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

What to pick for my next pair of classic skis?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 26th 05, 09:00 PM
Marsh Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What to pick for my next pair of classic skis?

Zach, Nathan, Eli, et al:

Over the past two years, I've fallen back in love with classic
technique, and made pretty serious improvements in my technique. I
bought a new pair of Fischer 812s last year hoping that they would
become my 'A' skis (supplementing my 8 yo ARCs). Both pair were flexed
by Tom Novak and Ahvo to make sure they did fit.
So... The 812s seem to work very well, most of the time, on manmade and
firm natural tracks. They do require pretty significant kick to get
them to bite - I found I was often one wax warmer than others to get
reliable kick. The kick zone was very well defined, removing any
kickwax outside the pocket in about 5K. But they are rockets on glide,
so I felt pretty good about getting them.
The Atomics have been Buicks -no flash, not extremely fast, but pretty
reliable (but getting to where I doubt Tom can grind them more than once
more). When it came time to pick skis for the Birkie, Ahvo suggested
them instead of the 'faster' 812s, suggesting that the softer kick would
get me to the finish line better. He was right. I had kick all the
way, getting out of the tracks only a couple of very short segments -
and mostly for traffic. And skied a PR, in spite of having my skis
disappear at the start and missing my wave by 10+ min.

So the question of the day is: In general, what would you add to a
classic quiver for next season? A pair of 'wet' skis, or a pair of
hardpack skis with a little softer pocket that the 812s' WC one?

TIA,

Marsh Jones
Ads
  #2  
Old May 27th 05, 03:04 AM
Nathan Schultz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What did your 812's flex at? How much do you weigh? What conditions do you
ski/race in mostly? If you don't know flex numbers, what flex are the skis
(soft, med, stiff) and what length?

The hardest part to figure out is your technical proficiency. This can
alter the ski selection significantly. It sounds like you're a strong
classical skier, but how long have you skied, what kind of coaching have you
had, etc?

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

"Marsh Jones" wrote in message
...
Zach, Nathan, Eli, et al:

Over the past two years, I've fallen back in love with classic technique,
and made pretty serious improvements in my technique. I bought a new pair
of Fischer 812s last year hoping that they would become my 'A' skis
(supplementing my 8 yo ARCs). Both pair were flexed by Tom Novak and Ahvo
to make sure they did fit.
So... The 812s seem to work very well, most of the time, on manmade and
firm natural tracks. They do require pretty significant kick to get them
to bite - I found I was often one wax warmer than others to get reliable
kick. The kick zone was very well defined, removing any kickwax outside
the pocket in about 5K. But they are rockets on glide, so I felt pretty
good about getting them.
The Atomics have been Buicks -no flash, not extremely fast, but pretty
reliable (but getting to where I doubt Tom can grind them more than once
more). When it came time to pick skis for the Birkie, Ahvo suggested them
instead of the 'faster' 812s, suggesting that the softer kick would get me
to the finish line better. He was right. I had kick all the way, getting
out of the tracks only a couple of very short segments - and mostly for
traffic. And skied a PR, in spite of having my skis disappear at the
start and missing my wave by 10+ min.

So the question of the day is: In general, what would you add to a
classic quiver for next season? A pair of 'wet' skis, or a pair of
hardpack skis with a little softer pocket that the 812s' WC one?

TIA,

Marsh Jones



  #3  
Old May 27th 05, 04:24 AM
Marsh Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nathan Schultz wrote:
What did your 812's flex at? How much do you weigh? What conditions do you
ski/race in mostly? If you don't know flex numbers, what flex are the skis
(soft, med, stiff) and what length?


Hi Nathan,
46.7, 195 dropping to 190, turn 50 this summer. Minnesota conditions...
Med flex, 207 Cold.

The hardest part to figure out is your technical proficiency. This can
alter the ski selection significantly. It sounds like you're a strong
classical skier, but how long have you skied, what kind of coaching have you
had, etc?

Hard to say. The only two serious races last year were Mora, MN
(20s,orange klister, 812s) and the Birkie (3:16 watch time!) (single
digits, VR40, ARCs).
OK, the rest of the dirt. I've been skiing since the mid-70s, off&on.
I started trying to classic seriously again 2 years ago, race canoes in
the summertime, and have had minimal formal coaching - a couple of
sessions at local clinics with club level coaches and a fair amount of
critique from my highschool team coaching partner. If time works out
this year, I'll participate in Finn-Sisu's program. If not, whatever
seminars I can fit in. Technically, I'm so-so. I slap badly at times,
don't get enough drive out of my arms, don't explode off the ski when I
get tired, but I mostly can keep my back curved and keep my head down.

Thanks,

Marsh

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

"Marsh Jones" wrote in message
...

Zach, Nathan, Eli, et al:

Over the past two years, I've fallen back in love with classic technique,
and made pretty serious improvements in my technique. I bought a new pair
of Fischer 812s last year hoping that they would become my 'A' skis
(supplementing my 8 yo ARCs). Both pair were flexed by Tom Novak and Ahvo
to make sure they did fit.
So... The 812s seem to work very well, most of the time, on manmade and
firm natural tracks. They do require pretty significant kick to get them
to bite - I found I was often one wax warmer than others to get reliable
kick. The kick zone was very well defined, removing any kickwax outside
the pocket in about 5K. But they are rockets on glide, so I felt pretty
good about getting them.
The Atomics have been Buicks -no flash, not extremely fast, but pretty
reliable (but getting to where I doubt Tom can grind them more than once
more). When it came time to pick skis for the Birkie, Ahvo suggested them
instead of the 'faster' 812s, suggesting that the softer kick would get me
to the finish line better. He was right. I had kick all the way, getting
out of the tracks only a couple of very short segments - and mostly for
traffic. And skied a PR, in spite of having my skis disappear at the
start and missing my wave by 10+ min.

So the question of the day is: In general, what would you add to a
classic quiver for next season? A pair of 'wet' skis, or a pair of
hardpack skis with a little softer pocket that the 812s' WC one?

TIA,

Marsh Jones




  #4  
Old May 27th 05, 05:17 PM
Nathan Schultz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I would pick a softer pair of 812 plus. It sounds like the 812's you have
seem a bit on the stiff side, given those flex numbers and your experience
with them. It sounds like they are good in hard track conditions and for
klister.

My softest 812's that I find great in powder are 34kg (I weigh 71) -
48%. My klister skis are in the 41-42 range (~58%) with a camber height
greater than 1.1.

I think a good "universal" powder ski would be something in the
neighborhood of 50-52% body weight with a camber height of 0.8-0.9mm. But
then again, I don't ski on Minnesota conditions that often. What exactly
are "Minnesota conditions"?

Nathan

"Marsh Jones" wrote in message
...
Nathan Schultz wrote:
What did your 812's flex at? How much do you weigh? What conditions do
you ski/race in mostly? If you don't know flex numbers, what flex are
the skis (soft, med, stiff) and what length?


Hi Nathan,
46.7, 195 dropping to 190, turn 50 this summer. Minnesota conditions...
Med flex, 207 Cold.

The hardest part to figure out is your technical proficiency. This
can alter the ski selection significantly. It sounds like you're a
strong classical skier, but how long have you skied, what kind of
coaching have you had, etc?

Hard to say. The only two serious races last year were Mora, MN
(20s,orange klister, 812s) and the Birkie (3:16 watch time!) (single
digits, VR40, ARCs).
OK, the rest of the dirt. I've been skiing since the mid-70s, off&on. I
started trying to classic seriously again 2 years ago, race canoes in the
summertime, and have had minimal formal coaching - a couple of sessions at
local clinics with club level coaches and a fair amount of critique from
my highschool team coaching partner. If time works out this year, I'll
participate in Finn-Sisu's program. If not, whatever seminars I can fit
in. Technically, I'm so-so. I slap badly at times, don't get enough
drive out of my arms, don't explode off the ski when I get tired, but I
mostly can keep my back curved and keep my head down.

Thanks,

Marsh

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

"Marsh Jones" wrote in message
...

Zach, Nathan, Eli, et al:

Over the past two years, I've fallen back in love with classic technique,
and made pretty serious improvements in my technique. I bought a new
pair of Fischer 812s last year hoping that they would become my 'A' skis
(supplementing my 8 yo ARCs). Both pair were flexed by Tom Novak and
Ahvo to make sure they did fit.
So... The 812s seem to work very well, most of the time, on manmade and
firm natural tracks. They do require pretty significant kick to get them
to bite - I found I was often one wax warmer than others to get reliable
kick. The kick zone was very well defined, removing any kickwax outside
the pocket in about 5K. But they are rockets on glide, so I felt pretty
good about getting them.
The Atomics have been Buicks -no flash, not extremely fast, but pretty
reliable (but getting to where I doubt Tom can grind them more than once
more). When it came time to pick skis for the Birkie, Ahvo suggested
them instead of the 'faster' 812s, suggesting that the softer kick would
get me to the finish line better. He was right. I had kick all the way,
getting out of the tracks only a couple of very short segments - and
mostly for traffic. And skied a PR, in spite of having my skis disappear
at the start and missing my wave by 10+ min.

So the question of the day is: In general, what would you add to a
classic quiver for next season? A pair of 'wet' skis, or a pair of
hardpack skis with a little softer pocket that the 812s' WC one?

TIA,

Marsh Jones




  #5  
Old May 30th 05, 02:46 PM
Zach Caldwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Marsh - Sounds like you've got some really good advice from Nathan.
I'll see what I can add to what he's said:

It sounds as though Tom and Ahvo did a good job fitting you. The deal
with the 812 is that the pocket is particularly position-sensitive -
especially in the 202 or 207 lengths which are really designed for an
aggressive world-cup style male skier. The 192 and 197 are set-up as
"women's" skis and are more accomodating of a somewhat more neutral
body position.

To clarify things a bit - the 812 wax pocket is typically positioned
quite far forward, such that the back of the pocket is often under the
middle of the foot. This means that, with your full weight focused in a
neutral position - back near the mid-foot - your weight isn't getting
put through the pocket and the pocket stays very open (and fast). Great
for a fast-gliding striding ski. However, in order to get the ski to
kick you've really got to kick through the ball of the foot. If you
tend to initiate your kick farther back on the foot the ski will never
feel terribly secure.

It's possible to find 812s with a more neutral pocket position. They're
not terribly common. And when you find them they've got to be fit a
little bit stiffer than Fischer's standard recommendation. This is
because the standard recommendation is based on the expectation that a
neutral position full-weight load will not significantly load the wax
pocket. By getting a ski that will load the pocket in a more neutral
position you've got a greater mechanical advantage over the pocket with
your weight a bit back on the foot, but you've also got to be careful
to keep the ski fast enough at full weight.

I've got a friend (my first ski coach) who is a very accomplished skier
but who has an upright technique and tends to load the ski through the
back of his foot. I've picked him a couple of pairs of 812s, and while
he can ski them by adjusting his technique, he isn't terribly
comfortable on them. The second pair I got him had a pocket further
back on the ski and is a bit stiffer than the first pair.

SO - I'm guessing you may be experiencing an incompatibility between
your position on the ski and the design of the ski. Your Atomics have a
very different design with a more traditionally positioned pocket.

Options: You should consider Fischer's new Wet snow ski. This ski is
based on the 902 mold rather than the 812. The folks at Fischer claim
that the pocket is still an 812 pocket. I'm not convinced. The reason
I'm really excited about the 902 has much less to do with the tip and
tail splay (which are the immediately visible characteristics) than
with the action of the pocket. The wax pocket is positioned more
traditionally under the foot. It's plenty long in most cases - around
30cm in front of the balance point and back to the heel (or even a
little further back)under the foot. But the cool thing is how "active"
the pocket it. Most ski tend to get progressively stiffer as they get
closer to closing. This means that you reach a point of diminishing
returns in grip pay-off for added "umph" in your kick. The 902 pocket
tends to stay soft throughout the closing action. There is a lot of
movement in the pocket for relatively little added load.

The way I quantify this is by taking two flex measurements on classic
skis. First I measure the load required to close the pocket to 0.2mm
residual camber under the load - a pretty standard "closing flex"
measurement. But then I measure the additional load required to close
from 0.2 down to 0.1mm as an indication of how much weight willbe put
to the wax when you kick. Typically an 812 will require another four or
five kg to move from 0.2 to 0.1mm. The 902 tends to be much lower than
that. Kris Freeman has one pair that is only 1 additional kg.

The magic is this (using Kris's best pair as an illustration): you have
a ski with a true half-weight camber height of 0.9mm (that's very
high-plenty of room for klister or binder), but it closes at something
like 57% body weight. And then, once you've got it "closed" it's
putting a huge percentage of your weight straight through the wax.
Additionally, it's not as position-sensitive as the 812.

I thnk the 812 is an awesome ski for a huge number of people. It's a
"flatter" feeling ski and tends to feel like automatic roller-ski kick
for somebody who's natural kicking action is through the ball of the
foot. But I think the 902 is a really exciting ski for people who want
a more traditional feeling ski (forgiving of a more neutral position)
and a very active pocket. For the right skier the 902 is close to a
do-everything ski. I use mine 90% of the time I got skiing and love it.

There are options from other companies as well, but since we started
with Fischer I figured I'd focus there. Sorry for the (typically)long
response. Let me know if you've got additional questions.

Zach
http://www.engineeredtuning.net/



Marsh Jones wrote:
Zach, Nathan, Eli, et al:

Over the past two years, I've fallen back in love with classic
technique, and made pretty serious improvements in my technique. I
bought a new pair of Fischer 812s last year hoping that they would
become my 'A' skis (supplementing my 8 yo ARCs). Both pair were flexed
by Tom Novak and Ahvo to make sure they did fit.
So... The 812s seem to work very well, most of the time, on manmade and
firm natural tracks. They do require pretty significant kick to get
them to bite - I found I was often one wax warmer than others to get
reliable kick. The kick zone was very well defined, removing any
kickwax outside the pocket in about 5K. But they are rockets on glide,
so I felt pretty good about getting them.
The Atomics have been Buicks -no flash, not extremely fast, but pretty
reliable (but getting to where I doubt Tom can grind them more than once
more). When it came time to pick skis for the Birkie, Ahvo suggested
them instead of the 'faster' 812s, suggesting that the softer kick would
get me to the finish line better. He was right. I had kick all the
way, getting out of the tracks only a couple of very short segments -
and mostly for traffic. And skied a PR, in spite of having my skis
disappear at the start and missing my wave by 10+ min.

So the question of the day is: In general, what would you add to a
classic quiver for next season? A pair of 'wet' skis, or a pair of
hardpack skis with a little softer pocket that the 812s' WC one?

TIA,

Marsh Jones


  #6  
Old June 2nd 05, 05:42 PM
Bjorn A. Payne Diaz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A couple years ago I ended up getting a pair of 812 plus and a pair of
812 cold with nearly identical flex numbers. I find that I like the
plus in more conditions than the cold (because I have an easier time
getting it to kick). The cold works well in, well cold snow. This may
be a variance seen from pair-to-pair, but I tend to wonder if the
difference is between the flex of plus and cold skis?

BTW Nathan, MN conditions are old, man-made snow with an occasional
dusting of new snow. The new snow tends to screw up our rollerski
training and cycling.

Jay Wenner

  #7  
Old June 5th 05, 06:08 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nathan, I around 75 to 76 kilos. Why don't you send me a pair of your
stiffer skis this fall. I need a new pair of classics.

Jay Tegeder
"Keep training, lcyra never lies!" JT

  #8  
Old June 6th 05, 03:56 AM
Nathan Schultz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'll get on that Jay....

Nathan
www.nsavage.com

wrote in message
oups.com...
Nathan, I around 75 to 76 kilos. Why don't you send me a pair of your
stiffer skis this fall. I need a new pair of classics.

Jay Tegeder
"Keep training, lcyra never lies!" JT




  #9  
Old June 8th 05, 02:15 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah, I'll take a pair of the Fischers since you'll be on Salomons
right?

Jay Tegeder
"On the podium if the right people don't show up!" JT
p.s. Too many have been showing up at the road bike races. One podium
at a mountain bike race...

 




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
Warm and cold skis [email protected] Nordic Skiing 10 June 8th 05 05:20 PM
Ski "Logic" and the second pair of skis... Lisa Horton Alpine Skiing 4 April 2nd 05 02:59 AM
Probability of Getting Good Race Skis at Small Ski Shops ?? Tim Kelley Nordic Skiing 26 October 27th 04 06:41 PM
Used Ski Prices Zachary Caldwell Nordic Skiing 12 July 1st 04 12:36 AM
Ski Mountaineering Clyde Backcountry Skiing 2 September 23rd 03 09:18 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:33 AM.


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