or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Full Tune - No Detune

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 

Never thought about this before, but, I just turned my wife's and my skis in for full tunes and told the shop we wanted 1 on the base and 3 on the side and didn't want them detuned. The tech said they don't detune them, they just change the base bevel to 3 at the tip and tail, to which I responded I wanted 1 all the way. Did I make a mistake? Were they always like that and I just didn't notice??? I pretty much never touched the base edges, just the sides, and I always assumed base edges were 1 degree from tip to tail. We will be picking them up next weekend, just in time for race camp, and now I'm worried about her hooking up and face planting, then I'll never hear the end of it. eek.gif

 

Spacecase

post #2 of 30

I prefer my skis sharp tip to tail, and run the same bevels for the entire length. 

 

Some folks change base bevel as they approach the tips in order to achieve the same purpose as detuning.  I guess if you don't want what you do with your ski tips to affect how you ski it doesn't matter if they are detuned, debevelled, or bent up out of the way (ok, being facetious here), but I wouldn't want them to gradually sort of kind of do what I tell them to.  I want my skis completely under my control and strongly responsive.

 

IMHO if you (not you you, but the proverbial you) can't handle a good race tune, you should sharpen your skills.

post #3 of 30
Thread Starter 

That's what I thought, and why it surprised me when he said that after I said we wanted them tuned for racing. Just wanted to make sure I hadn't missed a super secret memo.

 

Hmmm... maybe, he thought we are newbies since we don't race on "Race" skis, and was trying to "protect" us...

post #4 of 30

I think there are a lot of folk who are not really into carving and don't like that locked in on rails feeling.  They prefer a more gradual "soft" entry into the turn, with the tips just more or less gradually gripping the snow and eventually pulling hard enough to make the turn.  For these folks, a race tune would suddenly and unexpectedly jerk them into a turn or rip out part of their knee if they weren't prepared to go along with that sudden turn.

 

There are other ways these skiers are accommodated, like having a soft enough torsional flex so that the ski won't grip the snow too hard.  It is admittedly easier to control "steered" turns with a less aggressive tune.  I'm leaving my Völkls at 1: 2 (I much prefer 0.5, 3), just to explore this aspect of skiing.  The base beveling change as you approach the tip is the best compromise for this type of skiing, as it allows good grip under foot, but still permits easy engagement control of the tips.

post #5 of 30

When a ski is layed up on edge the side bevel is going to matter more than the base bevel. I have some skis with a base bevel as high as 1.5 and they still carve fine, but what it lets me do while not carving is a huge improvement.

post #6 of 30

For me detuneing depends a lot on the ski.

 

I use three pairs of skis for NASTAR,

The Volkl Racetigers have a very strong tip that pulls you into the turn. They are easily overturned which costs time.  These skis are very sensitive to detuneing and I detune them a bit unless I expect hard ice.

My old Atomic LT12 21m Race Stock skis are so limp and flexy in the tip that detuneing makes no difference at all.  When I can put these skis through the couse well they are 1/2-1 second faster than the Volkls.

When the course setter gets creative and jams in the gates I run a pair of Elan SCX slalom skis.  These soft slalom skis are still wicked when skied GS style and would probably wreck me if I didn't detune tham a bit.

 

Tuning is very ski and skill sensitive.

You will never know how it affects your skis until you experiment by getting them really sharp then working them down over a series of runs to see the difference.

In soft snow none of this matters.

 

Based on my 50 years of skiing experience.

post #7 of 30


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

For me detuneing depends a lot on the ski.

 

I use three pairs of skis for NASTAR,

The Volkl Racetigers have a very strong tip that pulls you into the turn. They are easily overturned which costs time.  These skis are very sensitive to detuneing and I detune them a bit unless I expect hard ice.

My old Atomic LT12 21m Race Stock skis are so limp and flexy in the tip that detuneing makes no difference at all.  When I can put these skis through the couse well they are 1/2-1 second faster than the Volkls.

When the course setter gets creative and jams in the gates I run a pair of Elan SCX slalom skis.  These soft slalom skis are still wicked when skied GS style and would probably wreck me if I didn't detune tham a bit.

 

Tuning is very ski and skill sensitive.

You will never know how it affects your skis until you experiment by getting them really sharp then working them down over a series of runs to see the difference.

In soft snow none of this matters.

 

Based on my 50 years of skiing experience.


If you are at a point where you are confidently comparing times between different pairs of race skis you own, and can quantify how tip / tail edge tuning affects your times, you are operating on a level of sophistication and experience much higher than the one most people are at when they ask the basic question about detuning that the OP asked. I'm guessing the OP just wants a place to start, and your comment that you should start "by getting them really sharp" seems totally on the money to me.

 

I feel strongly that having detuned tips and tails is a HUGE roadblock to acquiring the feel for the kind of carved turn the OP's spouse is going to need if she's headed for race camp, at least here in the icy East, and is a major cause for frustration and failure in this area. It was only after - and IMMEDIATELY after - a friend tuned my skis for me and left them sharp all the way to the ends, quite a few years ago, that I really started to "get it" on boilerplate. So I say you start with no detuning (or increased base bevel) and go from there.

post #8 of 30

Let me say a bit more.

I sharpen knives as a meditation and can get a pair of skis so sharp that they will cut you without a burr on the edge.

That's a bit too sharp and one pass with a gummi stone brings them into the ballpark.

NASTAR is a great testing ground since the hill is non-threatening and you can really work on equipment and technique without the fear factor.

I do about 100 runs a year on the same hill with the same pacesetter.

Even though he really varies the course and I get more on my game as the season progresses, equipment and wax effects become apparent.

I don't think there is a better way to really inderstand carving.

True, the technique doesn't carry over into a Masters GS course but the equipment knowledgee does.

Ski racing is a game of inches and what seperates me from the best young dogs is about 50' at the finish.

Starting is critical too.

Most drag races are won in the first 60' with motorcycles.

Any fool can pin the throttle.

 

Nationally ranked #12 in 65-69 Platinum Class.

post #9 of 30

Something about base bevel.

Base bevel affects how far out to the side your skis get before they start to hook up in a turn.

With too little they start to hook up under you and they become touchy to steer into the turn.

The more you add the further out they get before they hook.

If you are strong and believe they will hook up eventually, you can get enough edge angle to carve a cow then really stand on the things, quickly release and adjust your trajectory.

One of the really cool things about carving is that period of time when the skis are crossing your upper body in a turn and you are weightless.

Your brain thinks you are headed for a wreck.

Then the skis hook, the G's build, and you are going somewhere else without losing any speed.

Higher base bevel angles require more faith in your equipment.

Get 'em way out there and believe!

 

I think changing bevel is adding an extra variable into my equipment that will be difficult to figure out.

My basic tune is 1 and 3.

Get them real sharp and put a diamond stone in your pocket.

Make a series of increasingly powerful GS turns and if they start to feel like they might get out of control, detune a bit.

I detune heavily above the snow contact line so they don't do something evil if I drive into a bump.

post #10 of 30

I only detune my tip/tail of my S7's, mostly because of the reverse sidecut in the tip and tail tends to snag in bumps and cause me grief.  My other ski's i don't bother and keep them sharp.  I say try them without a detune then do a light detune to see if you like it, you can always reverse it if you do it lightly.  

post #11 of 30

You missed the point. (Pardon the punwink.gif)

 

Ya gotta to get to the side edge first and the correct base bevel particulalry in the tip and tail are crucial to how the ski transitions to the side edge.

 

The tip and tail should have the same base bevel as the rest of the ski,  unless you have a known alignment issue.

 

Also if you start at a 1 you can always slightly increase the base bevel in increments.

 

If you start at a 3 degree base edge at the tip 'n tail there is no going back. You have to regrind the whole ski!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

When a ski is layed up on edge the side bevel is going to matter more than the base bevel. I have some skis with a base bevel as high as 1.5 and they still carve fine, but what it lets me do while not carving is a huge improvement.



 


Edited by Atomicman - 11/27/11 at 10:19pm
post #12 of 30
Thread Starter 

I guess we'll try them out on Sunday before race camp and see how we like them. The main reason for my question, is 3 degrees base bevel at the tip seems pretty excessive, if they are hooking up too much, I may go with 1.5 then 2. I need to see if Alpinord can get me a Ski Sharp here by Friday.

 

BTW, Her skis are Volkl Tierras and mine are Volkl Grizzlies. And yes, I race GS on them, for the last two years I even raced slalom on them, until I picked up the Head C180s.

 

Spacecase

post #13 of 30


3 degree base bevel anywhere on the ski is ridiculous. A true clean accurate burr free 1 degree shold ski perfectly. Only after tryingthat if they were not satisfactory would I increase the tip & tail bevel in very small increments.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacecase View Post

I guess we'll try them out on Sunday before race camp and see how we like them. The main reason for my question, is 3 degrees base bevel at the tip seems pretty excessive, if they are hooking up too much, I may go with 1.5 then 2. I need to see if Alpinord can get me a Ski Sharp here by Friday.

 

BTW, Her skis are Volkl Tierras and mine are Volkl Grizzlies. And yes, I race GS on them, for the last two years I even raced slalom on them, until I picked up the Head C180s.

 

Spacecase



 

post #14 of 30

A different point of view. Really think about this, it may transform your skiing.

 

Actually your skis don't go out to the side, your COM gets inside your skis.  Hw far you have to tip your ski to engage the side edge is determined by how much base bevel.

 

I can stand directly over my skis (and so can you) and roll my ankles and feet and get to the side edge without the skis getting to "OUT" to the side as you put it at all. But to tighten the trun radius and achieve higher edge angles which are needed to tighten the turn raidus I need to inclinate (get inside the turn without leaning in) and angulate appropriatley!


 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

 

Base bevel affects how far out to the side your skis get before they start to hook up in a turn.

 

post #15 of 30

In physics it is called taking either the Eulerian or La Grangian viewpoint.

You can look at things like you are the skier or you can look at things like you are the ski.

The whole discussion about skis crossing under or your COM crossing over is not very useful.

My skiing goal is to keep my upper body as still as possible and let my skis go where they need to be.

 

We are talking about the same phenomena, how base bevel affect the hook up characteristics of the ski at low edge angles.

I can't edge my ski with while standing directly over it by pronating my feet in my boots.

I can put more pressure on the inside edges by pressuring the inside of my foot.

But without any edge angle on the ski the pressure doesn't do much.

I also don't think the" roll your ankles inside your boots" view is physically accurate.

If you can actually pronate your foot inside a stiff boot something is wrong with your fit.

 

I think people use their foot and ankle muscles to vary the pressure distribution across the botttom of their foot.

You can push with your big toe or you can push with your little toe.

This is not ankle rolling but it feels like it.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

I'd change my mind if someone posts a posterior skelatal drawing showing how the bones move to create an edge angle when the foot is directly under the hip and knee.

 

 

 

post #16 of 30

Knee angulation & tipping  your feet (boots and all) stand up and do it!

 

And actually you should be able to do some fine balance adjustments insdie your boot. I ski in a NON_POSTED footbed for this very reason and have my boots ground on the medial side to allow some room. Other wise you can only use gross motor movements at the hip to balance laterally

 

Read this!

 

 

 

#4 - Skiing Inside The Boot

At Harb Ski Systems we are always striving to put our customers and ourselves in the best products available in the ski industry. My staff and coaches are all professional skiers and have been for many decades. These people are not just instructors and coaches, but also boot fitters, footbed specialists and alignment experts. We feel that to teach skiing properly at the highest level you must understand the whole system: feet, ankles, boots and alignment.

With this level of understanding, ski instruction becomes very precise and effective. My staff and I are always looking to enhance our own experience on snow. Therefore I encourage them to try many products and to modify their own. Recently, we have been working on ski boot modifications.

Last summer, I modified many ski boots at Mt. Hood for FIS Junior US development racers with great success. We began this season modifying ski boots for many other racers including World Cup and US Ski Team racer, Erik Schlopy. This has become an ongoing relationship. We send modified boots to Europe for Erik and he sends his new boots to us from Europe to modify. Erik, remember, has access to the best boot technicians the World Cup can provide, but prefers to send his boots to us. We are working on two different modifications on Erik's boots. They increase the ability of the foot and ankle to produce edging power and the ability of the ankle to access the boot wall through medial wall and boot board modifications. These are the same movements of the ankle we try to provide for all our footbed and alignment customers.

 

The functional articulation of the ankle and foot in the boot provides and enhances the skier's ability to make refined, fine-tuning movements to adjust the ski edge angle on the snow. If this articulation is not available, movements are made at the hip using the adductor muscles to lever the ski on edge. This is a very gross motor movement and does not allow for much adjustment once the movement to the edge begins. In high-end expert skiing or World Cup racing the combination of ankle, foot and leg edging adjustments is essential.

So, why do so few recreational skiers have access to these movements? Because most industry footbeds are overposted and too rigid. This concept has been in my mind and I have applied it for generations as a ski racer, skier, coach and instructor. I have always felt that foot and ankle articulation in the boot are critical to skier performance, especially in the areas of ski edging, holding and controlling. But everywhere I investigated, even to this day, I find that the ski industry is trying to accomplish exactly the opposite.

With hard footbeds and ski boot walls that are very tight on the medial (inside) ankle, most products reduce lateral movement of the ankle toward the boot wall - reducing or eliminating foot articulation. In some ways of thinking this can be justified and explained to seem like a benefit. For example, if rigid footbeds with dense material filling the arch stop any foot movement, one could think that you would get immediate edge and energy transfer. Yes, this does seem to make sense - until you begin to understand that you are now forced to use your upper leg muscles to achieve this immediate edging and transfer. The upper leg muscles (adductors) do not have the ability to fine-tune the edge, thus eliminating any presumed "benefit" of the rigid footbed/immediate-edge-power concept.

Skiers whom we have converted from rigid footbeds to those that allow articulation become more balanced, smooth, and fluid. They also benefit from better foot circulation and therefore have warmer toes. Many overposted and rigid-footed skiers fight their edges. The lack of foot articulation creates chatter on hard snow and over-steering on soft snow. The skis are also super-reactive and feel nervous. Many skiers complain of arch pressure or even pain, but are afraid to mention it because they supposedly bought a "special upgrade". All these problems can be immediately relieved with a more compliant and accurately designed footbed. Now we must keep in mind that every body has different abilities and needs. Some skiers have excess foot movement that needs to be controlled, though not eliminated. A rigid foot and ankle demonstrate the opposite needs.

The rigid foot and ankle are particularly interesting because increasing range of lateral movement in the ankle and foot is much more difficult than reducing range of motion. Hence every footbed needs to be carefully designed and built for the needs of the individual foot to optimize lateral edging power, allowing the range of articulation of the foot and ankle required to apply force to the boot wall. Applying force to the boot wall can only be achieved if the muscles that tip - evert - the foot can function. The peroneal muscles that run up along the outside of the tibia must be able to move the foot through some range of motion for this to occur.

In our painstaking effort to evaluate a skier's balance on snow, we came across some interesting findings. We video all of the skiers who come to our camps while they perform on-snow balancing exercises. After careful analysis of the skiers before and after alignment, over a period of six years, we have determined that skiers with rigid feet and skiers with flexible feet both suffered similar consequences from rigid, inflexible footbeds. These skiers were not able to use their lower joints in the ski boot to help balance or edge the ski. They instead leaned or otherwise used the upper body in a contrived manner to lever the ski to an edge. Most of these skiers cannot engage the edge of the ski – make it slice into the snow. Instead, they demonstrate slipping of the ski.

After a complete set of range-of-motion measurements are taken and a footbed made to allow for proper articulation of the ankle and foot, the skiers again perform the on-snow balance exercises. This second set of exercises yields very different results. Again, slow motion video analysis is used to determine differences in balancing and skiing abilities. One noticeable difference is a new, relaxed body position. The lower body acts as an adjuster of balance and the upper body a stable unit over the boots and feet. Some observers go so far as to say that, the skiers skied as if they had another joint to use in the boot to edge and balance over the ski. Another noticeable difference is an improvement in the skier's ability to engage the edge of the ski, eliminating the slipping that was previously evident. In this season alone we have assembled quantifiable evidence that the footbed and movements I am describing in this article are not only effective but also necessary for higher performance and comfort. We have documented major performance increases with ski racers the very next day after footbed changes. In one particular case, the ski racer improved by thirty FIS points on three different occasions. This occurred without further coaching or equipment changes.

We can document such changes in recreational skiers by video and observing their improved edging and ski performance characteristics, but many objectors and detractors would claim that this is unscientific. When we have quantifiable results based on huge improvements in racing times, there is very little left to doubt. When the top ski racers in this country are noticing the performance benefits, and when our recreational skiers are noticeably skiing better and improving faster, that's all the proof they need.

 

post #17 of 30


 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
 

[ snip - quoting from Harb (I think) ]

So, why do so few recreational skiers have access to these movements? Because most industry footbeds are overposted and too rigid. This concept has been in my mind and I have applied it for generations as a ski racer, skier, coach and instructor. I have always felt that foot and ankle articulation in the boot are critical to skier performance, especially in the areas of ski edging, holding and controlling. But everywhere I investigated, even to this day, I find that the ski industry is trying to accomplish exactly the opposite.

With hard footbeds and ski boot walls that are very tight on the medial (inside) ankle, most products reduce lateral movement of the ankle toward the boot wall - reducing or eliminating foot articulation.

 

,,,

 

Skiers whom we have converted from rigid footbeds to those that allow articulation become more balanced, smooth, and fluid.

 

I remember having a pair of Caber boots, circa 1980, whose big claim to fame was that the underside of the boot board sported a hard rubber ridge down the long axis, so that the whole thing could rock slightly, side-to-side. Not saying this was good or bad, or that it represents exactly what is being talked about here, but the basic concept sure sounds similar. What goes around comes around.

post #18 of 30


That was the Caber Bio Boot
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post


 

 

I remember having a pair of Caber boots, circa 1980, whose big claim to fame was that the underside of the boot board sported a hard rubber ridge down the long axis, so that the whole thing could rock slightly, side-to-side. Not saying this was good or bad, or that it represents exactly what is being talked about here, but the basic concept sure sounds similar. What goes around comes around.



 

post #19 of 30

I wish some of the real bootfitters on this forum would comment.

Harb's theories are somewhat contraversial I think.

Knee angulation is a myth unless the knee is bent.

Stick your leg out straight and try to articulate your lower leg laterally at the knee.

Doesn't happen with normal joints.

With the knee bent you can get all kinds of "Knee angulation" by rotating the femur in its socket using the hip rotator muscles.

I do adjust my turns by using my foot and ankle muscles to shift weight laterally across the foot.

This changes the pressure distribution under the ski but not edge angle.

When I watch a good boot fitter put a racer in a plug boot that his foot barely fits with the ultra thin lace up liner out, I cant imagine that there is room in there for ankle pronation.

Indeed, I think a lot of the stuff that skiers talk about is not anatomically possible.

Good discussion though...keep it coming.

 

post #20 of 30


I ski in a Full plug Head Raptor 150 with an ultra thin lace up liner. Couldn't put 'em on 'til they were worked on. But where your thinking goes astray is that the ;lowere shell has so mch plastic thickness it can easily (and was) grond to allow room for the navicular  which does allow fine adjustment momvemnets in the boot particulalry with a non-posted bed.

 

And I can absolutly get my skis up on edge with them directly below my torso.

 

No one said to keep your leg straight. i said stand over your feet and employ knee angulation and you can easily simultaneously turn both skis on edge without getting your ski out from underneath you or by  inside of the skis path.

 

http://www.yourskicoach.com/SkiGlossary/Angulation.html

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

I wish some of the real bootfitters on this forum would comment.

Harb's theories are somewhat contraversial I think.

Knee angulation is a myth unless the knee is bent.

Stick your leg out straight and try to articulate your lower leg laterally at the knee.

Doesn't happen with normal joints.

With the knee bent you can get all kinds of "Knee angulation" by rotating the femur in its socket using the hip rotator muscles.

I do adjust my turns by using my foot and ankle muscles to shift weight laterally across the foot.

This changes the pressure distribution under the ski but not edge angle.

When I watch a good boot fitter put a racer in a plug boot that his foot barely fits with the ultra thin lace up liner out, I cant imagine that there is room in there for ankle pronation.

Indeed, I think a lot of the stuff that skiers talk about is not anatomically possible.

Good discussion though...keep it coming.

 



 

post #21 of 30


Harb's theroies in this case don't seem controversial at all to me. They seem to proven by in depth video analysis and direct improvement in race results.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

I wish some of the real bootfitters on this forum would comment.

Harb's theories are somewhat contraversial I think.

Knee angulation is a myth unless the knee is bent.

Stick your leg out straight and try to articulate your lower leg laterally at the knee.

Doesn't happen with normal joints.

With the knee bent you can get all kinds of "Knee angulation" by rotating the femur in its socket using the hip rotator muscles.

I do adjust my turns by using my foot and ankle muscles to shift weight laterally across the foot.

This changes the pressure distribution under the ski but not edge angle.

When I watch a good boot fitter put a racer in a plug boot that his foot barely fits with the ultra thin lace up liner out, I cant imagine that there is room in there for ankle pronation.

Indeed, I think a lot of the stuff that skiers talk about is not anatomically possible.

Good discussion though...keep it coming.

 



 

post #22 of 30

As regards how much posting and support is best in the custom footbed, one point that hasn't been mentioned much, and that I think is very important is that it really depends on how much force you are expecting that foot to withstand and transmit.  If you are pulling 3-g turns at high speeds on rough terrain, then you probably would bennefit from an "over-posted" foot bed.  If you are making lazy .5 to 1.5 g turns then a softer more flexible footbed is in order.   You pay your money and make your choice depending on what is most important to you.  There is no "best" option for everything, just like there has to be compromise in what ski you want to own for all purposes.  At one time I was happy to put up with a SG in moguls so I could enjoy skiing at DH speeds, now... not so much.

post #23 of 30


With all due respect, this concept of how fast you ski and how many G's you are pulling is totally without merit in reference to a posted or non posted footbed.  It is just not a relatable.

 

Much more important is physiology( pronated, suppinated for example) and rigid or amourphous foot. But more importantl, physiology  in combination with the ability to micro mange your balance.

 

Apparantly you didn't read the article I posted and you know that I ski race skis on hard snow and have race Master's  including a p[air of Atomic 209 Super G's and I will only skis in a no posted footbed. the Head Rep here who is on hell of a skier also skis on a non-posted bed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

As regards how much posting and support is best in the custom footbed, one point that hasn't been mentioned much, and that I think is very important is that it really depends on how much force you are expecting that foot to withstand and transmit.  If you are pulling 3-g turns at high speeds on rough terrain, then you probably would bennefit from an "over-posted" foot bed.  If you are making lazy .5 to 1.5 g turns then a softer more flexible footbed is in order.   You pay your money and make your choice depending on what is most important to you.  There is no "best" option for everything, just like there has to be compromise in what ski you want to own for all purposes.  At one time I was happy to put up with a SG in moguls so I could enjoy skiing at DH speeds, now... not so much.



 

 

post #24 of 30

I certainly read Harb's article and it is not the first time footbed compliance has been a topic of discussion.

I think Ghost makes a good point...a skier is going to need different amounts of footbed compliance depending on their discipline.

A world cup downhiller skiing at the limit of control at 90 MPH is going to need different suspension than a ballet skier.

 

Now, I do know something about skiing from the ankles since I am old enough to have actually used leather boots and longthongs.

Skiing from the ankles was about all you could do with Stein era equipment.

Whatever you do with your foot and ankle muscles in modern equipment is all about fine balance skills.

The power is generated where you have some lever arm over your skis...namely the upper cuff.

I have never been very convinced that a lot of PSIA style fine balance drilling has much to do with advanced skiing.

It is helpful in a teaching progression, looks cool and lets instructors show off but I doubt that Body is very good at it.

Generating large edge angles means the forces are large too and it takes a correctly stacked skeleton and big muscles to make that work.

post #25 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post


With all due respect, this concept of how fast you ski and how many G's you are pulling is totally without merit in reference to a posted or non posted footbed.  It is just not a relatable.

 

Much more important is physiology( pronated, suppinated for example) and rigid or amourphous foot. But more importantl, physiology  in combination with the ability to micro mange your balance.

 

Apparantly you didn't read the article I posted and you know that I ski race skis on hard snow and have race Master's  including a p[air of Atomic 209 Super G's and I will only skis in a no posted footbed. the Head Rep here who is on hell of a skier also skis on a non-posted bed.



 

 



I have read it, but quite some time ago.   I still maintain that a different amount of compliance and support when forces are larger than when forces are smaller will work better than having the same soft footbed regardless of the actual forces involved.  Maybe I'm just a Ludite, but I need some convincing using a good physical argument (not just personal annecdotes and opinion) to convince me otherwise.

post #26 of 30

Not really interested in arguing. You're entitled to your opinion.

 

 

post #27 of 30


By the way, soft and non-posted are NOT the same
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post



I have read it, but quite some time ago.   I still maintain that a different amount of compliance and support when forces are larger than when forces are smaller will work better than having the same soft footbed regardless of the actual forces involved.  Maybe I'm just a Ludite, but I need some convincing using a good physical argument (not just personal annecdotes and opinion) to convince me otherwise.



 

post #28 of 30

I deceidied I'm not done here.

 

Ghost, you have not shwon even anecdotela evidence. Nothing, notta, just some idea you dreamed up.

 

Har did hours of video analysis, worked on this with World Cup and other racers

 

We can document such changes in recreational skiers by video and observing their improved edging and ski performance characteristics, but many objectors and detractors would claim that this is unscientific. When we have quantifiable results based on huge improvements in racing times, there is very little left to doubt. When the top ski racers in this country are noticing the performance benefits, and when our recreational skiers are noticeably skiing better and improving faster, that's all the proof they need.

 

 

NO mention is made in this article of different foot bed versions for different raace discipline in my estimation because the type of footbed should be determined by physiology and biomechanics,  neither of which change beause your speed increases. After all no matter what the footbed hat is needed for a particular skier. it still rests on a hard solid boot board.

 

I have been told by credible sources there are top World cup racers that use no footbed.

 

 

You have not one shred of evidence ,fact anecdotes, or even a sniff of information, showing that a hard posted footbed is preferable to a non-posted footbed for speed events.

 

At least I have shown some fact, testing and outside opinion, other then mine, of the attributes for certain skiers of a non-posted bed.


Edited by Atomicman - 12/26/11 at 10:01am
post #29 of 30

This whole thread is getting derailed here, guys.

post #30 of 30

"I have been told by credible sources there are top World cup racers that use no footbed."

Me too, and that is about as non compliant as a footbed gets.

Yah, this thread has been kinda hijacked but it still is about the effects of tuning on edge engagement.

What I see is good racers with boots so tightly fitted that they must be heated to get them on or off.

I doubt that there are soft or non posted footbeds in those boots.

Speed secrets are hard to elucidate in any sport but in skiing the top racers seem to go towards ultra tight fit which maximizes energy transmission to and from the ski.

There is always one racer who is exploring new ground looking for advantage but, in general, the top guys in most sports are running very similar setups.

If only we really knew what that was.

You are as likely to get a look inside a world cuppers boots as you are to get a look under the hood of a NASCAR in racing trim.

 

Recreational skiing is different and skiing all day takes its own setup.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs