New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Multi-Radius Ski"???

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
Date line: metro Milwaukee WI USA "early morning" 12-1-2005

"I can't be the first 'idiot' to think of a 'multi-radius ski', can I???"

A few glasses of wine, some forum talk about tip-waist-tail measurements and the resultant ski dynamics... That simple combination MUST have happened millions of times by now??? Thousands of times??? Hundreds??? Ekkk???

OK, If I am the first idiot... I've just given the "Bill Gates" idea I've been looking for my entire lifetime away here... but surely, there are others on this globe who have been 1) drinking wine [or equivelant] 3) Thinking about skiing 2) Think they're a genius... ( )

I've done a preliminary key-word search here at epicski.com and tried using altavista.com too... Obviously I can't think of every combination that might find "such a thing" here tonight/this morning... but since you all ARE genius's's'es..s. Do you think it's possible?

Maybe for benefit of everyone I should first state my opinion of the benifits of such a thing? Imagine a ski that "floats on powder" but "carves slalom turns like a sports car". A "solid steady" ski at speed, but "turns like heck" when you lay it over??? One ski, all conditions... deep powder/hard ice... dogs and cats living together... (ooops, a mental skip to ghostbusters there, sorry).

So 3 ideas...

1-Imagine a "curved" ski base... on the flats when it's level only the base and any "straight" edges touch. But start "laying it over" and progressive amounts of edge "catch" and effect a shortening effective radius???

2-How about a multi-edged ski... when running perfectly flat a lower set of straight edges touch, but as the ski is rolled on edge. Additional edges which are "stepped" up from main edge and of different radius start to engage and turn the ski progressively quicker???

3-Lastly, how about a ski where the outside edges of the WAIST are "pressure sensitive". With powder conditions or a more straight down hill orientation the widest part of the waist holds firm... but when you angle the ski more on edge on harder and harder base, parts of the waist give way or "retract" and expose a narrower and narrower waist with the resultant shorter turning radius???

"Open Season" = call me an idiot... what do you think?

Tim
post #2 of 23
The Elmbrook school system has some nice high schools, you could probably catch an introductory physics class at one.
post #3 of 23
I worked for one of the manufacturers in the mid 90's.

We tried #2.

It doesn't work. The area between the two edges was constantly accumulating ice, which would severely lessened the effectiveness of the upper edges.
post #4 of 23
I've heard of an 'inflatable' snow board, I don't remember the brand, that you can stiffen of soften according to your needs with a hand pump.
I also remember there was experiments with sort of 'barbed', irregular edges, supposed to react differently according to pressure and angulation.
Now, I think that any significant alteration of the basic design of ski edges would prove overly difficult to sell, because of after-market tuning issues. What shop would sell a product it can't run through its standard tuning equipment ?
post #5 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takecontrol618
The Elmbrook school system has some nice high schools, you could probably catch an introductory physics class at one.
I took 2 years of physics here at Elmbrook's Brookfield East high school back in 1979-80 & 1980-81... It was all they offered then. My oldest son, now 17, is a senior there now... in his 2nd year of physics also. Maybe they'd let me sit in to brush up? His 1st years physics instructor there was a classmate of mine for both MY years... it could work? I have an "in".
post #6 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
I worked for one of the manufacturers in the mid 90's... We tried #2... It doesn't work. The area between the two edges was constantly accumulating ice, which would severely lessened the effectiveness of the upper edges.
That does make sense. #2 is OUT!

Tim

(Edit: see Kneissl below... NOT out.)
post #7 of 23
Didn't somebody post a picture here a little while back of a European ski with multiple edges? I want to say it was made by Kneissl?
post #8 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by roundturns
Didn't somebody post a picture here a little while back of a European ski with multiple edges? I want to say it was made by Kneissl?
Yes, it's Kneissl. Check out www.kneissl.com Alpine section and then Innovations.
post #9 of 23
Thread Starter 
Fantastic!!! Thanks all!

The video there does a great job of showing how it works. I'll search here to find that earlier mention here at epicski and see if anyone has skied it...

(Note: If you go look... the british flag at the far top right changes to english version, It was out of the window when I loaded it and there is NO scroll bar to even indicate something is off the screen. I had to nearly max out the window size for it to show. Same thing with the "Skip Intro" on the flash opening, but it was off screen to the lower right.)

Tim
post #10 of 23
Thread Starter 
Can't find any mention of someone skiing it. There was one member who was in line to get a chance... but gave up. I'll try the greater www.

Tim
post #11 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
1-Imagine a "curved" ski base... on the flats when it's level only the base and any "straight" edges touch. But start "laying it over" and progressive amounts of edge "catch" and effect a shortening effective radius???
Wasn't this what the Volkl 3-D Sidecut was all about?
post #12 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by sudovec
Yes, it's Kneissl. Check out www.kneissl.com Alpine section and then Innovations.
I just checked out their website and they have a video about the technology. It seems like a gimmick. Anyone ever see one or use one?

According to the video, depending on how much the ski is on edge determines the ski's radius. This seems rather improbable because you are always "bitting" with the outside edge much more substantially than those little inner edges.
post #13 of 23
Still working on the sidecut. The best I can do is with a super-g sidecut, but with intelligence-like fibres that make the ski extremely flexible when desired so it can easily bend into a sharper corner, but stiffen it up otherwise.
post #14 of 23
#3 - fat tips on Zags, Liberty C-Notes, etc.
post #15 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Still working on the sidecut. The best I can do is with a super-g sidecut, but with intelligence-like fibres that make the ski extremely flexible when desired so it can easily bend into a sharper corner, but stiffen it up otherwise.
Yea... like the electronic adjustable active suspension systems on some high end vehicles??? How about a fibre that changes charactistics when a current is applied to it. (Some current ski maker says something about electronics embedded, but never paid it much attention when I've come across it... figuring it is just another "gimmick"?) Imagine having a good old fashioned dial adjustment, or a thumb switch on the poles or even just a speed/angulation sensor with programmable charactistics??? Hey, that was easy to solve? Next up, the meaning of life...

Great idea Ghost!!!

Tim
post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
Maybe for benefit of everyone I should first state my opinion of the benifits of such a thing? Imagine a ski that "floats on powder" but "carves slalom turns like a sports car". A "solid steady" ski at speed, but "turns like heck" when you lay it over??? One ski, all conditions... deep powder/hard ice...
Hmmm... Sounds like my Metrons...
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
1-Imagine a "curved" ski base... on the flats when it's level only the base and any "straight" edges touch. But start "laying it over" and progressive amounts of edge "catch" and effect a shortening effective radius???
A number of companies are doing this, including Rossi's race room skis. The sidecut is greater when it's on edge than when it's flat because the widest part of the shovel is ahead of the snow contact point when flat.
post #17 of 23
What kind of wine was this?
post #18 of 23
*raps on chest*

I think it was glue, actually...


Seriously,

1. Reminds me of a one-wheeled motorcycle. NOt a bad idea, but what we have accomplishes the same purpose. The radius gets tighter anyway as you lay it over, it's just that skis have so much taper from tip to tail that you don't always feel the effect. On as ski with equal tip and tail width you would really notice.

2. I have trouble getting a picture of this, at least without the initial edge getting in the way.

3. ooga booga... For me, how about a flying saucer instead?

My answer to number one really explains all of this. Well that and the fact that skis tend to be so much stiffer in the middle
might affect things.
post #19 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shmerham
What kind of wine was this?
Red...
post #20 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wassnowboarder
...Reminds me of a one-wheeled motorcycle. NOt a bad idea, but what we have accomplishes the same purpose...
Hey Was... glue? Hmmm... what flavor? Do they have a shiraz???

Anyway, my point is... just about every review you read of a big sidecut ski, even the beastly heavy and stiff Metron B5, talks about them getting "squirrley" at the highest speeds. And yes, the big shovel big side cut skis, again like the Metron B5, reportedly do a decent job of crud busting... but no one would claim they equal a Gotama, Explosiv or other fat boy in the deepest powder???

25 years ago, even a high schooler like me thought about increasing sidecut to make getting the skis turning easier. I always assumed there was some obvious logical engineering/physics reason my 203 Rossis nearly lacked any sidecut. Looking back, there obviously wasn't...

So... 25 year from now. Will the electric responsive mult-radius ski be the norm??? Who knows... but at least I'm not as shy as in high school, let's talk about it...

Tim
post #21 of 23
I seem to remember an old Dynastar that was designed to have two radii and were designed to be switched foot to foot. They had graphics on the skis ahead of the binding that looked like, "( >" and "< )" The idea was, for older technique, to have a tighter radius on the inside edges for tighter turns and have the ability to swap skis for a larger radius "< )" "( >" I also remember the cap had some asymetry to it for some added stiffness on the "slalom" edge. I remember skiing the ski in a demo and could feel what they were claiming. I don't think that idea would work now with our two-footed technique.

Cheers,
post #22 of 23
Line has 2 skis modeled after snowboards this year. The Invader and Elizabeth, they are very straight in the middle with a tip and tail that has alot of side cut. I recommend watching the elizabeth video to see how good this ski is in powder.

www.lineskis.com
post #23 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvwcom
25 years ago, even a high schooler like me thought about increasing sidecut to make getting the skis turning easier. I always assumed there was some obvious logical engineering/physics reason my 203 Rossis nearly lacked any sidecut. Looking back, there obviously wasn't...
Actually, they hadn't developed the technology to make skis torsionally stiff enough (in relation to longitudinal stiffnes) to prevent a wide tip/tail from deflecting so much as to negate the value of the extra sidecut.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion