or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Modern Downhill Skis?

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Anybody know what world cup racers are on these days? Sidecut? Length? Men vs Women?
On the tube they all look like traditional metal laminates, is this right? Thanks in advance? :
post #2 of 19
They haven't really changed that much in terms of length (205+) and sidecut (30m) since speed and straightline stability are the main considerations. Edi Podivinsky was saying on CBC that the torsional rigidity and dampening have been the biggest improvements.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ February 15, 2002 06:26 AM: Message edited 1 time, by saffron_boots ]</font>
post #3 of 19
you both said the same thing, except poseur was talking about just dh skis, and todd was talking about sl through dh skis. relax todd...
post #4 of 19
Race Stock DH boards used to be up to a 225cm. These days the longest DH length produced (at least by one company) is a 215cm. They produce their DH/SG boards in 198,203,208, and 215. With those lengths I would assume that the men are skiing on somewhere between a 205 and 215, and for SG probably 198 to 210.
GS racing skis for men, 188 and 195cm.
SL skis, we know those are short all less than 170cm no shorter than 155cm.

That's the info I have gathered.....
post #5 of 19
I am relaxed thanks, I discuss this stuff for a living - so I might be anal . . . but I'm relaxed! :

205cm would have been too short for DH in the past or now, but would have been a SL/GS length. Hence my confusion, should have looked at the title though and just realized the writer just didn't realize 205 was never used for such events.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ February 15, 2002 12:58 PM: Message edited 2 times, by Todd M. ]</font>
post #6 of 19
1.2 Restrictions

1.2.1 Geometric features Ski length

Minimum length (unwound length) for all disciplines:
Ladies: 150 cm
Men: 155 cm
Children I & II: 130 cm
The ski length has to be marked on the ski. Profile width

Minimum width of the running surface at binding without any tolerance:
60 mm. Radius

Downhill Ladies & Men: minimum 40 m
Super G Ladies & Men: minimum 33 m
Giant Slalom Ladies & Men: minimum 21 m
Giant Slalom Children I: minimum 14 m
Giant Slalom Children II: minimum 17 m
Marking on skis compulsory.
At FIS race level, Giant Slalom skis may also be used for Super-G and
Super-G skis may be used for Downhill.

For all FIS related info, go to the FIS site;

For technical rules, go here;
http://www.fis-ski.com/rulesandpublications/specificationforcompetitionequipment2 001-2002.pdf

Most manufacturers will generally go as close to the rule limits as possible. However, the maximum and minimum settings are just just that, and if a manufacturer wishes to go in the other direction, they can do so. Atomic's DH, SG, and SL, turn radii are generally very close to the minimum, but GS team skis (which I have and have measured) are 5mm wider under foot, and using formula calculated to be closer to 29m.

The length of the DH and SG skis used depends upon the skier's size and strength and how the course is set. A brutally fast and demanding DH like Kitzbuhel will have the racers on their manufacturer's longest ski (Atomic 218cm), where a more tecnical course like that of the 2002 Olympics will have the racers using 214cm. SG is the same, with skis ranging from 208 to 212. There is not really that much difference in measured length, but at those speeds and at that level, it is huge. Construction is still sandwich wood/glass/metal, since stability and edge hold at speed is most important. How so? Well, if a DH and SG ski is 'fast', top skin cosmetics will be changed as the graphics of the retail (generally based on GS) version changes. A flat smooth surface is easier to re-paint than one with lumps and bumps. Also, the speed discipline skis also suffer much more abuse than technical discipline skis. Delaminations are common, and being able to inject glue into the crack and clamp is easier with the sandwich skis. If the bases don't get damaged, DH and SG skis are used for many seasons, and are sent back to the factory in the off season for repainting and repairing as required. As soon as a ski requires repairs to the extent that a run over machine is required, it is thrown into the waste bin.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ February 15, 2002 04:59 PM: Message edited 1 time, by BetaRacer ]</font>
post #7 of 19
Did anyone notice the salomon skis that the austrian who won the mens downhill was on?? They looked rather short for a downhill ski and they were not the typical salomon design that i have seen in the past. He was actually taller than the ski he was on... A few other people i know noticed it as well.
post #8 of 19
The title of the post, Modern Downhill Skis, seems fairly clear and straightforward.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ February 15, 2002 12:15 PM: Message edited 1 time, by ryan ]</font>
post #9 of 19

I disappeared (worked) for a few hours and come back to this?!

Commented on Downhill, and Downhill only. Read (past tense) the friggin' question, literally and carefully. Did very well in exams this way.

I was paraphrasing what Edi said.

Thanks Ryan.
post #10 of 19
LOL poseur that was among the funniest things i've heard all day. some people, i guess, have trouble realizing that this is a forum on the internet, not a court assigned to value their life's work...
post #11 of 19
>>some people, i guess, have trouble realizing that this is a forum on the internet, not a court assigned to value their life's work... <<

Your right its not a court . . . but that sounded like a judgement nonetheless! :
post #12 of 19

All they cared about showing to the camera after Strobl was finished was the Salomon Ski. So they stuck another pair in his hands. Happens all the time. Bjorn Dahlie the Norwegian cross country runner loved his older skis. He did not want to change these skis and put on the later graphis. So as soon as he was finished, someone gave him a new pair of skis to show to the cameras and TV.
post #13 of 19
Heluvaskier, the ski that Strobl was holding was a GS ski. At either the Olympics or World Championships, the manufacturers present their skis (or cosmetics) for the following season. Sometimes sizes available are for retailer testing, and not always what a racer would normally use. By holding the ski, it gives the manufacturer early publicity, and the photos can be used for brochures for the next season. Appearance of shortness could also be attributed to the ski being on an angle. Look at the skis that the racer holds up right when he finishes the run. Usually if they are single, it was the one he/she used. If they are strapped, it could be what was used, but could also be that the marketing guy got to him already.

Smoke and mirrors.
post #14 of 19
Thread Starter 
Can anybody give me dimensions? For example-
At 210cm the skis measure:
95 tip 65 waist 80 tail???????
post #15 of 19
BetaR, some fascinating insights there thanks.

p.s don't know why everyone got their knickers ina twist about the thread though. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #16 of 19

1996-97 Atomic DH 214 Dimensions 90 65 78
1999-00 Atomic DH 217 Dimensions 91 66 80

Both have sidecut radius 50m
post #17 of 19
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ted:
Can anybody give me dimensions? For example-
At 210cm the skis measure:
95 tip 65 waist 80 tail???????

To do an accurate sidecut radius calculation you really need the contact length instead of the manufactures overall length. The contact length is roughly the straight line distance from where the width is measured at the tip to where the width is measured at the tail. Guessing from the 210cm ted specified I used 200cm as the contact length. The sidecut radius works out to be about 44.5 meters. A little less than the 50m norfjellposted for similar length skis but ted's skis have a much wider tip hench a shorter sidecut radius.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ February 18, 2002 07:34 PM: Message edited 1 time, by PowderJunkie ]</font>
post #18 of 19

Having messed around with a lot of ski measurements, I have found that the contact length is much closer to 20cm less than the ski length.
post #19 of 19
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Norefjell:

Having messed around with a lot of ski measurements, I have found that the contact length is much closer to 20cm less than the ski length.


I can go with 20cm less. I was thinking of DH skis that tend to have a very abbreviated tip although I don't have a pair of DH skis less than 30 years old to meassure.

Going with the 190cm contact length and the rest of ted's meassurements produces a sidecut radius of just over 40 meters.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion