If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Too many glide waxes?
I've wondered if some of us (such as myself) aren't carrying more glide
waxes than we need. Especially living in the midwest, do the "less-than-elite" need more than 5 or 6 glide waxes? For example, how would this collection perform? 1. At the coldest temps waxing is usually pretty straightforward, with standbys like a CH4 or a Start Green, etc. 2, Taking one step up in temperature, Rex Blue has a very wide temp range for training and is also good for racing when the humidity is low. 3. At a warmer temp and higher humidity, low Fluoros such as Swix LF7 or LF8 seem to have pretty good range, and Fast Wax Tan has lots of fans. 4. Most of us want a saturation/storage wax, and a warm wax like CH10 or Rex Violet works well and can also be used for training in warmer temps. 5 - 6. That leaves another one or two additional waxes to cover circumstances such as higher than usual humidities. Would one or two high content or pure fluoros do the job? What would you choose? I'm curious to know what other skiers think about a "minimalist" wax box, especially when I look at the waxes I've accumulated over the years but rarely used. A second reason for this post is that while the best skiers sometimes let us know how well they've raced on skis with three to four layers of (sometimes) exotic wax combinations, some of us (well, me, actually) who try to get fancy don't always get much bang for the buck. And when that happens we may not be eager to write in and tell folks that we blew three hours of waxing/scraping/brushing and $40.00 worth of waxes just to have slower skis than our buddy who had, say, two coats of Rex Green. If these "failures" aren't reported, but the success stories are, it could create the impression that to have a good race you must have a lot of waxes and a sophisticated grasp of when to use them. But for those of us without that level of skill are we better off just sticking to a few waxes that work well over a wide range? Finally, if we save money on wax, maybe we can add, or stonegrind, a pair of skis for a specific conditon, giving us a performance boost that way. All comments appreciated! Russ |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
one hint that the choice of glidewax is not so important was one
Vasaloppet elite guy I spoke to. He uses CF8 every time on Vasa. No matter what temp or condition there is. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the interesting reply. I had assumed the Vasaloppet was
usually skied in warm and humid conditions and that elite skiers would use some type of fluoro. One of our better skiers here in Minnesota almost always uses Rex Blue in our Vasaloppet and Koroloppet, sometimes with a fluoro overlayer. I haven't skied much on CH8 but I have found that LF8 works well and in a wider temperature range than the package suggests. Russ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Laurent,
I was hoping someone would mention the use of Toko, which I don't use. Toko's idea of mixing waxes means we can buy fewer waxes; on the other hand, we can also complicate our lives trying to figure out how much of each wax to mix. I'm also interested to hear that you're using Cerax, whose popularity has dimmed here. Are you skiing in a predominantly dry or a humid climate? When you mention "manual grinders" are you talking about what we call a "riller" for adding structure to the base? OmniPrep: I've used it but I haven't seen a benefit over fine (white) Fibertex, although I'm told there is one. I didn't mention in my original post that one of the reasons for asking the question about a reduced wax kit is my observation that skiers of similar ability may do equally with very different waxes, e.g., when one waxes with a cold temp pure paraffin/plastic, e.g., for 15 degrees F and below, while the other is using a high fluoro rated for 12 to 28 degrees F. In a long race I can imagine that one skier might do well at the start when the temperature is cold, while the other does better as the day warms up. In any case, if conditions vary that much, should I spend too much time worrying about getting the wax just right? I think the answer (for me) is "no." Thanks for the reply. Russ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Russ,
I was not talking about mixing wax intentionnaly, I was just indicating that applying different "layers" is a sort of nonsense with gliding waxes. Everything mixes, obvioulsy. Waxing/scraping/brushing many times may have an impact to the base but not to the resulting final waxing for a particular day. Yes, I was talking about using "rillers". The Swix and the Toko ones as mentionned. Ski conditions in France varies a lot, but never really dry exept in some places like Bessans. Talking about Nanowax (Cerax). I did several marathon races in pair with my brother He's very carefuly waxing his skis the "traditionnal" way : one base "layer", one HF "layer" and then one pure fluoro powder "layer". He's not tempering with the factory stonegrind. I'm waxing the "nanowax" way : One base prep (Briko "CH" type), rilling, final Nanowax Cerax coating. So, we are skiing together, at race pace, during 42 kms. (Okay he's waiting a bit for me during uphills. He's ranked 121 at the 2006 Transjurassienne Worldloppet , which is a fairly good result. I'm 247 and quite prood of it). Any major glide difference ? No. Minor difference ? slight better glide for me on wet conditions. Of course, our skis are different and fitted for each other. He's taller and more athletic. He's on Rossignol (stiff and medium), I'm on Vandel (soft and medium). So, my advice is to have two pairs of well-fitted skis and then "cheap" waxes. (Nanowax maye be considered as cheap in its category as a 40 Euros bottle does for 15 to 18 times.) I like "wet" bases as they are soft and accept manual structures easily. The structure disappearing after a couple of hot-waxing. On a correct base, waxes durability his high (powder or Nanowax) and lasts more than 42 kms. Laurent a écrit : Laurent, I was hoping someone would mention the use of Toko, which I don't use. Toko's idea of mixing waxes means we can buy fewer waxes; on the other hand, we can also complicate our lives trying to figure out how much of each wax to mix. I'm also interested to hear that you're using Cerax, whose popularity has dimmed here. Are you skiing in a predominantly dry or a humid climate? When you mention "manual grinders" are you talking about what we call a "riller" for adding structure to the base? OmniPrep: I've used it but I haven't seen a benefit over fine (white) Fibertex, although I'm told there is one. I didn't mention in my original post that one of the reasons for asking the question about a reduced wax kit is my observation that skiers of similar ability may do equally with very different waxes, e.g., when one waxes with a cold temp pure paraffin/plastic, e.g., for 15 degrees F and below, while the other is using a high fluoro rated for 12 to 28 degrees F. In a long race I can imagine that one skier might do well at the start when the temperature is cold, while the other does better as the day warms up. In any case, if conditions vary that much, should I spend too much time worrying about getting the wax just right? I think the answer (for me) is "no." Thanks for the reply. Russ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
There are several situations in which it is useful to have a selection of
competitive brands for each temperature and snow condition you might encounter. The first situation is if you have a speed trap and several sets of calibrated skis. You can actually measure the difference for the different waxes and base treatments that might be best for the current conditions and pick the best combination. Usually this involves the use of ski technicians and a test skier who will test at race time the day before the race and again on race day if conditions change. Another situation is if you have access to reports from a team who is doing wax testing and want to try to match their selection as closely as possible. Other than that, you are probably best to restrict yourself to a few favourites for the conditions you usually encounter and something for extreme cold and extreme wet if you don't usually ski in those conditions. Scott wrote in message oups.com... I've wondered if some of us (such as myself) aren't carrying more glide waxes than we need. Especially living in the midwest, do the "less-than-elite" need more than 5 or 6 glide waxes? For example, how would this collection perform? 1. At the coldest temps waxing is usually pretty straightforward, with standbys like a CH4 or a Start Green, etc. 2, Taking one step up in temperature, Rex Blue has a very wide temp range for training and is also good for racing when the humidity is low. 3. At a warmer temp and higher humidity, low Fluoros such as Swix LF7 or LF8 seem to have pretty good range, and Fast Wax Tan has lots of fans. 4. Most of us want a saturation/storage wax, and a warm wax like CH10 or Rex Violet works well and can also be used for training in warmer temps. 5 - 6. That leaves another one or two additional waxes to cover circumstances such as higher than usual humidities. Would one or two high content or pure fluoros do the job? What would you choose? I'm curious to know what other skiers think about a "minimalist" wax box, especially when I look at the waxes I've accumulated over the years but rarely used. A second reason for this post is that while the best skiers sometimes let us know how well they've raced on skis with three to four layers of (sometimes) exotic wax combinations, some of us (well, me, actually) who try to get fancy don't always get much bang for the buck. And when that happens we may not be eager to write in and tell folks that we blew three hours of waxing/scraping/brushing and $40.00 worth of waxes just to have slower skis than our buddy who had, say, two coats of Rex Green. If these "failures" aren't reported, but the success stories are, it could create the impression that to have a good race you must have a lot of waxes and a sophisticated grasp of when to use them. But for those of us without that level of skill are we better off just sticking to a few waxes that work well over a wide range? Finally, if we save money on wax, maybe we can add, or stonegrind, a pair of skis for a specific conditon, giving us a performance boost that way. All comments appreciated! Russ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Scott,
As you say, if you have access to traps, well-matched skis, technicians, etc., then waxing can be a whole different world. But, as you conclude, if you don't have those resources, sticking to a small set of waxes that you know how to use is probably the way to go. I think my (beginner's) error was to be impressed by what I saw at World Cup races, and what I heard from elite skiers with decades of experience, and to think that a big wax box was a way that I could "buy" speed. Any comments you care to make on what you have found to be a good, basic, wax kit would be appreciated. Thanks, Russ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I've had very good luck with the Swix wax wizard. Check the weather forecast
and wax a day or two before traveling to the event. In cold, low humidity races I almost exclusively use the CH hydrocarbon waxes, so a wax job only costs $3-5. Purchasing 900 gram bulk packs also saves cash. Some might see the Swix line as confusing, due to the sheer number of waxes. But the individual waxes are optimized for the condition designed for. There is overlap and the waxes will run farther than specified. http://www.swixsport.com/waxwizard.asp Paul Haltvick Bay Design and Build - LLC Engineering, Construction and Information Technology Services FSx - Fischer / Swix Racing |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Rex blue was a good wax, but I won't consider it for racing now unless
the conditions are very dry. There's too many other waxes that are faster. LF6 is certainly better. My experience is with Swix, and my normal race waxes a LF4 LF5 (mix of 4 and 6) LF6 or LF6 with Cera FC1 (depends on humidity) HF7 or BD7 with Cera 7 or 8 (or a mix of 7/8) HF8 with Cera 8 The only reason I use the CH waxes is to prep the skis for other waxes. I normally train on LF waxes and I purchase both the CH and LF waxes in bulk (180 gram x 5) quantities (1 ea of 4, 6, 7, and 2 of 8). It's a great way to go. I have also been training on other waxes (including HF waxes) that I've purchased through the years but didn't particularly get into using, e.g. Toko, Solda, Rex, Start, Holmenkoln. If you're not into racing, a wax box with LF4, LF6 and LF8 would be very good for only having three waxes. Jay Wenner |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
skate skiing technique question | wintermutt | Nordic Skiing | 8 | February 8th 05 04:24 PM |
fluor kick waxes? | Mitch Collinsworth | Nordic Skiing | 7 | February 5th 05 08:42 PM |
A V2 timing question | Chris Crawford | Nordic Skiing | 16 | December 15th 04 02:03 PM |
Do all polymer glide waxes need to be removed with cleaners i.e Cerax and Start Golden Line? | Douglas Diehl | Nordic Skiing | 4 | March 29th 04 03:57 PM |
glide: skating vs. traditional??? | Ken Roberts | Nordic Skiing | 4 | August 22nd 03 11:57 PM |