EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Will midfat 'tune' make a more 'usable' ski?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will midfat 'tune' make a more 'usable' ski?

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

Hi everyone,

 

I think that I will pick up a midfat for next season. This will be a one ski quiver for mainly eastern skiing with west trips. For no other particular reason than the comments on this forum I am leaning towards a Sultan 85 and also interested in checking out the Motive line, but by no means have I made up my mind.

 

But with reference to the thread..

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/94348/how-do-you-rank-midfats-in-terms-of-ice-and-variable-performance

 

I'm wondering out loud. While my understanding is limited, edge hold is created through a number of factors - one being edge tune. If, for example, a basic tune is 1/2 (base/edge) on a front side ski (70/30) and you took a 50/50 ski, the Sultan for example, and put a 1/3 tune on it - would this make the 50/50 ski work better for edge hold in eastern conditions without hurting off piste performance. I realize that a 'tuned' 50/50 ski will NOT perform like a 70/30 ski.

 

Regards

 

Stephen

post #2 of 15

IMO, 1/2 (base/edge bevel) tuning is just fine for midfat skis being used for all conditions in New England. If I need more edge hold then I need to generate larger angles in my skiing by bending more at my hips (lifting my uphill hip), to use my edges more aggressively...

post #3 of 15

I ski 80% of my days in the East, almost exclusively on a pair of Head Monster 78's tuned 1/2. They're not quite my old race carvers, but do just fine on the hard snow.

 

My guess (having never tried it) is that a more aggressive edge will not improve this type of skis' hard snow performance as much as it will hinder you in soft or 3D conditions where you'd rather smear than carve your turns.

post #4 of 15

1-3 will have more edge hold on ice or hardpack.  1-2 will be easier to modulate grip when you are not locked into an edge-locked non-skidded turn on ice or hardpack.  I prefer 0.5-3, but regularly skis 1-3, 0.5-2, and 1-2. It doesn't make enough difference to me that I would bother getting a base grind to decrease base angle, and I wouldn't be in a big hurry to get the sides done, but the difference is noticeable.  The tune won't matter in soft snow. 

 

You are also correct, the torsional flexibility and width of a ski puts a limit on how much you can do with edge tuning.  If I had a new pair of Sultan's I was getting tuned in a shop, I would just keep whatever base angle they had until it was time for a base grind and have them put a 3 degree side bevel on 'em. 

post #5 of 15

If your angles get too big (or like a racers tune) the sharpness doest tend to last as long as say, 1(top)2dgree (side wall). 3 degree side seems (to me-IMO) alot of angle.

 

I do agree that its hard to tell between .5/2-1/2-or 1/1...3/1 you can tell, also, where you detune makes a big difference aswell. None to a couple of inches will make alot of difference to where tips will engage. When you find angles you like stay with them.

 

post #6 of 15

Why not ski the ski's first. Then decide if the tune is right for you.

post #7 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

1-3 will have more edge hold on ice or hardpack.  1-2 will be easier to modulate grip when you are not locked into an edge-locked non-skidded turn on ice or hardpack.  I prefer 0.5-3, but regularly skis 1-3, 0.5-2, and 1-2. It doesn't make enough difference to me that I would bother getting a base grind to decrease base angle, and I wouldn't be in a big hurry to get the sides done, but the difference is noticeable.  The tune won't matter in soft snow. 

 

You are also correct, the torsional flexibility and width of a ski puts a limit on how much you can do with edge tuning.  If I had a new pair of Sultan's I was getting tuned in a shop, I would just keep whatever base angle they had until it was time for a base grind and have them put a 3 degree side bevel on 'em. 

^^^^What he said. 
 

post #8 of 15

Yes, ski design and construction materials have some effect on ice hold - as does the tuning, but in my experience nothing has a greater impact on ski grip than your binding mount position and your own skiing skills.  You can take a comparably great ice holding ski and nullify everything great about it with a mere small change in your mount position.

 

Let the games begin...

post #9 of 15

Interesting point about binding position relative to the ski center, and the same can really be said for a lot of skis even when you follow their marked mounting locator, as where they place the boot center mark sometimes seems to be a little subjective. My experience is only with placing the boot center right on the center mark, and I have definately seen some skis that wanted me to be centered quite far back from normal (e.g., Head iM82). However, I've never personally seen this do little more than make me adjust my skiing fore/aft balance - almost subconsciously. This is something I seem to be able to do in just the first few turns on a set of skis, and seems to me as similar to adjusting to the oversteer/understeer balance of different cars - some tend to lose grip at the rear first and some seem to lose grip at the front first, respectively. It's easier to adjust to this while skiing since I can just shift my balance forward or aft to equalize the effect on skis. As should be expected, this effect is more pronounced on shorter ski lengths as they have a shorter "sweet spot".

 

Having said that this has had little impact for me, I have also always followed the suggested mounting position, and always double checked to make sure my boot center mark was right over the ski center mark. I don't personally have experience intentionally mounting forward or rear of the mark, and would be interested in hearing about the effect on grip (ice hold).

post #10 of 15

I can also "force the issue" and adjust my balance, but it never feels natural and it's definitely not easy for me.  My muscle memory wants me to be where I'm comfortable and if that doesn't allow me to use the ski design to its fullest because of a bad binding position then I'm not happy. 

 

The only reason I decided to add my previous post was because I experienced this very issue (lack of grip/poor ice hold) with 3 separate pairs of skis this past season - all were easily rectified with binding position changes for each ski.

post #11 of 15

In my experience, the tune doesn't make much difference in soft snow anyway, so yes, a 1/3 will improve grip on the frontside. Every ski I own outside of racing or dedicated powder (>105mm) has a 1/3, I just like the feel.

 

That said, agree with Noodler that binding position is key. IMO, a BOF mount will concentrate your force where it should be to pressure your edges. (As long as you are capable of getting a high enough edge angle.) OTOH, it will probably detract from soft snow float. The solution: Get a Railflex and Schizo and go experiment! 

post #12 of 15

I race tune my iM88 Monsters and they perform brilliantly in all conditions.....so I would say yes, go for it.  But with that being said it will also really depend on your skiing style, if you tune them to bite you better be up to the task or things can get nasty rather quickly.  I'll add, if your skis are not race ski stiff, radical edges may lead to less than favorable performance I would think.....kinda like putting sticky racing slicks on a 1985 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham. 

post #13 of 15

For starters, I would recommend sticking with the factory bevel, whatever it is for the skis you decide to purchase - just make sure they're nice and sharp for the icy days. 

post #14 of 15

The key here is you have realized that tune is HUGE! After all, it's the edges that do it. So experiment, keep your edges tuned, and see what happens. It seems a 1/3 does help on ice, but doesn't hold up as long as a 1/2. Can anyone say what happens as the edge "wears down?" Is it like a 1/2 for a while, or just junk? I haven't tried it yet myself.

post #15 of 15

1-3 works out for me. On east coast or mid Atlantic it works fine.

 

My new skis are 84's.

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 › Will midfat 'tune' make a more 'usable' ski?