New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ted Ligety in Sochi - Page 2

post #31 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Altitude, the World Cup skis are different. This has always been the case- where they put the graphics form the retail ski on the WCup ski which is usually a laminated ski and bears no relationship to the retail ski. There's no attempt to fool any athletes. It's a bit like when Nascar had cars that looked like street cars but only had the body style in common with a street car.

 

primoz can confirm, but I remember hearing in that in speed events if an athlete found a fast ski they liked, they'd just change the graphics on the topsheet and use it for the next season. That was before they kept changing the specs all the time, but it may still occur.

 

Fischer used to make a downhill ski with a hole in the tip. Late 70's, early 80's?

But if there is no KERS or Intellegence in the consumer version of the i.GSRD, they are effectively lying to you and could be seen in court, no?

post #32 of 56

Head World Cup Rebels iGS RD:

Features

  • KERS
  • Intelligence Technology
  • Worldcup sandwich construction
  • RD racing top sheet
  • Race structured high speed UHM C base
  • Rebel Camber
  • HEAD Raceplate RDX
  • FIS approved for Continental Cup and Masters
  • NEW: FIS approved skis for World Cup and European Cup - GS Men: 98/65/81 @ length 195 cm; radius: 35 m & GS Women: 102/65/82 @ length 188 cm; radius: 30 m

 

http://www.head.com/ski/products/skis/rd--race-department/worldcup-rebels-igs-rd/4654/?region=us
 

Where's the lie? It has it in it.

The full on World Cup version does not, according to those that know.

The topsheet of the WCup ski is a billboard for marketing.

post #33 of 56

I don't know how it's in USA, but in Europe there's 1000s of tv adds every day literally lying straight in your face... from super cool toilet/kitchen cleaning detergents with which you just lightly slide over dirt, and kitchen is shining like new (reality is "a bit" different unfortunately), to all sorts of medicines which make all diseases look like child play (and everything in between). And noone goes and sue them for misleading buyers ;)

post #34 of 56

So...we're likely to see bathroom ads and kitchen cleansers on the top of World Cup skis? smile.gif
 

post #35 of 56

Perfect shape for a condom ad!

 

If Head doesn't really tell you waht KERS is then they can claim they have it.

A rubber band is a kinetic energy recovery system for sure.

post #36 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Head World Cup Rebels iGS RD:

Features

  • KERS
  • Intelligence Technology
  • Worldcup sandwich construction
  • RD racing top sheet
  • Race structured high speed UHM C base
  • Rebel Camber
  • HEAD Raceplate RDX
  • FIS approved for Continental Cup and Masters
  • NEW: FIS approved skis for World Cup and European Cup - GS Men: 98/65/81 @ length 195 cm; radius: 35 m & GS Women: 102/65/82 @ length 188 cm; radius: 30 m

 

http://www.head.com/ski/products/skis/rd--race-department/worldcup-rebels-igs-rd/4654/?region=us
 

Where's the lie? It has it in it.

The full on World Cup version does not, according to those that know.

The topsheet of the WCup ski is a billboard for marketing.

The lie it that supposedly it does nothing whether it is on the WC or not.  Notice how they always switch to i.Speed's when on the podium......

Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

I don't know how it's in USA, but in Europe there's 1000s of tv adds every day literally lying straight in your face... from super cool toilet/kitchen cleaning detergents with which you just lightly slide over dirt, and kitchen is shining like new (reality is "a bit" different unfortunately), to all sorts of medicines which make all diseases look like child play (and everything in between). And noone goes and sue them for misleading buyers ;)

IDK but most of the time in the US, if you can sue, you do.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

So...we're likely to see bathroom ads and kitchen cleansers on the top of World Cup skis? smile.gif
 

I have no response....

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

Perfect shape for a condom ad!

 

If Head doesn't really tell you waht KERS is then they can claim they have it.

A rubber band is a kinetic energy recovery system for sure.

true, but they do describe what it is, vaguely, but people could still tell you what Intellegence and KERS should be.
post #37 of 56

I thought this was about Ligety at Sochi!

 

Oh well, I do remember the little red hearts with the drop of mercury in them on the tips of Dynastars that was supposed to have a damping effect.  They had to be better than my Dynastar Acryglas that were so longitudinally stiff it was hard to stay on the ground in irregular terrain. 

 

Does anyone remember the K2's I think that had the little lights that were supposed to twinkle as some kind of alleged damping effect in the ski generated minute amounts of electricity? The concept didn't exactly take off and neither did it appear to have any effect. Probably all that these gimmicks did was to announce that the mfr's had adopted dampening in lieu of excessive stiffness in search of better performance.

 

I don't really understand what Kers is supposed to accomplish. The normal objective it seems to me is to give the ski sufficient stiffness that it can recover quickly from bending while simultaneously storing as little energy as is feasible in order to exert as little unnecessary force to the snow. I mean if you had a pair of skis that could snake perfectly over any and all terrain irregularities, shape itself to any turn you needed to make and maintain perfect edge hold that would be ideal. The ski exerting unnecessary force against the snow would seem to slow it down but then I am no expert on ski design, certainly not a marketeer!

post #38 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oisin View Post

I thought this was about Ligety at Sochi!

 

Oh well, I do remember the little red hearts with the drop of mercury in them on the tips of Dynastars that was supposed to have a damping effect.  They had to be better than my Dynastar Acryglas that were so longitudinally stiff it was hard to stay on the ground in irregular terrain. 

 

Does anyone remember the K2's I think that had the little lights that were supposed to twinkle as some kind of alleged damping effect in the ski generated minute amounts of electricity? The concept didn't exactly take off and neither did it appear to have any effect. Probably all that these gimmicks did was to announce that the mfr's had adopted dampening in lieu of excessive stiffness in search of better performance.

 

I don't really understand what Kers is supposed to accomplish. The normal objective it seems to me is to give the ski sufficient stiffness that it can recover quickly from bending while simultaneously storing as little energy as is feasible in order to exert as little unnecessary force to the snow. I mean if you had a pair of skis that could snake perfectly over any and all terrain irregularities, shape itself to any turn you needed to make and maintain perfect edge hold that would be ideal. The ski exerting unnecessary force against the snow would seem to slow it down but then I am no expert on ski design, certainly not a marketeer!

I do remember the K2's that were supposed to "burn off" the excess vibrations through piezoelectric fibers and the LED's.  As to KERS, it is supposed to literally be an intelligent system that feeds generated electricity back to piezoelectric fibers in the tail which stiffen and propel you out of the turn faster, almost like if you got way in the backseat.  As to Intelligence, it is exactly what you say, supposed to make the ski torsionally stiffer and softer depending on terrain and speed etc.

post #39 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by AttitudeXX View Post

I do remember the K2's that were supposed to "burn off" the excess vibrations through piezoelectric fibers and the LED's.  As to KERS, it is supposed to literally be an intelligent system that feeds generated electricity back to piezoelectric fibers in the tail which stiffen and propel you out of the turn faster, almost like if you got way in the backseat.  As to Intelligence, it is exactly what you say, supposed to make the ski torsionally stiffer and softer depending on terrain and speed etc.

Yeah but I think your skis sometimes get faster when you get way in the backseat because you've lifted the tips off the snow and there is suddenly much less surface area and hence less friction. We used to take rental skis out and do that, get way back so that the fronts would come up off the snow and the skis would accelerate. I'm not sure that increased pressure of the ski against the snow by itself would be anything but increased drag altho I suppose stiffness in the tails can propel you off the bumps, but then whatta I know?

post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by oisin View Post

Yeah but I think your skis sometimes get faster when you get way in the backseat because you've lifted the tips off the snow and there is suddenly much less surface area and hence less friction. We used to take rental skis out and do that, get way back so that the fronts would come up off the snow and the skis would accelerate. I'm not sure that increased pressure of the ski against the snow by itself would be anything but increased drag altho I suppose stiffness in the tails can propel you off the bumps, but then whatta I know?

That's not really true ;) You get feeling you are accelerating, but in reality you are only much less stable so it feels you are going faster ;) In reality bigger surface is faster, since weight is distributed to bigger surface and there's less pressure to snow per square centimeter/inch/meter.

In very soft conditions going a little bit back means faster ski, since contact between ski and snow is transfered a bit back, and is not in (pretty) steep radius of ski tip. But that still doesn't mean you should be going in squat like you can see some people going down trying to get better speed.

post #41 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oisin View Post

Yeah but I think your skis sometimes get faster when you get way in the backseat because you've lifted the tips off the snow and there is suddenly much less surface area and hence less friction. We used to take rental skis out and do that, get way back so that the fronts would come up off the snow and the skis would accelerate. I'm not sure that increased pressure of the ski against the snow by itself would be anything but increased drag altho I suppose stiffness in the tails can propel you off the bumps, but then whatta I know?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

That's not really true ;) You get feeling you are accelerating, but in reality you are only much less stable so it feels you are going faster ;) In reality bigger surface is faster, since weight is distributed to bigger surface and there's less pressure to snow per square centimeter/inch/meter.

In very soft conditions going a little bit back means faster ski, since contact between ski and snow is transfered a bit back, and is not in (pretty) steep radius of ski tip. But that still doesn't mean you should be going in squat like you can see some people going down trying to get better speed.

Right, but neither of you are talking about what KERS is supposed to do.  I'm talking about moving weight back at the end of a carved turn to release the ski more energetically.

post #42 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

That's not really true ;) You get feeling you are accelerating, but in reality you are only much less stable so it feels you are going faster ;) In reality bigger surface is faster, since weight is distributed to bigger surface and there's less pressure to snow per square centimeter/inch/meter.

In very soft conditions going a little bit back means faster ski, since contact between ski and snow is transfered a bit back, and is not in (pretty) steep radius of ski tip. But that still doesn't mean you should be going in squat like you can see some people going down trying to get better speed.

I'm not so sure you are correct. We used to get behind the US team members who were practicing their tuck on some kind of cat road at Vail (mid 60's) and I know for certain that levering up the tips of my Head Comps (flexible skis) allowed me to overtake them. I'm pretty certain they had better ski prep than mine. You could feel the acceleration occur. I've also watched others reefing up on those rental skis we used to borrow. It was not pretty, the front of the ski would come off the snow a foot or so, the skis were that flexible. You could see a marked sudden acceleration. I am not sure why this should happen. I only offered the explanation of reduced surface area because it seemed plausible. I really don't know the physics of it but there's no question that it happens, for some reason. Maybe as you say it is simply due to getting the tip out of the way. I can't actually imagine skiing very far like this since most of the ski ahead of the boot is off the snow and it is pretty awkward.

post #43 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oisin View Post

I'm not so sure you are correct. We used to get behind the US team members who were practicing their tuck on some kind of cat road at Vail (mid 60's) and I know for certain that levering up the tips of my Head Comps (flexible skis) allowed me to overtake them. I'm pretty certain they had better ski prep than mine. You could feel the acceleration occur. I've also watched others reefing up on those rental skis we used to borrow. It was not pretty, the front of the ski would come off the snow a foot or so, the skis were that flexible. You could see a marked sudden acceleration. I am not sure why this should happen. I only offered the explanation of reduced surface area because it seemed plausible. I really don't know the physics of it but there's no question that it happens, for some reason. Maybe as you say it is simply due to getting the tip out of the way. I can't actually imagine skiing very far like this since most of the ski ahead of the boot is off the snow and it is pretty awkward.

I can feel a speed increase in a butt tuck from reduced tip pressure and aerodynamic advantage.....unstable as hell though!  My tips don't lift off the snow, at least on my fischer SL's

post #44 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by oisin View Post

I'm not so sure you are correct. We used to get behind the US team members who were practicing their tuck on some kind of cat road at Vail (mid 60's) and I know for certain that levering up the tips of my Head Comps (flexible skis) allowed me to overtake them

That has probably more to do with less air drag which was gained by going behind skier infront of you, then by "lifting" tips and having less surface on snow ;)

AttitudeXX tips get off the snow even on extremely hard SL skis (at least I can easily do this on same skis... Fischer WC SL which came from guy in WC, who skis extra stiff version). But I'm not talking about lifting them for 5cm, but just a little bit so snow comes in contact with ski maybe 2-3 cm behind tip radius.

post #45 of 56
The reasoning for the holes in tips of DH skis back in the '70s was aerodynamics. The tips weren't low profile (yet) so someone decided to reduce air resistance by cutting holes. Swing weight had nothing to do with it to my knowledge.
post #46 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

That has probably more to do with less air drag which was gained by going behind skier infront of you, then by "lifting" tips and having less surface on snow ;)

AttitudeXX tips get off the snow even on extremely hard SL skis (at least I can easily do this on same skis... Fischer WC SL which came from guy in WC, who skis extra stiff version). But I'm not talking about lifting them for 5cm, but just a little bit so snow comes in contact with ski maybe 2-3 cm behind tip radius.

true, mine probably chatter and lift slightly but it's not a large amount.

post #47 of 56
Current hole in Fischer skis is suppose to be there because of reduced swing weight... at least that's Fischer's official reason.
post #48 of 56

Has anyone on the World Cup planted their pole in the hole in the tip of the ski during a race?

I know of this happening at college level.

That in itself would be reason to not have a hole.
 

post #49 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Has anyone on the World Cup planted their pole in the hole in the tip of the ski during a race?
I know of this happening at college level.
That in itself would be reason to not have a hole.

 
I have never heard of this or seen it happen but who knows? I guess it would be possible with small race baskets. Also, that could be one of the reasons the 2nd generation hole ski wasn't a hole at all....
post #50 of 56

I never saw something like this and I never heard of this, and to be honest, I don't really see it being possible, but you never know.

In GS skis, thing with no hole in this year's skis is, that skis are less narrow at tip due new regulations, and there's no need for hole anymore. Also this years non-WC skis still have hole, so only 35m (or 30m for women) are without holes.

For SL skis, there were at least 2 different holes over the years now. First one was bigger, and second one (model which came out on end of 2009/2010 winter) is much smaller. Reason for this is, that tip of SL ski was breaking (because of gate hitting tip of ski), so they made hole smaller and therefore tip stronger.

post #51 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

I never saw something like this and I never heard of this, and to be honest, I don't really see it being possible, but you never know.

In GS skis, thing with no hole in this year's skis is, that skis are less narrow at tip due new regulations, and there's no need for hole anymore. Also this years non-WC skis still have hole, so only 35m (or 30m for women) are without holes.

For SL skis, there were at least 2 different holes over the years now. First one was bigger, and second one (model which came out on end of 2009/2010 winter) is much smaller. Reason for this is, that tip of SL ski was breaking (because of gate hitting tip of ski), so they made hole smaller and therefore tip stronger.

Makes sense..... i thought the first hole was "open" and the previous holes were filled with a resin of some sort and then had p-tex over the bottom of them.

post #52 of 56

These are not race skis. Top of line "store" skis have some transparent plastic over hole, and lower end skis have even p-tex and top sheet over hole. For this I would say main reason is, that skiing, especially in wet snow, is not really comfortable with hole in tip, when you are getting snow straight in your face through hole.

post #53 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

These are not race skis. Top of line "store" skis have some transparent plastic over hole, and lower end skis have even p-tex and top sheet over hole. For this I would say main reason is, that skiing, especially in wet snow, is not really comfortable with hole in tip, when you are getting snow straight in your face through hole.

i guess, i always thought that that was one of the reasons for it, as well as making the tip stronger and easier to wax, as well as preventing anything from going through the hole(sticks, poles etc.).

post #54 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Has anyone on the World Cup planted their pole in the hole in the tip of the ski during a race?
I know of this happening at college level.
That in itself would be reason to not have a hole.

 

I've seen it happen in a slalom over in new york. Right out of the start gate, no re-run. Ranks up there with one of the worst starts I've seen other than the time I was running a Mac-cup finals slalom at waterville. It was really warm out and many of us were skiing with the tops of our suits off. Some kid from plymouth (40 or so points) was gonna run it in a t-shirt, and as he pushed off the start gate he lost his entire right pole. He continued down, blocking gates with his bare arm/hand. Was pretty horrific to watch, and his hand/forearm was a mess afterwards.
post #55 of 56
I was at a race recently where an 11-year old girl competed in a slalom race with just one pole and took all the gates with one hand. Turns out she had broken her other arm in training, so she had the other arm in a plaster cast! She also won the race.... An impressive performance, although I hate to think what the hospital would have said to her parents if she had crashed and made her injury worse!
post #56 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperkub View Post

I was at a race recently where an 11-year old girl competed in a slalom race with just one pole and took all the gates with one hand. Turns out she had broken her other arm in training, so she had the other arm in a plaster cast! She also won the race.... An impressive performance, although I hate to think what the hospital would have said to her parents if she had crashed and made her injury worse!
Lol! Sounds fun, I sometimes like to run SL without poles when I'm wearing my poc full arm jacket under my suit.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home