 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Arno wrote: |
| laundrymanif you tip the ski at a greater angle, it has to bend more before the whole edge is in contact with a hard surface and therefore the turn radius will be tighter |
Bingo. It's due to (most!) skis having a narrow waist than tip or tail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Kramer, Arno, I'm with you on those things - up to the limit of the radius of the sidecut. I'm still open to persuasion though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
laundryman, actually the radii that are impossible to 'carve' are those that are larger than the sidecut of the ski (if weighted such that the edge is in contact with the snow). In those cases the ski may be going on a long curve, but the edges will actually have to have some degree of sideways motion to avoid turning at the sidecut radius. I think I saw a comment from Physicsman that the "carving" radius of the ski on hard ground is approximately sidecut_radius*cos(edge angle) - not sure how well that sticks at high edge angles though. AIUI what Kramer is talking about is relevant to snow with a degree of softness in it, when you can increase the effective edge angle by pressing the centre of the ski and curving the front of the ski deeper into the snow, and cutting your own trough through its depth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
GrahamN, thanks, that figures.
rob@rar, I don't know. I don't suppose the edges are circular arcs, so the radius of curvature will vary along the edge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
rob@rar, they're Atomic GS11s with Neox bindings in 174.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kramer, this could be rubbish but i was told that if you can get a 60 degree edge angle you half the effective radius of the side cut. Also IMO the more you bend the shovel, i recon you can make smaller arcs as per what you described.
I am not sure i can go through another geometry lesson though 
In terms of the OP question yes, overdone. I see too many people who "want to learn how to carve" in their one hour lesson and are barely intermediates without control of the skis. Being able to control Pressure, edging AND rotation are all equally important skills IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar,
Are your Fischer's 165cm long ? Could be interested
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
skimottaret, do you not think that by learning to carve, all the other skills fall into place?
Some good friends of mine have never forgiven me for suggesting that they did not know how to carve after having a two hour lesson on how to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skimottaret, if the angle was 66 2/3 degrees that would fit in with what GrahamN says.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Kramer, I guess i look at it the opposite way.. If a skier has all the basic building blocks of steering inputs in their armoury of skills, and that once you can make the skis do what you want them to (rotation and skidding included) a good clean carved turn output is more naturally achieved. I do see peeps who can park and ride Long radius turns and think they are advanced "carving" skiers but are unable to make changes for terrain and lack dynamicism.
For instance I park and ride a lot and doing skiddy rotational drills like braquage and horseshoe turns has helped me get on the edges quicker. Still cant "carve" well though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Swirly, thanks, FWIW my guy told me that if you hold a 10 degree edge angle you will get you the sidecut radius in a rail road turn without pressuring the skis. This makes sense to me as an assumption cause at 0 degree edge angle the skis wont turn. so perhaps the 60 degree takes that into consideration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| stewart woodward wrote: |
rob@rar,
Are your Fischer's 165cm long ? Could be interested |
They are 161. Used a little on plastic, but a fair bit of life left in the edges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Charli939 wrote: |
| comprex wrote: |
Mostly I get yelled at by the up&down skiers in the group. |
The what :~/ |
Ah, sorry, thought that was fairly obvious. If you look at Fastman's video, the group I refer to generally have both
a) exaggerated motion up the hill with the hips at the end of the turn
b) difficulty choosing other than direct fall-line skiing lines without traversing
making the moniker doubly descriptive.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Tue 13-05-08 18:46; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Swirly wrote: |
| skimottaret, if the angle was 66 2/3 degrees that would fit in with what GrahamN says. |
Skimottaret was correct based on GrahamN's (simplified!) model. Remember, there's 90 degrees in a right-angle, not 100!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Kramer wrote: |
| Arno, I think that when skiing on piste, engaging the tips more, gives a better edge hold, allowing a greater edge angle without the ski washing out. |
agreed - or at least that's something i try to do and it seems to work
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I'll re-state: I believe for the vast majority you need a fairly wide piste.
I do agree that you can ski inside what is described as the radius of the ski. Nominally I believe the radius of a ski is half the width of the circle if you extended the ski until it met itself but then most skis do not have a consistent sidecut so there's an element of interpretation by the manufacturer. I read that Elan at one time were the only ski manufacturer to actually produce parabolic cut shapes. Most skis these days also have a wider shovel than tail, consequently there's more pressure applied at the tip, which means the ski gets pushed in to a shorter turn.
Incidentally, when I was in lessons and taught carving I was told both skis on the snow at all times. On nearly half of the Grandi video turns he actually lifts his inside ski off the snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Good discussion, gang. I agree with those who think carving is often rushed on the skier progression cycle. When shape skis hit the slopes everyone became enamored with the idea of carving. I remember conducting carving clinics for the ski school instructors at my home resort, and they were giddy over it,,, carving was very new to many of them. I think for a while that giddiness carried over into lesson content. Also, all the hype about carving the new skis brought about caused many recreational skiers to want to learn how to do this great new technique the skis they just bought were suppose to do so well. So the end result was the development of broad foundation skills would sometimes get lost in the shuffle. Hopefully the tide of irrational exuberance will settle, and the importance of teaching and learning a broad basket of foundation skills will come back into fashion.
| Kramer wrote: |
skimottaret, do you not think that by learning to carve, all the other skills fall into place?
|
Kramer, generally rushing to carving without the base skills to support it leads to poor quality carving, and the embedment of inefficient movement patterns. Base skills can be returned to and developed/refined, and once this is done the quality of the skiers carving and overall skiing can be enhanced,,, but such improvement won't really happen till the base skill deficits are dealt with. Look around you while you ski and ride the lift. Very view people can execute quality carved turns. This is not because they have not learned to carve,,, it's because they have not yet learned to ski. Once a solid quiver of foundation skiing skills have been developed, carving well becomes a piece of cake, and skiing in general becomes much more fun and rewarding. New parameters of what can skied, enjoyed, and done on skis open up to the person who makes the effort to develop their skill base.
skimottaret said it very well:
| Quote: |
If a skier has all the basic building blocks of steering inputs in their armoury of skills, and that once you can make the skis do what you want them to (rotation and skidding included) a good clean carved turn output is more naturally achieved. I do see peeps who can park and ride Long radius turns and think they are advanced "carving" skiers but are unable to make changes for terrain and lack dynamicism.
|
skimottaret, also add "balance" as a building block of major importance. Many think of balance as simply the ability to remain upright, but developing this skill area entails so much more than that. Balance should be a major focus area for all skiers who desire to improve their overall skiing proficiency.
comprex, you're so right about other skiers protesting when people actually turn. Tail wagging down the falline is a prolific epidemic on snowy ski slopes everywhere, so the concept of actually turning back and forth across the hill is rather foreign to many. So are the rules of the slopes. Make wide track, large radius, steered 90 turns on a crowded piste and you take your life in your hands,,, at least here in Colorado you do.
Kramer, good topic, the rotary caving thing. Yes, you can drop turn shape by adding rotary force to the feet while carving. It twists the skis about the plane of the ski base, hyper engaging the front of the ski, and dropping the radius of the turn. And while it does not twist the skis about the plane of the ground/snow, and thus directly steer the skis, it can lighten the tails to the point of creating a small degree of disengagement and tail drift, which can also tighten the turn. You're right, it's a lot of work. Not really something you do when energy efficiency or pureness of carve is the goal. Not really something racers focus on doing either. They more work along the fore/aft balance plane,,, loading the front of the ski to engage an aggressive turn initiation, and moving toward the tail to let the skis go.
As far as turn shape determiners: the amount of sidecut the ski has is numero uno,,, edge angle is how you manage radius within the range of turn shapes the ski's sidecut provides you, and fore/aft balance and rotary management is how you fine tune. How well you've developed your balance, edging, angulation, rotary skills determines how extensively you can exploit the range of turn shape possibilities built into the skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Nickski wrote: |
| I'll re-state: I believe for the vast majority you need a fairly wide piste. |
Most people don't use big enough edge angles, it isn't that difficult to stay within a small width though.
| Quote: |
| Incidentally, when I was in lessons and taught carving I was told both skis on the snow at all times. On nearly half of the Grandi video turns he actually lifts his inside ski off the snow. |
I don't see what he is doing as picking up the inside ski, I see it as just a result of really strong (old) Inside Leg Extension and the (new) inside ski taking slightly longer to drop back to contact the snow.
To actively lift the inside ski you need to lock up a lot of muscles around the pelvis which makes it hard to separate the pelvis from the upper body. Grandi still has really good separation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Swirly, I suggest you go back to your SATs maths: arccos(0.5) = 60 degrees  ; arccos(66&2/3) is undefined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GrahamN, hmm. yeah i just punched cos of 60 degrees in my calculator it tells me .5 as well, i should have checked first Swirly, where are you coming up with 66 2/3 = .5?
putting the maths test to one side how achievable are 60 deg edge angles for mere mortals... sitting at my desk i recon 45 is.. (70%) of side cut  which would give a 9 metre turn radius on my 13 M side cut SL skis.. defo possible without skidding too much...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
skimottaret, I have several pictures of WC skiers from last season with edge angles of what looks to be about 60 deg. They have about 5cm clearance between their inside hip and the snow/ice.
I think 45 is achievable without skidding at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Swirly wrote: |
Sideshow_Bob, [off topic] Inverse Cos 66&2/3 =0.5 right angles have nothing to do with it [/off topic]
|
Someone got their calculator in GRAD mode?  Hint: 100 grads = 90 degrees = right angle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grad_%28angle%29
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| This, on the other hand, is what the Gods do compared to us mortals! |
To get that degree of edge angle is one thing, but to do it with your eyes shut as well!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Sideshow_Bob wrote: |
| rob@rar wrote: |
| This, on the other hand, is what the Gods do compared to us mortals! |
To get that degree of edge angle is one thing, but to do it with your eyes shut as well! |
If I was skiing that quickly I think I'd probably have my eyes shut as well!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| because there is no rubbing off of speed |
You need to keep holding the turn until you start going uphill. Your tracks will look more like a series of linked C's and reverse C's than S's this way, and of course you have to be confident enough with the acceleration to the bottom of the C.
My efforts are still pretty smudgy of course, but that's the theory as I understand it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
TallTone, I guess thats possible. The thing is whilst I am still experimenting and haven't yet any control over the tightness of the arc that I make I could require a fairly wide unoccupied piste to be safe getting to this point  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
I just had a quick look at some photos of me skiing and I don't think I get anywhere near 60 degrees. These are the steepest angles I can find, and they are at 45 degrees or slightly more:
|
Just think, in Alaska you'd be standing upright!
I reckon anything over 40 degrees will be primarily governed by how much angulation you can get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Not sure the 'carving' thing is overdone; it's a buzz so that makes it good for me.
However FastMan, 's post struck a chord. This year I was castigated by a Swiss instructor who saw I could carve but that my 'Short - turns' were less than useless. She was young, but said emphatically that this was a 'poor' way to learn as carving should be the 'last' stage of development. I spent the winter 'improving' my shorter turns ..... guess what, the 'carving' improved as well.
( Still a crap skier though)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've always seen at another one of the skills. I think there is way too much emphasis put on it - since it is only relevant in certain conditions when you are trying to achieve particular things (mainly speed). This was confirmed to me this season on the all-terrain snoworks course where we didn't aspire to carve at all since we were dealing with different terrain and therefore a set of different skills to get down the mountain. I think some people see the drift through skiing skills as starting with the snow plough and some how ending with the carve in a linear hierarchy. Whereas it's not like that at all and to be honest, for my skiing - on the terrain I choose and with the skis I have, carving is probably the least useful tool in box.
I think the so called carving skis miss sell the idea of carving as being the "ultimate in moving with skis on".
As skisimon said its more about the building blocks - but this does not imply the aspiration is ultimately to carve merely that all the required skills will work together to make one into an "all - round better skier".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In answer to the Thread title I would say yes. Carving is ofteen made out to be the be all and end all of skiing.
Its very rare to see anyone carving on anything other than a wideish piste, not least because the speed and route across the slope is more risky. It does however look very good when done properly, but no better in my opinion than good wedlling, bump skiing or even precisely controlled side slipping.
I personally don't like the look of the modern skis-apart stance which I find untidy. I also have a theory that skiing fast with skis apart puts knees at greater risk of injury because they are not acting as a compact unit.
In contrast a feet together/knees together stance uses both legs as a single platform which may be slightly less stable, but is I believe less susceptible to catching an edge.
An analogy could be made with monoskiing where it is impossible to catch on inside edge I wonder whether monoskiers suffer from knee injuries ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
If you just think of the geometry of a ski with a sidecut on a firm surface - the more you put it on edge the more it has to bend for all the edge to be on the snow - but you may have to put in more energy to make it bend.
Edit: Oops, I failed to realize there was a page 2 on this thread. I notice it has already been said at the top of the page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nickski wrote: |
| Carving - the most efficient way to ski = the minimum loss of speed, what happens next ?? |
It's not the only way to ski Efficient. However straight down the fall line is THE most efficient.
But we'll run into just a few problems with that technique.
Have you tried carving on a flat, narrow icey slope with not so sharp skis? Or tried carving bumps?
The goal isn't to ski with minimum loss of speed, it's to have the ALL the skills to be a good all mouintain skier.
Carving is also not new, and introducing some skiding can be a faster way down a course of gates.
You can travel more distance in a carve therfore sometimes being slower overall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
If you want to add a little pair of turny things to your quiver for a good price I'd be happy to see them go to a good home 
