or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Speed Limit? - Page 2

post #31 of 61
Is that due to the DH boards becoming softer longitudinally, and stiffer torsionally - as ski technology advances? I know from skiing softer GS skis with a 24m radius that it is very easy to carve them tighter than a normal GS ski... and they often will hook up and want to turn even if youre not ready for the event...
Later
GREG
post #32 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjjohnston
This a whole new form of nonsense from TCS.


Maybe just you don't have enough sense to make sense?

Quote:
The earlier post about how DH skiers let their skis run and "swim" a little is dead on. If you watch the right bit of WC downhill -- when the skiers are running straight and the camera angle is directly in front, as at the finish of some races -- the movement is quite obvious. Kind of scary, even ... you'd hate to see somebody catch an inside edge at those speeds.


That's why you need to "do whatever (press your shins against the tongues of your boot as tightly as you can) to hold them down [to the snow]," if you don't, the tips of skis would come (float) up and intensify the wobble/"swim," and any recovery effort other than holding down tips would throw you off the balance, and "there's no recovery at 55mph+, and the skier would tumble all over the places."

Quote:
As Alaska Mike noted, DH skis definitely can hook up when they want to (which is usually when the racer wants them to, but not always). You hear racers talk about "high siding" or "getting high sided" a lot now -- a term I don't recall hearing until recently. It happens when the racer goes over the skis sideways due to inadequate inclination / skis carving more sharply than expected.


It's "flatboard" all the way, any "hint" of "edging" needs to be corrected right there and then, not that because DH speed is so fast that gives you little time to react, but also any error you made is magnified 4 times faster/bigger than you normally accustom to if you've doubled your normal speed.


IS
post #33 of 61
Another breath taking analysis that has me sitting on the edge of my seat!

You should be doing the commentary right alongside Bob B. & Hank K. for NBC Sports.
post #34 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichiskiing

Yes, flatboarding is what makes the DH skiing "the king of the hill." The "speed limit" or "terminal speed" is approaching when the tips of the skis want to come up and "breaking away up and away from the snow." If the tips of the skis do separate from the snow, the run is over, there's no recovery at 55mph+, and the skier would tumble all over the places. So, when you feel the tips of the skis start to "float," do whatever (press your shins against the tongues of your boot as tightly as you can) to hold them down [to the snow]; the "terminal speed" is reached when you can't no longer press the boots/accelerate.

Some say it's scary, others call it thrilling, what's your pick?

Have fun,
IS

I call it terminal bull$h*t. :
post #35 of 61
A legend in his own mind.
post #36 of 61
Alaska Mike, sjjohnston & HeluvaSkier - on hooking up:

As you might remember, they were the considerations when calculating the FIS ski regulations, esp. radii.

Skier´s reaction time (I guess 20 msec), the speeds in particular disciplines (130 kph DH/m, 110 kph DH/w & SG/m, 100 kph SG/w) and standheight (55 + 55 mm back then) were taken to find out when the correction of a hoooked-up ski by the racer is still possible.
The results were 45/35/30 meters.

Further, the loads have been studied with the limit of 4 g/men and 3.5 g/women with a reduction of 10 percent due to the skis torsion.

All these calculations, done at the Sports Institute of the University of Innsbruck, Austria, under professor Werner Nachbauer, resulted in the first generation of FIS regulations.

As we know and remember, the original 30 m (SG/w), 37 m (DH/w) and 40 m (DH/m) have been gradually changed to the present 33 and 45 m (plus those 55 + 45 mm standheight for adults).

You might also remember that the very first FIS attempt to regulate GS skis tried to set the 24-m radius. It was too late for the manufacturers to conform to this and for the next season the present 21 meters were agreed.
(Funny enough, most new GS skis exceeding 185 cm and used by the top racers would pass the 24-m limit...)

(I can´t find the original source which even had some graphs. I´m translating from a thesis a friend of mine submitted a few years ago at one of our universities. And again, it´s slightly off the original topic but the posts of the three Bears mentioned made me contribute my .02...)
post #37 of 61
Great post checkracer! I never knew the details of the FIS regulations. I knew they were based off an equation, but i did not know what. I think it would be interesting to see what effect skier weight would have on the equation.

Regarding GS, it is interesting. Companies have opted for a longer radius ski that will hook up into a turn easier, and ultimately allow a larger variety of turn shapes based on how much force/energy the skier is putting on the ski... versus a 21m radius ski that is very stiff and allows a limited variety of turn shapes. Even the 21m radius skis that you see now have the same capabilities as the 24+ skis. My tightest turning GS ski is the Elan - at 22.9 i think.

Later

GREG
post #38 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider
A legend in his own mind.


Or a legend on his own.

http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_v_is_straightlining.wmv


IS
post #39 of 61
To know the details it would be necessary to get the original source. It´s none of my priorities now but it should be possible because Werner Nachbauer (we just met once in St. Anton 2001) is a schoolmate of a good friend of mine from the Stams High School. (That´s the school most Austrian top racers attend.)

As to the GS skis I´m sure that they will be discussed again when the new season approaches. There´s a lot of difference between the short radical GS Salomon was announcing in 2000 (never introduced due to FIS regulations) and the present less shaped models most manufacturers offer as their racestock. (Your Elans if 182 cm are 97-63-87, right?)
post #40 of 61
Yup, 182's. I think they are the dimensions you posted. The narrow waist does make them want to be all over the place if youre not on the edges. Also... they don't turn unless you tell them to... but they are the most powerful GS ski I have ever been on... fast too. I gave them to my father for a run and he almost put himself in the trees twice. At the bottom he said they were scary and didnt turn, and gave them back. I was kind of glad since i was worried about getting a GSX out of the center of a tree.
Later
GREG
post #41 of 61
Oops almost forgot. TCS, you're an arrogant moron. Pull your head out of your own @ss so you can see what is happening in the rest of the skiing world... I know its going to be hard for you, but you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that you suck at life.
Later
GREG
post #42 of 61
I look at this thread (and some of the recent ones) a bit like a good presentation or movie:

There are stretches of interesting information (like the background for the FIS radius restrictions, which I didn't know), mixed with some comic relief (some guy proud of his ability to run straight down a groomed intermediate hill at 30 miles an hour doing a wind check and looking awkward and off-balance).
post #43 of 61
Yeah, here's a picture of how they "flatboard" in downhill races:

http://db.sciaremag.it/data/articoli/img_148_639_1.jpg

If that guy would just get off his edges, he might be faster than TCS.
post #44 of 61
oh yeah ride'm cowboy.

post #45 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier
Oops almost forgot. TCS, you're an arrogant moron. Pull your head out of your own @ss so you can see what is happening in the rest of the skiing world... I know its going to be hard for you, but you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that you suck at life.
Later
GREG
must.... not... laugh..
post #46 of 61
Thread Starter 
did you take that photo slider? pretty cool
post #47 of 61
No it's the one from sjjohnston's link
post #48 of 61

tai$hiSking ....

Doe$ he have to po$t a link to hi$ web $ite in every po$t?

A legend in his own mind, a rumor in his time.

$ign up now for hi$ free fir$t "lesson", then only $99 a month with contract?

When you can't afford advertising ... Hollywood ... any publicity is better than no publicity.
post #49 of 61
Not a legend:

http://db.sciaremag.it/data/articoli/img_148_639_1.jpg

A legend from 30 years ago: (well close for a canadian after all, we're so humble: )
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-41-417-..._canucks/clip1

Which skier has experience skiing fast? (hint: it's not the first one)
post #50 of 61
Great Clip Ghost...

No wonder they were dubbed the "Crazy" Canucks.
post #51 of 61

top speed

Returning to SkierXmans question, the best example of a ski reaching it's terminal speed .... the edge of it's envelope, was a comparison of the Volkl SL's (the gold and black), foam core,cap ski (not race stock), in a 170. On the hard pack they weren't bad down in the SL range of speed. When I ran them in a GS course, they would begin to chatter and dance. If you tried to run them "free" on the hard pack they would do the same thing. They did not inspire confidence at speed.

Later, I switched to Stockli SL's, a few pair in the 156 to 168 range. They are all straight sidewall (sandwich) construction and are a bit heavier. No chatter and no dancing on the hard stuff. Wood core and simply better construction (damping). When you let them run free, they will "squirm" a bit underfoot, considering they are short (156) and the sidecut, this is to be expected.

For a few years, Stockli had a monopoly on straight sidewall (non cap) construction unless you could get race stock. The past two years have seen a return to the "old way", and straight side wall skis can be found pretty easily now, Fischer and Blizzard are two that come to mind.

If you want to go shorter without having the ski "get shaky", I'd take a look at some of the newer generation sidewall skis.

My point is that construction techniques and core all play a part in stability at speed.
post #52 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichiskiing
You still here???????? Dude, get a clue!----------Wigs
post #53 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichiskiing

Or a legend on his own.

http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_v_is_straightlining.wmv

IS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs
You still here???????? Dude, get a clue!----------Wigs


Yawn... maybe just you clueless, do you spin?

http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/flatboard_freesking1.wmv


IS
post #54 of 61

spinning?

I'll save Wigs the answer. No, he fly casts.

But there is a rumor that up at Snowmass, they raise their own sheep, have looms and spin the wool for their socks?

I figured this is gonna make just about as much sense as any!
post #55 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichiskiing

Yawn... maybe just you clueless, do you spin?

http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/flatboard_freesking1.wmv


IS
I took a look at the video clip. THAT'S IT!!!!!!! How boring is that!!!! Anybody and their Grandmother could do that. Learn to turn. That's not safe for others on the hill!,---------Wigs
post #56 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs
I took a look at the video clip. THAT'S IT!!!!!!! How boring is that!!!! Anybody and their Grandmother could do that. Learn to turn. That's not safe for others on the hill!,---------Wigs


"Nothing is more stupid than one who deceives oneself to deceive others."

What makes skiing dangerous is a conceited little knowledge and small mind.


IS
post #57 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichiskiing

"Nothing is more stupid than one who deceives oneself to deceive others."

What makes skiing dangerous is a conceited little knowledge and small mind.


IS
Right. I guess I'll have to work a little harder to understand skiing. Maybe going straight is the smart thing to do.---------Wigs
post #58 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrstrat57
soooo if this is true(my first true supershape shortie is sitting in the closet waiting for winter) and logically I guess it is....my new 168 allstars won't go 40MPH without wobbling?? cause I have to have em on edge all the time??? No more flat boarding .....but at 30mph it will feel like 60mph, but that wind whistling in my ears thrill will be gone(should be wearing a helmet anyway) so as that might slow me down a bit I'll be a happier safer ski person and less likely to lose my lift ticket to the speed police......I'm soooo confused ....yikes it's all too much! Thus the question if TCS had raced Rick on my old Rossi 208 7G's (flatboarding) vs Rick on short carving skis who would have won??? Yep thinking too much again......hmmmm kinda like putting a 70 426 hemi roadrunner up against a viper I guess....depends on the track, and the driver..old school vs new...non of this having anything to do with x's question, it's all my fault: time to go back to sleep.

165cm Rossignol 9S, 2004 model. Skied during last winter. A real change from 191cm 9X Pro Course - instead of peacefully making 3-4 carves (this is at Blue Mountain, Ontario), I had to carve about twice every second, otherwise they would lose the edge and start plowing. When going straight, they would start to wobble after 4-5 seconds.

This is probably a common case when going from 25m radius to 15m.
post #59 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Jim Slade
I assume getting a metron up to GS speeds would be suicide with the width of their nose and sidecut. Never tried one though.
No problem. You just don't do it skiing them flat!
post #60 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkierXMan
Silly question but I was reading reviews of the past years skis and noticed a couple of reviewers use descriptions such as:

"Great performance but has a definitive speed limit of 25mph etc etc.."

I assume this is a metaphor for becoming uncontrolable after a certain speed is reached? I would assume a ski pointed downhill will keep accelerating and the friction and resistance on snow wouldn't be enough to have a terminal speed.
Greetings, X!

Since I'm one that uses this phrase in my reviews, I can at least tell you what I mean...

When I am out working through a bunch of skis on a demo day, I run each pair through a specific series of maneuvers on as wide a variety of terrain as I can find on a given day. One of the components of the test is to get the skis going as fast as I can comfortably do--and then a little faster.

Sometimes, my comfort level is well above what I can do on a given ski because it begins to have a "life of it's own" as a result of its interaction with the snow and slope at speed. More and more, however, skis will go above what any typical recreational skier can reasonably ski.

When I say that a ski "doesn't have a speed limit that I could find", it typically means that it will go at least 45mph on early season (man-made) Rocky Mountain hardpack while on edge. This year, I'm going to try to find straight-run limits as well, for those who have an interest in it. These will be much lower for most shaped skis, but will be an interesting differential between skis, I suspect.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching