Printable View
From my understanding, It's the orientation of the composite that contributes to torsional rigidity more so than the metal. VDS does indeed dampen but not nearly as much as metal. VDS is primarily used to aid in bonding along the edges and in places where shear forces are strongest. I would tend to lean towards the metal dampening the ski in this case and not the VDS...as would many others on this site.
Musta called that rubber VDS for a reason!:rolleyes2
http://shoptalk.sandwichtechskis.com...-and-skis.html
Wait, what? Get the fuck outta here. How do you even claim that? Are you gonna be great, too?Quote:
Originally Posted by RockinB
Keep reading bubsQuote:
Originally Posted by tuco
http://snowboardmaterials.com/index....il-rubber-foil
Look again at the functions they state in your article bubs(and thanks for further proving my point), then look any where that I said bonding wasn't one of them(you're arguing a point that was never made). My point is the metal is the least damp component in the laminate.
You should read what Howard Head went through to produce a skiable metal sandwich ski(basically, the addition of-plastic base,topsheet as well as the other composites in the laminate,).
Perhaps I went full retard...I have always assumed that metal makes a ski more damp. Don't mean to step on any toes here. I have always thought VDS is for bonding characteristics and metal for 'damping'. Sorry Tuco.
Do you have a link to the Howard Head article. I am a geek when it comes to this stuff and would like to read about it.
So, do many of us still agree with you?Quote:
Originally Posted by RockinB
Not sure why you'd want to ski the Renegade in rough snow anyway. Its friggin 122 underfoot. The width alone will toss you all over the place.
Don't know. I've skied plenty of skis that wide underfoot that can rail and ski cut up pow pretty admirably.
This doesn't make sense to me... My 196 Rens don't have any issues in chopped up snow and my 191 Billys kill it in those conditions... Now the Rens on sketchy traverses are another issue...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
Chopped snow is different from rough variable imo. Totally agree with you - though I prefer narrower for inbounds most of the time. 110ishQuote:
Originally Posted by Undertow
I don't think 110 vs 120 are the definitive variables here, chopped or rough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
Throwing up a post to subscribe here. Picked up a 186 from backcountry a few months ago. Been procrastinating on mounting them. Leaning towards making them my touring setup, but inserts would be an option too. Hoping the skies poop lots of dry fluffy stuff all winter long...
This is the point I was trying to make, but you did it much more eloquently than I did...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustonen
YMMV but I found the Rens to be pretty dismal as a touring ski. They're tanks, and the forward mount makes kick turns annoying. Granted, I was using the CAST setup on mine. IMO they're great for lift served in areas that don't get pillaged on pow days (ie Japan), and motorized backcountry outings. I'm holding onto mine for sled skiing. Just my two cents....Quote:
Originally Posted by Lev
I'd disagree. Love touring on mine. Inserts for alpine and tech bindings.Quote:
Originally Posted by North
I think you misunderstood. I prefer 105-110 for inbounds chop and powder. I prefer even narrower for rough variable conditions - 90ish. For chop, I do notice a big difference between 105-110 and 120+. The 120+ have a ton more ankle torque and are much more ski to work through the chop with. I'd much prefer to give up some float for a few untracked laps for better performance in tracked laps. 120+ for me is a (mostly) untracked all day sorta ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustonen
That's pretty cool, sport. You think maybe the Lindahl(p)=w105••w110(!w90) theorem makes the 2016 Renegades less damp, or more damp, than the 2015 model?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
(What the fuck are you even talking about?)
Bump it. Two feet of new in Little Cottonwood today. I hope someone takes out a pair of VibeVail Rens at Alta or the Bird and gives us an update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramboh
Ya I am in Canada too. Ouch is right. I luckily had $450US in a PayPal account from selling some other skis so it didn't hurt as much exchange wise. Free shipping and no taxes makes me feel a bit better.
Good luck finding 186s? Seems to be very few around in the <$500US price? Not like a few years ago.
I took my 2015s out at Baker in puking snow and 1'+ fresh this week.....yelled "Hold my Dick" a number of times over big knolls. No "VibeVeil Technology" on my 14/15s?? but I managed just fine. Totally different skiing in powder snow than my NAS Pows. F'ing fun is all I can say.
The new semi cap construction looks bomber, feels heavy with Dukes but again I don't care. Just one run in pow and it was money well spent. Not sure I will ski these a ton or do longer than short sidecountry jaunts with these.....but I just want to own them. For those pow days. And cause they are Rens. I lean them against the wall in my office..... instead of spending $500 on a useless painting or something. They are like a fucking statue or piece of art? Isn't real art supposed to move you when you look at it? Cause I just look at them and feel good. Just look at em?
PS - I am 88 from tail my 186s. I like em there. Pivoty.
K
Fuck yes! The unofficial mantra of the Renegade skier lives on.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
Glad you're loving your sticks. I'm crossing my fingers that this same storm system lines up for tomorrow so I can finally get out on my 196s. Need to get them going so I can get in shape for the heli trip later this month.
HMD
I had my 196 owls leaning against my office wall from April through November last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
I have the 196 Ren with the Owl graphic and I know most seem to drool all over the Crow top sheet, but to me the owl is by far the sexiest I have seen on any ski... I have not had mine out this season and hope that will change when I travel to OR in early Feb...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustonen
As a former Owl owner, I tend to agree; the transparent top sheet was a nice touch. Something about the Crow 2.0s that speak to me. I guess it's the better artistry that was refined for that run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertow
In actual skiing; I remembered today why these things were so rad. 9-10" of nice, creamy PNWet snow with what seemed like nearly an inch an hour snowfall. The Renegades really succeed in denser, coastal snow. Of the years I've owned them, only once at Bridger were they the right tool. The rest of the time, the Montana cold smoke was far too light and the skis always sunk to the bottom. It made me kind of not like them unless it was really deep, which was rare.
Then, today - POW! Super fun rad time skiing. These ski are brilliant and sublime and rip. I still maintain that when shit gets all chopped up, they can suck. Riding what is effectively a board plank makes the ski punish you, particularly when the snow firm up and the bumps get all hard and you're skiing in mank city.
Otherwise ... "hold my dick!"
Hold my dick! Awesome, forgot about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
I thought you lived in Chilliwack? Move to the island this year? Anyway I'm gonna keep my eyes peeled for 186's, I love them in the trees at Whistler and they are enough stability for going fast in pow for me. Had an awesome time at Whistler last weekend on them, so fun to throw them sideways and just powerslide around in powder. More on the way this week too.
cheers