Interesting concept. Turning 3D snow into 2D snow like on the groomers.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Skis for carving in powder
Interesting concept. Turning 3D snow into 2D snow like on the groomers.
The video posted by @tromano perfectly illustrates what I tend to do skiing moguls, point the tips down to keep the skis in contact with the backside of the bump. Even without dolphining, in the air, one can see that the tip can be pointed downwards quite a bit, which is what led me, when visualizing, to imagine submarining. But, I've had a chance to think about it more. I have to keep remembering, I am making my own mogul. The steepness of the backside of the mogul is what I want it to be; no need to point the skis down that way, that much. That, plus a wider ski should keep me up.
I also have some additional thoughts about carving in powder. There was something about 3D.
I was having trouble imagining it. But, then, this same video got me thinking. We can't see skis and boots under the surface. But, to conceptualize 3D, I am imaging the turns, both skis on the snow or in the air, happening under the surface. Goes back to skiing powder like skiing moguls. One can carve a turn in moguls, one can carve a turn in powder.
As for carving powder on the surface, get a very wide ski. I found a Blistergear review of the Lotus 138
http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2012-2013-dps-lotus-138-pure/2
"I could slide or carve them through the trees"
What still has me wondering are some segments in this video
There are segments in which the skier is not coming up to the surface at all. No propoising at all. The turns all happen below surface. I'm thinking either narrowing skis or a mastery of technique.
Karlo, great video. Perfect for the subject at hand.
I see you are from NJ. Maybe that is the cause of the powder mystery. I am from NYC so I can relate. We NE/NY skier don't see much powder around here. Fortunately, I spent the entire season from Jan to April out west. So I can see and understand both sides.
Let's back track a bit onto good old fashion New England skiing. Hard pack & boiler plates. 2D snow at its finest.
I am not a instructor so I'll try to explain this in rough layman's term.
Now think about your turns on that hard stuff. Actually, think about the relationship of your skis (BoS) relative to that huge hunk of meat on top of your legs. No, not that hunk of meat.
Focus & concentrate here. We are talking your torso/trunk (CoM).
How do the skis move relative to the trunk in a really rounded turn?
Here is a diagram of the XYZ axes for reference purpose.
X axis - Left and Right.
Y axis - Up and down. Into the sky vs into the snow.
Z axis - Forward and backward is uphill & downhill along the fall line.
We know the skis goes left and right (X axis). They also start behind us (top of turn) and end up in downhill from us along the Z axis. The question here is do the skis travel along the Y axis?
For lots of eastern skiers, the answer is maybe, maybe not. Many figured it's pointless trying to move the ski along the Y axis. It is like trying to drive your skis into a concrete slab. So they don't think it is necessary to move the ski along the Y axis. The arc that their skis scribe does not have a up and down component (Y axis).
These skiers ended up with a 2D ski turn. In fact many don't even do 2D turns. They just hang out of the back seat and push their skis from side to side. More or less 1.25D.
You, OTOH, being a instructor, knows better. Your skis not only move along the X & Z Axes. You also drive the skis into the snow to engage the edge. Especially at the apex of the turn. That in essence is moving the ski along the Y axis. Yes, it doesn't go into the hard snow much, but there is still lots of pressure Along the Y axis.
In the western hard pack (what we call New England powder here at home) the skis go into the snow much deeper with the same force. The softer the snow the deeper the skis go in. 3D turns?
A simpler way to visualize all the BS I just spewed is to look at the tracks of your turns on a "soft" groomer. Some sections of the track will be deeper than others. The varying track depth confirms ski travel along the Y axis.
Wow, all that just to say our ski turns are 3D.
Observation #1: Most eastern skier are comfortable on groomers out west. We hear it on the forum all the time. 2D snow, 2D turns. Good match.
Observation #2: Lots of eastern skier have issues with powder and crud. 3D snow, same old 2D turns. Not good.
3D snow can be skied better with a 3D turn. Visualize the arc the ski travel. It should be 3D. The up and down (Y axis) is often missing for eastern skiers hence the difficulties in 3D snow.
On your video, slow motion the series of turns from 1:30 to 1:38 and follow the arc of the travel for the ski and you can see it moves in 3D.
Hope that helps.
I see you are from NJ. Maybe that is the cause of the powder mystery. I am from NYC so I can relate. We NE/NY skier don't see much powder around here. Fortunately, I spent the entire season from Jan to April out west. So I can see and understand both sides.
Let's back track a bit onto good old fashion New England skiing. Hard pack & boiler plates. 2D snow at its finest.
I am not a instructor so I'll try to explain this in rough layman's term.
Now think about your turns on that hard stuff. Actually, think about the relationship of your skis (BoS) relative to that huge hunk of meat on top of your legs. No, not that hunk of meat.
Focus & concentrate here. We are talking your torso/trunk (CoM). How do the skis move relative to the trunk in a really rounded turn?
Here is a diagram of the XYZ axes for reference purpose.
X axis - Left and Right.
Y axis - Up and down. Into the sky vs into the snow.
Z axis - Forward and backward is uphill & downhill along the fall line.
We know the skis goes left and right (X axis). They also start behind us (top of turn) and end up in downhill from us along the Z axis. The question here is do the skis travel along the Y axis?
For lots of eastern skiers, the answer is maybe, maybe not. Many figured it's pointless trying to move the ski along the Y axis. It is like trying to drive your skis into a concrete slab. So they don't think it is necessary to move the ski along the Y axis. The arc that their skis scribe does not have a up and down component (Y axis).
These skiers ended up with a 2D ski turn. In fact many don't even do 2D turns. They just hang out of the back seat and push their skis from side to side. More or less 1.25D.
You, OTOH, being a instructor, knows better. Your skis not only move along the X & Z Axes. You also drive the skis into the snow to engage the edge. Especially at the apex of the turn. That in essence is moving the ski along the Y axis. Yes, it doesn't go into the hard snow much, but there is still lots of pressure Along the Y axis.
In the western hard pack (what we call New England powder here at home) the skis go into the snow much deeper with the same force. The softer the snow the deeper the skis go in. 3D turns?
A simpler way to visualize all the BS I just spewed is to look at the tracks of your turns on a "soft" groomer. Some sections of the track will be deeper than others. The varying track depth confirms ski travel along the Y axis.
Wow, all that just to say our ski turns are 3D.
Observation #1: Most eastern skier are comfortable on groomers out west. We hear it on the forum all the time. 2D snow, 2D turns. Good match.
Observation #2: Lots of eastern skier have issues with powder and crud. 3D snow, same old 2D turns. Not good.
3D snow can be skied better with a 3D turn. Visualize the arc the ski travel. It should be 3D. The up and down (Y axis) is often missing for eastern skiers hence the difficulties in 3D snow.
On your video, slow motion the series of turns from 1:30 to 1:38 and follow the arc of the travel for the ski and you can see it moves in 3D.
Hope that helps.
Low moisture content snow is all. Yes, you'll be in it, not so much on it. PNW, the latter is the norm, the former the exception. Much higher moisture content/density.
Yes, I totally get what you mean. Regarding a 3D turn, I was referring to more than the depth of edges. I was referring to the the turns seen in the video that @tromano posted,
I don't mean, in this video, the dolphin turns on groomed. I mean the turns in the moguls, even with turns arcing in the air. I am imagining those turns happening under the surface of the powder. These turns, albeit shorter, I see as practically the same as seen here,
except that in powder, the skis and boots are below the surface. Lot of x axis in making the turns. Lots of z axis starting and ending a turn. And a LOT of y axis as the skis go up one side, then down the other of a mogul or, in powder, the "virtual" mogul as @James referred to.
As to the video segment you refer to,
it perfectly captures what I am seeking, a powder ski that I can carve turns with. Here, the ski floats so much, it looks like carving on a groomer. Looks like the skier is on a very wide ski. I guess that's the solution.
hmm. Quite wide. Thanks.
Guess I'm puzzled. I haven't skied a fat ski that I can't ski tip to tail (arc vs. slarve) in powder. For reference, favorite big ski of all time is v1.0 (and now resurrected current '17-'18) of the Blizzard Bodacious.
Here is a upside down diagram of the arc of the sun. It probably best illustrate the path a "carving" skis would take under the snow. Mark's tip to tail.
There are many factors that affects this arc. Few that comes to mind are skier skill, ski design, ski construction and snow quality.
Also be mindful about this "carving" action. While it is tip to tail skiing. It is not the same as a carved turn on the groom. You are not riding on the edges of the skis but rather on the bottom of the skis. The trick is to optimize the forward travel of the ski along the arc with the ski design & construction (rocker, splay, reverse camber) and resistant created by compression of the snow under the ski.
Almost all the new wider ski can ski that arc in a tip to tail fashion as Mark mentioned without difficulty. A rocker/splayed/reverse camber ski will usually flex easier at the tip. Allowing the ski to surface easier with less effort from the skier. It's just juggling of the various factors.
My powder board is a 177 cm Volkl One. Looks like a Venetian gondola. It works for me.
Most folks just go out and buy the widest reverse camber ski with a huge rocker and be done with it. That is just one of the quickest way to load the equation.
The most often overlooked factor is the skill of the skier. Few years back I was flying through an 18" spring dump at Snowbird on my 186 cm Volkl Gotama. Thought I was doing good until my son ran me to the ground on his Atomic D2 SL, 158 cm. He is 200 lb. I guess another way to load the equation is with tons of skill and tree trunk thighs.
BTW, he has wide skis there. He just wanted to prove a point. I got it.
Equipment vs skill. Your pick. Would be nice to have both.
There are many factors that affects this arc. Few that comes to mind are skier skill, ski design, ski construction and snow quality.
Also be mindful about this "carving" action. While it is tip to tail skiing. It is not the same as a carved turn on the groom. You are not riding on the edges of the skis but rather on the bottom of the skis. The trick is to optimize the forward travel of the ski along the arc with the ski design & construction (rocker, splay, reverse camber) and resistant created by compression of the snow under the ski.
Almost all the new wider ski can ski that arc in a tip to tail fashion as Mark mentioned without difficulty. A rocker/splayed/reverse camber ski will usually flex easier at the tip. Allowing the ski to surface easier with less effort from the skier. It's just juggling of the various factors.
My powder board is a 177 cm Volkl One. Looks like a Venetian gondola. It works for me.
Most folks just go out and buy the widest reverse camber ski with a huge rocker and be done with it. That is just one of the quickest way to load the equation.
The most often overlooked factor is the skill of the skier. Few years back I was flying through an 18" spring dump at Snowbird on my 186 cm Volkl Gotama. Thought I was doing good until my son ran me to the ground on his Atomic D2 SL, 158 cm. He is 200 lb. I guess another way to load the equation is with tons of skill and tree trunk thighs.
BTW, he has wide skis there. He just wanted to prove a point. I got it.
Equipment vs skill. Your pick. Would be nice to have both.
And how this is germane to the discussion?
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 6,329
It isn't but if we are going to be using the old saw that really good skiers can ski anything effectively in powder, which leads usually to a fat skis are cheating meme we're already going off track.
I was just curious why a 200lb guy would have an SL ski below 165 in their quiver. Dryslope or indoor racing maybe I could see.
I'm a fairly strong believer that you can buy a turn ( or at least turn assist) and don't think we have yet established whether the OP has really explored the parameters of what it feels like to ski powder centred.
I wouldn't have thought gear is the problem as they say they are on a low 100s rockered ski but I thought it worth eliminating as its fairly easy to rent or borrow a true pow ski and see if they can be skied in a centred normal stance.
I was just curious why a 200lb guy would have an SL ski below 165 in their quiver. Dryslope or indoor racing maybe I could see.
I'm a fairly strong believer that you can buy a turn ( or at least turn assist) and don't think we have yet established whether the OP has really explored the parameters of what it feels like to ski powder centred.
I wouldn't have thought gear is the problem as they say they are on a low 100s rockered ski but I thought it worth eliminating as its fairly easy to rent or borrow a true pow ski and see if they can be skied in a centred normal stance.
Last edited:
There we go!
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2015
- Posts
- 8,474
WHEN will LIne make this in a longer model?!
I don't know if I understand exactly what @karlo is looking for, but if I've got it right, it's the same feeling I find in a wide pow ski that still has significant sidecut, some early rise, some camber, and very little tail rocker.
I know that doesn't make for the easiest pow ski, but it sure makes for a satisfying turn feel and finish in particular. I don't worry about "slarving" capability. I can skid any ski, anwhere, anytime!
Because he can.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 6,329
I have a 151 fis womens sl and weight 190. I used it for instruction & training drills. Bonus it is a chore in wet deep snow.
Now that I can believe.
I just don't think it's that helpful to the OP to go all epic with humble brags about what's the skinniest most innapropriate ski people can ski powder with. We all get it, more skills = greater performance envelope with any given tool. Skills + gear > Gear etc
BTW the rest of KingGrump's 3D model post I think is excellent. As I said before glad I don't have to think about all that though or I'd never actually be able to ski.
Not really a brag about skinny skis. More of a case study on how to optimally load the skier skill, ski design/construction and snow quality equation.
Don't know how the OP skill level. Figure different example would be helpful.
I travel with 6 pairs of skis so that should speak volumes about my skills, or lack of.
Snow quality a part of the equation that I haven't even touched upon yet. Most skiers dream about the fantasy powder we regularly see in ski po*n. Well, for most, that usually remains a fantasy. I've had my share of powder days out west. Some sublime, fantasy like. Some coyote ugly. Most are somewhere in between.
One can select the powder ski for their fantasy that happens once every blue moon or ...
Don't know how the OP skill level. Figure different example would be helpful.
I travel with 6 pairs of skis so that should speak volumes about my skills, or lack of.
Snow quality a part of the equation that I haven't even touched upon yet. Most skiers dream about the fantasy powder we regularly see in ski po*n. Well, for most, that usually remains a fantasy. I've had my share of powder days out west. Some sublime, fantasy like. Some coyote ugly. Most are somewhere in between.
One can select the powder ski for their fantasy that happens once every blue moon or ...
The short segment that KingGrump pointed out in the Alta Powder Skiing video convinced me. I've been watching too many (boring) movies with skiers charging down incredibly steep faces, slarving (slide-carving?) and assumed that very fat skis can't carve (the tail follow tip, not the edge into surface)
Perfect. I can imagine the skis, boots, knees, and even waist below the surface and the skis, bent of course, tracking the arc of the sun.
He
hasn't, not with the BMT 109's in deep powder. In fresh powder, but with the skis still contacting what feels like a base, he has no problem being centered. However, from this thread, there is now a plan. Ski it like a mogul field with strong core. Ignore the fact that it looks like a smooth groomer; focus on what is felt by the feet, not by what is seen. We'll see in February.I hope I have the chance to check out the Pescado. My dependable deep powder skiing is in Japan. I'm at the mercy of what is available there as demo's. Clearly though, I need to check out a much wider ski than the 109's, like a 120-something, though sounds like the 109's will be fine if I attack. And, maybe I should check out the FIS SL ski; don't float at all and hope I don't drown.
Much thanks to everyone that has been posting.
Karlo, sounds like you have got the picture. 
Now, you will have to explain it back to me so I can understand all the BS I've been spewing.
Don't know what size BMT 109 you have. That is a really good reverse camber ski. Good float.
IMO, the 3D stroke is more important than the width of the ski. If the stroke is right, the tip will bend and float.
We'll take up the discussion of the suitability of FIS SL ski in spring mush later on in the season.
Cheers.
Now, you will have to explain it back to me so I can understand all the BS I've been spewing.
Don't know what size BMT 109 you have. That is a really good reverse camber ski. Good float.
IMO, the 3D stroke is more important than the width of the ski. If the stroke is right, the tip will bend and float.
We'll take up the discussion of the suitability of FIS SL ski in spring mush later on in the season.
Cheers.
