 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
livetoski, I think you need to find the narrowest point and measure from there, it probably isn't at the boot centre.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
rjs,
yep looks like I made the first mistake the measure above should read 66 not 62! but the narrowest point of the old skis is near as dam it under the boot centre actually
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...and so does Physicsman... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Nice one, so the old skis have a 20m radius wow thats a shock for straight skis, on the flex issue then they have pretty stiff tails medium to soft tips and a pretty big under foot camber, well they used to have!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
livetoski, ok
No.
Just measured my old very definitely straight skis (Rossi 7SK, circa ~ 1995) and I got an effective length of about 186cms and a sidecut of 10-12 mm giving me a radius in the range of 36-40m....
Which compares sensibly with the reasonably current 32m SG skis also in my garage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
livetoski, Are you sure you let the calculation run ? Using the spreadsheet I get a radius of 51.6m for your skis.
My final straight slalom skis are 85-60-75 in a 201 which gives a radius of 39.1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Either they are not old straight skis or someone's forgotten that you have two sidecuts, one on each side of the ski... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rjs, under a new name,
yep I thought that too, just re did mine and got 55 m radius to be fair thats why I asked the question on here I treid a few calculations using my own excel spread sheet and could not get my head round what the results said, I must be doing something wrong some where?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
livetoski, 55m sounds about right
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
under a new name, no way 55m I could carve these bad boys much quicker than that !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| livetoski wrote: |
| under a new name, no way 55m I could carve these bad boys much quicker than that !!! |
No you couldn't, you could only carve part of the turn on the old skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
livetoski, the radius of the sidecut is not the radius of the turn...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
