A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Nordic Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Coating vs Waxing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 17th 12, 11:46 AM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
lolix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Coating vs Waxing

See FluoroPolymeric Coating By Leonid Kuzmin
http://kuzmin.se/pgs/fp_drum_en.html



Ads
  #2  
Old January 18th 12, 04:40 AM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
gr[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 52
Default Coating vs Waxing

On 1/17/2012 6:46 AM, lolix wrote:
See FluoroPolymeric Coating By Leonid Kuzmin
http://kuzmin.se/pgs/fp_drum_en.html



Sounds a little like NotWax a liquid teflon wipe.
  #3  
Old January 20th 12, 12:46 AM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
Jay W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Coating vs Waxing

On Jan 17, 10:40*pm, gr wrote:
On 1/17/2012 6:46 AM, lolix wrote: See FluoroPolymeric Coating By Leonid Kuzmin
http://kuzmin.se/pgs/fp_drum_en.html


Sounds a little like NotWax a liquid teflon wipe.


I'm hoping someone with reputation actually tries this. He's using an
angle grinder at 5000 rpm, which I'm sure generates quite a bit of
heat. So this seems like rotocorking or superrotocorking. Also, I'm
confused why he would do some light metal scraping (spactula?) after
the fluoro. Finally, I think Kuzmin is missing the idea that wax
wearing off the ski will make the ski faster. Downhillers slobber on
the Cera expecting it to last only a few seconds. They don't do that
because they enjoy blowing money.I started corking in Cera over the
top of an ironed in applicaiton, and I believe that's faster since the
skis slow 15-20 km later.

Jay
  #4  
Old January 22nd 12, 10:58 PM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
lolix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Coating vs Waxing

. Finally, I think Kuzmin is missing the idea that wax
wearing off the ski will make the ski faster.


I thanks Kuzmin for having brought to the attention of everyone a fact
that was well documented by the P-Tex manufacturer from the
beginning :
Wax absorbtion is near null.

Indeed, the information is there, at CPS (Formery Gurit, formerly IMS)
http://www.cps-gmbh.net/p-tex-sintered.php
A total of 1,2g (!!) goes into a whole P-Tex 4000 ski base.

So even if a sizable amount out of that 1,2g wears out the base, I
don't think it's something I will rely on.
Unless someone comes out and demonstrate that this very small amout of
wax act as catalyst or something alike.

Moreover, having seen racers at the 50km Olympic skate race allowed to
change up to 4 times their skis, the entire world now knows that high
performance wax does not "wear" out the base, it simply goes out quite
quickly.

I learn from you jay, the waxing paradox which is trying to bond a
highly repelent component (fluor) onto another highly repelent
component (UHMWPE).
,done by mean of "wax", which in return is not so good in le long run
(non abrasive resistant, prone to capture dust and less
hydrophophobic).
I'm not chemist but Kuzmin's idea to achieve a fluoro coating w/o wax
is something promising, until we get full FP bases.
  #5  
Old January 25th 12, 10:42 PM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
runcyclexcski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Coating vs Waxing

On Jan 19, 7:46*pm, Jay W wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:40*pm, gr wrote:

On 1/17/2012 6:46 AM, lolix wrote: See FluoroPolymeric Coating By Leonid Kuzmin
http://kuzmin.se/pgs/fp_drum_en.html


Sounds a little like NotWax a liquid teflon wipe.



Oh, no. Pseudoscience is back again.

Just order a roll of single-sided Teflon tape from McMaster and tape
it to the bottom of the skis if you want a teflon coating w/o waxing.


  #6  
Old January 25th 12, 10:43 PM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
runcyclexcski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Coating vs Waxing



I am not chemist but Kuzmin's idea ...


Neither is Kuzmin
  #7  
Old January 26th 12, 05:48 AM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
gr[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 78
Default Coating vs Waxing

On 1/25/2012 5:42 PM, runcyclexcski wrote:
On Jan 19, 7:46 pm, Jay wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:40 pm, wrote:

On 1/17/2012 6:46 AM, lolix wrote: See FluoroPolymeric Coating By Leonid Kuzmin
http://kuzmin.se/pgs/fp_drum_en.html


Sounds a little like NotWax a liquid teflon wipe.



Oh, no. Pseudoscience is back again.

Just order a roll of single-sided Teflon tape from McMaster and tape
it to the bottom of the skis if you want a teflon coating w/o waxing.


1.2 grams of wax being absorbed sounds like a lot to me! The base is
quite dense, formed from powdered p-tex melted (sintered) together, so
there is a very low percentage of open space to absorb wax (which is
good or else you have foam rubber and it will damage much more easily).
This 1.2 grams of wax can now leach out of the ski very slowly, causing
a wax layer a few molecule thick. The classic "dry base white look" is a
good indicator that the wax has left the working surface of the ski
and needs to be renewed. Most waxes seem to last quite a long time
before this happens.
gr
  #8  
Old January 26th 12, 05:03 PM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
lolix
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Coating vs Waxing


there is a very low percentage of open space *to absorb wax


Chemists say that wax goes in there by dilution. There is no "open
space" nor pores in the UHMWPE.
By cooling done the base, a small amount of wax wears out the base.
I'm not aware of another possible process to "un-dilute" in that
case.

So if a small amount of 1.2g sounds a lot to you, OK fine. I prefer
not to rely on that.

BTW, my kuzmin-preped bases never show the 'classic "dry base white
look" '.

Maybe good stone grinders exists, but I have not one at hand and I
like to do things myself.
So, I've thrown away my custom-made hot-box and swapped for a pair of
scrappers.
At least I've gained a lot of room in my garage.
  #9  
Old January 27th 12, 05:16 AM posted to rec.skiing.nordic
gr[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 78
Default Coating vs Waxing

On 1/26/2012 12:03 PM, lolix wrote:

there is a very low percentage of open space to absorb wax


Chemists say that wax goes in there by dilution. There is no "open
space" nor pores in the UHMWPE.


Is it still a sintered base?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Waxing on TV... [email protected] Nordic Skiing 4 March 10th 06 11:56 PM
waxing broady Snowboarding 2 February 13th 05 05:44 PM
Waxing Help Wile E. Coyote Nordic Skiing 8 December 27th 04 04:01 AM
Ski waxing JP European Ski Resorts 7 March 5th 04 01:02 AM
Seal Coating in Three Rivers Bob Larson Nordic Skiing 1 July 24th 03 02:48 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.