Universal Toko Wax as a basic layer

(Joeconn4) wrote in message ...
My team uses the Toko universal moly, primarily because it has a much lower
minimum temperature than their LF/HF moly. I can't give any advice concerning
its effectiveness in warmer conditions because the only time we used it this
winter (other than to refresh skis) was a -10F - -5F weekend. The courses we
used it on had some pine needles and residue from grooming machines on the
trails. Due to low humidity most of our team did not go with LF Blue or HF Blue
over it, choosing Start Green instead. Our skis were dogs on the warmer day
(10k/15k skate), but were ok on the colder day (3x5k classic relay). Not great,
just ok.

In hindsight we should have tested a Universal Moly/Toko CH Blue mix or LF
Moly/Start Green mix. If it's possible I think we waxed too cold for the
conditions. That sounds stupid considering how cold it was, but I believe it to
be true. We did have one racer on Univ Moly/CH Blue and her skis were the best
of anyone.

As previously mentioned in this thread, some Moly and good structure sound like
the key for your current conditions.

First of all, I agree about the structure being the key.
The other thing, is that I am skeptical about validity of "0...-30C"
range of the all-in-one waxes. These waxes are definitely softer then
even -4...-10C. I doubt they can stand the abrasive cold snow. I used
Toko HF paste wax in cold conditions (-15C) and it was plain terrible,
although the advertised range was also 0...-30C. Nothing works better
in cold than hard plastic wax, such as Toko Blue.
When conditions are very cold like in your case, it sounds like Star
MAP black as an underlayer and Toko Blue (non-fluorinated) would work
best. MAP black has a range of -5C...-20C and is extremely durable
and antistatic which is important in cold/dry snow.

Zach used Map Black as an underlayer for the Birkie, even though the
snow had transformed in the few days before the race, and remained warm
on race day. You might want to check the Sierra Nordic website
(tips/archives) for how to apply it. Alaska Pacific U used to have a
nice talbe for when to use it, but it's gone now.

Gene

TahoeXCSkier wrote:

"Griss" wrote in message news:c2qggr$1v8psm$1@ID- Here's my take as a back-of-the-packer... and I have and use the "all in
one" moly. I use the Toko black all in one exactly the same as I used to
use plain graphite waxes.

I use it as either a base layer or an additive to either CH (I use CH as a
generic term for non-fluro waxes) or LF waxes. I used to have some either
Start or Swix graphite which I did the same with, but now that Moly is hip,
I use it instead.

If it's CH conditions (cold and dry), and I think moly is in order, I just
wax over it with CH wax of the day or add it to the CH wax of the day.

For fluro conditions, I'd either use the "all in one" as a stand alone layer
with an LF layer over it , or as a moly additive to the LF layer. If I
were using Toko LF moly, I'd go directly from it to HF, which I understand
is a fairly common thing to do.

I personally have gotten away from using LF as a top layer. To me, it's
either CH conditions or fluro conditions. If it's fluro conditions, I go
with HF. To me, the only use for LF is as an intermediate layer to better
bind the HF to the CH wax in the base (I could easily be wrong, but that's
the theory I happen to follow).

I have no idea if this is world-class waxing, but what the hey, it seems to
make sense to me.

Grissy

All this makes perfect sense to me. I am also trying to avoid LF as a
top layer: LF seems to make little difference, especially in wet
conditions. I've tried Swix, Toko and Solda wax so far, and I am also
going to test Star. I heard great reviews of Star's base waxes (MAP
black and MAP 200), but the price of these waxes is just ridiculous,
especially since they don't seem to contain any fluoro. Skiing last
weekend was frustrating: it was below freezing in the morning, so my
highly fluorinated wax got "scraped-off" by hard/icy snow, and at
around 10 a.m. it started melting. At 11 a.m. it was water skiing and
my wax wore off (Solda F20 yellow, 2-yr old High Fluoro wax).
Although the snow didn't look dirty, a lot of dirt accumulated on the
base. So I am going to try all-in-one moly as an underlayer, and,
possibly, MAP200 on Sunday (although I prefer skiing to waxing every
day).

"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote:
Zach used Map Black as an underlayer for the Birkie, even though the
snow had transformed in the few days before the race, and remained warm
on race day. You might want to check the Sierra Nordic website
(tips/archives) for how to apply it. Alaska Pacific U used to have a
nice talbe for when to use it, but it's gone now.

I think the same table can be found he
http://www.jenex.com/wax/index.html

Star has a new line of waxes now, so parts of the table are outdated. The
base and prep waxes are the same, but instead of the Ultratech, Tekno,
Eclipse, etc. they now have NA (no additive), LA (low additive), HA (high
additive). Does anyone have any experience with these waxes? In
particular, what would be a comparable wax to the low fluoro Ultratech? I
thought the Ultratech was pretty fast and a good value at $14 for 65gm. I
used it as my race wax because I don't want to spend too much. The NA wax,
costs $15 for 60g and I presume it has no fluoros in it unlike the
ultratech, while the LA is $30 (more than I would spend). Is the LA more
comparable to the ultratech than the NA? Meanwhile I have stocked up on
some ultratech wax.

Thanks for noting that table. Substitute "Additive" for "fluor" and I
think you can identify the waxes. Zach favored HA2 and F1 on top of Map
Black for the Birkie. Next season I'm going to take a look at Dr. D's
high end fluoros, which are more affordable. Some shops, such as the
Sports Rack in Marquette, MI sell the larger blocks of the "no additive"
waxes for a good price. The older Star yellow is an excellent base
cleaner (I see on Zach's site that he uses it too for his process).
Don't know about the newer version.

Where are you located? The shop in Grand Marais MN that sold me the
older waxes also had some recommendations that are different than on the
tables and boxes.

Gene

Andrew Lee wrote:

"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote:
Zach used Map Black as an underlayer for the Birkie, even though the
snow had transformed in the few days before the race, and remained warm
on race day. You might want to check the Sierra Nordic website
(tips/archives) for how to apply it. Alaska Pacific U used to have a
nice talbe for when to use it, but it's gone now.

I think the same table can be found he
http://www.jenex.com/wax/index.html

Star has a new line of waxes now, so parts of the table are outdated. The
base and prep waxes are the same, but instead of the Ultratech, Tekno,
Eclipse, etc. they now have NA (no additive), LA (low additive), HA (high
additive). Does anyone have any experience with these waxes? In
particular, what would be a comparable wax to the low fluoro Ultratech? I
thought the Ultratech was pretty fast and a good value at $14 for 65gm. I
used it as my race wax because I don't want to spend too much. The NA wax,
costs $15 for 60g and I presume it has no fluoros in it unlike the
ultratech, while the LA is $30 (more than I would spend). Is the LA more
comparable to the ultratech than the NA? Meanwhile I have stocked up on
some ultratech wax.

I consider Noel's (Sierra Nordic owner) Tech Tips a "waxing bible". I
did actually use his method for applying MAP black, only for Toko
Nordlite Moly (-8C...-15C range) and it worked great.

Anyway, this morning I tested Toko Moly all-in-one + Star Tekno TF12
med. fluoro (-5C...+5C) and I was thrilled how incredibly fast my skis
were.
I started at 8:30 a.m. when the snow temperature was about -3C, icy
and average humidity. Finished at around 9:45 a.m, when the snow was
melting and temperature was above +5C (it climbed to +15C around
noon). Skis were rilled with Swix riller 2mm and .75mm on top of
that.

There is simply no comparison with my last weekend's experience: same
conditions, but different wax: Toko World Loppet Yellow as an
underlayer and Solda High Fluoro yellow on top. Wax was gone after
about 10km, or just didn't match the conditions anymore. (stated range
for Solda was -2..+1C). Plus I had a lot of dirt accumulated on the
base which didn't help the glide.

So my test is inconclusive, whether Toko Moly all-in-one as an
underlayer kicked ass, or Star Tekno TF12 was so great, or both.
Noel said that Tekno TF12 is the best wax for spring dirty/wet
conditions. I had my doubts, as the stated humidity for TF12 was
50%. It was over 90% today, but it didn't seem to affect the glide.

After I was done skiing today, I applied 1 layer of TF12 (after
thoroughly brushing the base). No underlayer this time. I'll try again
tomorrow and see if
lack of Toko Moly all-in-one makes a difference. By the way, the
amount of dirt accumulated on my base today was very minimal.



Gene Goldenfeld wrote in message ...
Zach used Map Black as an underlayer for the Birkie, even though the
snow had transformed in the few days before the race, and remained warm
on race day. You might want to check the Sierra Nordic website
(tips/archives) for how to apply it. Alaska Pacific U used to have a
nice talbe for when to use it, but it's gone now.

Gene

"Andrew Lee" whatsupandrewathotmaildotcom wrote in message ...
"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote:
Zach used Map Black as an underlayer for the Birkie, even though the
snow had transformed in the few days before the race, and remained warm
on race day. You might want to check the Sierra Nordic website
(tips/archives) for how to apply it. Alaska Pacific U used to have a
nice talbe for when to use it, but it's gone now.

I think the same table can be found he
http://www.jenex.com/wax/index.html

Star has a new line of waxes now, so parts of the table are outdated. The
base and prep waxes are the same, but instead of the Ultratech, Tekno,
Eclipse, etc. they now have NA (no additive), LA (low additive), HA (high
additive). Does anyone have any experience with these waxes? In
particular, what would be a comparable wax to the low fluoro Ultratech? I
thought the Ultratech was pretty fast and a good value at $14 for 65gm. I
used it as my race wax because I don't want to spend too much. The NA wax,
costs $15 for 60g and I presume it has no fluoros in it unlike the
ultratech, while the LA is $30 (more than I would spend). Is the LA more
comparable to the ultratech than the NA? Meanwhile I have stocked up on
some ultratech wax.

Star is standardizing on 60 gm packages (almost every wax company now
does this). They are also charging more for their waxes this year
because of weak dollar. I heard that NA wax was not any better than
World Loppet/System 3/Swix CH. Don't have any first hand experience
though. Low additive is supposedly in between old Ultra Tech and
Tekno. And this is making Star Waxes not a good buy anymore. Sierra
Nordic sells LA for $26. Unfortunately they've sold out all
Teknos/Ultra Tech. :-( Another thing I don't like about the new Star
products is that they don't have wide temperature range waxes any
more, like Tekno TF12 (-5...+5C), which is quite necessary in Tahoe
area.

Seems like Solda is a better value at this point: $40 for F31 (High
Fluoro). Solda is yet another company that switched to 60 gm packaging
this year (last year it was 75gm).

All of the wax companies make much larger bars of the non- and
low-fluoro waxes; they have to for shops and wax techs. Just a matter
of finding who sells it or developing an industry connection (check
Sports Rack in Marquette). I'm not sure why you would think that NA is
necessarily any better or worse than another brand's non-fluoro, aside
from specific conditions and testing. Zach finds the previous Star
non-flouro best for heat treatment, but demurs on its on-snow
qualities. I understand about the relative value of the dollar. Swix
and Toko must be taking some losses -- relative or absolute I'm not sure
-- to feed the US market, altho I assume they make it up in part on
volume. You may want to expand your shopping (and waxing knowledge)
horizons beyond Sierra Nordic to find some of the older Star waxes.

Gene

TahoeXCSkier wrote:

Star is standardizing on 60 gm packages (almost every wax company now
does this). They are also charging more for their waxes this year
because of weak dollar. I heard that NA wax was not any better than
World Loppet/System 3/Swix CH. Don't have any first hand experience
though. Low additive is supposedly in between old Ultra Tech and
Tekno. And this is making Star Waxes not a good buy anymore. Sierra
Nordic sells LA for $26. Unfortunately they've sold out all
Teknos/Ultra Tech. :-( Another thing I don't like about the new Star
products is that they don't have wide temperature range waxes any
more, like Tekno TF12 (-5...+5C), which is quite necessary in Tahoe
area.

Seems like Solda is a better value at this point: $40 for F31 (High
Fluoro). Solda is yet another company that switched to 60 gm packaging
this year (last year it was 75gm).

"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote:
All of the wax companies make much larger bars of the non- and
low-fluoro waxes; they have to for shops and wax techs. Just a matter
of finding who sells it or developing an industry connection (check
Sports Rack in Marquette). I'm not sure why you would think that NA is
necessarily any better or worse than another brand's non-fluoro, aside
from specific conditions and testing. Zach finds the previous Star
non-flouro best for heat treatment, but demurs on its on-snow
qualities. I understand about the relative value of the dollar. Swix
and Toko must be taking some losses -- relative or absolute I'm not sure
-- to feed the US market, altho I assume they make it up in part on
volume. You may want to expand your shopping (and waxing knowledge)
horizons beyond Sierra Nordic to find some of the older Star waxes.

The Uniblock is still in the Star wax lineup:
http://www.starwax.com/products/star...3/uniblock.htm

I've been using it since I started skiing because it is inexpensive, and has
been recommended for base saturation by people for years.

At my local shop, it is $18.95 for 400g. The NA is $14.95 for 60g in the
same shop. That's why I was curious about how the NA would perform compared
to the Ultratech. It is the Ultratech's replacement pricewise, if not
fluoro content -wise. I agree that testing is the only way to find out, but
as someone on a budget, I like asking around first...

Gene,

Based on my personal experience, there was no significant difference
between non-fluoro Toko and Swix waxes. The price is the same and
work about the same way in applicable conditions.
I was, however, surprised to find a non-fluoro product which costs
twice as much and, per my friend's personal experience, not having any
noticeable advantage over Toko or Swix.

Sierra Nordic is only one of many places I buy wax from (SkiGuys.com
or Sports Rack is among others). I am always interested in finding
more information about waxing and would certainly appreciate any links
to sites which may contain any useful info.


Gene Goldenfeld wrote in message ...
I'm not sure why you would think that NA is
necessarily any better or worse than another brand's non-fluoro, aside
from specific conditions and testing. ...You may want to expand your shopping (and waxing knowledge)
horizons beyond Sierra Nordic to find some of the older Star waxes.

Gene

While I take a lot of what Ian Harvey of Toko has to say with a big
spoonful, some of his waxing suggestions in the last issue of Master
Skier did make sense and run exactly contrary to Noel's. I'm thinking
especially of the use of higher heat in waxing, especially for colder
waxes. Both of them are much more declarative in their opinions in
almost everything than I think justified.

Gene

TahoeXCSkier wrote:

Gene,

Based on my personal experience, there was no significant difference
between non-fluoro Toko and Swix waxes. The price is the same and
work about the same way in applicable conditions.
I was, however, surprised to find a non-fluoro product which costs
twice as much and, per my friend's personal experience, not having any
noticeable advantage over Toko or Swix.

Sierra Nordic is only one of many places I buy wax from (SkiGuys.com
or Sports Rack is among others). I am always interested in finding
more information about waxing and would certainly appreciate any links
to sites which may contain any useful info.

Gene Goldenfeld wrote in message ...
I'm not sure why you would think that NA is
necessarily any better or worse than another brand's non-fluoro, aside
from specific conditions and testing. ...You may want to expand your shopping (and waxing knowledge)
horizons beyond Sierra Nordic to find some of the older Star waxes.

Gene