Are sandwich skiis allways better than regular ones if we dont consider price? Ore are advatages mainly showing on icy racing tracks?
post #1 of 26
1/27/04 at 11:18pm
|Originally posted by HeluvaSkier:
In my opinion the avantages are more apparent on groomed snow and icy hard pack. Laminate skis with vertical sidewalls are tpically superior (when i say typically i mean always) to a cap or half cap ski on groomed snow. When it comes to all mountain performance, it depends how strong of a skier you are. A softer easier ski to ski on that is not a full laminate may suit you better than a fairly stiff race bread ski. It comes down to personal preference. There are few people out there that will ever use the entire performance envelope of a ski like the Stockli Stormride XL, but there are many people who will easily see and use the advantages that it offers on groomed snow.
|Originally posted by simonsays:
From what ive seen all the Salomon Wc and europa cup skis (eXCEPT dh or sg) are cap construction, ive had several pairs of the WC slaloms and they have all been this way it appears that the skis used by janica, and sebastian amiez etc are too. Also quick question about atomic wc boots why do they appear to be all flat soled compared to the shop version which has toe and heel interface system (not sure what its actUally called as you can tell....)??
|Originally posted by yuki:
With all due respect with regards to Atomic, when you are a WC racer, you go where the money is. To suggest that you, as a member of the general public, are getting anything like a ski that the WC boys and girls use is absurd.
I am just waiting for the shoe to drop with Ambrosi Hoffmann now that he has had a WC podium on Stockli ... Atomic will probably lure him over with the big bucks.
The straight sidewall skis have been creeping back in in the last two years. As well as the Elans, I have noted a strong presence by Fischer too, on the racks and available to the public.
The lack of performance and pro-form ball breaking sent me over to Stockli, the Volkl and Atomics that I had available as an instructor where just not cutting it.
|Originally posted by HeluvaSkier:
D(C), you are correct. I think that the cap is cosmetic, but it allows for the edge to be see off the plan of the sidewall, which is interesting to me. The Salomon GS skis in fact have more edgehold than any other ski i have ever been on - including atomics. One question for the Atomic skiers: How does a double lobe construction with no continuity between the lobes, and not metal structure running acorss the top of the ski offer superior torsional stiffness? Is it just because Atomic says it does? If you actually look at how a beta lobe is constructed you will notice that by bending any material into a tube, you immediately decrease its ability to flex longitudinally, much like the design of an I-beam, but in reverse form. The tough in the middle of the skis construction does ntohing to increase torsional stiffness. The possibility is though, that they are so incredibly stiff longitudinally, that they have to retain some amount of torsional stiffness. One more thing to point out - the construction of retail Volkl skis SUCKS.
I had a Volkl rep and coach tell me last night that compared to his P60 race stock skis his Six Stars are a POS in any conditions. I have skied a good number of Volkl skis to hold this to be true to their retail line. The things that are on the top of skis recently are NOT LOAD BEARING STRUCTURES! They liken themselves to dampening systems like the K2 MOD, and Salomon ProLink. Notice that in most cases these types of lobes are dropped on the race stock skis - ie Fischer, and dont try to tell me that Fischer makes bad race skis. Skiing on Atomics and claiming that all other ski companies make out of date crappy skis must be bliss... after all that is what ignorance is right? I pray for the day that i can get ahold of a true WC Atomic SL or GS ski and find out what is really under those little lumps, because im willing to bet that it is a laminate ski in disguise, with the beta offering only stiffness and dampening.
|Originally posted by Atomicman:
Excuse me, but you were the one claiming the virtues of only vertical sidewall sandwich construction skis. I was merely responding to your "Narrow Minded and misinformed opinion".[/QB]
|Originally posted by HeluvaSkier:
Um... actually i have played with the HCX, Dual X, GSX, SLX, and RCG Ti. Those lobes take no load and are for dampening only. If you have ever chopped an elan in half you see that they sit on top of the titanium top sheet. The stock race skis dont have this though. According to the rep they are purely cosmetic and dont really do anything - accept on the RCG ti, on which they are MUCH bigger and integrated into a 4mm riser on top of the ski.
From a longitudinal stiffness standpoint Beta is brilliant. It allows for the ski to have more snap to it because of the design of the lobes - they dont like to bend. Its like taking a paper towel tube, cutting it in half length-wise, and trying to bend it. It will buckle in the center before it will bend into an arc. This is why Atomics are usually very stiff, and have a lot of pop. Since the Beta lobes are flatter on the WC skis, im suggesting that they are most likely mounted on top of, or integrated into, a laminate ski underneath the topsheets. VIST actually will make WC plates to fit this profile, and as far as i know, VIST builds plates for atomic, so most likely the WC plates have this profile as well. Beta isnt a bad construction, but by itself it feels chattery, light weight, and not terribly solid. Coupled with a few layers of laminates underneath those lobes, which im nearly certain this is what the WC skis are, the skis probably have the best of both worlds... meaning a solid feel of a laminate and the pop and livliness of the beta lobes. I would like you to note that this only applies to the WC race boards, not to the skis that Atomic markets to consumers - which brings me back to my original post, and precisely why i dont ski on atomic skis.
My post was in no way narrow minded. I have probably been on more race stock boards in the last few seasons than most people, and can often comment on each one recalling specific instances of when and how i skied on it. I'm just relaying the common theme from all of the skis that i have skied on. There are exceptions to the rule, but there arent many. I don't consider non-race stock Atomics to be an exception. I have not skied on one race ski that wasnt a laminate, that could outperform a laminate race ski, the SL:11 included. It was a great ski, but it did not have the same feel as other laminate skis. The same goes for the Dynastar OmeGlass 64 Slalom ski (retail)... to put it blatantly - it had no balls in the course - no offense Dynastar fans.
Anyhow, i keep getting caught up in these controversial threads, so in order to keep peace im going to go skiing (practice actually).
obtw, when i say played with, i mean i have seen them cut in half in every way imaginable, so i know what is inside. Anyone want to donate their Atomics?
|Originally posted by U.P. Racer:
This is hilarious.
There is ONE reason that WC skis are sandwich. They are easy to make, and easy to change. Throughout the season, the race room is always tweaking the shape and flex of the skis to see what works best.
Can a cap ski be made with the same performance of a sandwich? Yes. By making a whole new mold. This is expensive and time consuming, and frankly, the racers don't care what they look like, so why do it?