New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

KERS - Page 3

post #61 of 77

I've skied both the Supershape Magnum KERS and the liquidmetal version the KERS replaced.  I liked them both, but I never had a chance to compare them side by side on the same day, so I can't say whether I would notice a difference.  OTOH it seems perfectly plausible to me that you could use electronics to make the ski damper and/or stiffer to bending, and then less damp and/or less stiff when unbending (or vice versa).  That's a more sophisticated use of piezio-electronics than the old K2 system, which just added damping. 

Whether those systems are allowed on WC depends on the definition of energy storage device.  The ski KERS is a control system more than an energy recovery system like the KERS used in Formula 1.  OTOH just because it's on the retail ski doesn't mean it's on the WC ski.  There's really not much to argue about.  You can't really isolate one part of a ski's construction, you either like the ski or you don't.  I like the KERS ski.

 

BK

post #62 of 77

Also have to consider that it is customised for each type of ski too whether we think it works or not.

I would imagine any effect built into the Titan's or SS chips is not necessarily the same as the effect in the WC Speed/SL racing ski's. At least the tolerance of when it works would require a different input for a start with the racing skis increased flex and torsion.

Marketing whatever though, personally I bought the Titan on the ski's numbers (width and sidecut) alone as a bit of a gamble not really considering the chip angle. I actually thought before I skied it I would be potentially too light to initiate it for effect anyway but regardless these are the best skis I've ever skiied for how and where I ski . 16 days in a row at Whistler they rocked.

 

But as Bode above stated which I completely agree with too as a ski is used as whole, "You can't really isolate one part of a ski's construction, you either like the ski or you don't. I like the KERS ski."     Me Too beercheer.gif.  

 

 

post #63 of 77

I have a Sansa mp3 player that has a metal alloy back which I found out is Liquidmetal.  Feels and looks like metal...very hard, light, and brilliant, does not corrode.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719 View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex View Post
Not even necessary. Piezoelectric micro-energy harvesting is mostly controllerless.


Yeah but harvesting is not the point there, the piezoelectric sensors are for monitoring vibration.




Piezo electrics can be configured to act as generators, mechanical filters and mechanical actuators. Taking things to a macro level before one uses it is a waste of chip space. This has been known since surface acoustic wave devices were first invented.


Quote:
It's a SOLID alloy like Ghost said.

 




Solid doesn't mean crystalline. "Crystalline" and "Amorphous" are different phases of materials. And not all metallic glasses are alloys. Liquidmetal is called that because it is a metallic glass, i.e. not crystalline like other metals and other metallic alloys.


 

post #64 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post


 



Chip you see is just decor, the actual processor is located under the ski bindings, embedded deep.

post #65 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

Once again... this what I wrote "comes from guy who works for Head".... as serviceman for one of their best athletes ;) Normally service guys are the one who are there when skis are done (at least when it comes to top few athletes), so he knows exactly what is in ski ;) Second, KERS, the way Head describes how it works, is based on current FIS regulations prohibited in all FIS compliant skis, which means it would be pretty hard to win Olympic medal with that ski ;) So KERS is marketing hype only and nothing else... if you like it or not. Ski behaving differently is not because of KERS but because of this how ski is done and what kind of materials they use, but definitely not because of something called KERS.



Have not read guide lines in a few years.  But from what I recall, it would be illegal only if it were not self powered; if it required an outside energy source.

post #66 of 77

Agreed, to use an automotive analogy, yet again.   When McLaren chose to race their F1 super car, they actually had to detune it in power and its active aerodynamics since the race class forbade them.   In other words the street car was actually more capable than the professional race car.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer View Post

I've skied both the Supershape Magnum KERS and the liquidmetal version the KERS replaced.  I liked them both, but I never had a chance to compare them side by side on the same day, so I can't say whether I would notice a difference.  OTOH it seems perfectly plausible to me that you could use electronics to make the ski damper and/or stiffer to bending, and then less damp and/or less stiff when unbending (or vice versa).  That's a more sophisticated use of piezio-electronics than the old K2 system, which just added damping. 

Whether those systems are allowed on WC depends on the definition of energy storage device.  The ski KERS is a control system more than an energy recovery system like the KERS used in Formula 1.  OTOH just because it's on the retail ski doesn't mean it's on the WC ski.  There's really not much to argue about.  You can't really isolate one part of a ski's construction, you either like the ski or you don't.  I like the KERS ski.

 

BK



 

post #67 of 77

My Head RD i.SL and i.GS skis both have Intellifibers but no chip...dont know if that was due to rules or what.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by snala View Post

Also have to consider that it is customised for each type of ski too whether we think it works or not.

I would imagine any effect built into the Titan's or SS chips is not necessarily the same as the effect in the WC Speed/SL racing ski's. At least the tolerance of when it works would require a different input for a start with the racing skis increased flex and torsion.

Marketing whatever though, personally I bought the Titan on the ski's numbers (width and sidecut) alone as a bit of a gamble not really considering the chip angle. I actually thought before I skied it I would be potentially too light to initiate it for effect anyway but regardless these are the best skis I've ever skiied for how and where I ski . 16 days in a row at Whistler they rocked.

 

But as Bode above stated which I completely agree with too as a ski is used as whole, "You can't really isolate one part of a ski's construction, you either like the ski or you don't. I like the KERS ski."     Me Too beercheer.gif.  

 

 



 

post #68 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post


 

HEAD,s without KERs http://www.skionline.ch/images/gallery/105193232.JPG
 

 

post #69 of 77

Isn't that the KERS logo above the binding? confused.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by billybo View Post



HEAD,s without KERs http://www.skionline.ch/images/gallery/105193232.JPG
 

 



 

post #70 of 77

Interesting discussion, and technology.

 

For anyone that doesn't know, the F1 season opener in Australia was won by Red Bull Racing, who has such serious problems with their KERS that they never used it once the whole race - but still won without it. BTW, F1 KERS working properly is claimed to provide the driver with 80 HP at the touch of a button (only allowed once per lap).

 

From a skiing application/user standpoint, I really like skis with stiff tails because of the energy they generate at the end of the turn propelling me into the start of the next turn - while carving medium radius turns on groomed snow/hardpack. Stiffer hard snow skis do this just fine with traditional construction. However, I dislike skis with stiff tails while skiing bumped-up ungroomed terrain because I need to be so conscious of keeping those stiff tails relatively clear of the downhill face of the bumps, instead of just having fun skiing them as they come. That's the place where I like skis with softer tails best - but that's also a place where skis get bent pretty well, and would excite such a technology even harder instead of easier. So, it seems to me there would be a perfect mismatch between how this ski technology "could" work, and the typical skiing application that would be useful for me and probably a lot of others as well (e.g., provide tail stiffness on hard snow, and tail softness on bumped-up terrain).  

post #71 of 77

...as far as ski companies "developing new alloys", I kind of doubt that. The ski market isn't really big enough for most metals mills to develop and roll sheets of a 'newly developed' special alloy.  I think it's more of the marketing folks developing creative names for existing alloys that are already readily available in sheet form in the marketplace.

post #72 of 77

Yes, and as an example the ski/snowboard industry quite extensively uses "Titanal". The creative name of this alloy sounds a lot like Titanium, but there is NO Titanium in Titanal:

 

"Titanal® is not titanium and in fact does not contain any titanium. The chemical composition of Titanal® in weight percent breaks down to approximately 88.5% aluminum, 1.7% copper, 2.5% magnesium, 7% zinc, and 0.1% zirconium." 

post #73 of 77

As much as I know so far, the Intelligence system and the KERS system do make a difference. I race(but in the midwest lol)so I guess I would consider myself a part of the 2%(milk)biggrin.gifwho could feel a difference.  In one day, in the span of a hour or two and over 5 different runs for each ski, I skied a XP100, a XRC1100 and a I.Supershape.(that's right, not avaliable in the us)  As far as I could tell, the XP100's sucked in comparison to my Fischer's.  The XRC's had much better edge grip, but they also had a 10cm advantage on the RC4's.  The I. Supershapes had the edge grip of the XRC's with no chattering and great stability.  All edge bevels and waxes were the same, so that wasn't contributing to anything.  The problem that I found with the I. Supershapes was that they weren't nearly stiff enough for me.  We have a demo days coming up in March and Head is one of the brands being presented.  Please bring the race line so I can try before I buy!

 

All in all, KERS and Intelligence are looking promising.

post #74 of 77
I have kryptonite in my edges
post #75 of 77

I have an alloy of plutonium and uranium-285 in mine.

post #76 of 77

I believe the i Supershape is still available retail in Canada......no idea why US purchase is no longer possible.

 

Best ski I have ever been on, not even close.
 

Nice thread bump btw!

post #77 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrstrat57 View Post

I believe the i Supershape is still available retail in Canada......no idea why US purchase is no longer possible.

Best ski I have ever been on, not even close.

 
Nice thread bump btw!
Thanks and best insight I have on the removal of the supershape is that the us loves pow pow. We still have the supershape speed magnum and Titan, although all of them relate to less aggressive skiers and snow conditions.... I heard that the market in the us is not looking for a 66 ish ski under foot with a 12.9 radius in a 170something ski as much as they are looking for >72 underfoot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion