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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
directions on how to make a hotbox for 25 dollars.
also keeps pizzas warm. http://www.tognar.com/waxing_tips_ski_snowboard.html |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Of course there is a small layer of wax on top of the Ptex.
And to maximize the structure benefit, nothing better than a layer of liquide wax, such as Nanowax Cerax. I've been using it for years and I'm not afraid to say that it povides either same or better glide than pure fluoro powder. www.nanowax.com Laurent |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
You might also be interested in the new claims that steelscraped skis
without glides roughly as fast (except for the first few kms or so) as 'well-waxed' skis, discussed in other threads here (such as http://groups.google.com/group/rec.s...read/974c94e1= ce9b0271/1caeae1f19655e4b?q=3DKuzmin&rnum=3D2#1caeae1f19655 e4b )=2E From what I've read about it so far, the general conclusion seems to be that the reasoning and explanations in the thesis ( available at http://epubl.ltu.se/1402-1757/2006/0...IC-0603-SE.pdf ) are far from flawless from a scientific point of view, but seems to work in practice at least in te sense that as long as you don't ski in the world cup, olympics etc, one steel scraping can get you some 10000 km with roughly the same glide as your best waxing friends. I don't know if Kuzmin's own stteel scraper (or whatever you call it in English) is better that what you can find in a local store, but for those interested, it can be ordered from the e-mail address given at http://www.kuzmin.se/index.php?action=3Dbestall and detailed instructions (only in Swedish so far, though) on how to do the scraping is given at http://www.kuzmin.se/index.php?action=3Dhur . (I haven't tried myself yet, due to work in a snowless country abroad, but have ordered a steel scraper for trying out next winter and judging from others who tested this winter (for example in Vasalopet and =F6ppet sp=E5r) it seems to be a very simple way to get very good glide that lasts for very long with very little work or expenses (once you have bought the steel scraper and perhaps a roto brush). / Niklas wintermutt wrote: hi. i have never waxed skis before except with the liquid stuff. i skate ski have rs 11's. i have always had sierra nordic wax my skis once a year. usually ski royal gorge california some questions for the group. "how to wax". 1. you get the wax on. OK. 2. why do you scrape it off? 3. do you take the wax you scraped off and re-use it or toss it? 4. why do you put more layers on? since you just keep scraping it off? 5. can you damage the bottoms of the skis scrpaing them? 6. after you scrape you brush? why do you brush ? why not just polish them? 7. then you polish the skis. OK i got that one figured out also. =20 TIA. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
lolix wrote: Of course there is a small layer of wax on top of the Ptex. And to maximize the structure benefit, nothing better than a layer of liquide wax, such as Nanowax Cerax. I've been using it for years and I'm not afraid to say that it povides either same or better glide than pure fluoro powder. www.nanowax.com Laurent I don't think that Cerax or similar products maximize benefit of structure any more than properly applied and brushed waxes or powders. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Camilo a écrit :
lolix wrote: Of course there is a small layer of wax on top of the Ptex. And to maximize the structure benefit, nothing better than a layer of liquide wax, such as Nanowax Cerax. I've been using it for years and I'm not afraid to say that it povides either same or better glide than pure fluoro powder. www.nanowax.com Laurent I don't think that Cerax or similar products maximize benefit of structure any more than properly applied and brushed waxes or powders. I do think so. And it's so much easier. I've made sevral marathon races donce in pairs, together with my brother (ranked 121 at this year Transjurassiennne worldLoppet). He put fluoro powder, I put Nanowax. I've always had same glide or better than him. Of course, proper wax grounding, base prep, is still necessary. Laurent. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
You might want to read Ian Harvey's extended discussion of Kuzmin at
http://www.skinnyski.com/gear/display.asp?Id=3D4430 Thanks! Without having had time to read Kuzmin's thesis myself, what I've heard from those who have is exactly that there are some (or several?) flaws in the explanations from a scientific point of view and that more tests in more different conditions need to be done to give statistically sound conclusions about what glides best in different weather conditions. I don't think that anyone yet has done such large-scale tests (except perhaps the different national team waxing teams, who won't tell us about their results, because for them it's trade secrets), so I guess it's upfor those who are interested to do enough tesths to concince themself or others. I have no personal interest in which method that becomes the dominating one in the future, so my post here was mainly for sharing with others what I found interesting. Personally I have double interests in this field: 1) The skier in me just want to have the best possible glide with the minimum amount of work, without caring whether anyone really knows for sure and can explain why method A gives better glide than method B. From what I've heard from others who tested and from the Vasaloppet- and =D6ppet sp=E5r-results of a friend of mine, I feel convinced that Kuzmin's method doesn't give bad glide and I will therefore try it out myself next winter in traning and in less important races, and if that convices me that Kuzmin is right in claiming that skis prepared in 'his way' glide fast, then I'll try it in Vasaloppet also. 2) The scientist in me woul also like to have deeper and scientifically sound understanding of why which method is better than the other in certain weather and conditions. There is much left to be done there, I think. I have still not seen any convincing scientific or statistical evidence that one of the two glide surface preparations is clearly better than the other, so in the choice of waiting for others to find out or trying myself, I found the results so far good enough for deciding to try myself. And to give a tip about it to others, which I have done now. / Niklas |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
the scientist in me is wondering why we don't have ski-snow interfaces
like my non-stick cooking pans. why not a teflon bottom or whatever they are putting on the cookware nowadays. it must be durable considering the soap and heat and rubbing cookware is exposed to. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On 9 Apr 2006 16:54:09 -0700, "wintermutt" wrote:
the scientist in me is wondering why we don't have ski-snow interfaces like my non-stick cooking pans. why not a teflon bottom or whatever they are putting on the cookware nowadays. Because snow is variable, and the best glide comes from matching the hardness of the ski with the hardness of the snow. JFT **************************** Remove "remove" to reply Visit http://www.jt10000.com **************************** |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Funnest thing about XC: waxing! | [email protected] | Nordic Skiing | 4 | March 12th 06 06:23 PM |
More CSM questions | Onno61 | Nordic Skiing | 3 | February 4th 05 12:51 AM |
First home board WAXing. Did I do anything wrong here? ... | toddjb | Snowboarding | 20 | February 6th 04 04:23 AM |
Wax shelf-life and other tuning questions | msegal | Snowboarding | 3 | January 30th 04 06:35 AM |
Questions about waxing | SebB | Nordic Skiing | 10 | December 8th 03 05:47 PM |