To add a bit more information, I'm told the (tear-off) label #s (above
the binding) are actually close with this year's batch, but bench
testing got very different numbers on the carbonlites previously. It
also depends on who's doing the testing and with what equipment (I'll
know more about this soon with a pair of non-carbonlite RCS).
Concerning residual camber and forward lean, it's been pointed out to
me that as we age flexibility in the ankle decreases. So even if one
skis in a flexed forward position, a 50 or 60 year old skier (and
probably most all citizen skiers) will not be able to get the pressure
down on the front of the kick zone that a more flexible and stronger
elite or WC skier can. Important issue in fitting.

Gene


On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:44:40 -0700
wrote:

Jon wrote:

Thanks for the detailed response.
The carbonlites in question are classic's.

Warm or cold?

Just curious, what is "residual camber?

My understanding(!) is that it's open camber in front of the kick zone
when the ski is fully weighted, hence residual. Thought that seems
paradoxical, it's the way Fischer built the Carbonlites and I think
even some of the regular RCS classics, their 812 construction types (a
rep told me this year to look for a pair of colds in my flex range
with the longest pocket and most residual camber). In terms of
skiing, I think it fits best with someone who pushes off the ball of
the foot, vs. a more full or mid-foot push off, and perhaps means the
need for a stronger kick at any flex number (with a Fischer ski
fullly weighted - down to 0.1mm - the ski will still be slightly open
from the foot forward). This idea of 'left-over' camber is definitely
not traditional and initially some shops were sending them back.
I've heard that this year's batch of Carbonlites has less residual
camber.

Gene


On Jan 7, 2:15*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 05:40:55 -0800 (PST)

Jon wrote:
I've had a few people want to flex test some Fischer
Carbonlite's I'm selling, in spite of the fact that Fischer
gives a specific flex point.

Just curious if anyone has experience with the manufacturer's
numbers being off?

You didn't say classical or skate, but yes, I read a comment
somewhere to that effect the other day re Fischers and know from
my own experience that the tag numbers are often off a bit.
*That's part of why, for example, Zach Caldwell takes a flex
tester on his visits to ski factories and warehouses when picking
skis. *Another reason is that it's unusual for ski pairs to have
matching flexes, although the manufacturing technology has
improved over the years. The person measuring them also has to
know what they are doing re the brand of ski, since Carbonlite
classics (and skates?) have, or have had, residual camber by
design that other skis don't. *

If you're talking about classical skis, the other thing that's
very important (and another thing Zach measures) is the "finish,"
or closing flex, i.e., how much pressure it takes to go from a
one-leg full-footed ride to a firm push off from the ball of the
foot. Kris Freeman, for example, exerts a whole lot more force
downward than most of us do, and since he skis relatively
upright, he will likely exert more force down than another racer
with a more forward, classical Norwegian stance (Odd-Bjorn
Hjelmeset comes to mind). *This is why in general comparisons
between the needs of citizen skiers and what elite racers use, is
dicey at best. *And even more so as we age, with muscle power
available seeming to decrease, meaning the need for a relatively
or absolutely softer ski (this is something I've found very few
people selling skis understand, especially younger ones). The
closing flex can be gauged by feel on a board - full foot, paper
slides; ball of foot it doesn't - but more accurately it's
measured with a press and digital meter from the 0.2mm to 0.1mm
closure points, at 8cm behind the balance point (if I've got
those numbers right).

Gene