Marwe 610; First 150kms
 

I have had my Marwe 610 rollerskis for ~3weeks and I have skied about 150kms on them. I have found these freestyle rollerskis simulate the real thing better than other freestyle rollerskis I have used.

Specs
- Freestyle Technique
- Honecomb Chassis
- Weight ~ 1.75kg/pair
- Clearance ~3.5cm
- Wheels 105x25mm
- Rolling Resistance = Medium

Price - $325
- $40/replacement wheel

Most of the rollerskiing I do is in the footshills west of Denver where (surprisingly) you will see more bicycles than cars, making for some ideal spots to ski. The terrain is mostly hills and the road surface ranges from smooth to rough.

Marwe rollerskis are imported from Finland by Finn Sisu out of Minnesota. I ordered my skis predrilled and I mounted the bindings. Mounting was straight forward. I found that threading the holes with the binding screws first(before mounting bindings) made the process much easier and insured the screws would go in straight when mounting the bindings.

The first thing that caught my attention when I tried the skis was the snow-like feel they have. When the ski is compressed the honeycomb shaft flexes somewhat like a snow ski. This also dampens much of the road vibration that a aluminum ski will not.

The wheels are 105x25mm. They roll over most road debris I encounter. After 150 km the wear on the wheels (or lack thereof) is good. The front and back wheels wear fairly evenly. I think this is due to where Finn Sisu places the binding - Which is more forward than what Marwe recommends. My old skis have the bindings mounted closer to the rear wheel, and I did not get even wheel wear. Marwe wheels come in four different rolling resistances (I think Finn Sisu only offers medium): very low, low, medium, great. The medium friction wheels produce a snow-like speed on all terrain.

The rollerskis seem fairly durable. My one concern is the bottom of the ski does make contact with the pavement when edging off the ski on occasion. The ski does have a protective plastic runner on the bottom, but as the tires wear and the ski clearance is lowered the ski is more likely to scrape the pavment and damage the shaft.

Marwe rollerskis come with plastic mudguards which can be removed if so desired. I have not used them in the rain yet so I cannot comment on their effectiveness in keeping wheel spray at a minimum. The mudguards are effective by keeping the skis free of dirt/grit which can damage the binding if it gets trapped under the boot.

There is one setback - No speed reducer/brake. Speed control has been somewhat of a problem. Hills are manageable. Anything less than a 5% grade can be controlled with a wide snow-plow. A steep hill takes a while to negotiate.

Strengths:
- snow-like feel
- relatively light weight
- tire wear
- rides over debris
- vibration damping
- mudguards
Weaknesses:
- speed reducers/brake (lack of)
- cost? (probably offset by long term cost w/ wheel durabilty)

Overall:

- Highly recommend as an effective training device to
simulate nordic freestyle skiing. 4.5/5 stars

Pics: click below "Attach Files" (low quality)

Jim -- Just curious: Are you satisfied with the length of your poles?
For reference, a guide I like is he
http://www.sierranordic.com/PoleSale.html.

Gene

Jim Howe wrote:

Pics: click below "Attach Files" (low quality)

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Filename: rs05d.JPG |
|Download: http://www.skibanter.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

--
Jim Howe

"hey, Fat Tony, what's in it for me?"

Do people care about the recommended max 85kg limit on rollerski that
are not aluminum?
like honeycomb and wooden cores.
are there any above 90kg using non-aluminum rollerskies, and it works
well?

I weighed about 97 kg. and used the Marwe 510 with honeycomb shafts with no
problems.
I used them for a couple years but didn't scrape the shafts.
Gene now has my old and I suppose that if he developed a problem due to the
use I gave them we'd know about it.

Gary Jacobson
Rosendale, NY


wrote in message
oups.com...
"hey, Fat Tony, what's in it for me?"

Do people care about the recommended max 85kg limit on rollerski that
are not aluminum?
like honeycomb and wooden cores.
are there any above 90kg using non-aluminum rollerskies, and it works
well?

vagle,

Initially I was concerned about my weight (83-87kg) exceeding the capacity of the Marwes. I contacted Finn Sisu and they assured me that my weight would not be a problem. They stated that they have many skiers around the country in the 185-200lb range skiing on the 610s.



Gene,

My height is 74.67 inches. My pole length is 170cm for both snow and rollerskiing. While standing with my boots on the pole comes up half way between my chin and lower lip.

I used to live in Sacramento and skied at Royal Gorge. I was actually sized with a 167.5cm pole by Noel at Sierra Nordic. I swithced to 170cm because I felt more comfortable getting more leverage with the longer pole.

My classic poles are 160cm and come up to the shoulder joint as Noel recommends. The recommendation for the skate pole is 107% of the classic length.

Noel's formula -

SKATE: 2.26X74.67 = 168.75cm (I use 170cm)

CLASSIC: 2.12x74.67 158.3CM (I use 160cm)

158.3x1.07 = 169.4cm

I think the length's I use are consistent with what Swix charts recommend. Although I noticed last year the length recommendations had increased from the previous year.

I'm wondering what your impression is based on the rollerskiing picture - Too long or too short? I don't notice a significant difference in feel when I go from the snow to dryland skiing.

Jim

Here's a better picture?

http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/42b848f8...pHGuCBQjt3S05S

So that's where they came from. I'd completely forgotten. But I'm not
that heavy. 84kg is my max in Minnesota and I've returned from there.

GG


Gary Jacobson wrote:

I weighed about 97 kg. and used the Marwe 510 with honeycomb shafts with no
problems.
I used them for a couple years but didn't scrape the shafts.
Gene now has my old and I suppose that if he developed a problem due to the
use I gave them we'd know about it.

Gary Jacobson
Rosendale, NY

wrote in message
oups.com...
"hey, Fat Tony, what's in it for me?"

Do people care about the recommended max 85kg limit on rollerski that
are not aluminum?
like honeycomb and wooden cores.
are there any above 90kg using non-aluminum rollerskies, and it works
well?

Doesn't work for me. Redirects to he
http://bcvrf.yahoo.com/bc/42b848f8_1...tures/rs05.jpg

Jim Howe wrote:

Here's a better picture?

http://tinyurl.com/dk4ql

--
Jim Howe

Jim,

You stated you like the Marwe's better than other rollerskis you have
tried. Could I ask you which other brands you have skated on? Does
the flex of the ski influence the ski's ability to roll over rough road
surfaces? In that respect would you say the body flex acts like the
pneumatic tires on Jenex V2's? Thanks, still trying to gather as much
info as I can for my own purchase of rollerskis.

nordvind,

I've rollerskied on V2 Aero 125s, V2 940 Combis, Elpex F1,homemade rollerskis. All have aluminum shafts and the main differences were between the wheels - Size, speed, pneumatic or hard/soft rubber, etc.

A large percentage of my rollerskiing was done on the homemade pair and the Elpex. The other skis were demoed from a local outdoor/ski shop or borrowed from friends.

I used scooter wheels on my homemade pair and these were quite fast compared to any other ski. The durabilty was quite poor, although the scooter wheels are relatively cheap. The Elpex wheels durabilty was quite a disappointment - I think I got 200km total. This was not acceptable at $75/pair. I do have two friends who ski on the Elpex and are happy with them. They also have gotten more kms from the wheels, which may be attributed to my weight of 87 kilos. The Elpex simulated snow speed better than the homemade, but equivalent to the V2s and Marwe.

The 940 combis were pure crap to skate on vs the others, so I would recommend you don't waste your time. Specialize your ski for each discipline, though I have heard the Marwe combis are excellent because you can convert specifically to skateing by removing the classic extensions, making it a pure skating rollerski.

The aero V2 125s were nice....the large wheels dampen vibration and roll over most anything within reason. The speed reducers work very well. I was not happy with the weight and the durabilty of the pneumatic tires. Also, my weight does exceed the recommended weight limit of the ski. With my weight and the speed reducers I could not see the tires lasting very long. The wheel also has a checkered past even when used by skiers within the weight range. I have a friend who with a pair who is on the upper end of the range and he has blown out a few tires. Jenex tells him he is too heavy or is skiing "wrong". I did not consider the V2 150s because of the weight.

The Marwe and the V2 125s both dampen vibration better than the other skis. The Marwes, in my opinion, feel more like snow skiing than the 125s. I'm not smart enough to explain why...probably has something to do with what part of the ski is absorbing the energy from the road.

I have not noticed that the flex has any negative influence on the skis abilty to roll over rough roads. The Marwes roll as well as any of the skis. They were the most comfortable and the most quite. The ski is stiff enough but it also has flex - like a snow ski.

There is a trade-off when deciding which rollerskis. You have the snow-like feel and the excellent wheel durabilty of the Marwes vs. the safety features of the V2s. If you train on hills and are not comfortable with not having speed reduction, then I would go with the V2s. If hills are not a problem - I would recommend the Marwes.....

I hope this helps. The best thing is to demo from a shop or friends, then you can make the best choice for yourself.

Jim