EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs › Montana Sport's Wax Future Machine
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Montana Sport's Wax Future Machine - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgrandy View Post

Heat is heat,  time is time

 

It takes both time and temperature (time AT temperature) to "saturate and penetrate"  Do the math,  no free lunch.

 

But

 

Infra Red "light" is a great way to warm the surface without warming the air between.  I am sure a hot box, well insulated, will be more efficient energy wise. 

 

UV lamps can only be harmful.  UV "solarizes" plastics,  making them old and brittle before their time.  Not good from my perspective.

 

If you get a bunch of IR lamps,  you can always raise chickens, ducks and pigs in the off season ;-)

 

PS  a "calrod" water heater element or two would make great IR emitters  if powered by Reduced voltage  (A 240 V heater element powered at 120V etc)

 

remember,  E=I^2 R

 

Cheers

 


icon14.gif Yep.   While it is a cool machine, its benefits are a load of BSmeter.gif.  Unless they are using special UV reactive wax, the same amount of heat will be required to melt and penetrate as with a hot box or iron.   The only benefit, if there is one, is that you wont need to heat the whole ski, (binding grease, those pads under the Free Flex bindings etc.)  But in doing so I would imagine the heat will need to be much more concentrated and the whole system far less energy efficient.

 

If they really wanted something precise that would penetrate only so many micros into the base and only heat the wax and nothing else, computer guided laser would be the way to go.

 

post #32 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post




icon14.gif Yep.   While it is a cool machine, its benefits are a load of BSmeter.gif.  Unless they are using special UV reactive wax, the same amount of heat will be required to melt and penetrate as with a hot box or iron.   The only benefit, if there is one, is that you wont need to heat the whole ski, (binding grease, those pads under the Free Flex bindings etc.)  But in doing so I would imagine the heat will need to be much more concentrated and the whole system far less energy efficient.

 

If they really wanted something precise that would penetrate only so many micros into the base and only heat the wax and nothing else, computer guided laser would be the way to go.

 


Have you seen one in action.  I have.  My understanding is that a hot box takes a lot time from start to finished waxed ski.  Wax Future took only two minutes if that.  And the only thing you needed to do was roto brush the ski after it was done. So it save on the amount wax used as well as time. 

 

This thread was started wondering if a hand held device could be created for cheap $$$.  Some of us are still waiting for someone to find out size and power of the infrared bulb.
 

 

post #33 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildcat hank View Post




Have you seen one in action.  I have.  My understanding is that a hot box takes a lot time from start to finished waxed ski.  Wax Future took only two minutes if that.  And the only thing you needed to do was roto brush the ski after it was done. So it save on the amount wax used as well as time. 

 

This thread was started wondering if a hand held device could be created for cheap $$$.  Some of us are still waiting for someone to find out size and power of the infrared bulb.
 

 


I don't have to see it operate I understand the concept.   Wax melts with heat, only a poorly designed hot box wont be able to supply heat in ample time to keep up with this machine.  Its does take up less room than my box though...then again I can hotbox 4 pairs of skis at the same time.  Unless they were using some proprietary UV sensitive waxing system, then the benefits are inflated....not to mention UV rays degrade plastic.

 

post #34 of 45
It is just a glorified infared light mounted on a track where you can control speed using potentiometers and light out-put using a rheostat. You will save wax compared to traditional ironing but I willing to bet you can get a faster ski out of a hot box.

Neat concept and it is nice to see someone truing something new...
post #35 of 45
Just an update.... Got to see this first hand and not sure what to think... The only advantage that I can see is that less wax is wasted and burning the base will be much harder. You could buy a lot of wax for what this is going to cost you. The big downfall i see is if you mix wax. Right now I do it with the iron and let the hot box soak the base. No real good way of doing it with this. Is it neat, yes... Would I trade my iron for it, no. I will bet you will never see this in a race techs basement....
post #36 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuckerDH View Post

Why not just use a hot box which costs $300 to build with automated controls?

That does look interesting though... Any prices?


 ...Or less.  I built mine for about $150...

 

http://www.rmmskiracing.org/articles/RMalm-2006-03-Hotbox.pdf

 

http://www.rmmskiracing.org/articles/RMalm-2006-03-Hotbox-Part2.pdf

 

biggrin.gif

post #37 of 45



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiRacer55 View Post





 ...Or less.  I built mine for about $150...

 

http://www.rmmskiracing.org/articles/RMalm-2006-03-Hotbox.pdf

 

http://www.rmmskiracing.org/articles/RMalm-2006-03-Hotbox-Part2.pdf

 

biggrin.gif


Thanks for hot box instructions.  

 

Now do you think there is any way of building a Wax Future machine?  I think that was how this thread started.  I know that a lot of people feel the hot box is the way to go but you can not take traveling.   So I was hoping to come up with an hand held infra-red lamp to do the job that the wax future machine does.
 

 

post #38 of 45

Well, there is this hand held option..

heat.gun.vaporizer.jpg

 

Just dial it down one notch from melting the contact cement holding your ptex together..

post #39 of 45

Yes a heat gun works well, however we are trying here to figure out what (store bought) lamp would yield the same results as the Montana Wax Future.

Also the heat gun would not work the same since the heat is not spread across the width of a ski or snowboard.

 

After thinking about it I kind of like the heat gun idea.

The only draw back is that you need to go up and down as well as across.

Now if there was a way to spread the heat evenly across about 14"?

Maybe some how with 2 or 3 heat guns mounted to a rail?

 

Any ideas?

 

 


Edited by michaelj7 - 6/12/11 at 4:48am
post #40 of 45

I guess we will keep looking!!! Thank you on the heat gun idea.

 

Hank

post #41 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildcat hank View Post

I guess we will keep looking!!! Thank you on the heat gun idea.

 

Hank


I may end up giving in to buying one...does anyone know the price of the wax future?

Or better yet if anyone is selling a used one?

I am also looking for a used belt sander & Grinder.

 

 

post #42 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelj7 View Post




I may end up giving in to buying one...does anyone know the price of the wax future?

Or better yet if anyone is selling a used one?

I am also looking for a used belt sander & Grinder.

 

 

I'm not sure but the guy in town who has a wax future said it was about 12,000.00 dollars.   I don't tell you will find a used is they are so new.

 

We'll need to keep  thinking and waiting something will happen. 


 

 

post #43 of 45
post #44 of 45

The idea behind traveling IR wax heaters is to heat the base and melt the wax without heating up the whole ski.

The cyclic heating allows most of the ski to stay cool.

It would take study to see if this cyclic melting is as effective as continuous melting in a hot box.

I could make an argument that the heating/cooling cycle could be more effective than continuous heating if continued for long enough.

Keeping the bulk of the ski cool is a good idea since the easiest way to damage skis is to overheat them and let the epoxy creep.

You could probably make an IR laser ski wax machine that would write your name on the base for no extra charge.

Or how about a 3D printer machine that would vary the wax along the length of the ski to meet your needs.

Generally, a setting between wool and cotton on any old yard sale iron will make skis as fast as any in  my experience.

If it is wet speed is 80% structure.

post #45 of 45

The way I see it is hot boxing for base saturation is best.  The entire ski is heated.  This, I would think, places less stress on the ski as it is all expanding and contracting at the same time.

 

I have been boxing skis up to 158 F for a long time now with no issues.  My hot box holds 12 pair no problem and can load more depending on length.

Those infrared machines can only do one pair at a time.

 

It's all about proper base preparation.  I do that in a hot box.  After that one can keep up with the iron no problem assuming they re-wax on a timely schedule.
 

The only advantage I see in the infrared machine is for a high volume shop.  Must be better than an iron in the wrong hands.   Bla bla bla.

 

At any rate those machines can not replace a hot box that one can build for way less than 12 grand!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs › Montana Sport's Wax Future Machine