I measured the UC's.? 6.5" of tip in front of the snow contact point.? 5.5" of tail behind the rear contact point.
And I agree.? The first 3" of the UC looked very much like the Howitzer and Watea, a gradual rise (but it keeps on curling another 3").? Same comment for the tail.
But like you said, I also don't know enough about why skis? are a certain way.? Seems to me they could cut the really turned up 3" off the tip and the same with the tail and have a ski 5" shorter with the same skiing characteristics??? But I don't know if that is really true, or whether the extremes of the tip rise actually have some positive function?? It is the case that most twin tips look just like this, and maybe it is ONLY style and not function.
But I imagine that I (not a jib/park skier) would not be able to tell the difference if the UC178 was tip/tail bobbed to be a UC 174 (retaining all of the rest of the ski as is).
And we have seen slalom and other skis (Atomic B5) get very short and still have excellent stability, so don't agree with the freakishly short part.
And much of the attraction of the UC is that it has the sidecut on a shorter running length.? If you just look at tip/waist/tail numbers for similar length UC and Watea the Watea actually has more sidecut.? But because of the twin tips (and therefore the running length and where the wide parts of the ski actually are) you get a desirably short turn radius and (evidently from the reviews) at no loss of stability.? And I imagine that there will be times and places where that fact that it skis like a shorter ski with less tip/tail might be an asset.
From the pictures, I was surprised at how much the tip of the Watea looks like the Howitzer, what you described as a more gradual rise.? I agree that a ski with "gradual rise" like the The Howitzer looks to me like a more functional tip shape even without the rocker.
Home
Login
Register