EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Does ski profile thickness matter?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does ski profile thickness matter?

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
When I was shopping for skis I noticed that Dynastar's ad copy mentioned the very thin tip tail profile of the Huge Trouble as a selling point.  I didn't understand why.  Today I overheard a shop employee claim that the thin profile of some Elan allowed the ski to handle crud better; something about it slicing through crud and getting tossed around less.... I still don't get it.  Why would the thickness of the profile matter in crud, or in any conditions?  Thanks.
post #2 of 7
A ski with a 33 m turn radius is less likely to unintentionally hook up on a pile of crud and start a tight turn.

One might argue that a thinner tip will ride up less, but at 115 mm in the middle of that ski, I don't think that would make much difference.
post #3 of 7
 Do they mean the thickness of the ski's layup, or do they mean the width of the tip?
post #4 of 7
 Could refer to the height of the tip/tails, ie. how much they stick up.
post #5 of 7
must be the thickness of the ski, as generated by the core, plus base, plus other layers, plus top sheet. That would affect the performance, deflection, dampening, riding of the tip or tail in soft snow, crud.

Dynastar produced skis of different thicknesses relative to the length of the ski is some of their models, and they are proud of that as balanced and accurate stiffness for the skier size.
post #6 of 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by barcolounger View Post

 Why would the thickness of the profile matter in crud, or in any conditions?  Thanks.

Second moment of area: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area  
post #7 of 7
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

must be the thickness of the ski, as generated by the core, plus base, plus other layers, plus top sheet. That would affect the performance, deflection, dampening, riding of the tip or tail in soft snow, crud.

Dynastar produced skis of different thicknesses relative to the length of the ski is some of their models, and they are proud of that as balanced and accurate stiffness for the skier size.

Yeah, that's the definition of thickness that I think they were using.  For my particular ski both the tip and tail have a very thin cross section, but the tip is quite stiff and the tail is quite soft. So I don't think thickness is a good indicator of flex.  So to restate my question, is there some advantage to a thin profile in and of itself (not as an indicator of some other characteristic like flex or dampness), or is this just a nice bit of marketing?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Does ski profile thickness matter?