Bigger Bro Model

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

I got a question - Do you guys perceive any noticable correlation between the same or similar sidecut on skis of different width dimensions? Should the sidecut of a fatter Bro be modified in any way to enhance the skis girth? And how should that sidecut engage in relation to the flex? What do you see as the advantages/drawbacks of a pintail, meaning a narrower tail, irrespective of whether it is turned up or flat? Rocker the tip and not the tail?

Ok. That was a long question.

---

splat - FWIW: i see the pintail becomes better and better the wider you get. my FFF (145-118-125) and 120's (140-120-125) are so $$$ with an 15-20mm pintail. i'd say more like a 15mm pintail with a kick on the tail (ie. dp) and more like 20mm if you keep that tail nice and flat (ie. FFF). also, the pintail helps the tail break loose and butter once the ski is more than 45deg from the fall-line, but still hold an edge up to 30+deg along the fall-line really well.

also, a relatively wide shovel compared to a relatively narrow tail is really nice for dropping. landing centered onto a little pitch is so $$$.

if you are doing a rockered shovel, run that core all way up and skip the spacer. keep that thing from flapping. also, a less round flex would be nice. stiff tail, med shovel.

^^^^What Bullit Said^^^^

Bullit we seem to want the same ski. I am right in line with everything you said.

I feel that anything above 200 you'll sell less overall. I ski fairly hard but would not want anything over a 195. You might be better saleswise having two versions, a mid to high 180s & 195. Just my opinion, I love my 183 Gotamas and 193 sanouks, just my opinion.

don't listen to the masses, splat. besides, there's no money to be made in catering to them. build the big ski. :D

Yep, make them big skies. It's not like they are going to be a big crowd pleaser anyway (atleast for the general public).

But do think of a slightly shorter and softer model.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squatch

don't listen to the masses, splat. build the big ski. :D

---

I never thought that I would say this in business world, but yeah,squatch is right.

Since your project is gonna be a Non-Profit effort with limited production, go with a Bang. Dont do any compromises. Make a ski that really kicks your teeth in and leaves you to bleed. Make that ski a legend,to whom all others skis under the sun will be compared decades after.

And most importantly: Make it pink and with unicorns,stating I AM A MAN,I AM FREE AND I AM PROUD!

Now say it :
I´M A MAN AND I´D LIKE TO RIDE THE PINK UNICORN!!!

http://www.a-rocking-horse-to-love.c...small/t_76.jpg

B??E, quit effin' with my effort...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

and you're a pussy 12-year-old or whatever. Let me clue you in, in a couple years, not so far away, you'll feel the same as we do.

I recommend you stop being such a faggot. This is a rager, destroyer ski. NOT FOR PUSSIES. If you want something average, go buy a B4 or Squads or something.

---

The John Bonham "Hammer of the gods" signature model.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y195/skifishbum/jb.jpg
I was hoping for something similiar to the BD or 190 sumo.
Only FKNA made w/ pride in America.
And if I could come personally work om my sticks that would be the topper.
3 seasons ago I gear whored some 198 R/ex's from the UAC swap. First run I did not ride good and ate some Aspen wood. Dislocating my shoulder and lost the month of Jan. Urrl had mercy on me and it didn't snow that month.So I don't know if I posess the cajones or skills to ride such a beast, but it's gonna be fun as hell trying.
Maybe the shorter fatter Notorious BIG model too.
And a "Selena" model For Adam;)

Edit Splat here is that link to lightning boards http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45732

Since I just settled a case and dont feel like working too much this afternoon, I will throw in my $.02. I agree with some others that have already piped in.... If you want to make a conventional shaped ski and make it a "real big mountain" ski, bring back the shape of the Nordica FF/105 but wider. How bout just adding 10mm all the way through and add some length. That would end up with 135-115-125 and about 200cm and would be alot of fun. You dont want to make it stiffer than Squads though, cuz my 194 Squads dont handle pow as well as they could if they were a touch softer. And this isnt going to be a ski you would want to ski on hardpack unless it was really smooth. Plus with the extra length, you dont need the stiffness as much. Now if you want to make a "non-traditional" ski, something along the lines of the 193 EHP in a 200 would also be fun. :biggrin:

If you're going to build a hammer, build a BFH. This is a niche ski; no use compromising.

208cm
The tiniest and lowest of rounded flip tails: just enough so it doesn't hang up on sideslips.
I'll let everyone else argue about waist width and exact dimensions.
Very little/no camber.
~8cm extra tip rocker, giving it the running length of a 200cm with normal tip. Then you can make it stiff without getting too much tip dive.

OK. I'm dreaming of shapes.
Thanks for the suggestions.
We're hoping to send some protos south.
The press is up and running and we have enough materials on hand to get some rough shapes out.
Anything else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marshalolson

its sad that nobody has the sack to ski square and flat tails these days either. make that fucking thing a true 205.

---

If only one could get a ski like that...

Splat - the perfect ski you need as a template has already been built. It's the 190cm Nordica FF9.1/ W105.

Just scale it up to 200cm and the waist will rise proportionately to 110mm. Simple.

It answers all the questions. Why waste time and money reinventing the wheel?

Think I don't ski well enough to enter that discussion here, sorry.

I know I don't but it's not going to stop me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bad_roo

I know I don't but it's not going to stop me.

---

I'm glad I'm not alone on that one.

If your making a 200 make a 190 as well so us smaller chargers can charge and compete on them.
Dreaming...

Even though it's clearly obvious clear that I'm not good enough to really comment... But I'll still do it.

I still say that do the 205 no compromise ski (stiff, say Squad stiffness or slightly less) version and then a tuned down for us wussies... like 195 and softer (around Explosive or slightly less), no real point in downsizing to smaller as it would be too close to the 88 Bro.

Oh, zero or very little camber, slighly flaired and rounded tail (like on Stöckli Stormriders), also a pintail would be swheet... Also the showel should be a bit softer over all than the rest of the ski, giving good turn initiation and make the ski a tad easier to manouver. Stiff underfoot and tail would mean that you could still go at mach looney on it and it would really pop out of turns plus takea a beating when landing airs. A slight pintail would be also sweet to make smearing easier and not hook up the tail. As for tail rocker, well I'd say no but the tail of Stöckli Stormrider DP's is pretty nice (slighly raised and rounded in the corners).

Just my hippy opinions...

I flexed a squad once....I am scared

195+ ! anything else is for pussies.(though more than 20Xcm (with x lower than 6 ;) ) wouldN't be necessary either i guess)
and yeah around 110ish underfoot would be great.
don't decrease the tip width. i'd say 135mm wouldn't be bad either.
(at that length the radius would still be high 30s or more..)


btw. has anyone a 198 squad for sale ? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subtle plague

btw. has anyone a 198 squad for sale ? :D

---

Just one? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subtle plague

btw. has anyone a 198 squad for sale ? :D

---

I broke the one that I flexed so that guy might be willing to sell






slappin hand on thigh

Hey...somebody call me an asshole or something and get me off the front page of this discussion....:D:nonono2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by train07

Hey...somebody call me an asshole or something and get me off the front page of this discussion....:D:nonono2:

---

asshole

.....

I havn't read through this entire thread so I'm sure this has been said at least once....but I'll say it again.

You already have a 100 waist ski, which by many people's standards is all they will ever need. Dude...6 years ago 90 or 100 was HUGE. Pow plus' were just monsters and obsurd in size. Now it's normal.

Marketing/Financial Concern:
It costs money to make big skis. Material, time, setup/changing cost, tooling, etc etc....you know this. To build a huge ski that only a very select few people will buy hardly seems worth it from a financial viewpoint, unless you're plan is to charge $700 plus....in which case someone like me wouldn't even consider it.

I know it's pesemistic (fuck, I don't even know how to spell pess-a-mis-tic), but just my opinion.

All that having been said, I'd love to see a big bro at 195, swallow tail or twin, similar flex to softs. If they run $500 or $600 like the current bro, I'd even think about buying it. But it'd be last on my list after some 179's, and some sub 170's for my wife.