Here is a note from Rob up in the hills...this is why we asked him to be on our team. Feedback gets us where we need to be...read on if you want to get inspired....
I just spent an hour or so sketching out ideas for the Jake. I am a HUGE fan of the S3 for touring - and even everyday resort riding too.
Reasons why they're great:
BIGGEST tip rocker around. Mine measure 40cm of tip rocker, and it curls up to the sky. I will send a measurement of how high the very end of the tip rises from the ground. This allows the ski to plane above the deep stuff breaking trail. It also helps to get speed on those 30 degree slopes that aren't quite steep enough to ski for real.
98mm waist. I like this for trailbreaking as well (also good for carving & bumps). The side-by-side spacing between the two skis matches a walking stance pretty well. I've skinned on S7s and felt a bit bow-legged because of the wider (115mm) waists. I do feel that 98mm is still shy of optimal float, so I'd love to see the Jake have a waist in the 102-106 range. Carving & bumps should take the backseat to float in a BC ski.
23m radius. Nice for fast GS turns on spring corn & hardpack. Fast enough turn initiation in the trees & bumps.
Flex. The S3 has a great powder flex. Total rocking-chair soft tail. 40 cm tip rocker, 30 cm tail rocker. There are some downsides to this in spring conditions & landing cliffs, but people should be playing it safe in the backcountry anyhow... right?
Things that could be improved:
Chatter. Unfortunately the huge tips flop around & can send vibrations down the skis. It is a hardpack problem, but it is something to consider for spring conditions. Early morning on Indy Pass this spring I had a ski chatter right off of my foot, forcing me to flop onto my other side & self arrest. The S3 is just wood & fiberglass, so perhaps a bit of carbon in the huge tip could help? Or would it direct even more vibrations down the ski?
Float. I think having 102-106mm in the waist would improve the S3 without taking away from a narrow stride. The tip & tail should probably be widened proportionally to preserve the radius. I realize how small 4-8mm looks on a ruler, but it would add ~75-150 sq. cm of surface area per 186 cm ski.
Soft tail? 30 cm of tail rocker. Great in the bottomless, but a little too squirrely in spring conditions & cliff landings. I think your carbon could help with that, but I'm not sure if it's worth losing that rocking-chair effect.
My Jake idea:
40 cm tip rocker
25 cm tail rocker
--> or does the rocker profile need to match the Kylie for pressing purposes?
--> thought: too much tip sidecut causes the tips to chip each other on the skin track
Softer flex profile than the Kylie, softer tail
--> these things are for hauling to boottomless pow fields, right? :)
I've experimented with calculating radiuses, but I cant get the math to work right. I need this book: http://www.amazon.com/
FYI, the Kylie's 186 running length dimension in the pop-up flash photo adds up to 184. Perhaps the tip rocker should read 32 cm? Just something I noticed.
I've got some cool ideas about flip-core too, I'll make a drawing soon.
I'll be in Denver Saturday too, if you plan on being in the shop I'd love to swing by. I'm off the slopes until Monday due to a hip injury.
Have a happy turkey day - and thanks for the spot in the Grace family!