Too bad rongon, it doesn't sound like the ski for you. I will take them off your hands for you. Are you on the East coast? PM me and we'll work out a deal. No really.rongon wrote:Hopefully 1cm back will cure the problem. If so, then I plug the old holes, drill the new, and I'm back in business. If not, then I'll have a pair of gently used, drilled once Vector BCs for sale.
Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
- lowangle al
- Posts: 2755
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:36 pm
- Location: Pocono Mts / Chugach Mts
- Ski style: BC with focus on downhill perfection
- Favorite Skis: powder skis
- Favorite boots: Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Retired cement mason. Current job is to take my recreation as serious as I did my past employment.
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
- rongon
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:09 pm
- Location: NY State 'Forever Wild'
- Ski style: Wanderer - XCD, telemark
- Favorite Skis: Fischer Excursion 88 (3-Pins), Madshus Annum (Switchback), Elan Ripstick 96 (Switchback X2)
- Favorite boots: Asolo Extreme, Crispi CXP
- Occupation: I work to live
- Website: http://skinortheast.com
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
I'm not selling those Vector BC skis yet. I didn't choose the mount point myself, I let the tech choose it. That may have been a mistake, since it looks like it got mounted 'by the book' with the center of the boot over the ski center mark. The tricky part about that is that I ski Crispi boots, which have a shorter sole length than Scarpa boots. So... The 'boot center' mark on a Crispi is more forward than the boot center mark would be on the same size Scarpa boot. Yeah, it's crazy.
I went through this with my Annum skis as well. I had originally mounted them on the pin line mark on the ski for my size boot, but found that I didn't like how they felt. I moved the bindings back -1cm and then they felt just right. I'm hoping the same thing happens with the Vector BCs.
(As an aside, on the Annums, moving the mounting point back -1cm put the pins on CC. So now I've got them on the trad mounting point, and I like it. Big surprise, eh?)
I'm trying to decide between mounting points on these S-Bound 125s. BoF on CRS puts the pin line +2cm from CC. I'm thinking of mounting them halfway between those two points, so pins +1cm from CC. That ought to work, right?
(Can you tell I'm itching to think about skis and skiing?)
I went through this with my Annum skis as well. I had originally mounted them on the pin line mark on the ski for my size boot, but found that I didn't like how they felt. I moved the bindings back -1cm and then they felt just right. I'm hoping the same thing happens with the Vector BCs.
(As an aside, on the Annums, moving the mounting point back -1cm put the pins on CC. So now I've got them on the trad mounting point, and I like it. Big surprise, eh?)
I'm trying to decide between mounting points on these S-Bound 125s. BoF on CRS puts the pin line +2cm from CC. I'm thinking of mounting them halfway between those two points, so pins +1cm from CC. That ought to work, right?
(Can you tell I'm itching to think about skis and skiing?)
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
I'm pretty sure your skis are the easy skin, no? I think the 125 was only made with the generation.
The previous ones had a very specific way to adjust your mounting position. FWIW, I think it works. Some other people have deviated and wound up back, or near what they recommend.
On the previous ones, balance was very far forward. It just so worked out that they had marks right about at balance, and that the balance was +1 to +2cm from chord, depending on the model of ski. If the mark is there, I would use it. There was also some smaller marks that were used to make slight adjustment for boot size. The nominal, large mark was for a size 42 and each mark was for the next size smaller (toward the tail of the ski) or larger (toward the tip). I think the marks are 2.5mm apart IIRC (it's on this forum). I'm not sure if the 125 (or the newer S Bounds) have those marks, but I'd check balance and chord and see what the relationship is. If balance is forward of chord by like 2cm, I bet they are the same (marks or not) and I'd use that previous procedure.
I wear a size 43 or 44 boot, and I mounted on the large mark (balance/42) for both my S Bounds. Both work great (2.5mm is pretty small compared to the ski length). It seems that Fischer's actually engineering these skis to be mounted up this way, and designed them such that they balance out nearly at that point (unlike many other skis). They also assume you are going to use FH bindings, not like a Vector or any other DH ski which may be setup for Tele or AT in which boot center may be the given mark. I don't really doubt Fischer on this. These skis work pretty well.
PS The same could be said about the Annum and the marks on those, but IIRC, the marks for the Annum were 1cm forward of the Epoch. I can't recall what the Eon was, I'd have to check my notes. Either way, I believe the Annum was the most aggressive in terms of moving the foot forward and was the farthest from the skis balance point. I really don't think balance has much to do with how the ski turns (although some will disagree) but perhaps it rather leads us more to the skis shape and fore/aft distribution/rocker/etc.
The previous ones had a very specific way to adjust your mounting position. FWIW, I think it works. Some other people have deviated and wound up back, or near what they recommend.
On the previous ones, balance was very far forward. It just so worked out that they had marks right about at balance, and that the balance was +1 to +2cm from chord, depending on the model of ski. If the mark is there, I would use it. There was also some smaller marks that were used to make slight adjustment for boot size. The nominal, large mark was for a size 42 and each mark was for the next size smaller (toward the tail of the ski) or larger (toward the tip). I think the marks are 2.5mm apart IIRC (it's on this forum). I'm not sure if the 125 (or the newer S Bounds) have those marks, but I'd check balance and chord and see what the relationship is. If balance is forward of chord by like 2cm, I bet they are the same (marks or not) and I'd use that previous procedure.
I wear a size 43 or 44 boot, and I mounted on the large mark (balance/42) for both my S Bounds. Both work great (2.5mm is pretty small compared to the ski length). It seems that Fischer's actually engineering these skis to be mounted up this way, and designed them such that they balance out nearly at that point (unlike many other skis). They also assume you are going to use FH bindings, not like a Vector or any other DH ski which may be setup for Tele or AT in which boot center may be the given mark. I don't really doubt Fischer on this. These skis work pretty well.
PS The same could be said about the Annum and the marks on those, but IIRC, the marks for the Annum were 1cm forward of the Epoch. I can't recall what the Eon was, I'd have to check my notes. Either way, I believe the Annum was the most aggressive in terms of moving the foot forward and was the farthest from the skis balance point. I really don't think balance has much to do with how the ski turns (although some will disagree) but perhaps it rather leads us more to the skis shape and fore/aft distribution/rocker/etc.
- lilcliffy
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
Hi Rongon,
Been loosely following this one...
To go back to your original question- it is unclear to me- why do you want to reduce the camber of the S-125?
I have never tried this ski- have tried all the other S-Bounds- and I find the stiffness and camber quite unique for a hybrid tele-xcountry ski. I like the responsiveness and "pop" of the S-Bounds when downhill skiing. I also like the feel of the flex underfoot- but I find the parabolic sidecut a bit squirrely for a xcountry ski.
Why would you try and change the flex pattern of the S-125 before you have tried them out?
Been loosely following this one...
To go back to your original question- it is unclear to me- why do you want to reduce the camber of the S-125?
I have never tried this ski- have tried all the other S-Bounds- and I find the stiffness and camber quite unique for a hybrid tele-xcountry ski. I like the responsiveness and "pop" of the S-Bounds when downhill skiing. I also like the feel of the flex underfoot- but I find the parabolic sidecut a bit squirrely for a xcountry ski.
Why would you try and change the flex pattern of the S-125 before you have tried them out?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
- fisheater
- Posts: 2622
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:06 pm
- Location: Oakland County, MI
- Ski style: All my own, and age doesn't help
- Favorite Skis: Gamme 54, Falketind 62, I hope to add a third soon
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska, Alico Ski March
- Occupation: Construction Manager
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
lilcliffy wrote:Hi Rongon,
Been loosely following this one...
To go back to your original question- it is unclear to me- why do you want to reduce the camber of the S-125?
I have never tried this ski- have tried all the other S-Bounds- and I find the stiffness and camber quite unique for a hybrid tele-xcountry ski. I like the responsiveness and "pop" of the S-Bounds when downhill skiing. I also like the feel of the flex underfoot- but I find the parabolic sidecut a bit squirrely for a xcountry ski.
Why would you try and change the flex pattern of the S-125 before you have tried them out?
Rongon,
I am just a hack in the XC world. I only XC, because I like to be in the woods, like a little exercise, and really like free downhill turns. I really enjoy the pop I get out of my S-bound 112's. I also really like the way the tips come up in powder. I have not been in any really deep powder, but I have had them of 2 feet of light pow, and the were great. I weigh about 180 and am 5' 9", I ski on the 189 S-bound. I use 3 pin hardwire bindings, and ski T-4 boots (2 buckles). I can make turns on resort hardpack, and really do not have any difficulty flexing the ski. I just is not an ice ski, but in Michigan I can still anything at our resorts with this ski. If I ever mount my old alpine mid-fats, I would ski them at the resort, but this ski forces me to weight the uphill foot when it is icy, forcing me to become better.
I didn't intend to be so long winded. My experience leads me to believe the 125 is probably a nice turner. Good luck!
- rongon
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:09 pm
- Location: NY State 'Forever Wild'
- Ski style: Wanderer - XCD, telemark
- Favorite Skis: Fischer Excursion 88 (3-Pins), Madshus Annum (Switchback), Elan Ripstick 96 (Switchback X2)
- Favorite boots: Asolo Extreme, Crispi CXP
- Occupation: I work to live
- Website: http://skinortheast.com
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
Hey lilcliffy, those are good questions. I've abandoned doing anything to them until I've skied them for a little while. I'm a little intimidated by how big the camber looks, since I was thinking of these being a good ski for those tours with 5 mile approaches over rolling terrain before you get to the steep stuff (like Adirondack slides). With the skis standing base-to-base, it takes a fair amount of effort to squash the camber down to where the bases are touching each other all along the skis. They're much stiffer than the Annum skis, and they're bigger skis too. I'm hoping it doesn't take too much effort to ski slowly downhill through tight trees on a steep-ish slope. We shall see, I guess.lilcliffy wrote:Hi Rongon,
Been loosely following this one...
To go back to your original question- it is unclear to me- why do you want to reduce the camber of the S-125?
I have never tried this ski- have tried all the other S-Bounds- and I find the stiffness and camber quite unique for a hybrid tele-xcountry ski. I like the responsiveness and "pop" of the S-Bounds when downhill skiing. I also like the feel of the flex underfoot- but I find the parabolic sidecut a bit squirrely for a xcountry ski.
Why would you try and change the flex pattern of the S-125 before you have tried them out?
--
Last edited by rongon on Wed Oct 05, 2016 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- rongon
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:09 pm
- Location: NY State 'Forever Wild'
- Ski style: Wanderer - XCD, telemark
- Favorite Skis: Fischer Excursion 88 (3-Pins), Madshus Annum (Switchback), Elan Ripstick 96 (Switchback X2)
- Favorite boots: Asolo Extreme, Crispi CXP
- Occupation: I work to live
- Website: http://skinortheast.com
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
Whoa, that's a lot of info there!MikeK wrote:I'm pretty sure your skis are the easy skin, no? I think the 125 was only made with the generation.
The previous ones had a very specific way to adjust your mounting position. FWIW, I think it works. Some other people have deviated and wound up back, or near what they recommend.
On the previous ones, balance was very far forward. It just so worked out that they had marks right about at balance, and that the balance was +1 to +2cm from chord, depending on the model of ski. If the mark is there, I would use it. There was also some smaller marks that were used to make slight adjustment for boot size. The nominal, large mark was for a size 42 and each mark was for the next size smaller (toward the tail of the ski) or larger (toward the tip). I think the marks are 2.5mm apart IIRC (it's on this forum). I'm not sure if the 125 (or the newer S Bounds) have those marks, but I'd check balance and chord and see what the relationship is. If balance is forward of chord by like 2cm, I bet they are the same (marks or not) and I'd use that previous procedure.
I wear a size 43 or 44 boot, and I mounted on the large mark (balance/42) for both my S Bounds. Both work great (2.5mm is pretty small compared to the ski length). It seems that Fischer's actually engineering these skis to be mounted up this way, and designed them such that they balance out nearly at that point (unlike many other skis). They also assume you are going to use FH bindings, not like a Vector or any other DH ski which may be setup for Tele or AT in which boot center may be the given mark. I don't really doubt Fischer on this. These skis work pretty well.
PS The same could be said about the Annum and the marks on those, but IIRC, the marks for the Annum were 1cm forward of the Epoch. I can't recall what the Eon was, I'd have to check my notes. Either way, I believe the Annum was the most aggressive in terms of moving the foot forward and was the farthest from the skis balance point. I really don't think balance has much to do with how the ski turns (although some will disagree) but perhaps it rather leads us more to the skis shape and fore/aft distribution/rocker/etc.
From what I can remember, there's no 'mount here' mark on this pair of SB 125's. I'll have to look again when I get home. I don't know what year these skis are from. They're dark blue and black, and the bases have a white extruded kick pattern area, black sintered tip and tail.
I'll have to double-check where the BP, CC, and BOF/CRS points fall on the ski. I measured all those a few weeks ago, and have them penciled on a piece of masking tape on the skis. I'll get back to you on this...
I too found that the Annum's mounting line marks were quite far forward. I mounted mine as recommended to start with, and skied them like that for a season. I found that they felt like there was a lot of tail sticking out behind me, which I didn't like. The next season, I moved the bindings back to pins-on-CC, and found that I loved the skis that way in any kind of soft snow, including more than two feet of fresh powder on one memorable day. Like others, I've found the Annum to be a really good ski for XC skiing in deep, untracked snow, and not bad for turns in soft snow.
I'm hoping the S-Bound 125 will be similar, but with more of an emphasis on downhill performance, while retaining reasonably good XC performance. To compare to my Vector BC's, I find the Vectors to have terrible kick-and-glide performance, really only good for shuffling along on the flats. They are really good for making turns, though. Far better for steeper-and-deeper than the Annum. But the Annum is a far, far better XC ski. If the SB 125 strikes a compromise between those two, then I might really love it.
Anyway, I'll get back to you on where the BP, CC, and BOF/CRS points are on the SB 125.
--
- lilcliffy
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
Very cool- and very interesting...rongon wrote: With the skis standing base-to-base, it takes a fair amount of effort to squash the camber down to where the bases are touching each other all along the skis. They're much stiffer than the Annum skis, and they're bigger skis too.
I had assumed that the S-125 would be a straight shot at the Voile Vector BC....Based on your description- obviously not!
The flex pattern you describe is very interesting for a Nordic ski that fat...
I wonder how it compares to the Rossi BC-125 and the Altai Kom as well as the Vector BC?
Wow- very cool...
Please consider posting a review when you've had a chance to review them.
I will particularly appreciate the fact that you are doing both xcountry and downhill skiing with them!
I almost bought a pair of these in a 189cm on clearance this summer- as you said- they were so good of a deal- hard to pass up!
I was almost set on the Altai Kom for my next downhill-oriented backcountry XCD ski....Now with what you are describing with the S-125....plus it comes as long as 189cm? Hmmm...
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
- rongon
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:09 pm
- Location: NY State 'Forever Wild'
- Ski style: Wanderer - XCD, telemark
- Favorite Skis: Fischer Excursion 88 (3-Pins), Madshus Annum (Switchback), Elan Ripstick 96 (Switchback X2)
- Favorite boots: Asolo Extreme, Crispi CXP
- Occupation: I work to live
- Website: http://skinortheast.com
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
MikeK -- Looking at my particular pair of S-Bound 125's, I do not see a mounting point marking on the skis.
The Balance Point (BP) is just aft (toward the ski's tail) of the Chord Center, but only by a centimeter at most.
The Ball of Foot on Center of Running Surface (BOF-CRS) puts the pin line another 1.5 cm forward of the CC mark.
[EDIT: I had to fix this -- I goofed up!]
So, using BP as the reference, CC is about 1 cm *forward* of the BP. BOF-CRS is about 2.5 cm forward of the BP.
[/edit]
This is pretty much the same as for any other trad-camber (no rocker) ski I've had, Dynastar Legend 3800, Atomic Diran, and Madshus Annum. It's also the same relationship between those points on my Madshus Annum skis. I think it's safe to say that the S-Bound 125 is a trad-camber, non-rockered ski that's 125mm across the tip, about 95mm across the waist, which is lighter in weight but with a stiffer camber than something like the Dynastar 3800, and with a fishscale base. It seems like a wider, stiffer version of the Annum/Guide. That may not be a bad thing.
The Voile Vector BC is a noticeably different kind of ski, rockered tip and all.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
--
The Balance Point (BP) is just aft (toward the ski's tail) of the Chord Center, but only by a centimeter at most.
The Ball of Foot on Center of Running Surface (BOF-CRS) puts the pin line another 1.5 cm forward of the CC mark.
[EDIT: I had to fix this -- I goofed up!]
So, using BP as the reference, CC is about 1 cm *forward* of the BP. BOF-CRS is about 2.5 cm forward of the BP.
[/edit]
This is pretty much the same as for any other trad-camber (no rocker) ski I've had, Dynastar Legend 3800, Atomic Diran, and Madshus Annum. It's also the same relationship between those points on my Madshus Annum skis. I think it's safe to say that the S-Bound 125 is a trad-camber, non-rockered ski that's 125mm across the tip, about 95mm across the waist, which is lighter in weight but with a stiffer camber than something like the Dynastar 3800, and with a fishscale base. It seems like a wider, stiffer version of the Annum/Guide. That may not be a bad thing.
The Voile Vector BC is a noticeably different kind of ski, rockered tip and all.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
--
Last edited by rongon on Tue Nov 01, 2016 3:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Squash a little camber out of S-Bound 125?
Wow - that's entirely different than mine (or the others).
I'd guess BOF at CRS would be an ideal point.
A lot of my other traditional skis are just like this too - balance is aft of chord, but my 3 pairs (I have two S78s and one S98) of S bounds were all like I described above. Others here have given me the same info regarding them.
I'd guess BOF at CRS would be an ideal point.
A lot of my other traditional skis are just like this too - balance is aft of chord, but my 3 pairs (I have two S78s and one S98) of S bounds were all like I described above. Others here have given me the same info regarding them.