Deprecated: Function set_magic_quotes_runtime() is deprecated in /home/split/public_html/talk/common.php on line 106
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/session.php on line 942: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/session.php on line 942: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/session.php on line 942: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3545: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3547: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3548: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3549: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /common.php:106)
Splitboard.com Forums • View topic - Critique My Design...Pretty Please


Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:04 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 12:03 pm
Posts: 51
so thinking in cross section-

instead of typical up turned tip and tail basically an elongated U
(or elongated W with some boards e.g. Billy goat)

keep the tip up (traditional form), followed with rocker, then camber in middle, followed by a down turning tail.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:28 pm
Posts: 454
Location: Cottonwood, UT
What do you think about my rocker/tip shape? I used one elongated ellipse to create it. I've seen some boards that use a straight section of rocker with a smaller radius tip at the end of it? Any pros or cons you can see here?

Why did you say it I should make it taper more?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
I like the gradual tip, maybe they plane a bit more and push a bit less than a tight radius. 2.5 or so inches really inst a very tall nose in my opinion, even if you were going to add significant rocker to the front of the board, I would not reduce the lift in the nose or length of the nose curve. Reduce it if you just want a lighter spinning board, no other reason to. I put a bit more tip than needed in my boards but it's nice to always go over that re-frozen roller ball or stump or rock so I like my noses to stay up at most points in a turn. have plenty of insert options from centered to way back for your own stance width because you may find the balance point at speed to be a bit different than a standard resort board nose.

Oh and add 20 cms length for 4-6% wasatch pow :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
If you like to haul ass in variable snow conditions like when there is a bit of windcrust around or in melt freeze spring snow I would advise an 11-12 meter sidecut, they do so much better if you pop off your base and up on your edge by surprise at speed in the middle of a turn. a 10 meter sidecut still turns really quick on a grippy snow covered exit trail out of the Wasatch drainages, a 12 meter requires a bit more banking of the board on the pack, and a 14 meter is sort of like wait for it . . . then wall hit,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:28 pm
Posts: 454
Location: Cottonwood, UT
I was just going through everyone's responses before I pull the trigger on this. I'm going to start cutting the tip/tail molds pretty soon so I have to make my tweaks pronto.

Snurfer wrote:
I just don't understand putting in a mini notch in an upturned tail. If you read the descriptions of most of these designs they claim to do the faux ST so one can ride switch. If you can ride switch it means the tail is upturned and the only way that notch is sinking is if you lean back.


Snurfer - I imagine the micro notch in the tail does far less for the amount the tail sinks than the actual length of the tail and its relation to the stance setback. Basically, as your rear foot gets closer to the tail the pressure induced on the tail section rises. Because the tail is shorter and closer to your center of gravity, it forces it to sink more which raises the nose. I'm thinking this is why this shape of board typically doesn't have tail rocker. If it did it would further pronounce the "wheelie-ing" effect which would reduce the planing effect (Kinda like a fishing boat with too much weight in the back and too powerful a motor. If that makes any sense.).

At the same time, since the back foot is so close to the short tail it allows you to pivot off the rear foot. Kinda like a skateboard. I'm kinda theorizing here as I type but this seems to make sense to me from a physics standpoint. Granted it will be a much different feel from the traditional swallowtail where you are more centered on the board. I would think a real swallow would carve better as well on harder snow due to the longer running length.

After thinking through this I think I'm going to push the sidecut back to 10 or 10.5 meters (baby steps to larger radius).

Scooby2 wrote:
2.5 or so inches really inst a very tall nose in my opinion, even if you were going to add significant rocker to the front of the board, I would not reduce the lift in the nose or length of the nose curve. Reduce it if you just want a lighter spinning board, no other reason to. I put a bit more tip than needed in my boards but it's nice to always go over that re-frozen roller ball or stump or rock so I like my noses to stay up at most points in a turn.


Scooby - How tall would you make the tip? I wanted to make it about 80mm but I'm trying to use the same tip molds for a pair of skis I plan on making so I didn't want to spend the money on more tip mold materials. But maybe I should just not be cheap.

whistlermaverick wrote:
Looks fairly good, I have something slightly similar.
With a nose that big(really long) I don't think you have to be setback any more than 20mm.Stance can be centered over the sidecut. The running length seems fairly short for 9.5m, maybe bring it up around 125.I wouldn't go with any more than 11mm of taper.


Mav - I think I will increase the overall length as well as the running length. I've always been skeptical about how they say a 160 Fish is long enough even for the tall and large riders. I've never had a board that short. My first board was a 162 Sims and that was when I was a short teenager. I can't imagine that short of a board now. I made my old 163 Burton Johan into a splitboard last year and it felt so short to me. Definitely will be my loaner split.

Thanks to everyone for the critiques, it was helpful. Any last minute ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:40 pm
Posts: 211
Location: Monakirk's
Do you have room to slide the nose further onto the the nose block? I guess this would give you a longer nose but it would give more height. I personally think that the 65 height will work, A friend I ride with bought a factory second prior spearhead with a super flat nose and he really likes it. I reckon you can get away with less height on larger noses. Happy Building!

_________________
http://www.snowsurf.ca/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 8:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
Hey White Pine,
Are you making your own molds and pressing your own board then? Nevermind the cost of materials, the labor in getting a nose or tail mold just right is enough. Maybe you could use the same mold for a lower ski tip, then just extend the mold up farther for the nose of the snowboard, you can always press a shorter nose or tail into a longer nose or tail mold. In fact most press setups work a little better when the curve of the nose/tail molds extends in the same general direction a bit farther than the core. It prevents the air hose that delivers the pressure from having a weird kink over the top of the mold. Making two molds for skis and board that are both for wasatch backcountry conditions should not be necessary. I'll check tonight and let you know what my boards nose height is.

I reckon a lot of shorter freestyle board in deep dry snow really do not need as much nose because they do run like a motorboat with too much weight in the back, so the overall backwards tilting pitch of the board keeps the tip up. With bigger pow boards and lighter riders on not so long boards, or at real high speeds, or denser snow, the board will plane off at an angle closer to the snow surface, so oddly a bigger board is more secure from nose diving only with a bigger nose than a little board under a heavier rider.

Because bigger boards plane out at less of an angle to the snow surface, they go faster in deep dry snow and you exit turns with more speed, accelerate faster etc. That's pretty much the feeling myself, snurfer and other longboard riders are after style-wise. On the other hand a shorter board will pivot and push snow a lot easier which gives a lot of real good instantaneous ability to react and control speed in narrow couloirs, between rocks, spines, tight trees.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
WP-
Not counting the rocker in my boards, they have 8 cm lift, stepping on the bindings on a flat floor, the total lift is 11.5cm, length of the nose curve is around 20-22 cm.
I've never thought it needed to be bigger, even on deep 4-5 percent days

Oh, and make a split first, it's a lot easier to make a great bc board


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:28 pm
Posts: 454
Location: Cottonwood, UT
nearls wrote:
Do you have room to slide the nose further onto the the nose block? I guess this would give you a longer nose but it would give more height.


I could do this, but yes I'd end up with a longer nose. When comparing to other boards like the Voile Mojo for example. The rocker is 320mm and the tip height is 70mm. Not many other boards give the spec on their rocker length. It seems they just give the length of the tip without the rocker. Since my design is in the ballpark of the Mojo I'm thinking it may work at least for my first design.

Scooby2 wrote:
Hey White Pine,
Are you making your own molds and pressing your own board then? Nevermind the cost of materials, the labor in getting a nose or tail mold just right is enough. Maybe you could use the same mold for a lower ski tip, then just extend the mold up farther for the nose of the snowboard, you can always press a shorter nose or tail into a longer nose or tail mold.


Yeah, I'm going to attempt to press my own stuff. I'm got a baby on the way in like 4 weeks so I'm afraid things are going to slow way down when that happens. The skis I'm designing actually have a rocker length of 375mm and tip height of 85mm. I tried to split the difference with the ellipse so the snowboard doesn't have a height of much less than 70mm and I didn't want the ski tip height too high. I'm going to have to do two different tail molds though. Unless I drastically change my first design and do a traditional or swallowed tail.

Scooby2 wrote:
Because bigger boards plane out at less of an angle to the snow surface, they go faster in deep dry snow and you exit turns with more speed, accelerate faster etc. That's pretty much the feeling myself, snurfer and other longboard riders are after style-wise. On the other hand a shorter board will pivot and push snow a lot easier which gives a lot of real good instantaneous ability to react and control speed in narrow couloirs, between rocks, spines, tight trees.


You make complete sense to me. I totally agree. For my first board (Non-split) I wanted to make a board for glades and tight trees and couloirs. Cause at the resort this is mainly where I tend to stay (All the wide open hits get tracked out way too fast). Once I refine it I'll turn it into a split. My second board is likely going to be a true swallowtail split. I'll have to depend heavily on guys like you and Snurf to refine that one because my O-sin isn't a true swallow.

Scooby2 wrote:
WP-
Not counting the rocker in my boards, they have 8 cm lift, stepping on the bindings on a flat floor, the total lift is 11.5cm, length of the nose curve is around 20-22 cm.
I've never thought it needed to be bigger, even on deep 4-5 percent days


Is this on a swallow or traditional shape?

Scooby2 wrote:
Oh, and make a split first, it's a lot easier to make a great bc board


You think I could do a split on the first board without screwing it up? There are a lot more things that can go wrong with extra edges and all those inserts. I guess I could estimate the balance point for the toe pivot based on the weight of all the materials and the center of gravity. I'm new to composites so I'm not sure I'll get the flex right on the first go around (Like where to put carbon fiber and how much of it, core thickness, etc.). If you've got any tips in this regard I'm will to absorb any info you've got.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 2:16 am
Posts: 105
Location: New Zealand
First ever board I built is a Split, and its wicked. Climbs so well, rides well, but I know I can improve on it as it is a tad stiff. That said its bulletproof and will probably outlive me so a great start. Give it a go. Just be super thorough don't rush it. Plan Plan Plan then do it. I built a mothership press and it paid off. I read and read skibuilders.com and it paid off. Check out my Facebook there is a pic of my board there http://www.facebook.com/Splitn2 , the best fun I have had in a long long time was planning and completing my first build, now I am hooked!

_________________
SPLITN2.COM - Aotearoa Back Country Developments Ltd | Christchurch New Zealand | rich@splitn2.com | Custom Splitboards | Spark R&D | Fitwell Backcountry - the ultimate Splitboard Boot!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 4:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
1st, congrats on beocming a Dad!

+1 on skibuilders, you'll find everything on there.

Answering your question that nose is the same on all the boards I have made, none of which are swallows. I see swallows as a way to keep your stance centered relative to your effective edge while the board has more area up front. I don't really care about being centered over the edge, so just adjusting your stance back with a regular tail is just as effective and gives you more surface area for a given overall length of board. I would guess that a Voile Swallow Tail 178 has about the surface area of a 165, just laying two boards over each other.

I would not say that locating the touring bracket and essentially making two skis with inserts is any harder than making a solid. I would say making a good mold, press and heating are all way harder. If you make a comparably thick core with the standard layer of glass on it, you'll get close to what you are looking for. Huge coverage of these issues in skibuilders. Your decision as to how far you want to go in spending and building, but I would build something you imagine rather than something that is readily available in last years version


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:28 pm
Posts: 454
Location: Cottonwood, UT
Scooby2 wrote:
1st, congrats on beocming a Dad!

+1 on skibuilders, you'll find everything on there.


Thanks. Yeah Skibuilders has a myriad of knowledge. I've been reading as much as I can on there for the past year.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Critique My Design...Pretty Please
PostPosted: Tue Oct 04, 2011 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
Looking at your shape a bit more, it looks to be within just a few millimeters here and there of a Voile 171 with the tail cutout a bit. I love making and riding my own boards and I'm sure you would, but do consider that what you make will probably be 1-2 pounds heavier and cost maybe 3-4+ times the price of a 171 mojo at retail at 695. 8lbs 3 oz for a 171 by 26 is pretty light. If you look at the Black diamond Efficient skis which seem to be some of the most engineered boards out there, all paulownia wood cores, profile shaping, carbon replacing much of the heavier fiberglass, and their 175's still weigh 8 lbs, and they are narrower than a split.

And it would be real impressive if you could get all the crap together to press a board this season with a new little person. I guess it just makes more sense if you were designing something more different that isn't really manufactured already.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  








Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group