EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs › 1 degree base and edge bevel vs just edge bevel?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

1 degree base and edge bevel vs just edge bevel?

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

I recently asked our local shop whether their new $40K tuning machine could do a base bevel, and was told only the edge should be beveled.
All other shops I have asked over the years say the same.

 

30 years ago I worked at the Copper Mountain repair shop, where we often tuned skis for racers.  Our shop was taught a base beveling technique where both the edge and the base were beveled one degrees, so that the file actually beveled both the base and the edge about 1/4 inch in from the edge.  A shop in Frisco, which only did ski tuning, primarily for racers, taught us this technique.  The angle is achieved by wrapping duct tape around the end of a panzer file. I also side bevel 1 degree to keep the edge at 90 deg.

 

I have used this technique on all of my skis since and find that the ski is more forgiving, and that I feel stabler at higher speeds. Also, there is then little need to detune the tips and tails.

 

I'm just wondering if this tuning technique was used elsewhere 30 years ago and whether it is still in use today. It sure works for me.

 

 

 

post #2 of 24

what you say is fairly accurate as far as the duct tape wrap but I would stay away from using a panzer file. it eats up too much edge

post #3 of 24

What???  You are trying to make the ptex base convex???  Most racers I know would be looking more at REDUCING the base bevel (metal part, NOT the BASE) to less than 1 rather than removing enough metal to carry that bevel into the base itself.  I'm sure you could do this by hand at home but why would you want LESS control?  

 

I can't wait to see how this thread develops....

 

popcorn.gif

post #4 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

What???  You are trying to make the ptex base convex???  Most racers I know would be looking more at REDUCING the base bevel (metal part, NOT the BASE) to less than 1 rather than removing enough metal to carry that bevel into the base itself.  I'm sure you could do this by hand at home but why would you want LESS control?  

 

I can't wait to see how this thread develops....

 

popcorn.gif



its not less control, its just less grip at lower edge angles which can make it easier to feather and slide...

post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 

Keep in mind that I didn't just dream this up.  It was in wide use by racers in Summit County, Colorado 30 years ago.  My main question is whether others have heard of it and whether it is still in use.  So far it appears that two others have heard of it, and one has not.  I'm hoping for more input either for or against, but I'm encouraged because the techs in ski shops in Colorado and the Sierra's just look at me like I'm crazy.

 

I realize it is kind of like having a convex base, but in reality +90% of the base is flat and only the outer 1/4" or so is beveled, so to compensate to set an edge the skier has to angulate an additional 1 deg which is about 3/8 of an inch at knee height.  The racers apparently felt the additional angulation required was justified in order to make the ski faster and more forgiving.

 

Like I said before I can easily feel the difference. Last season I did not have access to a good bench so could not base bevel my new skis. This year I beveled and it has markedly improved my ski performance.

 

The panzer file does remove a lot of material, but is only used in the initial ski prep, which is quite a chore and can take a bit of time. A finer file is used for later tuning.

 

thanks again

Izzenhood

Grand Junction, Colorado

 

By the way, skiing is still great at Powderhorn, we presently have some of the best snow in the state.

post #6 of 24

Of course, 30 years ago we didn't have shaped skis and the whole racing style was markedly different.  Racers were on 215's (or more?).  

post #7 of 24
Thread Starter 

Sibhusky

 

I agree that shorter length and todays ski designs may negate the need for base beveling, and that is why I ask. 
 

Since I'm now on 177's instead of 207's I wonder if the base beveling practice is still in use.  I've never gotten a straight answer from a typical ski shop, even when 205's were the norm.

Maybe it was just a local practice in central Colorado, but it still makes my cambered skis perform better.

 

Izzenhood

 

post #8 of 24

It's common to bevel the base .5* or 1*   extending the bevel into the base is not something I have heard of. could be too much. keep going and you'll have a hull instead of a base. (obscure reference)

 

The thinking is that it makes it less likely to catch an edge when sliding the ski

 

All my skis have base bevel in that range.

post #9 of 24

Perhaps the type of base beveling years ago was usually only used on DH skis which were at least 220cm in length. Shorter skis,

200 to 207cm generally were not beveled 1/4" in and were usually filed flat or as near flat as we could get them.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Izzenhood View Post

Sibhusky

 

I agree that shorter length and todays ski designs may negate the need for base beveling, and that is why I ask. 
 

Since I'm now on 177's instead of 207's I wonder if the base beveling practice is still in use.  I've never gotten a straight answer from a typical ski shop, even when 205's were the norm.

Maybe it was just a local practice in central Colorado, but it still makes my cambered skis perform better.

 

Izzenhood

 



 

post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 

Actually, when I worked at the Copper Mountain repair shop we base beveled slalom and GS skis. I do not remember ever doing a DH ski.

 

As far as removing too much material.  A one degree bevel extending 3/8" into the ski would only remove about 1/128" of edge, and less base.

 

I appreciate all the response. Looks like the nays are outnumbering the yays.

post #11 of 24

It is not uncommon to base bevel these days. The degree to which you do bevel them depends on the skier, terrain, etc. many racers are using 0deg or small increments on slalom skis.  I'm surprised you haven't been told a number of opinions on what base bevel to use based on your skiing style but in my opinion it is something you need to develop a preference for - greater base bevel will feel more "loose" 

 

If you start at zero and experiment you can find your happy place but start near zero as you can't put it back (just have to grind it again)

 

 

post #12 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sitskib View Post

It is not uncommon to base bevel these days. The degree to which you do bevel them depends on the skier, terrain, etc. many racers are using 0deg or small increments on slalom skis.  I'm surprised you haven't been told a number of opinions on what base bevel to use based on your skiing style but in my opinion it is something you need to develop a preference for - greater base bevel will feel more "loose" 

 

If you start at zero and experiment you can find your happy place but start near zero as you can't put it back (just have to grind it again)

 

 


Just to be certain that we are all on the same page; by base bevel I am refering to a bevel of the base edge with the bevel continuing into the base material.  Alternatively, when most people refer to a base bevel they are talking only about a bevel of the base edge.

 

When we were tuning skis we almost always beveled the base and edge at 1 degree by filing until we could see that we had removed base material up to 1/3 or 3/8 of an inch away from the edge.  Some preferred 2 degrees.  1 degrees always felt pretty good to me.

 

Our method of determining the bevel angle was crude. We wrapped duct tape around the end of the file until it was at the thickness necessary for either a one or two degree bevel, based on the ski width.

 

Thanks for your input Sitskib.


 

 

post #13 of 24

I keep saying to myself.. 30 years ago were we still using wood bases without metal edges?  But no, there was p-tex and metal 30 years ago.  All I can think of was that the turn method relied on pivoting the ski rather than rolling from edge to edge.  I can see that with a pivot, there would be a bit more forgiveness of not pivoting the ski precisely in a flat manner.  But, boy, back then my understanding of what I was "supposed" to do was non-existent, so I am not sure what I just described is the basis of this tuning scenario.  It's just all that I can come up with.  

post #14 of 24
Thread Starter 

See this link, which includes diagrams showing a bevel of both the base ptex and the base metal edge.

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/49730/base-grind-needed-or-not-for-small-change

 

It was provided by a Moderator on another forum who was familiar with the base beveling technique that I described. He says he saw the technique written up as a "racers secret" in an article from Ski or Skiing mag.

 

Although there are about 50 replies on the link thread, you will find the diagrams a few posts down. If you study them carefully they clearly show the bevel extending onto the base ptex.

 

As with my thread here, many of the posters on the linked thread thought that the "base bevel" being discussed only referred to the metal base edge, so as you read their replies it is hard to tell which type of base bevel they are discussing.

 

I called the ski shop in Frisco, Colorado that I referred to in the original post and they said that they no longer bevel the base ptex and the base edge, just the base and side edges.

 

Apparently it is old school and no longer done, but I can testify from personal experience that it still worked on my 2010 Recons.  I skied they last year without a base & base edge bevel. This year with a 1 degree base & edge bevel, and they are noticeably faster, and more foregiving.

 

Thanks again for all of your input.

post #15 of 24

You're talking about these diagrams?  http://www.epicski.com/t/49730/base-grind-needed-or-not-for-small-change#post_629783

 

Because even though there is something about beveling into the base for a "deeper bevel cut" (which I understood to possibly mean > 1), I don't see that coming into the discussion anywhere?  Did I skim too fast?  

 

And how long ago did this person on another forum say the article appeared in the magazine?

post #16 of 24
Thread Starter 

Sibhusky

 

Yes, those are the correct diagrams.  The poster that mentioned that he saw the technique described in a mag did not say when he saw it, but that is not revelant to my original question.

 

My original question in my first post was:

 

"I'm just wondering if this tuning technique was used elsewhere 30 years ago and whether it is still in use today. It sure works for me."

 

I'm not quite sure what you are asking in your last post. You stated "I don't see that coming into the discussion anywhere"  Do you mean the ptex base and edge base bevel, or the 1 degrees, or something else?

 

  I believe I was clear in my early posts that both the ptex base and the edge is beveled, although I didn't get around to mentioning that I used a  1 deg bevel until post 10 of 15.

 

My original question has been answered because a few others in these threads say that they are familiar with the technique. Apparently it is not in use today, except by me.

 

I will try to address your latest question if you can rephrase it.

 

thanks again

 

Steve

 

 

post #17 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Izzenhood View Post


 

  I believe I was clear in my early posts that both the ptex base and the edge is beveled, although I didn't get around to mentioning that I used a  1 deg bevel until post 10 of 15.

 

 

Clear?   No, it was not clear at all.   

 

It was only after you posted a link  to Alpinord's pic that I understood you meant   "Does anyone still intentionally cut into the base plastic when beveling base edges ?"  

post #18 of 24

30+ years ago race skis also had a groove down the center. 

post #19 of 24

Yes, but sometimes we filled part of the groove in with hard wax if the course was really turny.smile.gif
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

30+ years ago race skis also had a groove down the center. 



 

post #20 of 24

The angulation at the knee to get a 1 degree bevel to bite is EXACTLY THE SAME

whether the base is cut back or only the metal edge.  1 degree is after all one degree.

 

What does change, is that if the bevel is continued into the base, the metal edge is physically "higher" off the snow surface (ice this year).

 

So,  the result of a "base bevel" may be a ski that could slide sideways with less tendency to be grabby. (think pivot slips)

 

To me, that would only be a concession to sloppy skiing in this day.

 

I would not do it intentionally,  but every "home tuner" has come to grips with just this "racer's secret".  Almost inevitable with a hand  file, even if held in a file guide.

 

Oh,  I use Masking Tape,  much finer control as it is thinner than duct tape ;-)

post #21 of 24

Which is why I don't set my own base bevel....

post #22 of 24

icon14.gif

icon14.gifbiggrin.gif 

 

I would avoid cutting into the base at all cost. No one needs more abiliity to skid thier skis then a true 1 degree already provides, unless they have a bad alignment problem which should be addresses in other ways.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cgrandy View Post

The angulation at the knee to get a 1 degree bevel to bite is EXACTLY THE SAME

whether the base is cut back or only the metal edge.  1 degree is after all one degree.

 

What does change, is that if the bevel is continued into the base, the metal edge is physically "higher" off the snow surface (ice this year).

 

So,  the result of a "base bevel" may be a ski that could slide sideways with less tendency to be grabby. (think pivot slips)

 

To me, that would only be a concession to sloppy skiing in this day.

 

I would not do it intentionally,  but every "home tuner" has come to grips with just this "racer's secret".  Almost inevitable with a hand  file, even if held in a file guide.

 

Oh,  I use Masking Tape,  much finer control as it is thinner than duct tape ;-)



 

post #23 of 24

Tune your skis any way you like.

 

I'll tune my skis with a base edge bevel only, and probably 0.75° with the tip & tail feathered to 1°.

I'll file the side edges to 3° for more grip on hard snow.  On powder, 1° is fine.

I'll never dull or detune the tips & tails except the part that rises above the snow.  I don't want that part to catch on the side of a rut.  I do want the full length of the bottom edge working for me.

post #24 of 24

I think I'm probably just agreeing with most prior posts, but anyway:

 

Current Practice

 

Current "standard" tuning practice is to bevel the edge about 1 degree, just beveling the metal and not cutting into the PTex at all.

 

Variations include:

- less bevel: pretty common, particularly for racers on slalom skis;

- more bevel: on speed skis, at least downhill ones, depending on the skier, the course, snow conditions, etc.

- various fancier variation, like tiredknees' increasing bevel toward the tip and tail, or beveling one set of edges differently than the other. Something like tiredknees' variant seems to have some popularity with people who ski relatively extreme backcountry terrain

 

History

 

If you go back more like, I don't know, 40 years ago, everybody flat filed skis: no bevel whatsoever.

 

The notion of beveling kind of crept in, I think, from the racing side of things. I think it was initially primarily a speed-ski thing. Standard lore claims that Bill Johnson's "red sleds" at Sarajevo had some rather extreme bevel on them (non-technical gliding course). That was, of course, nearly 30 years ago.

 

Using a wrap (or several wraps) of tape on the file was a pretty well-accepted method for doing the beveling, up until someone invented simple little tools - like the Beast - that were more reliable. One problem with tape is that you have to keep the tape a constant distance inboard of the edge if you want to get a constant bevel. The more shaped a ski is, the more tricky that becomes (though it does, of course, remain doable). If you do make the effort to maintain a constant distance, you'll wind up using the same little strip of file on the edge, unless you start moving the tape around.

 

I don't know if beveling into the base was ever really considered "standard practice." Of course, in those pre-bulletin-board / pre-Internet days, there was a lot more strange local knowledge in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs › 1 degree base and edge bevel vs just edge bevel?