski that is specifically designed for park riding would not have the middle of its side cut in the middle of the ski. All of their pro athletes will ride it center mounted, 95% of their customers will ride it center mounted, so why would a company put the middle of the radius 5 cm or more behind center. Do they want us to turn badly???? Please help
just mount your skis ahead of true center to be a true park conformist
These really caught my eye this year. I've got a pair of Reno Jibs as well as "Moment Team" which are both symmetrical and measure 111/86/111 and from what I can tell the Team is just a stiffer version of the jib. FANTASTIC skis. My Reno jibs are missing 2-3 inches of edge underfoot from the street skiing days and have taken an absolute beating, still take them to the hill for the shittiest of days and have a blast of em. the Teams I've used as my groomer/park lapping/staying on piste, maybe a tree run or 2 skis for a decade and they've treated me as well as I've treated them. The Frankenskis seem to me to be a slightly softer and wider version of both these skis. If you're in the market for a symmetrical skis from this seasons releases I'd be looking at the Frankenski myself.
@hot.pocket could probably correct me if I'm wrong here with my assessment
I have wondered the same thing. I talked to an Atomic rep about it once and they said this:
1. Center mounted skiing still has a large bias of weight on the heel (even when riding switch), and therefore a slightly back-from-center side cut has better equilibrium
2. Just because a pro gets their own model doesn't mean they get to decide every aspect of the ski. They still have to be able to market it to broad audiences for teh $$.
Made sense to me, but I personally can't really tell the difference between symmetrical and not
My impression has always been that most skis, especially recently, are designed to fit a broader range of users and conditions. So maybe you sacrifice a little switch performance, but your ski now handles groomers better when mounted on the (very much not center) recommended line, which is realistically what the majority of customers are doing with it
Voyage86I do, but that sacrifices turning because I’m not in the center of the radius. That’s kind of the whole point if my question.
what are you looking for? you've stated the symmetrical skis on the market don't have what you're looking for as far....I know there's not as many symmetrical skis on the market as asymmetrical but there's not 1 that meets your needs?
Eli.braun98The RMU rippah is symmetrical and looks really interesting. So do the moment frankenskis
Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday Frankenski all day everyday
Am I totally nuts for thinking this but wouldn’t an asymmetrical ski mounted back ride switch better than a center mounted ski anyways? I feel like it gives the ski a tighter radius which is exactly what you want for sw riding. (Im thinking about driving a forklift or something with the turning wheels at the back). Plus ski boot stance puts you in forward position so your weight is more on the nose and want more ski up there anyways.
**This post was edited on Oct 23rd 2023 at 10:16:05pm
BLandzAm I totally nuts for thinking this but wouldn’t an asymmetrical ski mounted back ride switch better than a center mounted ski anyways? I feel like it gives the ski a tighter radius which is exactly what you want for sw riding. (Im thinking about driving a forklift or something with the turning wheels at the back). Plus ski boot stance puts you in forward position so your weight is more on the nose and want more ski up there anyways.
**This post was edited on Oct 23rd 2023 at 10:16:05pm
This sounds right but I have no way to prove it.
To add to back from center conspiracy theories, on rails its way easier to pedal for front swaps than back swaps just by nature of human anatomy (You can apply more downward force through your heels than your toes basically), so in theory, more ski length in front of your foot should actually give you more leverage and thus make backswaps and back spins off rails easier as well, right? And even though it would kind of remove some of the leverage from frontside pedals, because they are so much easier already it kind of balances it out? Just a thought I got no way to prove it.
Farmville420This sounds right but I have no way to prove it.
To add to back from center conspiracy theories, on rails its way easier to pedal for front swaps than back swaps just by nature of human anatomy (You can apply more downward force through your heels than your toes basically), so in theory, more ski length in front of your foot should actually give you more leverage and thus make backswaps and back spins off rails easier as well, right? And even though it would kind of remove some of the leverage from frontside pedals, because they are so much easier already it kind of balances it out? Just a thought I got no way to prove it.
JalmarKalmarI don't think there are that many symmentrical skis nowdays.
Fischer Nightstick, RMU Rippah, Moment Frankenski, Vishnu Wet, Vishnu Wide, Volkl Revolt 90. That's a fairly diverse set of skis ranging from comp jock to breaking coffee tables.
jompcockFischer Nightstick, RMU Rippah, Moment Frankenski, Vishnu Wet, Vishnu Wide, Volkl Revolt 90. That's a fairly diverse set of skis ranging from comp jock to breaking coffee tables.
Majesty Vandal as well, I thought the 4FRNT Switch, Icelandic Nomad 95, and J skis Joyride were also but they all have slightly wider shovels than tails and slightly different rocker profiles tip to tail.
Centermounts should be a ghi g if the past. Let’s start mounting skis more like they ere designed, which typically would be 2-5 cm back. symetrical skis are just another gimmic imo. Doesn’t help riding switch, best skis i have had for riding switch was the old b-dog. They had a wide ass nose and narrow tail
BassinovaThese really caught my eye this year. I've got a pair of Reno Jibs as well as "Moment Team" which are both symmetrical and measure 111/86/111 and from what I can tell the Team is just a stiffer version of the jib. FANTASTIC skis. My Reno jibs are missing 2-3 inches of edge underfoot from the street skiing days and have taken an absolute beating, still take them to the hill for the shittiest of days and have a blast of em. the Teams I've used as my groomer/park lapping/staying on piste, maybe a tree run or 2 skis for a decade and they've treated me as well as I've treated them. The Frankenskis seem to me to be a slightly softer and wider version of both these skis. If you're in the market for a symmetrical skis from this seasons releases I'd be looking at the Frankenski myself.
@hot.pocket could probably correct me if I'm wrong here with my assessment
chiknmcplanks2. Just because a pro gets their own model doesn't mean they get to decide every aspect of the ski. They still have to be able to market it to broad audiences for teh $$.
From what I gather. A lot of suggestions from pro's are really specific to something they, and maybe 1% of the customer base would like and generally would contribute to a ski being shitty for the vast majority of paying customers that want somethign that actually is usable in a wider range of conditions.
Most of the time when people are dickriding a model because a pro designed it....they didn't. Someone who actually knows something about ski design did with some input and testing.
