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!
In the coming months we are planning on designing a new park ski to help fill the void in the park lineup that the Vice has left behind. We have a few ideas as to what we would like to produce, but thought it would be cool to get the input of you, the park skiers.
Whether you have specific things you would like to see in a new park ski (waist width, radius, rocker profiles, flex profiles, etc.), have a certain style of park ski you would like to see (big jump ski, soft fat buttery ski, new wave style ski, etc.) or have similar models from other ski companies that you enjoy riding, we would like to hear it.
Alternatively, if you have anything that you see being put into park skis that you are not a fan of, we'd also like to hear about it.
While we could just go straight into it and start designing, it'd be cool to see what your thoughts are.
Something soft in the tip and tail, with a decent amount of rocker, but solid underfoot. Waist width between 90-100 with a light core material. Tip and tail taper would be nice too
Something with a close to, if not dead center mount point. 90-95 underfoot. Rocker tip and tail, camber underfoot, sandwich construction, full sidewalls, thick edges, stiff so there's more pop.
Would LOVE something that is like an updated Armada Pipe cleaner. Perhaps a little bit of rocker. With recommended mount thats like -2 or -1 behind center. Maybe like 88 underfoot or so.
I think the perfect ski would be an all around park ski that leans more toward jumps (Seeing as the frankenski is described as more of a jib ski) Symmetrical or close to it, mid stiff to stiff all the way through with tips/tails being just softer than underfoot, and with slight rocker and taper in tips/tails so you can still do some buttering and also to lower the swing weight (with camber underfoot for grip/stability) 88-94mm at the waist, so it's not so skinny like the vice but it's still nimble (plus the pb&j already has the wide park ski category covered) and maybe some carbon stringers to add pop. Good luck with the ski can't wait to see how it comes out.
**This post was edited on Oct 19th 2017 at 7:15:56pm
A moment version of the faction CT 2.0 would be sick. Make it super playful slight tip and tail taper symmetrical rocker in tip and tail 90-100mm underfoot and go with a 2-6 mm difference in tip to tail width. 16-22m turn radius for playfulness. Flex of 6 in the tip 7-8 underfoot and 6 or 7 in the tail. Put some thick edges on it and a durable base. Use lighter core materials mixed with something more durable. maybe use a carbon stronger to add extra pop.
~90-95 underfoot, rocker/camber/rocker, with a decent amount of rocker and not a whole lot of camber ~3mm, semi-soft tip and tail, mid-stiff underfoot, totally symetric center mount, THICC edges, and a race base. Also, I like full sidewall but price point is also important.
hot.pocketAlternatively, if you have anything that you see being put into park skis that you are not a fan of, we'd also like to hear about it.
Seems like all park skis are tending towards wider, floppy, lots of rocker. These are fun no doubt, but they're only really great skis if you live somewhere with snow. Seems like all park skis are forgetting ice coast kind of skiing where there is mostly fake snow, lots of hard ice. Quick edge to edge turning, not super wide, and a fast base make for a great ski for me. A little bit of rocker is ok.
a_pla5tic_bagSeems like all park skis are tending towards wider, floppy, lots of rocker. These are fun no doubt, but they're only really great skis if you live somewhere with snow. Seems like all park skis are forgetting ice coast kind of skiing where there is mostly fake snow, lots of hard ice. Quick edge to edge turning, not super wide, and a fast base make for a great ski for me. A little bit of rocker is ok.
I've always dig wider park skis (why I ride Pb&j's) so I wouldn't mind seeing a wider softer park ski but at the same time as the ice coaster stated above there are still people out there who prefer a thinner stiffer park ski
a_pla5tic_bagSeems like all park skis are tending towards wider, floppy, lots of rocker. These are fun no doubt, but they're only really great skis if you live somewhere with snow. Seems like all park skis are forgetting ice coast kind of skiing where there is mostly fake snow, lots of hard ice. Quick edge to edge turning, not super wide, and a fast base make for a great ski for me. A little bit of rocker is ok.
HG Skis are an east-coast company that make park skis that are 96 underfoot, have very little rocker and aren't super floppy. Also don't most ski companies make a ski like this? More and more people out west are starting to use wider, floppier park skis for sure, but it's not like traditional park skis are going away.
BASEDJAHHG Skis are an east-coast company that make park skis that are 96 underfoot, have very little rocker and aren't super floppy. Also don't most ski companies make a ski like this? More and more people out west are starting to use wider, floppier park skis for sure, but it's not like traditional park skis are going away.
mmm and for the low, low price of TWO brand new pairs of arv86s
personally i want a wider pipe cleaner. traditional shape park ski with a great base and some actual stiffness, but my version would be 98 waist. oh and add some nose rocker
SofaKingSickmmm and for the low, low price of TWO brand new pairs of arv86s
personally i want a wider pipe cleaner. traditional shape park ski with a great base and some actual stiffness, but my version would be 98 waist. oh and add some nose rocker
SofaKingSickmmm and for the low, low price of TWO brand new pairs of arv86s
yeah they are a little pricey, and not long enough (pls make 185), but HGs have full maple cores, which actually is becoming kind of rare. But as you said, you can still but traditional park skis from a lot of other places
BASEDJAHyeah they are a little pricey, and not long enough (pls make 185), but HGs have full maple cores, which actually is becoming kind of rare. But as you said, you can still but traditional park skis from a lot of other places
I don't know dick about core materials. What's the significance of maple vs others being used?
SofaKingSickI don't know dick about core materials. What's the significance of maple vs others being used?
skis that I've had in the past with maple cores were always a little stiff to begin with, but then break in really nicely and will still have life after 2 seasons of hard shredding. It seems like the move in the industry now is towards poplar and bamboo cores because they're light and snappy right out of the box, and bamboo is more sustainable, but I think that most non-maple cores tend to wear out and feel lifeless after a while.
rockered tip and tails, medium stiff tails, softer in tips
side to side rocker in tip and tails
side to side rocker is something that has yet to be done in park skis and has incredible potential imo
Actually would be super interested to see this, definitely feel like it has a place in skiing in the near future, maybe moment can kill it and be one of the first in skiing to implement it.
KravtZWould LOVE something that is like an updated Armada Pipe cleaner.
Will definitely check out the Pipe Cleaner.
Profahoben_212Reno rocker or reno jib
CLASSICS.
MVollerI think the perfect ski would be an all around park ski that leans more toward jumps...88-94mm at the waist, so it's not so skinny like the vice but it's still nimble (plus the pb&j already has the wide park ski category covered) and maybe some carbon stringers to add pop. Good luck with the ski can't wait to see how it comes out.
**This post was edited on Oct 19th 2017 at 7:15:56pm
So a slightly wider, updated version of the Vice? Also, all of our skis have carbon fiber stringers directly woven into the two main sheets of fiberglass and cover the entirety of the ski from tip to tail and from left to right, shown below in a cutout.
Stein2424A moment version of the faction CT 2.0 would be sick. Use lighter core materials mixed with something more durable. maybe use a carbon stronger to add extra pop.
I'll look into the CT 2.0 and see what it offers. Using lighter core materials might effect the ride too much, and would up the price quite a bit, but lighter composites would be an option to help reduce weight. See above about carbon stringers.
K-Dot.side to side rocker is something that has yet to be done in park skis and has incredible potential imo
Definitely an interesting concept, the only downside I can see is being able to adequately grind the base on the side to side rockered portions, but nonetheless something I want to play around with in the future. Gilson skis is doing a 'soft edge' (I think that's what they call it?), but it extends around the entirety of the ski. Something to check out.
-eREKTion-Also, I like full sidewall but price point is also important.
It will most likely end up as a full cap ski for price point purposes.
SofaKingSickoh and the graphics are just a mirror
Unfortunately we already have a finalized graphic that we will use on it that is not mirrored. I believe we released a teaser of it somewhere but it will get the moon graphic that was created for the 17/18 Vice before we gave it the axe.
I demoed Deathwishes when I was in colorado and really liked them. They held an edge and turned tightly, but they were super poppy, playful and, importantly, not noodles. Longitudinally stuffer, but also torsionally rigid compared to park skis may be a good way to put it.. Those would make a good park ski if you skinny them up and bring the geometry to a bit more centered design. I had tons of fun jumping around on them, but I could easily lean them over hard on the nice, wide slopes they have out there. They also were quick enough to not feel clumsy in tight spaces.
85-90mm waist, 17m turn radius at 170cm. Stiff, mild rocker but not an insane amount that would hinder turning. If you're any bit decent than you can handle a tighter turn radius on common features. I don't know how tighter turn radii never caught on with all this new wave stuff, honestly. It makes everything fun and carving into stuff is super quick and on edge, rather than having to smear turns and lose all your speed since your skis are 22m radius, 100mm waist noodles with flat camber and a lot of rocker. Maybe that wouldn't fit the style, but, whatever. Could be Nu New wave.
a springy buttery ski. Nothing compares to doing a nice butter on a ski with some spring too it and being able to really pop off of the nose/tail. All these super rockered/super soft skis initiate butters ways easier but aren't as fun imo. Also they make ollies harder too.
Swandog7Is there a timeline to the doing at all? Potentially this season if you're swapping the 17/18 vice graphic on to the 17/18 ???
To everyone else: I'll discuss specific build options this week. To swandog: hoping to launch mid season (potentially) depends on when we complete outstanding projects.
K-Dot.No, think Surface Labs or DPS spoons. A nice arc or angle of side to side rocker that have edges, not just extended sidewalls like the benchetlers
Like a convex base? How would that even perform in the park? I feel like it'd be really weird on hard snow.
K-Dot.No, think Surface Labs or DPS spoons. A nice arc or angle of side to side rocker that have edges, not just extended sidewalls like the benchetlers
-eREKTion-Like a convex base? How would that even perform in the park? I feel like it'd be really weird on hard snow.
There is a reason they aren't used on anything made for Hardish snow. They will suck ass.
Maybe a version of what atomic has but for the entire rocker portion? Crazy butters but still have an edge
Profahoben_212There is a reason they aren't used on anything made for Hardish snow. They will suck ass.
Maybe a version of what atomic has but for the entire rocker portion? Crazy butters but still have an edge
Read my original post dingus. That's exactly what I proposed.
If you've never skied a ski with the technology of side to side rocker then hold the negative comments. I've skied my surface labs in the park plenty and they're surprisingly functional. Make them flat underfoot and skinnier and they could be such a crazy jib ski
K-Dot.Read my original post dingus. That's exactly what I proposed.
If you've never skied a ski with the technology of side to side rocker then hold the negative comments. I've skied my surface labs in the park plenty and they're surprisingly functional. Make them flat underfoot and skinnier and they could be such a crazy jib ski
As long as they aren't beveled underfoot I think it's a good idea. Having a beveled base underfoot would be rough on hardback and would have some weird wear on the base I would imagine from rails.
I also think it would be a really small market though.
Was listening to the blister podcast they did with Luke the other day and he mentioned the new park ski (nothing about it just when they were joking around with names) so that got me thinking:
PataguccimaneWas listening to the blister podcast they did with Luke the other day and he mentioned the new park ski (nothing about it just when they were joking around with names) so that got me thinking:
Any updates?
Still working on it, got caught up with skiing trips and working on other specialty projects. Look out for it either late this season or early next season.
Would love to see something around 130/95/125 with tons of tip rocker, a little bit of camber, and some tail rocker. Beefy 2.5mm edges that came pre detuned underfoot would be pretty cool too.
Wolf-HowlerWould love to see something around 130/95/125 with tons of tip rocker, a little bit of camber, and some tail rocker. Beefy 2.5mm edges that came pre detuned underfoot would be pretty cool too.