Usual wax pocket theory seems wrong...

I almost bought a cold pair of Atomics much like that, something like
1-2 kg to close and very nice in hand. I didn't have bindings with me,
which gave time to check around. BNS' website mentions kick wax wear
problems, which they confirmed some customers reporting, and ER
Nordic's bench tests suggests problems should be expected in the front
part of the kick zone. I also noticed how few the number of skiers
using Atomic classics on the WC. Soon after, I tried a pair of Fischer
colds with 4 kg to close. With four normal layers of wax, no binder,
they were still kicking three hours later. I'd never had that happen
before with any classical ski.

Gene

wrote:

Both Zack Caldwell and Mark Waecher load both the 8 cm and 15 cm back
points with the 15 cm back point simulating full weight loading. Zack
notes that at full weight 15 cm back, he checks to see if the grip wax
pocket forward is still open.

My Atomic's pretty much work the way Zack says. My cold Atomics are
easy closing skis (55% of body weight to 0.2mm and an additional 2 kg
to close). I found that I pretty much lost all of my grip wax back of
the balance point after a classic marathon even using green klister as
a base binder. Even with the easy closing, the glide well. The down
side is wax loss after 30+ km.

Edgar

Thanks for the good notions. I suppose the paper test is just a rough
ballpark. Wax wear patterns may prove to be quite different---and
should be much more accurate.

Often times the manufacturer's marks back at the heel and the first or
second forward of the binding are good places to work from.

jeff potter wrote:

Thanks for the good notions. I suppose the paper test is just a rough
ballpark. Wax wear patterns may prove to be quite different---and
should be much more accurate.

wrote:
Often times the manufacturer's marks back at the heel and the first or
second forward of the binding are good places to work from.

jeff potter wrote:

Thanks for the good notions. I suppose the paper test is just a rough
ballpark. Wax wear patterns may prove to be quite different---and
should be much more accurate.

When I was first applying grip tape this winter I started
short and added bits until it didn't suck.

Boy, do they lie about the upper temperature range of that
stuff.

Bob Schwartz

On Mar 26, 7:38*am, jeff potter wrote:
The usual way of approximately locating the wax pocket of a classical
ski is to stand on both skis, equally, and slide a paper under them.
Where the paper binds is the outer limits of the pocket. Official
doctrine says the wax pocket keeps the kick wax off the snow when
gliding or doublepoling.

No, it doesn't!

It only works for 2-footed gliding and part of doublepoling.

It seems to me that the best wax pocket would be one where the kick
wax is off the snow when ALL your weight is on one ski --- that's the
condition in which MOST gliding occurs.

It then seems that the camber should be designed to collapse only when
one kicks or steps off of the ski, putting MORE than 100% of body
weight onto the ski.

With the way my skis are now when I glide while diagonal striding I'm
contacting the snow and causing friction with about 50% of my kickwax
zone.

Only when we use the klister zone is all the kickwax off the snow
during the diagonal stride glide.

I'm thinking that all classic skis should have wax pockets that
function like a klister zone. Klister skis should just have higher
pockets because klister is thicker.

So, what am I missing?

I suppose I'm missing the possibility that lightly weighted kickwax
works like a glide wax. ? *Seems unlikely.

Another angle is that a ski track isn't like a floor. ...Then again
many ski tracks are firm like a floor. Given the irregularites of a
track it almost seems like a kickzone should be higher off the ground,
yet still collapse easily with the amount of pressure a kick
generates.

Maybe a kick doesn't generate more than bodyweight?

Maybe kickwax doesn't cause friction when it's moving/gliding and only
works when it STOPS. Unlikely. Kickwax causes lots of friction. But
maybe if kicking isn't more than bodyweight then we just have to put
up with this friction?

Anyway, if there's a difference between the weighting of a ski when we
glide on it while diagonal striding and when we kick on it then the
ski-makers should isolate that difference and build their kickzone
around that. ...So it offhand seems to me.

--JP

Jeff, I don't think you're totally up on the theory and prctice of
striding-ski wax pocket.

Actually, wax pockets, when marked for serious skiers by professional
fitters, are market at various points of flexure. My skis have three
marks. I can't remember the measurements, but they indicate how far
the wax pocket will extend for various thicknesses of the gauge used.
A DIY is to use a single sheet of paper for one, doubled for the next,
tripled for the final. You use those various pockets to either
determine where to wax for certain conditions or how to feather your
wax thickness/layers.

Second, I don't believe the "theory" is that the pocket collapses
under 100% weighting. You get the ski fitted according to your weight,
the ski flex pattern and you ability and inclinations. In fact, I
don't believe that a well-fitted ski for a good skier will collapse
under 100% weight. IT might flatten enough so that a piece of paper
won't slide, but that doesn't mean it's totally flattened. It means it
flattens to XXmm (the thickness of the paper) under 100% weight.

Skis are then fitted so that, in essence, the 100% weighted gap
between the floor and the ski depends on the skier's ability to get
weight on that ski and to drive it downward in the kick phase.

One extreme are the recreational shuffler who really needs the pocket
to collapse totally or nearly totally (at least to the thickness of a
layer or two of grip wax) at a weight less than 100% so that he/she
can get grip w/o good balance or weight transfer.

The other extreme is the extremely strong expert skier with excellent
technique, balance and strong drive from the legs during kick. That
person can get grip at more than 100% body weight on a single ski
because of the strentgh of the leg pushing down and the total
committment of weight onto that ski. That person is likely to have
better glide because at any state less than 100% weight + downward
kick of a strong leg, the kick zone is either not in contact with the
snow at all, or is gliding lightly.

Finally, the ski and wax are designed to glide well even though the
kick wax might be in contact with the snow. It doesn't have to be off
the snow to work. If it's heavily weighted as when you kick or if you
extend the kick wax beyond the kick zone so that it is relatively
heavily weighted even in glide phase, it will grip as it's designed.
If it's lightly weighted, it glides.

So, ski fitting and waxing based on how the ski flexes in the wax
pocket is not as simple as the theory you described, and nothing is
"dictated" - it is guidelines which are used by experienced skiers and
fitters to first select a ski for the skier and then to wax.... and
the waxing and marking of the wax pocket is modified based on actual
skiing experience.

On Mar 30, 4:31*pm, Bob Schwartz
wrote:


When I was first applying grip tape this winter I started
short and added bits until it didn't suck.
Boy, do they lie about the upper temperature range of that
stuff.

The Start guys aren't lying: I happily skied 50 km on new wet snow on
Saturday and another 50 km on groomed wet snow on Sunday, both in
cloudy weather and temperatures that pushed the upper limit of +5
degrees C (~40 F?). My grip was excellent and my glide was fine.

OTOH I can remember spending more time on my knees than kicking on the
uphills on another occasion in very similar temperatures. IIRC it was
when there had been a small drizzle that had left a film of water on
cold old snow.

In other words, there are factors other than temperature that can make
the equation rather impossible to solve in all cases - and the wax
manufacturers invariably choose to omit to mention that the wax
doesn't necessarily work in all possible conditions within the given
temperature range.


Anders

On Mar 31, 12:11*am, anders wrote:
On Mar 30, 4:31*pm, Bob Schwartz
wrote:

When I was first applying grip tape this winter I started
short and added bits until it didn't suck.
Boy, do they lie about the upper temperature range of that
stuff.

The Start guys aren't lying: I happily skied 50 km on new wet snow on
Saturday and another 50 km on groomed wet snow on Sunday, both in
cloudy weather and temperatures that pushed the upper limit of +5
degrees C (~40 F?). *My grip was excellent *and my glide was fine.

OTOH I can remember spending more time on my knees than kicking on the
uphills on another occasion in very similar temperatures. IIRC it was
when there had been a small drizzle that had left a film of water on
cold old snow.

In other words, there are factors other than temperature that can make
the equation rather impossible to solve in all cases - and the wax
manufacturers invariably choose to omit to mention that the wax
doesn't necessarily work in all possible conditions within the given
temperature range.

Anders

I kept the first generation Start kick tape on one pair of skis for a
whole season, and part of the next. I tried it under many conditions
on my home trails in western Colorado at 10,000ft and always had
horrible glid. I applied it in the klister zone. Maybe it was my skis,
but I think not. Kick wax is easy and works great here on our cold dry
snow, until March-April when fishscales rule.

I tried Start this winter and it seemed fine.

It abraded off in harsh conditions.

I used it on a couple big days with tape on one ski and wax on another
and I could never tell them apart.

This is for touring in ungroomed self-skied-in tracks.

Seemed better than nowax. Quiet.

I also started very short and got no kick then added chunks til it
started working good. Now I don't recall where I ended up...

--JP

anders wrote:
On Mar 30, 4:31 pm, Bob Schwartz
wrote:


When I was first applying grip tape this winter I started
short and added bits until it didn't suck.
Boy, do they lie about the upper temperature range of that
stuff.

The Start guys aren't lying: I happily skied 50 km on new wet snow on
Saturday and another 50 km on groomed wet snow on Sunday, both in
cloudy weather and temperatures that pushed the upper limit of +5
degrees C (~40 F?). My grip was excellent and my glide was fine.

OTOH I can remember spending more time on my knees than kicking on the
uphills on another occasion in very similar temperatures. IIRC it was
when there had been a small drizzle that had left a film of water on
cold old snow.

In other words, there are factors other than temperature that can make
the equation rather impossible to solve in all cases - and the wax
manufacturers invariably choose to omit to mention that the wax
doesn't necessarily work in all possible conditions within the given
temperature range.


Anders

I never had it work well for me above freezing. It was much
better below freezing, very consistent. I guess it was
consistent above freezing too, it never worked. I think it
took me a little longer to determine the correct wax pocket
through experimentation because of that.

Bob Schwartz

At the WC level, skiers work with about 30 pairs of classic skis and
30 pairs of skate skis. Then they choose the 4-5 best (best gripper
and best glider) for travel during WC season.
If we had the chance to try 30 different pairs of skis with different
cambers strengths and lengths, we would not need to ask about ski wax
pocket. But it is not the case (for me at least :( ).

The way I approach my classic skis is that I try to get the optimum
(best glide for best grip), and tend too often to comprise kick for
glide. Sometimes it's a good choice, sometimes (too many times?) it's
not, depending on the course and snow conditons.

Rock