Red Bull Unrailistic | LIVE Broadcast

Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 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!

The Logic behind non-symmetrical Skis?

profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
Something I've been thinking about recently is the prevalence of asymmetrical skis. Most pros, and most kids who just shred the park use a ski that is fatter in the nose than it is in the tail. And as far as market share goes, from having a quicker glance around the hill, asymmetrical skis seem to out numbered perfectly symmetrical skis by a great deal. You rarely see pros, or people in the park in general riding Anthems, Da'Nollies, etc

But surely, there is an obvious advantage? A perfectly symmetrical ski will mean the centre of mass of the ski is directly beneath midsole, making it easier to balance on rails, because the weight of the ski is perfectly distributed, and will reduce swing weight in the air

So how come there is such great supply and demand of asymmetrical skis, despite theoretical advantages of symmetrical ones?

And I searchbarred, there was nothing really.
Jan 9 2010 4:20PM
0 0
profile picture
skiingonskis
Posts: 2076 - Karma: 262
because asymmetrical skis are better for going forward, which is what most of our sport is, duh
Jan 9 2010 4:24PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61107 - Karma: 118,293
symmetrical skis are about 4 or 5 years old, directional skis (non-symmetrical) have been around for hundreds of years.
Jan 9 2010 4:26PM
0 0
profile picture
dubaiski
Posts: 961 - Karma: 37
Its mainly due to people wanting to ride alot out of the park, you know like in powder or groomers. But if it is a park pecific ski i see your point in all aspects it should be better.
Jan 9 2010 4:26PM
0 0
profile picture
summersover
Posts: 5777 - Karma: 233
Asymmetrical skis are far better at carving (forwards) and are more versatile in tougher terrain. I personally think the advantages in control are far more valuable than a pretty much negligible weight and balance difference
Jan 9 2010 4:27PM
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
Surely there is no decrease in forward performance in having a symmetrical ski, whereas there is an increase in 'going backwards' performance will a symmetrical one.

Not to mention the other advantages listed?
Jan 9 2010 4:27PM
0 0
profile picture
Piste.Off
Posts: 11586 - Karma: 1,861
actually there are disadvantages to going forward with a symmetrical ski
Jan 9 2010 4:28PM
0 0
profile picture
skiingonskis
Posts: 2076 - Karma: 262
you're not getting it...
Jan 9 2010 4:29PM
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
That's why I made this thread.
Jan 9 2010 4:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Wobby
Posts: 316 - Karma: 266
I don't understand either. 
Why is there an advantage in going forwards with a non-symmetrical ski vs a symmetrical one?  The only advantage I have noticed is in pow, the tails float a much as the tips, but with rocker its not a problem.
What makes non-symmetric skis better?
Jan 9 2010 4:46PM
0 0
profile picture
Cheezcake.
Posts: 721 - Karma: 22
This is my first year on my symmetrical disordery's, and since the park isn't in full swing yet, i'm mostly spending my time on either mogul runs or in the small amount of trees we have.

what i've found is that asymmetricals are WAY more forgiving if you go into the backseat, and easier to turn if you do fall back a bit. in my disorderly's, if i'm not constantly putting tons of forward pressure on my boot and charging hard, i'm not having a good time on the tougher terrain.

on groomers though, symmetrical or asymmetrical doesn't make too much of a difference.
Jan 9 2010 5:18PM
0 0
profile picture
PeterWojnar
Posts: 3937 - Karma: 678
If you plan on spending 100% of the time you ski in the park, and 50% of it skiing switch, symmetrical skis are for you. If you EVER want to ski anything that isn't park, directional skis are the way to go. Symmetrical skis are for people who spin all the time, and go switch all the time. Basic fact is, nobody skis switch that much except for park rats. And park rats don't make up all that much of the whole market.
Jan 9 2010 5:30PM
0 0
profile picture
pekka_p
Posts: 440 - Karma: 39
Another thing that 'asymmetrical skis' can mean is that the inside edge has a bigger turning radius than the outside edge..Cause when carving, the downhill ski travels a longer distance than the upper one. I know that they made few telemark and racing skis like that couple years back but i think that bigger companies don't do them anymore??
Jan 9 2010 5:42PM
0 0
profile picture
yojimbo
Posts: 3631 - Karma: 27
with a symmetrical ski mounted at true center your weight is strapped in at the center of the ski. when going at higher speeds on steeper terrain or in deeper snow, it is easier to lose balance when encountering certain elements of forwards motion so more tip than tail or an asymmetrical ski makes it easier to maintain performance.
Jan 9 2010 5:50PM
0 0
profile picture
skiseemore
Posts: 988 - Karma: 17
pure park skis are only for park for a good reason steeps and pow are ridiculously hard on center mounted park skis believe me ive tried and it sucked
Jan 9 2010 5:55PM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
I ski forward more than I ski backwards.  skiing backwards you lean a lot further forward (on your tips) than on your tails.  You don't ski the same way backwards as forwards (unless you are always way in the backseat, which I understand some of the kids do).  therefore I an usually skiing more with the nose of the ski than with the tail. 

Swing weight/ rail balance weight is negligible. I bet the only people that notice the difference are the people that don't give a shit.  You should naturally be able to compensate for the weight, which isnt going to be much at all. 


 
Jan 9 2010 6:01PM
0 0
profile picture
jahmin44
Posts: 638 - Karma: 37

what about people who have non-symmetrical skis mounted true center? 

IF you are going to mount true center..would it not make more sense to have a symmetrical ski regardless of were you spend most of your time riding?

Jan 9 2010 6:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Elg
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 3,880
this depends on the ski, and how the sidecut (?) is.
Jan 9 2010 6:06PM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
No, the only thing that really matters for true center mounting is sidecut.  If you are in the center of the sidecut, then it doesnt really matter. 
Jan 9 2010 6:08PM
0 0
profile picture
wintersway
Posts: 5115 - Karma: 128
I am on my second pair of twins, and my first symmetrical ski now. I have been skiing since probably 1995, and have had straight skis, slightly shaped, and shaped skis. I wouldn't say that I have ever had a true carving ski, but I have no difficulty carving on groomers and through crud on any shape ski.

When I switched to a twin tip, I researched for a good all mountain pair that wouldn't have any real disadvantages out of the park and got Scratch Pro FS's as I was a smaller guy. These were actually better than any other ski had and were a twin tip. I had them mounted a little forward of recommended, to help learn switch, and really loved these skis in the woods, in a little pow, and on groomers.

Now I am on symmetrical skis; the Volkl Wall's and skiing at Sugarbush this season. I have had bumps, groomers, ice, crud, powder, trees, and some rails. I am an aggressive skier and have had no problems getting used to the extra length in the tail. I actually do think there are more advantages to the symmetrical ski than the assymetrical (mainly for east coast) as they will do everything you can do all over the mountain, and they do have a better swing weight and balance on rails. Ill be sticking to symmetrical from now on, unless i want a pow specific ski, which don't come in a symmetrical sidecut anyway.
Jan 9 2010 6:08PM
0 0
profile picture
wintersway
Posts: 5115 - Karma: 128
but as someone else said, asymmetrical skis have been around a lot longer than symmetrical skis.
Jan 9 2010 6:15PM
0 0
profile picture
MatRich
Posts: 4789 - Karma: 1,812

wierd.. where I ski almost everyone has symetrical centermounted skis.

its all a matter of what you will ski. if you have less wide in the back that just means less resistance in the back to iniciate your turn. Now when your doing park there is no reason to want this ( in my opinion) since you generaly go in a streight line towards a feature.Where you would want asymetrical is when you are goint to be turning a lot ( moguls, groomers, BC...) but then the big difference is made where you mounte your skis. the more you mount them near the tail, the less resistance for turns.

Jan 9 2010 6:23PM
0 0
profile picture
-fungus-
Posts: 249 - Karma: 14
my thoughts exactly, i'd like a ski that i can take outside of the park and still rip without having to worry about the control, i'll still manage fine in park without perfect symmetry...
Jan 9 2010 6:29PM
0 0
profile picture
fountain.
Posts: 1399 - Karma: 80
having symmetrical skis makes it much harder to just ride and make turns forwards. most people dont ride switch as much as riding forward. that being said, they would much rather have a ski that is going to perform well going forward, rather than having it symmetrical and lacking forward performance for unneeded reasons.
Jan 9 2010 6:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Lemuel
Posts: 14477 - Karma: 10,515
If you are a good skier,  there should be no effect on your skiing between a symmetrical and asymmetric ski.  All you saying that it is so much harder to ski a symmetrical ski, give me a break.  I have skied my invaders in everything, Its not that bad.  Steeps are not any harder.  I have chronics also mounted at center.  I can rip turns on both pairs.  I do not have a preference though.
Jan 9 2010 8:43PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)