Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

Rocker, Camber, and everything in between

275K views 448 replies 130 participants last post by  16gkid 
#1 · (Edited)
Looking around at all of the current board designs at the SIA show in Denver a couple of weeks ago was cool as always, but also dizzying. Board profiles (camber, rocker, etc.) were still the top story, with every booth showing off their favorite flavor (or in most cases flavors). It made me think how confusing it would be for a newer rider to make a board choice in the current market and how hard it would be to feel confident in their selection. There are now so many varieties out there that it is hard to stay on top of them all.

I thought it might be helpful to start a thread here that showed the basic profile types all in one place without the marketing spin. There are definately many sub categories of each, but these are the broad strokes.




Traditional Camber

Pros - Tried and true performance. Great rebound which helps transition from edge to edge and also adds to pop for ollies etc. Longer running surface means good speed and edge bite in carves. Boards can be ridden shorter than some other designs without sacrificing running surface.

Cons - The contact points of the effective edge (roughly the boards wide points) are in constant contact with the snow. That can mean caught edges and some hard take downs.

Rocker

Pros - Easy turn initiation. Lifted wide points even when weighted means less caught edges. There are many varieties of this design which include various degrees of rocker, asymmetrical rocker (nose lifted more than tail, rocker center point shifted more towards tail, etc.) and multi-stage rocker.

Cons - Lost running surface, lost rebound, lost edge grip (many rocker designs get around this by using other design elements to add grip back in).

Flat

Pros - Maximum Stability. Longer running surface. Boards can be ridden shorter.

Cons - No inherent rebound. Without additional measures these boards tend to feel less lively. The contact points of the effective edge (roughly the boards wide points) are in constant contact with the snow. That can mean caught edges and some hard take downs.

Camber-Rocker-Camber

Pros - Reestablishes much of the lost running surface inherent to camber and some of the rebound. There are many different varieties of this design which alter the placement of the camber and rocker elements as well as the dimensions of those elements.

Cons - Potential for more catchy spots due to the multi stage profile.

Rocker-Camber-Rocker

Pros - Reduces the issue mentioned above from traditional camber where the wide points create catch spots. Good rebound.

Cons - less running surface than conventional camber.

Flat with lifted contact points

Pros - Reduces the issue mentioned above from Flat where the wide points create catch spots. There are many variations of this design. Some have so long a flat spot that they are very close to flat. Others have so little flat spot that they might better be called "Rocker with a little flat spot".

Cons - less running surface than Flat.

Flat-Rocker-Flat

Pros - Reestablishes much of the lost running surface inherent to camber and some of the rebound. This design has a little smoother weighted profile than Camber-Rocker-Camber...

Cons - ...but a bit less rebound and pop.
 
See less See more
1
#313 ·
Well everyone being curious has got me compulsive and curious aswell. I like riding switch and finally got that down on my proto HD 2013-14 that it feels normal. I still cant charge as fast as riding regular but nothing awkward about riding switch anymore. Ive got a Yes PYL that just need a bit more snow for me to test out what this RCR is all about. ATM my fav board has been the 154cm PROTO HD, suprisingly I thought the 152cm proto ct I had was more surfy on powder, but my proto hd charged it harder. Might be just me.
 
#314 · (Edited)
RCR is and awesome profile. One thing to consider however is how different RCR profiles can be from one another (true of all of the general profile categories in this thread).

Consider that RCR is a variation on Camber. When Camber was the only game in town every style of board from Big Mountain to Asym Carver to Park to Jib were all built on the camber profile. The same variety is available to RCR and it actually opens itself up to even more variations. RCR can be configured to work well with any riding style. It can be directional or twin, stiff or soft, symmetrical or asym, etc.

The placement of the transition between the larger camber section and the smaller rocker sections has a huge impact on performance. We are finalizing design right now on two new RCR profiles (really a lot more than that because each size in each profile is actually different but...). One of these has the transition closer to the wide point and one a bit further away from the widepoint. We are talking about 3-5 cm (depending on size) of transition placement difference and the effect on performance and feel is dramatic.
 
#317 ·
WiredSports - thanks for the info on the camber/rocker profiles. Last time I bought a board, it was pretty much traditional camber and the skate banana was just starting to gain popularity. Now every manufacture offers 4-5 different profiles.... Thanks for bringing some clarity to the matter, you really helped narrow down my selection. :10:
 
#319 ·
i find it to be the best profile for rails and small jumps, you get most/all the advantages of rocker and only half of the disadvantages.
used to love it, but got a capita doa this season and when i tried my old capita indoor suvival this season i hated it, felt super sloppy when turning...
 
#322 ·
Hi Bertie,

Mervin (Gnu, Lib, Roxy) has a complex naming structure for their line. It is important to note that they actually use unique profiles within many of their named categories so in reality there are more than the eight general profiles that they actually detail for Lib and Gnu. In terms of the general categories we are using for this thread. the Lib and Gnu lines can be simplified to:

Camber: TT, C3 BTX (camber with a dip)
Rocker: BTX, !BTX! (rocker with double dips)
CRC: C2 BTX, EC2 BTX, XC2 BTX, C1 BTX (specialty directional)

I will be happy to compare specific models for you which is a lot more valuable than the generalities above. Let me know what you are looking at :)
 
#324 · (Edited)
Hi Bertie,

Profile is a single factor in the much broader performance picture. For example there are "damp" camber boards and very harsh feelling camber boards. That attribute is primarily impacted by core materials, thickness distribution, and laminates. Profile has much less of a role there.

To answer you Q about the the Hot Knife, it is a camber board. The subtle dip in the middle is a nuance feature and does not dramatically impact ride. So, rest assured, you have ridden camber :) (although only one flavor).

The Attack Banana is a fairly neutral design but EC2 possibly goes further than you would like in terms of relaxed profile for your east coast riding as described above (especially for more "normal" years that this past season).

The Rider's Choice is the Money board in Gnu's line for All Mountain. C2 is a highly versatile profile and the other elements have been balanced to match. This would be my choice for you.
 
#327 ·
I am an old school freerider. I love my carves. Last year I picked up my first rockered board. A Never Summer Chairman. While I adjusted to it, I never did fall in love with it. I am going back to a cambered board this year. Right now I am eyeballing the Jones Flagship which is cambered under foot, however appears to have a touch of rocker at the contact points tip and tail. My question is, how will this feel when I ride it? For those who know Traditional camber to ride it, how does the bit of rocker tip and tail feel to carve in comparison?

Gracias
 
#328 · (Edited)
Hi Mahihkan,

Stoked that you are getting a new deck! To keep the terms clear, The Chairmain is a CRC model and the Flagship is RCR. There are big differences in the way these perform in relation to true rocker and true camber. Your Chairman had a lot more weighted surface contact length than would true rocker boards and the Flagship will have significantly less than a true cambered board. The transitions from camber to rocker on the Flagship begin early with the nose rocker being very long (the RCR is directional). Let's get your basics so we can know better where the Chairman fell short for you.

Weight
Foot Size
cm size of your Chairman
Typical Riding Area
 
#339 ·
Flight Attendant is another strong choice (in 168 cm). It has a lot less effective edge than your Chairman 169 (129.5 cm compared to 135 cm) so do not go shorter. The narrower width and your new size 11 boots :) will help even more.

STOKED!
 
#341 ·
:laugh2: I am not sure I want to buy new boots at this point, but we'll see. I don't know how wide the 168 Flight Attendant is at the bindings, but a size 12 boot shouldn't be a deal breaker should it?

...and I guess I will need some special gizmo to mount my Union Bindings to the Burton.
 
#340 ·
I've been on a Prior MFR, good board. If you really want to go carving, you need a board like the Virus Avalanche FLP AFT. With an effective edge of 140 cm on a 160 cm board, no traditional board can come close for edgehold. It's also not punishingly stiff, and has a mild camber profile with an early rise nose (sort of an RCR without the first R)... Not cheap, but a lot of board for the money.
 
#349 ·
Flight Attendant 168. Do it. It could be 166 to 168 and you're fine.

No worries about the boots unless they're old models and have big footprint. Depending on your angles and stance width... you'll know if the width is ok once you set it up.

I think Union is compatible with channel as they have metal discs. Worst case, it's a specific channel disc which Union should have/supply. Not really a gizmo.

Keep your boots and your boot size if that's what you're comfortable with.
 
#351 ·
Right on! The boots aren't that old, a couple of seasons. I will certainly look into going smaller as I can see the benefit, but Vans I have been using are by no means huge.

For shits and giggles I measured up the width on an old Supermodel 168 from back in the day. She was smaaall waisted, and carved like a dream to my memory, so it's hard to imagine the FA should give me grief
 
#359 ·
The Pick Your Line 165 has 123 cm of Effective edge compared to 129.5 on the Flight Attendant 168 and 135 on your current Chairman 169 Wide. 12 cm of effective edge would a huge drop.

Regardless of if you get new boots in size 11 (get new boots in size 11) your foot length is 28.7 cm. Far more than profile, this is almost certainly why you had a poor experience on the Chairman 169 Wide and enjoed your old Canyon. Width matters. I think you will love the FA 168 cm. For sure consider downsizing your boots. That will change your world.

STOKED!
 
#360 ·
I am not sure I follow you entirely. The Canyon and the Chairman are both wide boards, Canyon being a few mm wider. Neither gave me issues with width. The Canyon was simply a much more enjoyable board. I much prefer not having the squirrelly feeling of the rocker between my feet.

Anyway thanks for the help. Good luck with your boot sales!:laugh2:
 
#371 · (Edited)
Yeah! There have certainly been a ton of variations added to each of the profiles we had originally described. We should probably add a new top level profile though for back foot / backset camber. It has been around for a while now and is showing up in larger #'s in product lines and on the mountain. This is really a very unique profile rather than a variant and should be considered on its own. Of course there are a lot of subtle (and not so subtle) variants even to this profile. But for fact, if you get a light pow day and an opportunity to demo a backset camber model...it may change your world.
:crazy7:



 
#373 · (Edited)
This profile type would group designs where the camber is positioned so that front foot weighting has either little or no effect on the camber zone (camber is controlled by the rear foot). This is significantly different than on camber boards where both feet are shifted back within the camber zone.

 
#375 ·
advice

Hy everyone. Can you please tell me, what is more suited for a beginner between Rocker-Camber-Rocker (Camrock), Camber-Rocker-Camber (Gullwing) or a full rocker? Ride will be mainly on slopes, no park, no offpiste(or very little offpiste). I consider myself begginer even if i ride for 3 years now, but i got stock in "leaf", and only last year i managed to do some S-turns. I have a Volkl Dash 2011/2012 with easy camber and as what i understand it more difficult to learn on a camber board. A friend of mine just got a full rocker and he was like me, even worst, but now he did turns so easy with his full rocker board, from the first ride with it. Sadly i couldn't go with him to test the board.
 
#377 ·
Hy everyone. Can you please tell me, what is more suited for a beginner between Rocker-Camber-Rocker (Camrock), Camber-Rocker-Camber (Gullwing) or a full rocker? Ride will be mainly on slopes, no park, no offpiste(or very little offpiste). I consider myself begginer even if i ride for 3 years now, but i got stock in "leaf", and only last year i managed to do some S-turns. I have a Volkl Dash 2011/2012 with easy camber and as what i understand it more difficult to learn on a camber board. A friend of mine just got a full rocker and he was like me, even worst, but now he did turns so easy with his full rocker board, from the first ride with it. Sadly i couldn't go with him to test the board.
Hi Mihai,

Volkl's "Easy Camber" is another name for RCR. The camber section ends inwards of the wide points and the camber section itself is very mellow. This is a relatively catch free design in comparison with classic camber.

Let's find out more about your specifics and see if we can find another element that may be snagging you.

Please post up your weight, foot size, and current board size.

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).
 
#376 ·
Best or easiest? Many of us who have been riding for a while learnt on straight camber - I'd argue that this would give you the most solid fundamentals and make you a better rider in the long run. It'll also be the hardest and most painful. If you want an easier time of it but still have a board that will allow you to progress past an absolute beginner my vote goes to CRC.
 
#378 · (Edited)
I have 177cm, 73KG. My foot size is 26cm. I already have boots Rome Stomp Navy Boa Size 8 (40.5 EU). Curent bindigs are Raven S600. Current board size...hmm...on the invoice it says 155CM, if i measure it i get 153 but on the graphics, near the binding i have the number "56", so this could stand for 156cm...so i am not so sure about the size. But on the below link i don;t see size 155, so i don't think this model has a 155 version, like it says on the invoice.

snowdb.com/catalog/voelkl/2012/dash

Now i see it says wide on the link :\. How can it be wide? I only wear size 8, and the boot is at it's limits. Wide is for people with big foots.

Later edit: I measured the waist also and i got 248mm, so according to the site above it is a 153cm. But that "wide" specification i think is wrong.
 
#379 ·
Hi Mihai,

It is not at all unusual for a board's actual length to be different than the "name" length. Let's get a width measurement (edge to edge) at the inserts that you are using. Please also post some pics of your setup showing your bindings and with boots tightly laced and fully strapped in to the bindings.
 
#380 · (Edited)
here it is

I think, one mistake i've made is that i set a 0 stance. Being a directional board i should move the bidings a little bit more to the tail, correct?

Oh and by the way i am riding with my right foot in front (i am right handed also). Sometimes i ride switch, not because i want to but because the board rides me, instead i ride her... Also, i have a narrow feet and my heel raises a little bit. Do you have any trick i could try to keep the heel in place? I am using some ski/snowboards socks from Blizard, it helps but not entirely.

















 
#384 ·
I think, one mistake i've made is that i set a 0 stance. Being a directional board i should move the bidings a little bit more to the tail, correct?

Oh and by the way i am riding with my right foot in front (i am right handed also). Sometimes i ride switch, not because i want to but because the board rides me, instead i ride her... Also, i have a narrow feet and my heel raises a little bit. Do you have any trick i could try to keep the heel in place? I am using some ski/snowboards socks from Blizard, it helps but not entirely.
Hi, at this point I think lessons would benefit you much more than a new board. A 153 is about the right size for you in length, and the easy camber should be no big deal. Lessons are really important in the beginning, and then there's a period you can spend a while learning on your own, then a lesson every year or so can help get you over a hump.

That said, has anybody ever tested you to find which is your dominant front foot? There's a few tests for this, the push test, the slide on ice test, etc.

Boot fit is also much more important than camber profile. You mention having heel lift. Head on down to your local shop and try on as many pairs of boots as you can. Mid-week during the day would be best. They should fit snug, with minimal heel lift. There are many good resources on here for proper boot fitting.

I suggest trying these things before worrying about replacing the board.
 
#382 ·
Hi Mikai,

Please also take a photo of the base of the board showing the toe and heel overhang of the boot in the same photo. The width measurement that we need is from edge to edge, measured on the base of the board (not the deck) directly under where your bindings are mounted.
 
Top