Rock n Roll Mount Point

[dan.boisvert]

I finally got to ski my new Rock n Rolls yesterday in 9-10" of chopped up powder on boilerplate, and didn't immediately love them as much as I thought I would. I think I liked the ski shape & construction, but I felt like I had too much tail and not enough tip all day. If I'm interpreting the hieroglyphics on the sidewall correctly, mine are mounted on the line. Unfortunately, due to details I no longer recall that are probably related to availability and impatience, I had these mounted with Peak 15's instead of Powerrails, so I couldn't easily play with the mount point. Anybody have suggestions on where to have these remounted to?

I've never been on a ski I felt had too much tail before, so that was odd for me. Would a centimeter or two's worth of movement be a noticeable difference? All my other skis are mounted wherever the shops put them, and they've all felt great. I'm planning to take the RnR's out again this weekend and find a soft groomer to confirm I don't like where they're mounted, but any advice would be appreciated. The conditions we had yesterday are some of my favorite kind on my iM78's, so I'm pretty sure there's something up with the tools here too, and it's not just the craftsman.

[jbotti]

I ski mine on the line and they ski great there for me. I have adjustable bindings and I have never even played with the mount point. As you sure they are mounted correctly?

[Max_501]

Dan, what length do you have?

I ski the 180 and its mounted on the mark.

[seskelson]

I also have the 180 with adjustable bindings mounted on the mark. No problems. Last year I had the 173 mounted on the mark-- no problems, it was just a bit short for me. Max asks a good question.

[dan.boisvert]

I have the 180, and no idea if they're mounted correctly. They look normal, but I don't really know what to look for there. Here's a photo of the midsole mark and the sidewall writing. I'm guessing the triangle with the arrow is the manufacturer's line, because I don't see a line on the topsheet itself at all. If I hold a straight edge along that line, the midsole mark is 5mm forward of where the straight edge hits the boot. I can't imagine 5mm would make that much of a difference, though. What do you guys think?

[theorist]

If I hold a straight edge along that line, the midsole mark is 5mm forward of where the straight edge hits the boot. I can't imagine 5mm would make that much of a difference, though. What do you guys think?]

Dan I believe that is the manufacturer's line, and it looks like the shop did not mount them with sufficient care. A couple of weeks ago I demoed the 180 with rental bindings that allowed me the choice of +3 mm or -5 mm. Those 8 millimeters translated into noticeable difference in how the ski felt, so I suspect the 5 mm could also affect you. Because of hole interference, they may not be able to move the binding back by only 5 mm to correct this -- they might need to move it more (anyone know what the minimum is?). But in any case, you don't want your skis drilled twice because of a shop error -- I think they owe you a new pair of skis; alternately, you could ask them to swap out (at their cost) your current bindings for some moveable ones.

How you balance on your skis also enters into this -- if, say, 1 cm back is optimal for you, then 5 mm forward is definitely not going to feel right. In addition, if the Peak bindings have a significantly greater delta than the Power Rails (heel height - toe height), that will also contribute to a feeling of being too far over the front of the ski. Anytime I'm planning to mount fixed bindings on a pair of skis, I always try to first get on a demo pair with moveable bindings (ideally with close to the same delta), to find what works best for me.

BTW, to check the mount position more precisely, I'd recommend laying one leg of a right angle tool (e.g., http://www.abtoolsonline.com/coppermine ... ark500.jpg) along the ski's bottom edge, and lining up the other leg with your boot's arrow. Then measure from that latter leg to the manufacturer's mark. Also be sure to use the arrow on your boot with an "A" next to it, as in your picture. The one on the other side could be positioned a bit back (for women, I think), which would give a more forward mounting position.

[Max_501]

Heads mark is typically a bit further back than it needs to be so this probably isn't an issue. I'll check mine this weekend.

[theorist]

Heads mark is typically a bit further back than it needs to be so this probably isn't an issue. I'll check mine this weekend.

Be interested to hear where you put yourself on the RnRs vs the Supershape or TT80. I understand that Head has a somewhat rearward mount point for the Supershape and TT80, but wasn't sure about the RnR.

[dan.boisvert]

Well, this got more interesting.

I got them out in firmer conditions Sunday, and felt like I had to be uncomfortably far forward before the tips started doing anything for me. We had a lot of sand on boilerplate to play with, and I was able to carve turns if I was really deliberate with my initiations and waay forward, but otherwise they were beating me up something fierce and chattering like crazy. I know, a ski like this isn't designed to hold on eastern ice, and isn't torsionally stiff enough for that, but they were the conditions I had to work with. They were more fun in some of the softer bumps I found, but I still felt like the tips weren't there for me the way I wanted, and that I'd feel like I was going over the handlebars in softer snow if I got far enough forward for them to start working.

My iM78's were in for a grind, so I took the RnR's with me when I went to pick them up last night, and asked the guys about shimming the toepieces to reduce the binding ramp. They measured the PRD12's on my iM78's and the Peak 15's on my RnR's, and came up with a 4mm delta for each, so ruled that out as the culprit. They looked at the mount points, thought the RnR's were close enough to the mark, but that my iM78's might be mounted 2cm back from manufacturer's mark--they couldn't quite tell, because the mark had worn off the sidewall. Anybody have a pair of 177cm iM78's they can measure from the tail to the mark for me?

They also suggested that it might just be the skis, and it might be the mild tip rocker I'm feeling and not liking. I think my current plan is to take them to another shop that's further away, but has a tech who's very well known and will probably be able to help me sort this out better. I'm not ready to give up on the skis yet, though I'm starting to wonder if something in the Rev series might feel more like a wider iM78. Any other thoughts?

[HighAngles]

Mount so that your boot shell midsole mark is lined up over the narrowest point of the ski sidecut. You can tune the mount +/- 10mm from there based on your skiing preferences. If that's not working for you then I would have to assume that you just don't like the skis.

Honestly, I would be hesitant to take any advice on mount points from a ski tech. I have more experience with this variable than any tech I've ever talked to.

[Max_501]

I know, a ski like this isn't designed to hold on eastern ice, and isn't torsionally stiff enough for that, but they were the conditions I had to work with. They were more fun in some of the softer bumps I found, but I still felt like the tips weren't there for me the way I wanted, and that I'd feel like I was going over the handlebars in softer snow if I got far enough forward for them to start working.?

They are stiff enough for holding an edge on ice. Either you've got a very bad tune, your movements are off, or something is funky with your boot set up. Get some video while skiing the RnR and we'll be able to rule out movements.

I don't think this is a mount point problem. BTW, your mount point is similar to mine.

[dan.boisvert]

Thanks, guys. I'll order some calipers and start looking at the mount points relative to sidecut on my skis. I've always been happy to ignore this stuff, and so far it had worked out great! Damn.

Your mention of a possible tune problem got me more useful information tonight, Max. I figured I'd be skiing these in soft enough snow that it wouldn't matter much, so I just threw on a 3 degree side edge and some wax, and went out to ski. Looking at the bases with a true bar tonight, they're a little convex, which might have something to do with what I'm feeling, too. I'll get that squared away to eliminate it as a variable, and see if it makes a difference. Video is also being added to the list. Thanks!

[Max_501]

Thanks, guys. I'll order some calipers and start looking at the mount points relative to sidecut on my skis. I've always been happy to ignore this stuff, and so far it had worked out great! Damn.

IMO that is a waste of time on the RnR because the standard mount point works great.

Looking at the bases with a true bar tonight, they're a little convex, which might have something to do with what I'm feeling, too. I'll get that squared away to eliminate it as a variable, and see if it makes a difference.

Now that can make a huge difference.

Harald skiing the RnR on a steep pitch.

[Jjmdane]

I picked up a pair of 187's and skied them at Cannon a few weeks ago during a demo day with varied conditions,ranging from hard pack to harder pack to scrapped off. I have PRDs mounted on the line and a tune of .7 and 4 and they held just about as well as anything I skied that day. Obviously they are not a race ski but they were fun and adequate on any of the conditions that I encountered that day. The guy that tunes my skis does a great job and he told me that Heads out of the box can be all over the map so I think if you have your skis tuned by somebody who knows what they're doing it could make a huge difference.
Prior to these skis I have not been a big fan of rocker but I really enjoy the Rock n Rolls. They seem to respond very well to early tipping movements. If this coming nor'easter hits as expected,I plan to take them up on Friday and ski some softer snow and cut up.

[Max_501]

Prior to these skis I have not been a big fan of rocker but I really enjoy the Rock n Rolls.

The RnR has what we jokingly refer to as "Marketing Rocker".