Your Experience with Rockered Skis

[thetrailboss]

I will admit that I was late to the game when it came to the rockered ski movement. I just got a pair of fully-rockered skis for powder skiing out here:

My intent was to get a great ski for primarily deep powder and crud dayswith the versatility to be a “one ski quiver” for decent skiing on groomedterrain at other times.

So far so good, but I’ve had to really adjust my technique. I’ve had mixed results on groomed terrain…they don’t feel as stable at speed on groomers and I find that Ihave to sit back a bit to get good traction and control. I also find that the “sweet spot” is smaller, but when you find it they take off. Ihad a really rough outing with these at Deer Valley last week when the snow was very thin and hard—they were very difficult to run with. But on soft groomers with some ice at Brighton last week I was able to dial them in and had a good time.

Deep snow is amazing. I feel as if I’m cheating. The skis really DO float on the snow and make me feel as if I am skiing on the powder instead of in it. The surfing aspect is really fun…but again I find that I have to adjust my position a littlebit. The feeling is really, really cool.

Maybe it’s these skis, but I can turn on a dime in the woodsand I love that. The stiffer tips and tails help with control—I’ve heard that many rockered skis are a bit floppy.

Now I know that one will use different “rockered” technologies on the east coast. I could not see myself using the Hammereds regularly at Sugarbush for example as I only had a few powder days every season and not really enough to justify pow skis. However, out here, especially from here on out, the snow only gets deeper and nicer.

So what are your experiences? What do you do differently than traditional cambered skis?

I will also add that yesterday I took out my Head 102’s for my outing at Deer Valley, anticipating some good groomed terrain and some good snow in the woods and off trail, but not enough for the Hammereds:

These are expert all-mountain chargers with traditional camber. I have had them for a couple seasons and have taken them out a few days here and there.

I don’t know if it was after coming off the Hammereds or something else, but I was able to REALLY drive these babies well. I felt like I was in the driver seat all day and thoroughly loved the feel. I think it had something to do with getting off of my rockered skis and shifting my position a bit. So maybe the rockered skis will help you ski traditional cambered skis better (?)

 

[Highway Star]

I think you're just trying to impress us with the size of your equipment....

 

[steamboat1]

My ski's have rockered tip & tail with traditional camber in the middle. Best of both worlds.

edit: forgot to add.



edit, edit: Would also like to say they handle smoothly & track really well at speed. No chatter or swimming here.

 

[Tin]

You sum it up. I love my Bridges and Gotamas. I don't like groomers and spend as little time on them as possible so I can't comment on that much. They do chatter on them once you approach sub-Tuna speeds. Call me crazy but I love the Bridge in the bumps even though it is 95 underfoot, feel like I can turn much better and the ski almost guides me. If it is heavy and wet they can feel floppy but for the most part I do feel like I'm on top of the snow instead of in it.

 

[Tin]

I think you're just trying to impress us with the size of your equipment....

 

[dlague]

I have a set of Chopstiks which are fully rockered with no camber and they are only used in powder conditions. I do not like them so much if the resorts are grooming the run outs since they behave poorly on groomed terrain.

However I have skis (Rossi Phantoms) that are front rockered with camber and it is a true all mountain ski. It floats well enough on the powder days and carves up the groomers with little effort.

The Chopstiks are fun but I have never really used them all day. Effectively, I stick to my Rossi's!

 

[Edd]

I demoed the Volkl RTM 84 last season on some very scratchy terrain. This ski is fully rockered. They bit well and I was amazed. I want to try them in som softer stuff and if I like them there then I'll probably buy them.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

 

[drjeff]

I've got a pair of fully rockered Blizzard Cochises (108 underfoot) that are my powder skis. I ski them with a slightly taller stance than with my front side carving pair of Atomic VF75's (75 underfoot).

And while with some WIDE open hill space and at "firmest" some packed powder with a soft base, I can get them up on edge and carve some BIG turns, it took me a few days on them to realize that in a non powder/non spring conditions soft snow situation that they want to be more "skidded" than carved to perform their best if they're not floating through deep snow.

In powder though, I LOVE these skis!!!!!! They float and charge through soft chop like nothing I've ever owned before in my now 35 years of skiing.

This combo works for me! And from an equipment standpoint is about as polar opposite as you can get!! A traditional cambered 75mm, 15m radius front side carving ski, and a fully rockered 108mm 28.5m radius powder ski

 

[thetrailboss]

Re: stance. I had to change mine.

And I've seen that many skis are adapting some kind of "rocker" profile.

 

[thetrailboss]

You sum it up. I love my Bridges and Gotamas. I don't like groomers and spend as little time on them as possible so I can't comment on that much. They do chatter on them once you approach sub-Tuna speeds. Call me crazy but I love the Bridge in the bumps even though it is 95 underfoot, feel like I can turn much better and the ski almost guides me. If it is heavy and wet they can feel floppy but for the most part I do feel like I'm on top of the snow instead of in it.

Sub Tuna speeds. Love it. :lol:

 

[fbrissette]

I've demo'ed several pairs and despite some variability the main conclusions were:

- they're ok on soft groomers when you stick close to their natural radius
- they all positively suck on hard groomers (the more rocker and the wider even more)
- they are awesome in tight woods with their quick turning ability
- they are awesome in chopped snow and crud
- they are amazing in powder

If you like groomers and ice (ski racer), rockers are NOT for you. If you like the rest they are fantastic. As to width and rocker length your mileage may vary but I did not like banana skis and very wide skis in the woods (my main play area). I think many people are overdoing it in the east. I have a feeling that ski width is becoming the macho bragging fad that ski length once was (you were not a man unless you skied 200+cm skis). The wider the better in true powder but the very wide skis are definitely less quick to turn in the trees.

But then, I'm sure someone will say that their 120mm waist banana skis are awesome on ice...

 

[skifree]

gotta keep changing to keep us buying

 

[tnt]

First season for me on Bushwackers - front and tail rocker, camber - 88 underfoot. So not a radical wide powder ski at all, but I had a few powder days on them so far, and the difference from my traditional camber skis is noticeable. Really super easy and fun in powder or chop or crud. Feels the same as my old skis on groomers. Maybe a little chatter at high speeds. Haven't had them on steep, big bumps yet, but the bumps I have skied, they've been solid. And no steep and tight trees yet, but again, the woods I've been in, they were great.

I noticed maybe sitting back a touch on the deeper days, but otherwise, kind of a smooth transition. Again, not going to the full blown fatties though.

All in all, I was a little skeptical - couldn't really imagine an east coast ski being any easier than my B3s….like, how much of a difference could their possibly be? But I notice it, and like it.

 

[dlague]

You sum it up. I love my Bridges and Gotamas. I don't like groomers and spend as little time on them as possible so I can't comment on that much. They do chatter on them once you approach sub-Tuna speeds. Call me crazy but I love the Bridge in the bumps even though it is 95 underfoot, feel like I can turn much better and the ski almost guides me. If it is heavy and wet they can feel floppy but for the most part I do feel like I'm on top of the snow instead of in it.

However, how do they work on the hard/frozen surfaces that we have been having lately? From what I have read at speed they can be some what unstable and the woods up until yesterday have been pretty hard snow wise.

 

[RISkier]

tnt, do the Bushwackers have metal? I know they have two 88mm waisted skis with the same dimensions. One has metal and one does not. Those are skis I'd like to try. My wife is on Black Pearls and really likes them.

 

[thetrailboss]

I've demo'ed several pairs and despite some variability the main conclusions were:

- they're ok on soft groomers when you stick close to their natural radius
- they all positively suck on hard groomers (the more rocker and the wider even more)
- they are awesome in tight woods with their quick turning ability
- they are awesome in chopped snow and crud
- they are amazing in powder

If you like groomers and ice (ski racer), rockers are NOT for you. If you like the rest they are fantastic. As to width and rocker length your mileage may vary but I did not like banana skis and very wide skis in the woods (my main play area).

These are my observations so far.

 

[Brad J]

Sub Tuna speeds. Love it. :lol:

Are we ever going to forget, I think not

 

[goldsbar]

I've demo'ed several pairs and despite some variability the main conclusions were:

- they're ok on soft groomers when you stick close to their natural radius
- they all positively suck on hard groomers (the more rocker and the wider even more)
- they are awesome in tight woods with their quick turning ability
- they are awesome in chopped snow and crud
- they are amazing in powder

Yup. Just remember, there's a bit of early rise and then there's rocker. Assuming we're talking rocker you can easily see, completely agree with the above.

 

[Tin]

However, how do they work on the hard/frozen surfaces that we have been having lately? From what I have read at speed they can be some what unstable and the woods up until yesterday have been pretty hard snow wise.

Best skis I've had.on frozen stuff. I think the massive underfoot for both of mine also help.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I think many people are overdoing it in the east. I have a feeling that ski width is becoming the macho bragging fad that ski length once was (you were not a man unless you skied 200+cm skis). The wider the better in true powder but the very wide skis are definitely less quick to turn in the trees.

Agreed on all the above.