View Single Post
  #3  
Old March 15th 04, 11:29 AM
MB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Icing on waxless skis

Me
In such conditions
grip (not only backwards, btw) tends to be much more important
than glide, but...


Hal Murray
I can't figure out what you are trying to say.


My point is that proper waxing makes handling more difficult in
certain conditios (steep small-scale rough terrain, off-trail),
and actually lowers the average speed.

If the skis are sticky enough so that they help you not go
forward when you are in steep forested terrain,


The differences here are subtle. An unwaxed non-porous base ski
will still glide pretty well forward, but it is easier to handle
especially in difficult climbs (up or down) than a properly
waxed. It's my experience with myself and others on the skis.

they will suck when you come to an opening and don't want them
to stick.


Of course, in easy terrain, maximal forward glide is desireable.
It's a compromize. The easier the conditons become, the more the
optimal ski will resemble a XC racing ski - small, light, carefully
waxed and matched, and, btw, definitively without fishscale bottoms!

While glide is important, minor differences in glide are
very secondary in difficult or heavy skiing conditions. In
soft snow, flotation and tip-flex are what really matters. The
backcountry (forest) skis I'm discussing are typically 210 to
280cm tall and 7cm wide skis. They also have, typically,
insufficient camber stifness for the weight of the skier by XC
standards: Ie the kick base often 'drags' a bit, which kind of
makes smaller differences in the glide waxing irrelevant.

For bc skis, a careful stifness/weight match would be rather
useless too, as the skier weight will vary upto 60lbs or more
depending on the pack worn. Too stiff is a no-no though, it
kills mobility.
Ads